Valve job

[VentureT]

So, after 2 years of having a couple of local shops (with the same migrating staff) adjust carbs for poor fuel mileage and backfiring (particularly on deceleration), I went to another shop after they couldn't seem to fix the issues. He was asking a series of different questions about valve adjustments, etc that the other shops weren't. He said he wanted to do a leak down test...One reading was a wopping 83%. So, I understand I am in for a valve job after getting jerked around with carb adjustments for 2 years to try to fix my measely 200-250 km per tank and decel backfiring.

 

The new-to-me shop is a one-man shop, charges a much more reasonable hourly rate than others I have been going to, and has been seemingly much more knowledgeable.

 

One question...just because I am tired of being jerked around....what does a valve job on an 03 Venture generally go for?

 

I understand between the leak-down test, the valve job and whatever else comes into play I am looking at the better part of 2500-3K.

 

Thanks

[flb_78]

Why would you need a valve job already?

 

Maybe a valve adjustment, which isn't near as involved.

[Yammer Dan]

Why would you need a valve job already?

 

Maybe a valve adjustment, which isn't near as involved.

 

:sign yeah that:

 

Thats my thoughts.

[VentureT]

Thanks for the replies guys.

 

I have about 97,000 km on the bike. I was told the valve adjustment only improved the leak test reading from 86 to 83% on the one cylinder. (I hope this makes sense because I am not a mechanic by any means).

[yamtom]

I dont think you said what the leakdown numbers are on the other cyls, but if they are ok, only one cyl needs the work. This is info that Ive heard over the years, that a complete valve job may just hasten the end for the engine due to much improved compression causing blowby to start on engines with already significant wear. Just the one cyl should have its valves done is my opinion, maybe that can get the costs down a bit. Lets hear it from you all, what say ye?

[VentureT]

I dont think you said what the leakdown numbers are on the other cyls, but if they are ok, only one cyl needs the work. This is info that Ive heard over the years, that a complete valve job may just hasten the end for the engine due to much improved compression causing blowby to start on engines with already significant wear. Just the one cyl should have its valves done is my opinion, maybe that can get the costs down a bit. Lets hear it from you all, what say ye?

 

The other numbers we all in the teens - between 13 and 16. I understand anything under 21% is ok.

 

Good point about the effect of the valve job....scary thought though.

 

Thanks again.

[Squidley]

Mileage wise 97K equates to about 60K in US miles, which really isn't a lot of miles for these motors. I have a hard time believing there would have to be a valve job done on it. Thats not saying that a valve isn't cracked, but like FLB 79 mentioned I would check the adjustment. Lots of things can make the bike pop, AIS hoses disconnected, Y pipes cracking (which is an issue) The leakdown will give erroneous results if it's out on the shimming. Something is telling me there's a bit more to it. There are unscroupulous folks that will say whatever they can to get a meal ticket (not saying this is the case) but I would check some lesser invasive things before I even considered a valve job.

[VentureT]

Mileage wise 97K equates to about 60K in US miles, which really isn't a lot of miles for these motors. I have a hard time believing there would have to be a valve job done on it. Thats not saying that a valve isn't cracked, but like FLB 79 mentioned I would check the adjustment. Lots of things can make the bike pop, AIS hoses disconnected, Y pipes cracking (which is an issue) The leakdown will give erroneous results if it's out on the shimming. Something is telling me there's a bit more to it. There are unscroupulous folks that will say whatever they can to get a meal ticket (not saying this is the case) but I would check some lesser invasive things before I even considered a valve job.

 

Thanks Squid! I hope I am not getting bent over again. I linked the ports a while ago - they all seemed to be connected fine (mod from here). He did the valve adjustment with only a 3% improvement. Would the Y-pipe cracking give me such poor fuel mileage? Again, 200-250 km / tank. I have heard this guy is honest but....i dunno what to think anymore about any bike guy in my area.

[allwx]

Hopefully you won't have to pull the heads off. but if a valve repair job ends up being necessary, to save money you could pull the heads yourself and carry them in to the shop for him to do the work. Specialized tools and know-how are required to do a proper valve repair/valve job. but pulling the heads is not such a big deal, IMHO. An awful lot of the expense of this would be the pulling and reinstalling of the heads. I wouldn't be surprised if it would save you 50% or more of the cost.

 

As for what you are saying about fuel efficiency... 200 or so km per tank. Is that on a 6 gallon expenditure? If you fuel up with 2 gal left in the tank, then that distance isn't bad at all. But if you fuel up with fumes left in the tank, then it is pretty poor unless you're riding 100 mph all the time.

[VentureT]

Hopefully you won't have to pull the heads off. but if a valve repair job ends up being necessary, to save money you could pull the heads yourself and carry them in to the shop for him to do the work. Specialized tools and know-how are required to do a proper valve repair/valve job. but pulling the heads is not such a big deal, IMHO. An awful lot of the expense of this would be the pulling and reinstalling of the heads. I wouldn't be surprised if it would save you 50% or more of the cost.

 

As for what you are saying about fuel efficiency... 200 or so km per tank. Is that on a 6 gallon expenditure? If you fuel up with 2 gal left in the tank, then that distance isn't bad at all. But if you fuel up with fumes left in the tank, then it is pretty poor unless you're riding 100 mph all the time.

 

Well, the guy has pulled it apart at the shop (I am a bit of a mechanical idiot) so I would rather pay to have it done and done right, seeing as I don't know anyone handy that way.

 

As far as fuel efficiency goes, that is the full 6 gallons - pretty crappy.

 

Thanks

[BuddyRich]

A valve adjustment on these bikes is about a four hour job. You think he went thru all that for a leak down test ?

[allwx]

I'm not clear on why making a (presumably small) valve clearance adjustment would make any difference at all on a leak down test. A change of only 3% is probably within a tolerance of variation. Whether 86% or 83%, that's a lot of leakage compared to the other three cyls with their sub-20% readings. Seems like one cylinder dragging ass like that could definitely make for bad mileage. If it was me, I'd just cut to the chase and pull the offending head off and have a look at the valves. If it's the cylinder instead of a valve, the head would still have to come off to fix that. You can't live with a near-dead cylinder, it'd drive me nuts! I'll bet the bike shakes more than normal, too.

[MikeWa]

83% is a lot of leakage.

Mike

[VentureT]

A valve adjustment on these bikes is about a four hour job. You think he went thru all that for a leak down test ?

 

He did the leakdown test, told me the numbers, then suggested the valve adjustment...he said that might fix it...but it only improved 3%...that's when he said I need a valve job and said he was nearly certain that would fix the issue.

 

Thanks for getting back to me on this post - EVERYONE.

[VentureT]

I'm not clear on why making a (presumably small) valve clearance adjustment would make any difference at all on a leak down test. A change of only 3% is probably within a tolerance of variation. Whether 86% or 83%, that's a lot of leakage compared to the other three cyls with their sub-20% readings. Seems like one cylinder dragging ass like that could definitely make for bad mileage. If it was me, I'd just cut to the chase and pull the offending head off and have a look at the valves. If it's the cylinder instead of a valve, the head would still have to come off to fix that. You can't live with a near-dead cylinder, it'd drive me nuts! I'll bet the bike shakes more than normal, too.

 

I really haven't noticed any extra shaking.

[allwx]

Does it use any oil? Reason I ask is, back on my 97 RSTD the motor started using oil at around 18k miles. It caught me totally by surprise. The pattern was, change the oil, no consumption apparent until the oil had about 2k miles on it. Then, between 2k and the 3k oil change interval it would use about a half quart. Probably related to viscosity breakdown, but it was a change from what had been the pattern for the first 18k miles. Other than that, the engine ran fine.

 

Then, at 26k I did my first valve adjustment. One of the intakes had no measureable clearance at all. My smallest feeler is .0015 and it wouldn't go into the gap. I just about had a cow! That is the reason I no longer wait until the interval on the first adjustment.

 

It is possible that intake was slightly damaged. Fuel mileage on that motor was never acceptable. I could barely break 32 mpg riding at a gentle 60 mph with no headwind.

 

I probably should have gone to the dealer with it under warranty, but I never did. AFAIK the bike is still alive. Must have well over 100k on it by now. It had over 70k when I sold it. The high mileage makes me doubt the valve damage. Seems like if there was a chunk out of a valve it would have gotten larger over time, but this motor never changed after that 18k point. It was extremely smooth and reliable. Just got crappy mileage and had to have a few oz of oil added between changes. I never did a compression test on it.

[VentureT]

Does it use any oil? Reason I ask is, back on my 97 RSTD the motor started using oil at around 18k miles. It caught me totally by surprise. The pattern was, change the oil, no consumption apparent until the oil had about 2k miles on it. Then, between 2k and the 3k oil change interval it would use about a half quart. Probably related to viscosity breakdown, but it was a change from what had been the pattern for the first 18k miles. Other than that, the engine ran fine.

 

Then, at 26k I did my first valve adjustment. One of the intakes had no measureable clearance at all. My smallest feeler is .0015 and it wouldn't go into the gap. I just about had a cow! That is the reason I no longer wait until the interval on the first adjustment.

 

It is possible that intake was slightly damaged. Fuel mileage on that motor was never acceptable. I could barely break 32 mpg riding at a gentle 60 mph with no headwind.

 

I probably should have gone to the dealer with it under warranty, but I never did. AFAIK the bike is still alive. Must have well over 100k on it by now. It had over 70k when I sold it. The high mileage makes me doubt the valve damage. Seems like if there was a chunk out of a valve it would have gotten larger over time, but this motor never changed after that 18k point. It was extremely smooth and reliable. Just got crappy mileage and had to have a few oz of oil added between changes. I never did a compression test on it.

 

Not using any oil.

[VentureT]

So the head is off the bike with the big leak -the exhaust ports/valves on the affected area appear a whitish colour like they have taken a fair bit of heat - different than the others. Seems like the guy is right from what I saw...in my humbly uneducated opinion.

[flb_78]

What brand and octane rating of gasoline do you normally use?

 

Any way to obtain some pictures of the engine while it's apart?

[VentureT]

What brand and octane rating of gasoline do you normally use?

 

Any way to obtain some pictures of the engine while it's apart?

 

Varies...usually 87% but if riding with my wife on her Victory Vision, premium (91 to 94%) due to her bike requirements.

 

I didn't get any pictures...I'm hoping first thing tomorrow the head is on it's way to get rebuilt.

[VentureT]

Hey everyone,

 

Spring is here in Ontario and I have been doing some riding. Still getting disappointing fuel economy....switching to reserve at about 200km(124 miles) and sucking fumes at 250km (155 miles) to a full tank.

 

After my valve job (see thread), I am still backfiring on deceleration & when changing gears (ranging from pops to bangs) but it is a little better than before. Sadly, this 3G worth of work did not fix all my issues.

 

I am running Baron's bag slash pipes, which have been packed. Never re-jetted because Barons told me I would not have to.

 

No carb readjustment/needle shimming after the valve job.

 

Getting frustrated with spending all this money and not having my problems fixed.

 

Any input is welcomed...any suggestions on who to go to in the Barrie, Orillia, Midland Ontario area is welcomed.

[darthandy]

I was just going over your thread and I have a possibly stupid question, but I'll ask it anyway. Do you keep the motor revved up or do you shift into the higher gears as soon as possible? These bikes live on revs and there are a number of threads attesting to the fact that many of us, including me, get better mileage when winding out these motors. I only very rarely use 5th - typically on a major 4 lane highway when travelling at around 120 KPH. The pipes you mention would usually require re-jetting and possibly some work with the needles. If not, you may be running too lean and among the symptoms would be backfiring and poor gas mileage. I normally get between 250 and 290 km before going on reserve and I like to rev that motor when I run - it may sound quiet to the outside world but from the seat, it sounds great! I used to get some backfiring but very rarely any more ... and the only change has been the way I ride compared to the way the previous owner rode. It's as if I "cleaned" something out by pushing it more. As well, I have run the proper amount of Seafoam through several tanks of gas and that probably helped or even made all the difference. If the shop actually did the valve work, it would seem the problem is either with the ignition or the carbs. My money is still on a lean running condition due to the pipes, but re-jetting is complicated if you are not knowledgeable or mechanically inclined. It would be nice if you could find someone with a set of stock pipes they could loan you to see if that helps things.

 

Andy

[allwx]

Well that is unfortunate, but at least you can be reasonably confident that you don't have a valve problem. How's the compression now? Would be worth a new leakdown test to make sure that cyl is actually holding compression as it should.

 

Regarding the popping. If you've still got your air induction system intact and it is functioning properly, you should get *some* popping on decel. That is normal, and is a sign that the air induction system is working properly.

 

The poor fuel mileage could be ascribed to another cause, of which there could be very many, including things not yet mentioned such as dragging brakes, wheel bearings, stuff like that. If your motor compression is up to par and all four carbs are well tuned, then you might start looking at those areas if you haven't already.

 

Someone else has mentioned the idea of keeping engine rpm high due to the overdrive nature of 4th and 5th gears. Myself, I ignore all of that and ride the bike exactly like I ride every other bike. I upshift early, keep it in 5th as long as I can. I do not shy away from a gentle throttle roll-on from 40 mph in 5th on level ground. The bike pulls fine in that gear, and I get a consistent 42-44 mpg on regular gas.

 

I think the keep-rpm-high theory made some sense on the original Royal Stars that had the 60hp motors. Those were dogs. Mine couldn't pull 5th gear into a gentle headwind. But the Ventures are a different animal, well able to be ridden just like any other bike and turn in good numbers along the way.

[VentureT]

I was just going over your thread and I have a possibly stupid question, but I'll ask it anyway. Do you keep the motor revved up or do you shift into the higher gears as soon as possible? These bikes live on revs and there are a number of threads attesting to the fact that many of us, including me, get better mileage when winding out these motors. I only very rarely use 5th - typically on a major 4 lane highway when travelling at around 120 KPH. The pipes you mention would usually require re-jetting and possibly some work with the needles. If not, you may be running too lean and among the symptoms would be backfiring and poor gas mileage. I normally get between 250 and 290 km before going on reserve and I like to rev that motor when I run - it may sound quiet to the outside world but from the seat, it sounds great! I used to get some backfiring but very rarely any more ... and the only change has been the way I ride compared to the way the previous owner rode. It's as if I "cleaned" something out by pushing it more. As well, I have run the proper amount of Seafoam through several tanks of gas and that probably helped or even made all the difference. If the shop actually did the valve work, it would seem the problem is either with the ignition or the carbs. My money is still on a lean running condition due to the pipes, but re-jetting is complicated if you are not knowledgeable or mechanically inclined. It would be nice if you could find someone with a set of stock pipes they could loan you to see if that helps things.

 

Andy

 

I wouldn't say I change gears as soon as possible but I am not trying to redline it (if we had a redline) either. I do a lot of highway (multi-lane) riding so I do use 5th a lot.

 

I had run sea foam through last fall with no change - prior the leak down test, with no improvement.

 

I did have stock pipes on it but the shop I went to said the packing was all burnt out of it. I already had the pipes I have on now once before then took off to put back on the stock pipes for a quieter ride. I had these non-stock pipes wrapped to dampen the noise.

 

I understand there is no way to re-pack stock pipes due to not being able to get into them - any truth to that?...Anyone?

 

So, being a mechanical idiot, here's a question I have....If I am backfiring, I understood that there was raw fuel being dumped into the pipes and reigniting. If that is the case, would I not be running too rich, as opposed to too lean?

 

My wife in her infinite mechanical wisdom (NOT!!!) seems to think that these Barons pipes are the cause of the poor fuel economy - not rejetting, carb settings, etc.. I hate having to say, yes dear, you are right...so someone chime in here. lol

 

Thanks

[VentureT]

Well that is unfortunate, but at least you can be reasonably confident that you don't have a valve problem. How's the compression now? Would be worth a new leakdown test to make sure that cyl is actually holding compression as it should.

 

Regarding the popping. If you've still got your air induction system intact and it is functioning properly, you should get *some* popping on decel. That is normal, and is a sign that the air induction system is working properly.

 

The poor fuel mileage could be ascribed to another cause, of which there could be very many, including things not yet mentioned such as dragging brakes, wheel bearings, stuff like that. If your motor compression is up to par and all four carbs are well tuned, then you might start looking at those areas if you haven't already.

 

Someone else has mentioned the idea of keeping engine rpm high due to the overdrive nature of 4th and 5th gears. Myself, I ignore all of that and ride the bike exactly like I ride every other bike. I upshift early, keep it in 5th as long as I can. I do not shy away from a gentle throttle roll-on from 40 mph in 5th on level ground. The bike pulls fine in that gear, and I get a consistent 42-44 mpg on regular gas.

 

I think the keep-rpm-high theory made some sense on the original Royal Stars that had the 60hp motors. Those were dogs. Mine couldn't pull 5th gear into a gentle headwind. But the Ventures are a different animal, well able to be ridden just like any other bike and turn in good numbers along the way.

Don't have any noted issues - not sure I really want to pay another $400 for a leak down test again though.

 

Thanks for the other ideas.