Jump to content
dirtrider

Valve Checking Procedure

Recommended Posts

dirtrider

Anybody have any BMW manual info yet showing (if) both sets of cam lobes are checked for proper lash clearance? Any info on the correct lash setting range?

 

As you get any info please post it here for future reference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ponch

Have you checked the AdvRider forum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TEWKS

Shawn Smoak (BMW mechanic) out in Vancouver mentioned that the valve checks & specs are the same as the Wethead. It's only when an adjustment is needed you have a "new cam timing/holder tool" to do that part of the job. I don't know enough about the procedure to actually comment on it but I assume "that tool" moves all the new shiftcam gizmo stuff out of the way.

 

Pat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lkraus
1 hour ago, TEWKS said:

Shawn Smoak (BMW mechanic) out in Vancouver mentioned that the valve checks & specs are the same as the Wethead. It's only when an adjustment is needed you have a "new cam timing/holder tool" to do that part of the job. I don't know enough about the procedure to actually comment on it but I assume "that tool" moves all the new shiftcam gizmo stuff out of the way.

 

Pat

I suspect the new Hy-vo timing chain necessitated a different tensioning tool. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clive Liddell

When I saw the 'shift cam' design I also wondered if the valve clearance on the one cam of the shift arrangement was correct on the 'high rpm cam'.  In fact I am still puzzled as to how this could be arranged?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dirtrider
22 minutes ago, Clive Liddell said:

When I saw the 'shift cam' design I also wondered if the valve clearance on the one cam of the shift arrangement was correct on the 'high rpm cam'.  In fact I am still puzzled as to how this could be arranged?

 

 

 

Afternoon Clive

 

If done correctly & no apparent  wear on just one of cams bases  then hopefully both cams use the very same base grind  (the valve lash is set on the base of the cam so if they share a common base (I believe they must to be able to shift the cam back & forth)  then one cam lobe should be as good as the other.

 

The problem lies in IF one cam base becomes worn more than the other (probably unlikely as there really shouldn't be much of any wear on the base due to no valve spring loading on that part of the cam lobe).

 

Time will tell on this cam shifting set-up. (hopefully no long term durability issues).   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ponch
On 1/29/2019 at 11:33 AM, dirtrider said:

 

 

Afternoon Clive

 

If done correctly & no apparent  wear on just one of cams bases  then hopefully both cams use the very same base grind  (the valve lash is set on the base of the cam so if they share a common base (I believe they must to be able to shift the cam back & forth)  then one cam lobe should be as good as the other.

 

The problem lies in IF one cam base becomes worn more than the other (probably unlikely as there really shouldn't be much of any wear on the base due to no valve spring loading on that part of the cam lobe).

 

Time will tell on this cam shifting set-up. (hopefully no long term durability issues).   

 

It's getting complicated. I can't wait to see the R1800C. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dirtrider
6 minutes ago, Ponch said:

 

It's getting complicated. I can't wait to see the R1800C. 

 

Afternoon Ponch

 

A little complicated but sliding the cam for 2 position variable valve timing is probably the simplest &  least complicated method that  I have seen. Plus,  servo failure would probably  still leave the bike ridable in some form.  (I kind of like it for it's simplicity)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ponch
35 minutes ago, dirtrider said:

 

Afternoon Ponch

 

A little complicated but sliding the cam for 2 position variable valve timing is probably the simplest &  least complicated method that  I have seen. Plus,  servo failure would probably  still leave the bike ridable in some form.  (I kind of like it for it's simplicity)

 

 

 

I'm getting to the point where I don't like to mess with things if I can help it. Just change the oil and other fluids and consumables and call it good. There's a lot to like about the beemers, but with increasing costs initial and maintenance, I just don't see the value, but then I am not BMW's target demographic. The camhead bikes are ok, but they aren't made for touring really. It's like Active Fuel Management in GM's vehicles that led to oil burning and valve train issues. I wasn't asking for that solution and if I knew it was a problem, I would have disabled it before it was an issue. I just think manafucturers put the customer below top priority with regards to a lot of things with vehicles, at least things beyond getting them to buy it. What happens beyond the dealer floor is whatever happens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dirtrider
5 minutes ago, Ponch said:

 

I'm getting to the point where I don't like to mess with things if I can help it. Just change the oil and other fluids and consumables and call it good. There's a lot to like about the beemers, but with increasing costs initial and maintenance, I just don't see the value, but then I am not BMW's target demographic. The camhead bikes are ok, but they aren't made for touring really. It's like Active Fuel Management in GM's vehicles that led to oil burning and valve train issues. I wasn't asking for that solution and if I knew it was a problem, I would have disabled it before it was an issue. I just think manafucturers put the customer below top priority with regards to a lot of things with vehicles, at least things beyond getting them to buy it. What happens beyond the dealer floor is whatever happens. 

 

Afternoon  Ponch

 

Unfortunately, the consumer isn't  the driving force on new divetrain  technology, first it's the new & ever tougher emission requirements, next is the mandated fleet fuel economy,  & each couple of years the vehicle  noise emission threshold is lowered (noise passby).    

 

Nothing wrong with the older  systems but they just can't meet newer  standards (especially in Europe).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ponch
7 hours ago, dirtrider said:

 

Afternoon  Ponch

 

Unfortunately, the consumer isn't  the driving force on new divetrain  technology, first it's the new & ever tougher emission requirements, next is the mandated fleet fuel economy,  & each couple of years the vehicle  noise emission threshold is lowered (noise passby).    

 

Nothing wrong with the older  systems but they just can't meet newer  standards (especially in Europe).  

 

Yup and that's why some manufacturers shit the bed. At least GM did. We'll be in electric vehicles in no time. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bwpsg42

Being just mechanical enough not to screw too much up, what don’t we have hydraulic  adjustment on motorcycles like we have in cars.  There must be some reason that I can’t think of.  Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dirtrider
19 minutes ago, bwpsg42 said:

Being just mechanical enough not to screw too much up, what don’t we have hydraulic  adjustment on motorcycles like we have in cars.  There must be some reason that I can’t think of.  Thanks.

 

 

Morning bwpsg42

 

Good question (on the BMW anyhow)  & I can only guess at the answer.

 

Probably first is cost as a full hydraulic control including engine re-design, added parts,  & packaging is EXPENSIVE.

 

Possibly no variable control available in the fueling computer so it would have to be fully RPM mechanical control.

 

Unless very complex & unique it would have to be done on the engine side or in the cam drive chain system so that would effect both intake & exhaust cams. The current system only effects one cam on each side  & it is a very simple 2 position cam slide.

 

Plus, apparently a more expensive & more complex system isn't needed  for BMW to pass 'current' emission & noise mandates so it is all they need at the moment.

 

I would imagine that in the future the cam timing/valve lift/etc will become more complex as the noise & emission standards become tighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dirtrider
10 hours ago, Ponch said:

 

We'll be in electric vehicles in no time. :)

 

 

Morning Ponch

 

It kind of looks like we are headed in that direction & once the range thing nut  is cracked (and/or very quick battery pack re-charge is worked out) we WILL be in electrics as they are very low emissions, very low noise, & no direct fossil fuel usage.

 

But the MoCo's are still having heart burn about the electrics as their one big worry is if they will be held responsible for battery disposal sometime in the future retroactive back to vehicle sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indy Dave

Not to mention the explode on impact issues with the batteries.  For the kind of traveling I like to do on my bike, I don't see an electric answer in my riding lifetime. Traveling loaded cross-country on remote roads does not lend itself to electric biking. Toss in the option to explore a road or three not on the planned route, and it doesn't add up. Granted, exploring those extra roads depends on having enough fuel in your tank - but at least one knows what kind of range is available to a near certainty.

 

So maybe for local riding, I'm sure the torque will be intoxicating!  But in my advancing age and diminishing resources, if I add a second bike, I'm going to need it to be more versatile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dirtrider
1 hour ago, Indy Dave said:

Not to mention the explode on impact issues with the batteries.  For the kind of traveling I like to do on my bike, I don't see an electric answer in my riding lifetime. Traveling loaded cross-country on remote roads does not lend itself to electric biking. Toss in the option to explore a road or three not on the planned route, and it doesn't add up. Granted, exploring those extra roads depends on having enough fuel in your tank - but at least one knows what kind of range is available to a near certainty.

 

So maybe for local riding, I'm sure the torque will be intoxicating!  But in my advancing age and diminishing resources, if I add a second bike, I'm going to need it to be more versatile.

 

Afternoon Indy Dave

 

You are basing your thought on what is available 'now' electric's  wise.  

 

As vehicle  electric's, battery design, & energy recovery evolves you might find that 400 miles per charge is normal, that carrying a small extra (reserve cell) that will get you another 100 miles is lighter than carrying an extra 2 gallons of gasoline. That some sort of remote recharging is available, like  onboard fuel cell, chemical, etc.

 

As far as predictable range goes,  that will evolve also as (we as consumers) get more educated on range vs usage vs experience. It will still take X amount of stored energy to go Y distance at  Z speed and load. Plus the computer monitoring will improve so will be able to plot distance-to-dead way more accurately.

 

Obviously this won't happen in the next year but once it starts going mainstream it will happen very fast as the technology progresses at a fast pace.

 

Just look at the auto companies that are now ditching old school engineers & conventional vehicle thoughts in favor of hiring

new school electrical & electronics engineering. (this part I hate to see as I am one of those old school engineers). 

 

Personally, I can't wait as electric vehicles are fun to drive & if we can get rid of fossil fuels as our main vehicle energy source (at least on-vehicle carry) we might be able to render some current greedy anti U.S. desert nations toothless.

 

When we start seeing electric powered propeller airplanes the gasoline day is done.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indy Dave

Evening Dirtrider -

 

I don't doubt that much, if not all of what you say, will come to pass. And I look forward to that electric motor torque. In my advancing years, for the kind of riding I like to do, way out here . .

 

large.20180601_163308.jpg.c6db6264e988ce82b2f97b08004551f7.jpg

 

 

large.20180601_164109.jpg.692a109d550a56b644bbaae9cf9ff528.jpg

 

 

 

large.20180531_124031.jpg.faec280e87d0ec6dbcaf5841970a75f7.jpg

 

large.20180529_074258.jpg.0e1ecbf9b924c6bdca3e58b7992f3139.jpg

 

 

 

large.20180603_153600.jpg.48a5ea66fb3e09587b2084dd07c6d454.jpg

 

I'm sticking with gas. Late in the day - hell any time of day - way out - I know what and how far I can go on gas. And if I run out, I'm likely to find someone with gas. Letting someone let me plug in is a bit of a different issue.

 

Or here in Yellowstone at 9:39pm due to several unforeseen instances.

 

vlcsnap-2019-02-03-20h19m55s145.thumb.png.5aff7619a625935d84822ac7ee7010c9.png

 

For me, in my lifetime and what I see as not having a stable of bikes in my declining years - I want something that can handle all comers, be able to improvise and not be the limiting factor for when and where I go.

Edited by Indy Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dirtrider
13 hours ago, Indy Dave said:

Evening Dirtrider -

 

I don't doubt that much, if not all of what you say, will come to pass. And I look forward to that electric motor torque. In my advancing years, for the kind of riding I like to do, way out here . .

 

I'm sticking with gas. Late in the day - hell any time of day - way out - I know what and how far I can go on gas. And if I run out, I'm likely to find someone with gas. Letting someone let me plug in is a bit of a different issue.

 

 

 

Morning Indy Dave

 

That is now, 10 or 15  years from now you might only find someone in the outback carrying electrons & no gasoline.  

 

Maybe in the future some company will make a helmet & riding jacket that has solar panels incorporated that you can plug into. Probably starve to death before making enough juice to get anywhere but it might sell.    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indy Dave

If I'm lucky(?) enough to still be kicking in 15 years...... let alone riding  .. .. . ... which has been my point.

 

I think the solar panels idea will have some traction, the limitations you mention not withstanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave_in_TX
On ‎2‎/‎3‎/‎2019 at 7:20 AM, bwpsg42 said:

Being just mechanical enough not to screw too much up, what don’t we have hydraulic  adjustment on motorcycles like we have in cars.  There must be some reason that I can’t think of.  Thanks.

I read somewhere that the maximum RPM for hydraulic lifters is about 7000. Maybe that's why you find them used in Harleys but few other bikes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dirtrider
1 hour ago, Dave_in_TX said:

I read somewhere that the maximum RPM for hydraulic lifters is about 7000. Maybe that's why you find them used in Harleys but few other bikes. 

 

 

Morning Dave

 

 

I have seen a number of small block engines that use conventional push rod (cam in block overhead valve) run at 8k or more using hydraulic lifters.

 

With roller lifters it is difficult to get long life out of the roller lifter roller needle bearings if there is any valve lash present as the lash gap allows the cam lobe to beat the roller needles to death  so roller lifters usually  tend to be hydraulic. (there are exceptions though) 

 

On 'overhead cam' design motorcycle  engines it is very difficult to package actual hydraulic lifters as that takes up a lot of space that adds engine width or adds engine height that is difficult to package in a motorcycle environment. 

 

Some motorcycle engines like Honda Goldwing use hydraulics for valve lash control but not actual hydraulic lifters (basically a static hydraulic lifter in a hole that the rocker arm pivots on) so the hydraulic take-up is on the rocker arm  pivot side not the cam lobe side. This adds little to no engine width but still allows hydraulic valve lash control. The 1200 Goldwing red line is over 7k (I would have to look but I think around 7.5K with an 8K max or somewhere around that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JamesW

I've always wondered why BMW couldn't have easily installed hydraulic lifters in the airhead/oilhead pushrod motors and omitted the need to adjust valve clearances.  As far as engine revs are concerned these motors aren't high rev anyway but they get the job done.  My 1100 has a red line at 7.5K and seldom needs a valve adjustment and a valve check only takes an hour and doesn't cost anything.  

 

For me I have no incentive to ever own anything newer in the way of a BMW.  It's kind of sad that vehicle manufacturers have to resort to gizmos in order to sell new cars/motorcycles.  This shift can technology has the potential to put the cost of maintenance and repair through the roof kind of like putting the alternator inside the motor which would make alternator replacement an over the top nightmare cost wise.  Personally I would have less heartburn over some of this if it said Honda or Yamaha on the tank.  Please excuse my negativism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JamesW

What do you suppose a new cam shaft would cost for one of these bikes?  Cam shaft metallurgy is pretty darn good and one seldom hears about failures but still....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dirtrider
4 minutes ago, JamesW said:

What do you suppose a new cam shaft would cost for one of these bikes?  Cam shaft metallurgy is pretty darn good and one seldom hears about failures but still....

 

Afternoon James

 

The current '18 cam is a little over $400.00 & the sliding cam would take a little more machining so it would probably be more.

 

It won't be too long before the shift-cam parts books are let  out to the public so we should have the (exact) answer pretty soon.

 

One of the advantages of multi valve heads is smaller valves & smaller valves need less spring pressure to prevent floating so usually less cam lobe wear. Plus the new sliding cam would split the wear between 2 cam lobes so might last even longer.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ponch
31 minutes ago, JamesW said:

I've always wondered why BMW couldn't have easily installed hydraulic lifters in the airhead/oilhead pushrod motors and omitted the need to adjust valve clearances.  As far as engine revs are concerned these motors aren't high rev anyway but they get the job done.  My 1100 has a red line at 7.5K and seldom needs a valve adjustment and a valve check only takes an hour and doesn't cost anything.  

 

For me I have no incentive to ever own anything newer in the way of a BMW.  It's kind of sad that vehicle manufacturers have to resort to gizmos in order to sell new cars/motorcycles.  This shift can technology has the potential to put the cost of maintenance and repair through the roof kind of like putting the alternator inside the motor which would make alternator replacement an over the top nightmare cost wise.  Personally I would have less heartburn over some of this if it said Honda or Yamaha on the tank.  Please excuse my negativism.

It's not just BMW. I had a Suburban that use Active Fuel Management and they are prone to valvetrain issues and burning oil. I go the latter. Even though I had the extended warranty, they wouldn't replace the engine as 1 qt for 1800 miles in one cylinder was acceptable. Their fix was a windage tray and a modified valve cover with a modified PCV system. It didn't help as the damage was done. Never again will I buy GM or any other brand that doesn't test their technology right. I wasn't the only person with the problem. It's a known issue and had I known it was, a company makes a device to disable AFM and I would have bought it.  If the Japanese can make long term reliable vehicles, so can any other manufacturer. The question is why not? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dirtrider
2 hours ago, JamesW said:

I've always wondered why BMW couldn't have easily installed hydraulic lifters in the airhead/oilhead pushrod motors and omitted the need to adjust valve clearances.

 

Afternoon James

 

It might have been possible on the airhead but why?  Would have taken a LOT of  redesign, changes to the oiling system, added weight, added complexity, & added  cost. Big costly changes for no real gain. Then you would have the added weight of the lifter hydraulics/oil so would  then probably need stronger valve springs to control the extra reciprocating  weight & that could increase cam lobe wear.

 

Back in the Airhead days BMW riders liked the simplicity & old school BMW simple mechanics.

Personally, I sure wouldn't have bought an Airhead if it came with hydraulic valve actuation back then. Now an extra transmission gear might have interested me.  

 

Now on the oilhead, that it a different animal as putting in hydraulic lifters would have been a real challenge without adding engine width, larger cyl heads,  LOTS more complexity,  as well as a total  valve train re-design with significant added packaging area increase.  With  2 valves operating off of one rocker arm, one push rod, one lifter,  it  would 'still' need to have the individual adjustments checked & set even IF  there was a hydraulic follower on the cam lobe. Just no real-estate available to add more lifters/push rods to get one hydraulic lifter per valve.  

 

The BMW that could REALLY benefit from hydraulic valve lash control would be the F 800 bikes-- But the F-800 engine is already tall and it would need to be significantly taller to add hydraulic valve control between the cam & valves.

That bike is a nightmare to do a valve check on & even more intense  if  a camshaft (or both) needs to be  removed to do an actual lash adjustment  (If you ever get a look at the BMW F-series bike service manual the real work starts AFTER you remove the plastic panels, battery, battery tray, & air box).

 

If you gave me a choice of adjusting the valves on  (12) oilhead bikes or (1) F- 800 it would be the 12 oilheads every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AZgman

If you think the F800 is bad, try a Triumph Trophy SE!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ponch
2 hours ago, dirtrider said:

 

Afternoon James

 

It might have been possible on the airhead but why?  Would have taken a LOT of  redesign, changes to the oiling system, added weight, added complexity, & added  cost. Big costly changes for no real gain. Then you would have the added weight of the lifter hydraulics/oil so would  then probably need stronger valve springs to control the extra reciprocating  weight & that could increase cam lobe wear.

 

Back in the Airhead days BMW riders liked the simplicity & old school BMW simple mechanics.

Personally, I sure wouldn't have bought an Airhead if it came with hydraulic valve actuation back then. Now an extra transmission gear might have interested me.  

 

Now on the oilhead, that it a different animal as putting in hydraulic lifters would have been a real challenge without adding engine width, larger cyl heads,  LOTS more complexity,  as well as a total  valve train re-design with significant added packaging area increase.  With  2 valves operating off of one rocker arm, one push rod, one lifter,  it  would 'still' need to have the individual adjustments checked & set even IF  there was a hydraulic follower on the cam lobe. Just no real-estate available to add more lifters/push rods to get one hydraulic lifter per valve.  

 

The BMW that could REALLY benefit from hydraulic valve lash control would be the F 800 bikes-- But the F-800 engine is already tall and it would need to be significantly taller to add hydraulic valve control between the cam & valves.

That bike is a nightmare to do a valve check on & even more intense  if  a camshaft (or both) needs to be  removed to do an actual lash adjustment  (If you ever get a look at the BMW F-series bike service manual the real work starts AFTER you remove the plastic panels, battery, battery tray, & air box).

 

If you gave me a choice of adjusting the valves on  (12) oilhead bikes or (1) F- 800 it would be the 12 oilheads every time.

Maybe the R1800C will have them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ScottT

"Anybody have any BMW manual info yet showing (if) both sets of cam lobes are checked for proper lash clearance? Any info on the correct lash setting range?"

 

I was at the local dealer here in Plano this last Saturday. I had them check for the latest service manual/DVD. The new one containing the R1250s is not out yet. If I get word before anyone else I'll share it here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×