RE: [ST] Valve Shim Replacement - Another Perspective[was:Crankstorycontinues...]

["Adrian Mansell" <amansell@xxxxxxxx>]

OK, that makes sense.  I guess this sets a minimum shim thickness which prevents it from making a bid for freedom under 'normal' (whatever that is) amounts of valve float.  Possibly that minimum thickness is larger than what would otherwise be required, so shim-over-bucket may be a bit heavier than under-bucket.

Ta,

A

> -----Original Message-----
> From: st-triumphnet.com-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:st-triumphnet.com-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On 
> Behalf Of Rick
> & Joyce
> Sent: 25 April 2005 22:05
> To: ST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ST] Valve Shim Replacement - Another
> Perspective[was:Crankstorycontinues...]
> 
> 
> > Can anyone explain to me why shim-under-bucket is better 
> > than shim-over-bucket?
> 
> Shim 'under' is better in higher rpm engines.  Shim over-bucket
> engines have a disturbing tendency for the shim to be spit out in an
> over-rev, &/or valve float situation.  When this occurs in a modern
> negative-clearance engine, the carnage is spectacular!
> 
> --
> Rick in Oregon
> '01 Sprint ST
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Triumph Sprint ST/RS mailing list
> Send list posts to ST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Change your list options at www.TriumphNet.com
> 
_______________________________________________
Triumph Sprint ST/RS mailing list
Send list posts to ST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Change your list options at www.TriumphNet.com