Need help figuring out what is right and wrong here. I’m reading through the Chalkdust II and come across on pages 70-72 where someone made reference to typos in the service manuals referencing cylinder positioning at TDC when inspecting valve clearances. I made the changes in my service manual as instructed and hopefully those are now correct. When I got to the next page or so the person claims there is another typo referencing “Specified Valve Clearance (Mean Value=0.125mm (Exhaust), 0.145mm (inlet) whereas the person claims the actual “mean value” for the exhaust should be .215 and not 0.125mm. I’m just wondering where does one confirm that this .215mm is the actual “mean value clearance” for the exhaust valve? Also on that page in my service manual, it gives a formula for figuring out what your replacement shim size should be with a formula of a+b-c=d whereas a= present shim thickness, b=Measured Valve Clearance, c= Specified Valve Clearance (mean value= (0.125mm printed or .215mm as corrected by Chalkdust II article and 0.145mm printed (Inlet), d= Replace Shim Thickness. Furthermore, my service manual gives an example of how to use formula with given values of: 2.300mm= present shim thickness- value “a” in formula, 0.31mm- measured valve clearance- value “b” in formula, 0.145mm value “c” in formula, and it comes out as 2.465mm as Replace Shim Thickness. However, the next sentence below it states “ Exchange the shim for the 2.475 size shim”. Is this last sentence also a misprint in the service manual as well because that does not make sense to me. I’m going to be doing a valve check soon on my bike soon and just want to make sure I go into it with the correct info and knowledge.
-
WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE ABLE TO POST? REGISTER FOR COG MEMBERSHIP
All registration must be done through the club's main webpage: To register / join COG, click here
For instructions to convert to full membership, click here
-
Can't post after logging to the forum for the first time... Try Again - If you can't post in the forum, sign out of both the membership site and the forum and log in again. Make sure your COG membership is active and your browser allow cookies. If you still can't post, contact the COG IT guy at IT@Concours.org.
C-14 service manual possible typos per Chalkdust II posted on COG
- Thread starter tmustang69302w8817
- Start date
Fred H just did my valves and the shim map he gave me states that the exhaust is .19mm to .24mm and intake is .12mm to .17mm.
That agrees with my full service manual (2015-2017 years). I believe all years are the same.
I can post the shim map Fred gave me for mine to see how the formula work if you want to see it.
The last statement is not an error, the calculated shim size is 2.465mm, but the closest shim size that you can get is 2.475mm. If there was a shim size that you could buy at 2.465mm, then you would use that one.
That agrees with my full service manual (2015-2017 years). I believe all years are the same.
I can post the shim map Fred gave me for mine to see how the formula work if you want to see it.
The last statement is not an error, the calculated shim size is 2.465mm, but the closest shim size that you can get is 2.475mm. If there was a shim size that you could buy at 2.465mm, then you would use that one.
Last edited:
The reason the manual says to replace with a 2.475 mm shim size is because it is the next closest shim size available to 2.465 mm
Try the attached excel spreadsheet, it does all the calculations for you. Just put in your measurement and existing shim size and will show you the shim size to replace with.
It's actually pretty simple if you work with inches. A change in one shim size basically equates to one thousandth of an inch. So if your valve is tight by 2 thousandths, you drop two shim sizes.
So for example, lets say you measure an exhaust valve that is .007 inches. I use .009 inches for "center spec" (it's actually .0085, but I round up to .009). So that means this valve is 2 thousandths tight. If it has a Kawasaki #25 shim, then I would go down two shim sizes to a #20. This would bring it back to .009 inches.
Try the attached excel spreadsheet, it does all the calculations for you. Just put in your measurement and existing shim size and will show you the shim size to replace with.
It's actually pretty simple if you work with inches. A change in one shim size basically equates to one thousandth of an inch. So if your valve is tight by 2 thousandths, you drop two shim sizes.
So for example, lets say you measure an exhaust valve that is .007 inches. I use .009 inches for "center spec" (it's actually .0085, but I round up to .009). So that means this valve is 2 thousandths tight. If it has a Kawasaki #25 shim, then I would go down two shim sizes to a #20. This would bring it back to .009 inches.
Last edited:
Yeah my manual states the same as far as the .19mm to.24mm exhaust and intake at .12mm to .17mm measurements. I guess just need to make sure the “c” value “mean valve clearance”, is in fact the .215mm as someone stated in the article and not the .125mm as printed in the service manual. Thank you for clearing up the shim replacement size. I was thinking I found another typo and then started to wonder about the whole print
Ok, I will definitely give the spreadsheet a try and thank you.
Ok, I will definitely give the spreadsheet a try and thank you
ok, I had a senior moment, I see where they derived the “mean valve clearance from. Like a buddy of mine told me, “what good is it to be stupid if you can’t prove it every once in a whileYeah my manual states the same as far as the .19mm to.24mm exhaust and intake at .12mm to .17mm measurements. I guess just need to make sure the “c” value “mean valve clearance”, is in fact the .215mm as someone stated in the article and not the .125mm as printed in the service manual. Thank you for clearing up the shim replacement size. I was thinking I found another typo and then started to wonder about the whole print
While not a typo as such, it should be noted that the torque on the rear engine mountings was reduced in the gen 2 FSM from what was printed in the gen 1 manual. This was to eliminate the risk of frame cracking where the c/stand mount crossmember is welded to the frame.
It's not a section referred to unless you're dropping the engine out. The loosening and tightening procedures are critical.
It's not a section referred to unless you're dropping the engine out. The loosening and tightening procedures are critical.
Thank you for letting me know. I’ll have to see what version of FSM I have. Do you know what the revised torque value is?
See page 7 of the attached document, which was issued for early ZX14's.
The torque on the adjusting collars was reduced in about 2010 FSM as the higher torque caused frame damage on a small number of earlier bikes, notably the ZX14 which came out a year before the ZG14. Kawasaki, in their wisdom, issued a recall of early ZX14 bikes for inspection and/or repair. For some unknow reason, the ZG14 was not included though the engine case, frame, hardware and mounting procedure is identical in this area and a small number of gen 1 have cracked/broken.
I have a gen 1 and did the retorque to the lower spec when I became aware of the issue some years ago.
www.tapatalk.com
The torque on the adjusting collars was reduced in about 2010 FSM as the higher torque caused frame damage on a small number of earlier bikes, notably the ZX14 which came out a year before the ZG14. Kawasaki, in their wisdom, issued a recall of early ZX14 bikes for inspection and/or repair. For some unknow reason, the ZG14 was not included though the engine case, frame, hardware and mounting procedure is identical in this area and a small number of gen 1 have cracked/broken.
I have a gen 1 and did the retorque to the lower spec when I became aware of the issue some years ago.
Australian Kawasaki GTR Owners-Frame crack issue at rear lower engine mount.
No doubt others have seen this. Note the ZX14 service bulletin linked to reply 120. ZX14 and ZG14 have the same arrangement. http://www.zggtr.org/
www.tapatalk.com
I will definitely add that note to my appropriate service manual page, thank you.See page 7 of the attached document, which was issued for early ZX14's.
The torque on the adjusting collars was reduced in about 2010 FSM as the higher torque caused frame damage on a small number of earlier bikes, notably the ZX14 which came out a year before the ZG14. Kawasaki, in their wisdom, issued a recall of early ZX14 bikes for inspection and/or repair. For some unknow reason, the ZG14 was not included though the engine case, frame, hardware and mounting procedure is identical in this area and a small number of gen 1 have cracked/broken.
I have a gen 1 and did the retorque to the lower spec when I became aware of the issue some years ago.
Australian Kawasaki GTR Owners-Frame crack issue at rear lower engine mount.
No doubt others have seen this. Note the ZX14 service bulletin linked to reply 120. ZX14 and ZG14 have the same arrangement. http://www.zggtr.org/
great spreadsheet, and a fantastic video series to make it doable- Thanks Fred, I'm elbow deep in my 2011 C14 just waiting on a few shims to come in befor putting it all back together. With some assistance from you and Murph I've nothing to fear