make a donation to the fz1oa
fz1oa chat
fz1oa picture uploader
maintain your own photo albums
locate fz1oa members
Members Assistance Guide
search the entire board
click here for fz1oa web site home page
register a new account, it's free!
fz1oa store
email the fz1oa webmasters
read the fz1oa guidelines
read the fz1oa policy
open pat's fz1 site in a new window
open iowaz fz1 site in a new window
technical tips

Go Back   FZ1OA Message Board > FZ1 & Fazer Owners Association > Exhausts, Carburetion & Performance > Gen 1 Exhausts, Carburetion & Performance

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-10-2016, 07:20 PM   #1
longeze
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 594
Facts About Mods as I know Them

After lurking this board for the better part of the last 2 years and spending far too much of my "free time" reading threads, I thought I should post the results of my research, measurements and performance mods for the benefit of anyone considering similar choices. It's worth noting that I encountered a considerable amount of misinformation and disinformation on this and many other websites causing me considerable frustration and wasted time, spent trying to reach a consensus of opinion or trying to derive the actual facts before making chips. Everyone knows that if it's on the internet it must be true right?

A year ago I bought a 2002 FZ1 with ~ 10K miles on it box stock. My impression of it was much as others describe, modest low end torque but if you wring its neck it goes pretty good. FWIW, in my prior life, I was a mechanic, a machinist and an engineer. I've been riding bikes for ~ 45years. Friends owned a bike shop so I had a chance to ride a wide variety of kit. I raced sprint karts & superkarts & road raced cars (sports racers) for ~ 10yrs, and fly high performance experimental airplanes and choppers. All this by way of saying that although I'm a 1st time poster here and you don't know me from beans, I ask that you give me the benefit of a small shred of credibility when it comes to evaluating relative performance improvement by the "seat of my pants" (admittedly subjective though it may be). At any rate, I just thought you might like to know that I didn't hop off a Vespa and start gushing here about the FZ1 mods.

My design priorities for this project:
Increase bottom end torque so I don't have to wind it out all the time.
At every opportunity, do what I can to limit reversion.
Limit material removal in the ports and boots to preserve the low end.
Limit material removal in the combustion chamber to preserve increased compression.
Do not destroy this wonderful engine by castrating the top end.
Preserve MPG as much as possible.
Don't build a bomb by pushing tolerances "too" close.
Keep the cost under $1000.

My Mods and Procedures:
0.010" Cometic head gasket with Viton coating
Sloted cam sprockets (on a mill) to accomplish 104.5 IN 100 EX timing
P-V clearance=0.075"EX & 0.045"IN @ closest points(~8deg B&A TDC)
Squish measured 0.033" several places (consensus=0.027" minimum)
Matched Intake ports to valve seats
Smoothed but did NOT knife edge port dividers IN or EX
Removed casting flash in all ports
Broadened shoulders of ports IN & EX at choke point on SSR only
Relieved area around the valve guides and streamlined intake guides
Flat faced the trailing edge of EX valve guides to create a cam profile
Cam Profile was chosen to reduce exhaust reversion
Progressively textured Intake ports (smoother closer to valves)
Blended head in area around EX valve faces nearest CYL walls ONLY
Did NOT blend head around EX valve faces near center to help reversion
Left sharp edges around IN valve faces to help fuel shear & reversion
Polished AND LAPPED all valves
Polished pistons and head (Toyota study showed 6% better torque+MPG)
Smoothed sharp thin edge around spark plug holes
Set valve lash 0.005"IN, 0.010"EX all = to within 0.0005"
Matched valve spring heights
Countersunk cam & head oil ports & filleted all sharp edges (oil wells etc)
Ported Boots but did NOT touch center hump other than to blend it in
Ported Boots but did NOT port match them (to help with reversion)
Ivans MB kit(all holes drilled,1/2"clipped springs, 14.5mm, 4.5 turns out)
Ivans MB needles 2nd e-clip slot from top
Removed Carb Heat Hoses & bypassed from thermostat port to radiator
Ivans AirBox mods
K&N Air Filter
HINDLE 4-2-1 full exhaust with 18" HINDLE muffler
Removed AIS & tapped EX port holes for 5/16"-18 to plug them
Slotted Timing Encoder for 4deg advance
Adjusted TPS per Ivans method
Jumpered the wiring harness when I removed the Exup & motor
Raised forks 8mm in triple tree
Replaced stock front brake pads with DP HH+ pads SDP418HH
New Dunlop Q3 front tire
Battery-Tender LI-FE Battery weighs 2LBs!!!
'01 R1 Shift arm
BMW S1000RR rear shock
NGK CR10E Spark Plugs gapped 0.032" (colder plug for safety)
EBC Heavy Duty Clutch Kit CK2358
Vesrah Heavy Duty Clutch Spring Set SK-254* SK-254 VSK254 971548
15T JT steel counter-shaft (front) sprocket
47T Vortex aluminum rear sprocket
645 LB/IN Spring(yellow) from a 2007 Honda CBR1000RR
Pirelli Angel ST 180/55-ZR17 Rear tire
Modified 2006~2013 R6 Throttle Tube
Replaced Turn signal indicator bulbs with high power green LED's T1.5-GHP
Replaced the 2 outermost dash backlights with high power cool white LED's T1.5-CWHP
Replaced the center dash backllight with a blue led T1.5-B (the high power version was out of stock when i ordered)
Replaced fuel gauge with a MultiGauge
Put a CrampBuster on my throttle grip
Replacing stock bars with older style Convertibars
Replacing Ft. springs & cartridges with 1.1 Eibach springs, Gold valve compression valves & Traxxion Dynamics rebound valves
Replacing stock clutch & brake levers with: 7 Click GP Lever Set from "The2Wheels.com"
AEM 30-0300X Wideband O2 gauge
Veypor V2 Multi-function gauge/logger
Eagle Tree Data Recorder

And for those of you with OCD:
New Teflon Valve Guide Seals
3.5 QTs Rotella T 15-40, Purolator PL14610 Oil Fiter & a generic fuel filter.

Without getting too deep into the politics of online marketing and the need for people to espouse opinions as facts with little foundation other than personal bias, let me state the following unequivocally:
The tolerances I'm running for P-V are perfectly safe. Also, while it's admittedly early yet, thus far the 0.010" head gasket is holding up just fine. Contrary to what some have posted, there ARE noticeable gains to be had from raising the compression, retiming the cams, putting on a full Hindle 4-2-1 exhaust and doing some prudent porting to this engine. While I have read in posts(here) and was personally cautioned against using a Hindle full exhaust due to its allegedly poor reversion characteristics and "flawed design", I experience NO PERCEPTIBLE flat spot or any reversion issues with it of any kind - NONE. It may be that there are some more low end gains to be had by retaining the use of the exup, but without back to back testing I can't know for sure. As it is, I'm happy with the trade off of less weight and maintenance against any benefit the exup might still provide, given my other mods. It pulls hard and unrelenting from idle through redline. I can pull away 2-up going uphill in my driveway at an idle and it's perfectly happy (no lugging or knocking) and it accelerates smoothly from there at any throttle setting including WOT without delay. It pulls harder and harder as it accelerates, to the point that I would like to remove the rev limiter since it's still pulling like the proverbial freight train at redline. You no longer have to wring its neck to get that rush of acceleration since it will pull hard at any RPM. I was and am surprised by the large gain in available bottom end torque. There isn't any significant penalty by way of softness at the top end (at least for my purposes) with the slightly advanced intake cam timing as some suggest.

My Mileage varies about 10mpg depending on how I ride. I calculate values of between 37 and 48 MPG. If I decide to take it to the dyno (to satisfy my curiosity) I'll post the numbers. Hopefully I'll get a chance to take it to the strip as well but the numbers wont mean too much since I'm probably 240LBs suited up and not very skilled at leaving the line anyway.

The front brakes are much stronger than with the stock pads and the feel is so much improved. Raising the forks in the triple tree makes the bike more "flickable" as does the weight reduction. I do notice a decrease in straight line stability so that's something to consider when making that change. I can really feel the loss of weight from the exhaust, battery and removing the lower fairing. It's certainly easier to push the bike around and I can definitely feel that it's lighter when I ride it. Removing the lower fairing really helped keep the bike from getting blown around by semis and the wind generally. I don't miss it in the least other than from an aesthetic perspective. I don't get that blast of heat off the engine now either and the weight loss is a bonus.

To anyone considering these modifications, I can tell you that they only changed the bike for the better in most every way, other than a necessity for a slightly higher (and rougher) idle, likely the result of increasing the valve overlap and enlarging the mixture bypass orifices in an imprecise manner by hand drilling at a compound angle. For those of you who are concerned about top speed, it's possible that removing the lower fairing slows the bike down a bit. Since I'm not racing my bike, I won't notice the difference of a few MPH loss at the top end. If you're considering a Hindle full exhaust, while I don't know how much better another system might be in terms of performance gain by comparison, I can tell you that it was feather light, well made and an awesome bang for the buck. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another one in a heartbeat. So, for those of you lamenting the unavailability of the Muzzy and other full systems, you may want to consider it.

Having read literally every word of every post I could find on this website about the following modifications, these are the conclusions I came to:

Seat mods:
The 2 major players are Corbin and Sargent. Corbin seems to be preferred for 2-up riding since among other reasons, there's a back rest available for it. The Sargent has been said to be a bit softer than the Corbin and many like it for solo riding. By far the most raved about seat option was from a guy who was active on this board called "Dirt Road", who made custom upholstery for our seats. With 1 exception that I could find, guys who tried other seats and seat mods greatly preferred this guys seats. While as of this post date, Dirt Road is no longer accepting orders, he said that he was training someone in his methods and would post up when the guy was ready to begin accepting orders. There's also a gel bubble overlay option that touring people really like. You'll have to do a search here to find it though.

Front Suspension mods:
1) The RavenRider $14 mod consists of cutting off the progressive part of the fork springs, essentially making them straight rate springs. As an alternative, you could just buy a pair of straight rate springs for $85~$130. By removing the progressive portion of the springs, they'll be shorter so you have to insert a pipe nipple for a spacer to take up the difference in length. This mod also involves changing the fork oil viscosity to improve the damping. I've never read anything but excellent results from people who have done this mod.

2) Installing RaceTech Gold Valves is a $350~$400 mod consisting of replacing the compression and rebound valving. This is a somewhat labor intensive operation. Most people chew up at least a day doing it, not including a significant amount of time reading or learning about the procedures they'll be undertaking before they begin. Results by most accounts are considered excellent (for the money). This is a step up from the RavenRider mod.

3) Traxxion Dynamics Axxion valves(no longer sold separately but Traxxion will install them for you) or AK20 cartridges are the higher $ option and generally considered yet another improvement still, beyond options #1 and #2 above. The AK20 cartridges give you the same performance as the Axxion valves but are interchangeable between bikes as a unit and in some threads I've read, are reportedly a permanent fix for the lack of anodized aluminum in our gen 1 forks which might lead to failure over time. Some say 20,000 to 30,000 miles before failure, while others who change their fork oil regularly have had no such issues. My understanding is that these options offer separate circuits for low and high speed compression and rebound which enable the suspension to afford you more compliance and grip. Last I read, having Traxxion install their valves and rebuild your forks will set you back around $750 and the AK20's will run you about $1100 if you install them yourself. The AK20 installation doesn't appear to be very difficult and appears to be roughly equivalent in effort to doing the RavenRider mod. I believe there's an AK30 gas shock cartridge available as well, but the cost probably outweighs the benefit for most FZ1 casual riders.

4) While at >= $1500, a significantly more expensive option than Traxxion AK20's are the Ohlins cartridges which in back to back testing were considered to be for the most part, roughly equivalent. The Ohlins were slightly preferred due to having a more "plush" feel and being more progressive under brakes. It was noted that unless you are racing at 10/10ths, you'd probably not notice the difference in grip between these two options. I couldn't determine if this was an option for Gen 1 bikes or not. I believe this is an option for Gen 2 bikes though. You'll have to check with an Ohlins distributor to find out.

5) Leave it stock. While not a "mod", it's a reasonable option especially for lighter guys weighing 165lbs or less. Set up right, the front of the bike isn't "that" bad for street riding. It's somewhat harsh over high speed bumps and can be hard on the wrists. Riding on poor roads especially at higher speeds, the bike moves up and down a lot if you set the compression stiff enough to help inhibit its tendency to dive under hard braking. Still, overall it's still an enjoyable enough ride and tracks nicely through smooth sweepers with a nice planted feeling without need for correction and changing direction is done without drama. If you're used to riding older bikes with damper rod suspension, this is definitely a step up from that. Personally, I'm thinking I'll opt for the Traxxion Dynamics option, probably the Axxion valves. I plan on keeping my bike a long while and don't put that many miles on it, so that option seems to make some sense for me.

6) Raise your forks in the triple tree. Raising the forks in the tree (lowering the front of the bike) between 7mm and 30mm is the accepted range. 13mm or LESS is generally the accepted safe range for street/track riding to improve the flickability of the bike as well as reduce the wheely tendencies somewhat. The bike is reportedly still stable through this range of adjustment with no high-side issues reported. Raising the forks beyond 17mm is something that should be considered for drag racing only. If you choose to raise them to that extent, you'll need to check for mechanical interference between hard parts like the lower triple tree and fender, radiator etc. You're on your own there. I raised mine 8mm with generally good result.

7) Strap the front of the bike. This is a drag racing tactic that involves installing a couple small eyes behind the front brake caliper bolt heads on each side of the bike and attaching a strap from 1 caliper eye over the frame by the steering head to the other caliper eye and tightening the strap to lower the front of the bike. This removes most if not all of the front suspension travel so you have to be careful to make certain you remove the strap before heading out to the street. By all accounts, strapping the front of the bike lowers your 1/4 mile E.T. by several 1/10ths and significantly helps to reduce the tendency of our bikes to wheely off the line.

Rear Suspension:
Replacing the rear shock absorber with either an R6 shock and spring, a BMW1000RR shock and spring(or a Honda CBR1000 spring), or a Penske shock and your favorite spring are the popular choices. They're all considered roughly equivalent by guys who have both the BMW and Penske shocks, reporting no noticeable difference in ride between them. The R6 has been said to be somewhat more compliant than the BMW option, but who knows how it was set up. Any of these options are a vast improvement over the stock shock. Cost of the BMW upgrade for me was ~$140 all in with a Honda Spring. I've read that the R6 mod is about the same and the Penske option will be much more expensive, typically between $450 and $750 - used.

Changing dogbones is also an option to alter ride height. You can raise or lower your bike by changing the rear suspension links("dogbones") to good effect if you're drag racing (lower the rear), or if you want to get the front end more planted by raising the back of the bike. The typical range of adjustment is about 1.5" either way, although I've read that some drag racers have lowered theirs much more. People also take this approach when they find that the bike is too tall for them to get their feet flat on the ground. I haven't done this to my bike, so I can't comment. Holeshot and others on this site sell adjustable links for our bikes so ask around if you're "inclined" to go that way.

Exhaust Systems and Slip-on's:
For headers, Holeshot and Hindle are the only choices for new equipment at this time. People who have had both give a slight performance advantage to Holeshot but have indicated that for the money they would probably choose a Hindle next time. It appears to me that the Holeshot system may have a longer service life since the Hindle is uncoated 0.020" stainless steel. For a used system, Muzzy seems to be the gold standard(good luck finding one) maybe followed by Yoshimira.

As for Slip-on's and mufflers, there are endless choices. If I could get one at a cheap price, MIVV would be my pick, but I suggest you find something that will fit your mid pipe diameter and take into consideration whether your pipe of choice has a stop for your center stand if you kept yours on your bike. As best I could tell after reviewing dyno sheets, there's very little performance advantage from one to the next, so just get whatever pipe makes your heart beat a bit faster.

Gearing:
15-47 Is the most popular choice for improving acceleration. This reduction in final drive ratio is by far the most popular mod for "bang for your buck". Another albeit less popular option is increasing the front sprocket tooth count by 1 to 17T. This reduces the RPM's at cruise speeds and helps to obviate the tendency by some of us to search for 7th gear all the time. If I weren't having issues with my 2nd gear popping out under hard acceleration, this would have been the way I would have gone for my bike.

Bars & Grips:
Pro-Grip 699 and gel grips seem to come up the most frequently as the preferred grip choices here, along with Grip Puppies. There is a lot variation in what people like to use but those are the names and grip types that come up the most frequently. I just picked up a set of Grip Puppies for my bike but haven't tried them out yet.

Many people including myself feel that the stock bars have too much sweep and pullback. You have to figure out what bars are right for your ergonomic needs, but Renthal and Bikemaster are a couple popular manufacturers that people like. More than a few people have changed to Gen2 bars for their Gen1 bikes as well. Here's a link I found useful for getting an idea of the dimensions of various bars: https://web.archive.org/web/20150323...asurements.htm Using risers to raise the bars an inch or so as well as bringing the bars rearward an inch or two are among the most often mentioned changes. For fitting yourself to the bike and reducing the tendency for your hands to tingle and get numb, you want to keep your wrists flat, arms below your shoulders, elbows out and slightly down with shoulders not hunched over trying to reach for the bars. "Cramp Buster", "Throttlemeister", "Throttle Rocker" and "Throttle Tamer" are also popular for a sort of poor mans cruise control as is filling the bars with lead shot to reduce vibration. Other common vibration mitigation methods include adding rubber strips under the bar risers, increasing the mass of the bar end weights, using a "Bar Snake" and re-tightening the engine mounts.

Windshields:
Laminar Lip and Double Bubble are by far the most often mentioned. There is also an adjustable height windshield that is often mentioned with favor, but I can't recall the name and can't find it in my notes. Most of the comments indicate that none of them help all that much with reducing wind noise and buffeting and that your height really makes a difference. On Gen1 bikes many people say that a lot of the noise and buffeting is from the mirrors. Those that change to bar end mirrors report an improvement in that regard. Personally, I found that with my full face helmet, that if I open my visor about an inch or two, that the wind noise goes almost totally quiet. I found it curious that when I tried that trick on my GF's bike that has a very short windshield that it didn't yield much improvement. So, for those of you that hate the wind noise as much as I do and don't mind the occasional bug getting through, try opening your visor and see if it helps.

Jet Kits:
I saved the "best" for last LOL. This is an endlessly disputed topic and by endlessly I mean I'd rather have my eyes gouged out and dunk my head in salt water than have to read all that crap again geeeezzzz. The bottom line is that if you're going to install a jet kit the 2 MOST POPULAR choices are Ivans and Holeshot with a 3rd DIY option using RavenRiders mod. With reference to Dale and Ivans kits, there are 3 flavors from each vendor: Slip-on, Stage 2(Holeshot) or MB(Ivans) for use with headers and a third option(pod kit) if you want to delete your airbox for looks and for easier removal of your carbs. Ignoring the less commonly used pod kits, there are 2 primary differences between the two vendors mainstay kits. Ivans kit has tapered needles and to do the full install, requires drilling the carb bodies and slides. Dales Holeshot kit has standard taper needles and doesn't require any drilling. At the risk of getting banned from this site, I'm going out on a limb to say that the consensus from people who have tried both seemed to me to clearly indicate that there is a slight but perceptible performance improvement with Ivans kit by way of smoother running and a stronger midrange. Dales Holeshot kit is less hassle to install, "might" offer a bit better MPG with his slip-on kit than Ivans slip-on kit (although that hasn't been proven) and comes with an optional 3 degree ignition advancer. Both kits are inexpensive at less than $150 and involve changing the main jets, adjusting the float heights, mixture screws and needle position. Optionally, if using Ivans kit it's recommended to cut the slide springs shorter as well. The RavenRider mod can be found on this website by doing a search so I won't reiterate it here. Although I didn't go that route, I can tell you with some certainty that his option is an excellent choice for people who don't want to spend more cash than they need to and aren't "that" picky about very slight differences in performance. If I had to guess, I'd think that it probably gives you 80% of what any other kit will give you through the low end and midrange, and likely no difference at all at Wide Open Throttle(WOT). From looking at what's involved in all the various kits, I'd guess that you may miss out on some throttle response improvement Using RavenRiders mods as opposed to using Ivans kit but that's just my guess. Since I was primarily concerned with improving my midrange, I went with Ivans Kit. If I weren't doing all my other mods, I would have gone the RavenRider route and wouldn't look back. What I would've been missing wouldn't be worth worrying about and certainly wasn't worth the ludicrous amount of time that I and others expended to write and read about all of this minutia. I'm slightly sorry if I offended anyone.

I want to thank those board members who took the time and effort to talk or write to me about this project and share their experiences with me before I began. I still can't believe I have a bike this capable for such a modest investment in time and $. :))

Ride Safe!

Last edited by longeze; 08-30-2017 at 10:50 AM. Reason: Added Some of My Notes on Popular Mods
longeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 08:18 PM   #2
vitesse
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,318
With a bike out of the box that will crack 3 sec. 0-60 and 160 mph what is the point? Just get an R1, BMW 1000RR etc.
vitesse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 12:14 PM   #3
longeze
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by vitesse View Post
With a bike out of the box that will crack 3 sec. 0-60 and 160 mph what is the point? Just get an R1, BMW 1000RR etc.
Vitesse, there are several reasons:
1) At my age, there are other places(for me) to park $15,000+ than on a bike that I only use for fun six months out of the year and that will likely lose the majority of it's monetary value over the next 10 years.
2) I enjoyed the challenge of trying to change the character of my FZ1 to be more aligned with my riding style and environment. We have far more short(1/2 mile +/-) straight roads than twisties in the rural areas near my house, so more of the fun is to be had on short rides from the rush of quick acceleration rather than doing swoopies through the turns.
3) I ride 2-up most of the time, and as I said, I'm about 240LBs suited up so we weren't experiencing acceleration anything like 0-60 in 3 secs. We probably are now.
4) The bike is much more fun for us to ride now than it was, since there's significant gains on the left side of curve. For our purposes, it's not about the max HP, RPM or top speed although I suspect there are potential improvements in those areas as well. It's mostly about feeling that strong smooth pull as you row through the gears at part throttle and 2500 fewer Revs than used to be required to experience that same acceleration. At the same time, it now has the capability to rush to redline as quickly as it used to when I rode solo, but now does so with my GF on the back so she can experience the rush also. She says it's like flying )
longeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2016, 06:02 PM   #4
thepopularjock
Sometimes I "Drunk Post" :)
 
thepopularjock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Brownwood, Texas
Posts: 3,960
Quote:
Originally Posted by vitesse View Post
With a bike out of the box that will crack 3 sec. 0-60 and 160 mph what is the point? Just get an R1, BMW 1000RR etc.

I see your point but spend some time on the R1, 1000RR forums. Very few guys leave their bikes stock. Modding/tinkering is an addiction.


Longeze ~ welcome and I enjoyed reading your write up. I'm also a little envious of your skills.



...
__________________
2004 Skunk
2002 R1 - Track Bike
2000 DRZ - Trail Bike
thepopularjock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2016, 06:43 PM   #5
longeze
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by thepopularjock View Post
I see your point but spend some time on the R1, 1000RR forums. Very few guys leave their bikes stock. Modding/tinkering is an addiction.


Longeze ~ welcome and I enjoyed reading your write up. I'm also a little envious of your skills.



...
Thanks for the nice words Jock, you're most kind. It has been a lifelong addiction for the better and worst of it ;) I'd just like to take this opportunity to encourage you and others who are reluctant to take on a project like this out of concern that it may be somewhat daunting or require of you, skills or equipment beyond your reach, to make a small leap of faith and just jump in with confidence. If you just change to a stock 0.0234" R1 head-gasket, you wouldn't even have to mess with re-timing the cams. It's honestly not that much more work than doing a jet kit. You guys won't need a degree wheel, dial indicator or anything special equipment or tools other than a torque wrench to get er done. Just pop the head off and use the new gasket to put it back together. You'll need to clean the old gasket material off the cylinder head and top of the block without dumping crud into the cylinder bores or cooling jacket. Use a plastic scraper so you don't scratch the aluminum mating surfaces. Some people like to use gasket remover to make things easier. I think permatex makes some of that stuff. Other people like to use carburetor cleaner and/or Brakleen to help speed things along. Whatever you use, just make sure the surfaces of the head and the block are totally clean, but not polished.

The pain in the butt was taking all those valves out of the head and replacing them, now THAT was a PITA lol. Fortunately for you, that's not necessary if you're only going to replace the head gasket. But just replacing the head gasket for a few extra ponies also changes your cam timing in good directions for you and you'll be VERY happy with the result and spend no more than $100 bucks all in and maybe one more evenings work beyond that required to do a jet kit. Just set the crankshaft timing encoder to line up with the Top Dead Center mark on the case, line up the dots on the cams with the vertical lines stamped into the head before you take it apart. Leaving the sprockets on the cams was by far the easiest way to do things. Just remove the two bolts holding the timing chain tensioner in and it gives you plenty of slack in the chain. As long as you don't move the crankshaft when you put it all back together, you can just connect the dots to put it back together like things were when you took it apart. You'll just notice that after you torque the head and install the cams that the dots are ever so slightly offset from the lines in the head, but they still align with the same links in the timing chain. If you're really worried, you can put a bit of paint on both 1 tooth of each cam gear and a bit of paint on the corresponding link in the timing chain that it's engaged with before you unbolt things to give yourself a little added reassurance that things are going back together as they should. Other than making sure you don't move the crankshaft once you begin dis-assembly, the other most important thing to keep in mind is that you MUST keep the slack in the chain on the side of the intake cam sprocket closest to the rear of the bike AND no slack in the chain between the 2 cam sprockets. There are any number of threads on this website that have pictures and complete written descriptions of these procedures, so you'll always have a convenient visual reference if you're ever unsure about where things are at for you. I'm saying it's not so much a matter of skill as it is one of desire and a little bit of a mindset that says that others have gone this way before so things will turn out just fine. Worry less, wrench more??? Good luck!

Ride Safe people )

Last edited by longeze; 06-19-2016 at 08:41 PM. Reason: Corrected head gasket info and more detailed & well thought out commentary.
longeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 11:17 AM   #6
longeze
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 594
Time for more timing data: For any of you considering re-timing your cams, I thought I would post some of the notes I gathered from various people who published their values and comments about their results. If you're not interested in cam timing, you may want to skip the rest of this post.

Since I've already told you of Ivans preferred timing numbers(108In, 100Ex), I won't publish comments from most others using those values. Suffice it to say that many people went that way and that those who ran those numbers(and kept them), did so because they were happy with what they got. Without further delay, here's some quotes and comments:

Ivan Stock cam timing is 106in/102ex ; orig recommend: 107in and 101 ex ; For best torque and non-interference stay at or less than 105deg advanced on intake anything more makes less pwr everywhere;
... using 105in/100ex will give better midrange at the expense of some top end.
... 105 on the exhaust doesn't really add any top end as compared to 100ex, but costs some midrange.
-----
In another post, Ivan made these comments: I would put the exhaust cam back to 100 degrees if you want the wheelies to return. 106 on the intake is pretty much the stock setting and will give the best midrange. If it was my motor, I would have set them at 108/100.
108/100 = 104 degree total lobe center (my preferred settings for this engine - Both R1 & FZ-1 with stock cams)
106/102 = 104 degree total lobe center (stock settings)
106/105 = 105.5 degree total lobe center (a little outside what I would use for this engine)
The further (numerically higher) you push the exhaust cam from 100 degrees on these engines, the weaker the whole chart gets, and you don't get the extra steam at the top end either (like 4 valve motors get).
Tha actual tuning window is pretty narrow as far as cam timing goes.
I had the motors out of my 88 FZR1000 and my 98 R1 more times than I care to share, finding out about what cam timing #'s that these engines respond well to.

Chuck at Graves suggested. the R1 setting the cams to 102in 104ex works good for best all round riding. For more top end power go with 106in 103ex. For low end 100in 104ex.
-----
In another post, Graves said that for bottom end/midrange, he recommends 100In/102Ex.

Tim Radley "i d start at 105/105 and see what that brings. If u have clearance issues or want to get rid of some midrange then swing the numbers higher. 1 degree increase is typically 0.1mm = 0.0039" change in clearance. "
"shorter duration cams should bump midrange up more and move the curve to the left. Lower the centreline numbers a bit too. But all depends on clearance." "The 163rwhp 02 R1 i did was at 102/104 timing. It doesn't tend to make big differences to the numbers more so to the delivery. I tried that inlet cam at 106. Was a bit better at peak, moved curve to the right. The newer ones i would run at 105 for a roadbike. I think the stock cams at 100 would rob you some top end but your mid should be good, but that is just an opinion."
And this: "Attack Racing's Formula Extreme R1 used stock Yamaha R1 cams - and he could have used any camset. I'm not saying that every modified R1 should use a stock intake cam, but, the better the head and intake, the less cam needed (assuming std displacement and redline) and the stock R1 intake cam is pretty big already. That's why an early R1 or FZ1 loses so much low and mid when one removes the stock airbox's restriction - The only way to get the lowend back is to close the intake a lot earlier or use a smaller, more appropriately sized intake cam."

From a forgotten source on the R1 Forum: "I have mine set at 109' inlet and 100' exhaust as advised my Martinc due to my ram air set up, I must admit I have not noticed any drop in the low / mid range with the high intake no' but maybe the low exhaust is compensating for this, I may alter that this winter when it is stripped down again by raising the exhaust no's up a bit to get a bit more top end by getting a lower overlap figure..but that may then show a dip in mid range.... "

From the R1 Winter thread I referenced earlier, Marcaztls started out his HVP project using 107in/103ex and asserted that stock was 105in/102ex ; To improve midrange and a more even curve he ended up with 105in/104ex and liked it better than 107in/103ex since it wasn't as top end biased and made for a good streetable bike ; "At present I'm on 107in/103ex which may be a little top end biased. I have now gone to 105in/104ex. it works great on the road" (he may have gone back to 107, 103 but not sure). "I have my original filled head. It was actually very nice to ride with, I'd do the ports slightly differently the next time I do it but I'm seriously considering putting that back on today, taking the timing down to 103/104 (as a compromise I'm running one single leaf of a Wiseco gasket that is 10.6thou new. That has taken me to an average squish of 28.9thou."
On 12/20/07 he said he was using 108.5in/105.5ex ;
On 03/12/08 he said "I measured what it was set at when I stripped the motor and it was 106.25in/102.25ex and I'm now set at 105in/105ex." Note that he used the 105/105 setting with conventional porting and thought it was probably "too much for the street" and "made very linear power" and was very happy with it. He said he wanted to see what HVP would do with same setup;
On 10/22/08 he said "Cam timing was previously set at 105/105 and now is 104.5/106.38 intake/exhaust." with two outer leaves of a standard gasket(he removed the center leaf of the stock gasket to make it thinner) and the head skimmed(surfaced to raise compression).
NOTE: Pages 55 and 59 of his winter blog has his DYNO results. Prior to pg 50 you'll find his test ride comments ;

Those are the posts that I believe were of the most interest. I was surprised not to find more results posted(especially for the R1) given the popularity of that bike.

Last edited by longeze; 06-19-2016 at 11:21 AM. Reason: DYNO references added
longeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 09:18 PM   #7
grommet
kinetic mentality
 
grommet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: hangin' with Toto
Posts: 12,125
It looks like you have maximized the hp potential of the motor. Glad to hear it's working well.

With my gen 1 stock engine, I did reach a point at the track where I wanted more power. Keeping corner pace with more powerful machines but being left behind on almost every corner exit.

With spirited pace riding on twisty roads, the hp of the stock gen 1 is more than adequate to stay well in the fun zone. The addition of better suspension and brakes make the bike a joy to ride quickly.

Best of luck with your bike. We'd love to see pics of the heads if you have them, and of course the whole bike.
__________________


Partly stabilized, partly curious.


Be your own man; don't be an owned man.

Some people would rather be dead than wrong.
grommet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 01:49 PM   #8
longeze
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by grommet View Post
It looks like you have maximized the hp potential of the motor. Glad to hear it's working well.

With my gen 1 stock engine, I did reach a point at the track where I wanted more power. Keeping corner pace with more powerful machines but being left behind on almost every corner exit.

With spirited pace riding on twisty roads, the hp of the stock gen 1 is more than adequate to stay well in the fun zone. The addition of better suspension and brakes make the bike a joy to ride quickly.

Best of luck with your bike. We'd love to see pics of the heads if you have them, and of course the whole bike.
Grommet, I hope you're right. My expectation when I began was to see something in the mid 80's for torque and low 150's for RWHP on a DynoJet. I've no doubt left some on the table since I was mostly focused on creating a more linear torque curve while preserving fuel economy(combating reversion) than maximum HP.

I had to laugh when I read your post about being left behind on corner exit. You pretty much summarized my persistently underfunded racing experience. The guys in the high buck stuff hold you up through the corners then run away down the straights lol. I used to pray for rain.. a lot. It wasn't so bad at short tracks like Blackhawk Farms but at Road America and the like there was no hope.

I know what you're saying about the stock bike in the twisties having sufficient power and I totally agree. When you're out in the boonies keeping the revs up it's a complete blast - box stock and more than fast enough for my skills and risk tolerance. If you read my reply to Vitesse I think you'll understand where I'm coming from. When I'm in "go fast mode" I'm mostly thinking in terms of smoothness and energy conservation/management. I look forward to the day when I get my forks updated and can get balanced suspension with the front capability to match that of the new rear shock. For now, since there aren't that many twisties locally, I'm enjoying my bike for what it is and having a blast with it.

Unfortunately I didn't take any pictures of my port work. I thought about it at the time but I didn't think anyone would be interested. There's nothing really unusual other than the way I textured the ports. I did some testing on scrap aluminum with different methods and found good result with an oddball burr that I got in a set of 70 that I bought used on ebay. It looks like a conical surform tool. If you let it chatter over the surface at (guessing) maybe 2500 RPM it delivers a very uniform series of elliptical small divots. My objective was to try to create a series of small vortex generators similar to those used on the elevator of canard aircraft only in miniature. I believe this method helps create a uniform boundary layer, creates a bit of vortex swirl to help the flow stay attached as it follows the Short Side Radius (SSR) of the port, helps keep the fuel in suspension and creates a series of one way "valves" which impede flow reversion. The divot profiles created resemble an egg shell shape if you quartered the egg shell and embedded it in the wall of the port with the sharp straight edge closest to the carbs in the intake ports and closest to the head in the exhaust ports. It would be interesting to see the result on a wet flow bench.

As for pix of my bike, it looks identical to dolphins IIRC. Thanks for your interest Grommet!
longeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 04:07 AM   #9
rdcusmc
Registered User
 
rdcusmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,726
Longeze, I'm in your corner no doubt. I love to tinker and improve things. Love the engine work you have described. Sounds like congrats for a job well done are in order.

Will be really interested to see the dyno result if and when you get it.

Best,
Ron
__________________
"The Few. The Proud. The Marines!"

2003 Blue FZ1 - Ivan's MB Jet kit, Akrapovic, GOEC w/remote and GPS, 07 R1 fork conversion w/6 pot brakes, R1 master cylinder, R1 rear wheel w/R6 caliper, Penske shock, Dirt Road seat, AIS removed, HID and LED lights, full Givi luggage, Galfer lines, chain oiler, Rizoma bar, cat-eye turn signals above headlights, grip heaters, factory lower fairings, air box mod w/high flow filter, Cometic thin head gasket, FazerPhil large gas tank mod (in progress).
rdcusmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 02:22 PM   #10
longeze
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdcusmc View Post
Longeze, I'm in your corner no doubt. I love to tinker and improve things. Love the engine work you have described. Sounds like congrats for a job well done are in order.

Will be really interested to see the dyno result if and when you get it.

Best,
Ron
Thanks for the kind words Rdcusmc! I think it was a board member here that had a great quote on their profile that said: "Engineering is the art of creating things you need, from things you can get". I love that quote - it's spot on. I'm keeping the jury out until I've got a full season of flogging it behind me. If it's still running decently come fall I'll call it a success ;) After I brought the bike inside for the winter and took it apart (in the front hall - no garage sigh), my GF said " With all the cars and equipment around here that need you to work on them, you take the ONE thing that runs well and tear THAT apart" LoL. I guess she was in the Vitesse camp.

I'll probably wait until fall to head to the dyno in the hopes that the cool dense fall air may help make my numbers look good (yes I know they compensate for DA and all that but still...). The mixture seems to be well enough in the ballpark so that I don't feel a pressing need for the A/F data just now. Ivans MB kit baseline is pretty good. I suspect I'm slightly on the lean side of things as was my intent since it runs a bit stronger after it warms up and starts easily with no choke above 75F. While on the subject of jetting, I've yet to sort out the "2-cycling" off load tendency it seems to have when lightly loaded as when cruising at steady speed at 45mph. I suspect it's an issue with the bypass circuit mixture being incorrect(rich?). Possibly this is endemic to the MB kit or a symptom of switching to colder plugs and a slightly wide gap? Any thoughts on that issue would be appreciated. I'll definitely post any hard data I acquire in an effort to contribute in some small way to the knowledge base that has been so helpful to me and others.

I just found this post in which someone else was experiencing a similar part-throttle 2 cycling issue with an MB kit install:

http://www.yamahafz1oa.com/forum/sho...+smooth&page=2

In Post #33 Ivan responds: "If you are talking about a slight burble at very light throttle from 2500 - 4500 or so...this is normal (sounds like a 2 stroke at very light load)".

I'm probably too picky, but I find it somewhat annoying that as I ride along the main roads out my door that as I motor along at 45~50 the bike is continually alternating between the sound of a chainsaw and the smooth purr of it's inner self. While I know there are always trade-offs to be made, I'm optimistic that a solution can be found that won't screw up the fuel curve too badly. If nothing else, maybe even going up a tooth in front would help... If Ivan cares to comment further that would be great! I hate to bother him at his shop since it's not a revenue generating activity for him.

I have the S1000RR rear shock (I bushed it rather than drill it out). I do plan on doing the Raven mod this winter. It's nice to hear your positive feedback on that - I can't wait! It's good to know there's kindred spirits out there Rdcusmc.

Keep the shiny side up )

Last edited by longeze; 06-11-2016 at 07:17 PM. Reason: New information on the topic under consideration
longeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 02:27 PM   #11
rdcusmc
Registered User
 
rdcusmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,726
Quote:
Originally Posted by longeze View Post
Thanks for the kind words Rdcusmc! I think it was a board member here that had a great quote on their profile that said: "Engineering is the art of creating things you need, from things you can get". I love that quote - it's spot on. I'm keeping the jury out until I've got a full season of flogging it behind me. If it's still running decently come fall I'll call it a success ;)

I'll probably wait until fall to head to the dyno in the hopes that the cool dense fall air may help make my numbers look good (yes I know they compensate for DA and all that but still...). The mixture seems to be well enough in the ballpark so that I don't feel a pressing need for the A/F data just now. Ivans MB kit baseline is pretty good. I suspect I'm slightly on the lean side of things as was my intent since it runs a bit stronger after it warms up and starts easily with no choke above 75F. While on the subject of jetting, I've yet to sort out the "2-cycling" off load tendency it seems to have when lightly loaded as when cruising at steady speed at 45mph. I suspect it's an issue with the bypass circuit mixture being incorrect. Possibly this is endemic to the MB kit or a symptom of switching to colder plugs and a slightly wide gap? Any thoughts on that issue would be appreciated. I'll definitely post any hard data I acquire in an effort to contribute in some small way to the knowledge base that has been so helpful to me and others. Nice to know there's kindred spirits out there Rdcusmc. Keep the shiny side up )
Not sure about the 2 cycling. Would be easy enough to experiment with different plugs and see if it affects your results.
__________________
"The Few. The Proud. The Marines!"

2003 Blue FZ1 - Ivan's MB Jet kit, Akrapovic, GOEC w/remote and GPS, 07 R1 fork conversion w/6 pot brakes, R1 master cylinder, R1 rear wheel w/R6 caliper, Penske shock, Dirt Road seat, AIS removed, HID and LED lights, full Givi luggage, Galfer lines, chain oiler, Rizoma bar, cat-eye turn signals above headlights, grip heaters, factory lower fairings, air box mod w/high flow filter, Cometic thin head gasket, FazerPhil large gas tank mod (in progress).
rdcusmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 02:41 PM   #12
longeze
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdcusmc View Post
Not sure about the 2 cycling. Would be easy enough to experiment with different plugs and see if it affects your results.
Yeah - the plugs are on the list but has to take a back seat ATM. My clutch parts just came in today. It turns out I need heavier springs to keep it from slipping. I'm trying the EBC HD plates as well since I got a good deal on them and read some good things. Hopefully my left arm is up to the task...

Just a couple miscellaneous thoughts: I like the R1 shifter mod. It's not the best thing since sliced bread or anything but for $12 and 5 minutes of your time I think it's well worth doing. It "feels" like you can shift faster and of course the throw is shorter. I was worried that it might make finding neutral more difficult but that hasn't been a problem. I had been having issues under hard acceleration with 2nd gear popping out, but only when riding 2-up. After installing the shorter R1 shift arm, the problem hasn't reappeared - yet. It may be that with the stock(longer) shift arm I wasn't exercising the full throw of the shifter fork travel, maybe due to wear in the bellcrank(I noticed it was a bit sloppy) or cumulative changes in the linkage geometry and stroke overall. It's also possible that I'm subconsciously being even more careful when rolling on the throttle in 2nd I suppose. I just thought I'd mention it for anyone with similar issues. Curing the 2nd gear engagement problem riding 2-up with the shorter R1 shifter arm was wishful thinking (sigh). I can't say I'm surprised but hope springs eternal huh? I really wailed on it with my GF on the back yesterday (at her encouragement mind you), and the problem reared it's ugly head - again. It didn't pop out of gear immediately as it had been doing, it wound up to about 6000RPM(guessing) before it popped out this time at WOT. Previously, as soon as you'd jump on it it would pop out immediately as I found out several times regardless of whether you were immediate or smooth and progressive with the throttle, and regardless of whether you speed shifted the bike or not, although speed shifting into 2nd seemed to make matters worse, and I no longer do that riding 2-up at all. I've found that it'll consistently tolerate full RPM acceleration at 1/2 throttle in 2nd when using the clutch and riding 2-up. I usually just short shift through 2nd to get around the problem now and live with it. WOT by myself and winding it up to redline hasn't been a problem with just me on the bike prior to my mods.

With respect to the 4 degree advanced timing encoder, I tried it back and forth and confirmed that on my bike, there are more vibrations when cruising at 55 MPH (stock gearing) than with the stock advance setting. I could feel the change in throttle response (for the better) with the 4 degrees additional advance and found that if anything the top end rush was improved as well. At the least, it's safe to say that acceleration to top end hadn't been hindered in any way detectable by the seat of my pants. I've set the timing to 2 degree additional advance for now, which HAS reduced the vibrations at cruise noticeably, so I'm using that as a compromise. I can't comment on fuel economy with respect to the timing changes since I haven't specifically tested for that. I'd like at some point to experiment with jetting changes and static advance settings to determine whether the vibrations couldn't be tuned out with changes in fuel mixture. With each change in timing I made, I readjusted the TPS for the smoothest setting I could obtain. Maybe it would be more worthwhile to set the TPS for best setting at the stock setting and make changes to the encoder advance while retaining the TPS position, I don't know.

One other thing I wanted to mention was that I think it was worthwhile to have spent a bit of extra time getting the valve lash settings as even as you can. I set mine within 0.005" by hand lapping them on a flate plate and 220 grit wet or dry sandpaper and WD40. If you don't want to spend the time to do that (about 5 minutes per shim), you can buy Honda shims. THey're interchangeable with ours and come in thicknesses of 0.005" increments, whereas the Yamaha shims are only available in 0.010" increments. The valve train is now essentially silent other than the whir of the timing chain. Prior to my work, I had a "ticking" sound akin to that of 1 valve out of adjustment by several thousandths. All valve clearances turned out to be within spec, and all valves were dead straight and true. The ticking I believe was from 1 or more slightly sticky cam buckets that were hanging up intermittently in their bores. I know some of you may cringe, but yes I gently polished out the burrs around the scoring in the bucket bores by hand with 200 and then 400 grit sandpaper and WD40 so that the buckets could all rotate freely in their bores. I didn't want to increase the bore diameters overall, so I tried to only polish the specific locations that showed the stress raisers. The work I did on the oil reservoirs and cylinder head cam bushing edges and oil orifices etc were done in an effort to reduce the friction and attendant heat which deposited aluminum material onto the polished cam journals. I used sodium hydroxide (lye) to remove the deposits from the camshaft bearing surfaces and finished up with a wire brush and 400 grit to remove the residue and restore the polish. In the "let no good deed go unpunished" dept. I find it funny that now that the valve train is quieter, I find myself listening to various other little noises which would have been inaudible previously, and worrying about where the hell those sounds are coming from. "Ride more worry less" I guess... )

Last edited by longeze; 06-19-2016 at 10:15 AM. Reason: Added note about Honda 0.005" valve shims and 2nd gear issues
longeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 01:23 PM   #13
longeze
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 594
It's hard to believe that my bike is 14 years old. I suppose in our disposable society it has outlived its useful product life-cycle which I think is a shame. I suppose this accounts at least in part for the general lack of interest in this thread ;) Even though I've been involved with high performance kit one way or another for most of my adult life, I can't help but admire the state of technological advancement represented by these bikes. For example, I was watching a review of the new Audi R8 on a "TV auto magazine" show. As the reviewer was waxing rhapsodic over the 0-60 (low 3's) and quarter mile (low 11's) times, I found myself thinking... my bike is faster than that... yup, my bike is faster than that too lol. I believe they quoted a $165,000 base price. My price of admission - about $4 grand all in with mods. Wow!

But I digress. On to some other observations and points of possible interest about Gen 1 FZ1 mods. I noticed a lot of guys who do head work go to some lengths to polish their heads mirror shiny. They say that it makes more power, promotes a reduction in carbon buildup and adhesion and in the case of commercial porters it makes the customer feel like they got value for their dollar. Recall that I mentioned a study by Toyota about these matters. That study showed that only 2% of the gains in torque and MPG derived from polishing the surfaces in contact with the combustion chamber came from polishing the head and the valves. Of that 2% gain, they went on to report that the majority of the gain was from polishing the valve faces themselves and that very little benefit was derived from polishing the surface of the head itself. The majority of the gains were to be had from polishing the crown of the pistons (~6% increase IIRC).

There is a fair amount of anecdotal evidence that polishing the head doesn't really help reduce carbon buildup in the combustion chamber either. It is said that in the areas where carbon buildup would be catastrophic such as between P-V or between the piston and head which might create a liability for mechanical interference, that polishing won't matter. In those close tolerance areas (think squishy zones), the heat, pressure and turbulence present impede the buildup of carbon to any extent where interference would be a factor. This is consistent with my observations over the years, having examined literally hundreds of cylinder heads, valves and pistons in various stages of disrepair and abuse. In the areas of closest proximity, I've normally seen very little carbon buildup. My point is that your time may be better spent polishing the piston rather than the cylinder head when looking for performance gains. I'd also like to mention that in the course of polishing that cylinder head with the idea of removing hot spots (a commonly cited reason for polishing the head, by porting guys who intend to raise compression), that those sharp edges around the intake valves are sometimes placed there intentionally to help re-atomize liquid fuel and to assist in impeding reversion. The same goes for the tiny grooves around the perimeter of the intake valve head.

I couldn't begin to count the number of times I read that you should NOT lap OR polish FZ1 or R1 valves. The usual reason given is that you remove the "special coating" that keeps them from burning up or that makes them more durable in the area of seat contact. If there is a coating (ceramic, titanium or nitride etc) on the valves then why would the FACTORY shop manual specify lapping the valves as a standard service procedure? There is so much inaccurate information on the web to be sorted through. I lapped mine AND polished the faces, coating be damned I say. I suspect that a polished face will do more to reflect heat and reduce the valve operational temperature than will a black nitride coating on the face. It is entirely possible that the alloy used in these valves has a nitrogen component however which would not be affected by lapping or polishing. While on this subject, for those of you who think that there's no point to polishing the crown of the piston or valve faces since they're going to get all dull from carbon deposits anyway, let me just say that even with carbon deposition, the polished surface will still reflect heat. It's still shiny under there and capable of reflecting some heat, unlike the light in the refrigerator which actually does turn off when you close the door (JK).

Now then, about those pesky progressive valve springs. On the majority of my springs the paint was gone or at least not visible to the naked eye. More curious is the fact that my valve springs were not all installed in the same orientation. I remind you that my bike only has 10,000 miles on the clock, so I think it's improbable that someone would have been in there for valve service. I have to conclude that they were most likely installed incorrectly at the factory. Maybe a newbie employee or someone loaded them incorrectly into a dispensing machine on the line? Who knows, but you may want to pay close attention to yours if you do any head work. I also found 4 intakes and 3 exhaust valve springs to be significantly shorter than the rest. Another area that likely warrants your close scrutiny. It leads me to wonder whether the bike had been sitting for long periods unused to cause this? Despite the seemingly obvious basic physics involved, it does matter which way the springs are installed(smaller coils closest to the head). Can you guess why? Go ahead.. I'll give you a minute to consider... .. . It turns out that the reason for this is that with a progressive spring, the coils resonate at different frequencies such that valve float can and does occur if the springs are installed up side down. I found that interesting and thought I'd share - fun facts to know and tell .

Next up: DIVIDE & CONQUER

Last edited by longeze; 06-12-2016 at 01:40 PM.
longeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 02:04 PM   #14
rdcusmc
Registered User
 
rdcusmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,726
If your suspension is bone stock you can upgrade it for about $20 and will be pleasantly surprised by the result. Look up Raven's suspension mod here on the site. Long story short, new dog bones for the rear give an effective 20% increase in spring rate and significantly reduces rear end pogo while raising the rear of the bike slightly to put a fraction more weight on the light front end. For the front end, the springs get a little shorter, get a longer spacer, different weight oil, slight raising of forks. You will be surprised how well this works for almost no $$$. If you want to go a different route that is still inexpensive, can start with BMW shock for rear with a stronger spring. Dean is selling kits on this site to make it easier. This shock is great in my experience and comes close to the performance of a custom rebuild of the stock shock at about ⅓ the cost. That said, I can't recommend the Raven mod highly enough, particularly for the cost and effort. I field tested this setup in Europe a couple years ago for a bike I had purchased during deployment. Made the bike a joy in the Alps compared to the skittish affair that was the stock suspension. My .02

Best,
Ron
__________________
"The Few. The Proud. The Marines!"

2003 Blue FZ1 - Ivan's MB Jet kit, Akrapovic, GOEC w/remote and GPS, 07 R1 fork conversion w/6 pot brakes, R1 master cylinder, R1 rear wheel w/R6 caliper, Penske shock, Dirt Road seat, AIS removed, HID and LED lights, full Givi luggage, Galfer lines, chain oiler, Rizoma bar, cat-eye turn signals above headlights, grip heaters, factory lower fairings, air box mod w/high flow filter, Cometic thin head gasket, FazerPhil large gas tank mod (in progress).
rdcusmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 03:48 PM   #15
smittynsc
Thinking about it
 
smittynsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sumter SC
Posts: 253
Great info. I think that there are people that are interested in this stuff but maybe don't have the resources to try any of it. Personally my bike stay too hot from riding to work on it. I have been around a lot of modified engines (mostly cars) and I can appreciate your mods. Any of the people that really know their stuff around here takes years to get your stuff back to you. lol
__________________
smittynsc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 04:52 PM   #16
rdcusmc
Registered User
 
rdcusmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,726
Keep the info coming and conversation going! Love this kind of meat n potatoes information. Curious the difference in valve spring lengths as well as mixed orientations. Made special note of your 2 degree's additional advance on timing as well. Love the detail on cam buckets and the cams themselves.

Hope you eventually make it to a dyno. Curious to see your power curves.

Best,
Ron
__________________
"The Few. The Proud. The Marines!"

2003 Blue FZ1 - Ivan's MB Jet kit, Akrapovic, GOEC w/remote and GPS, 07 R1 fork conversion w/6 pot brakes, R1 master cylinder, R1 rear wheel w/R6 caliper, Penske shock, Dirt Road seat, AIS removed, HID and LED lights, full Givi luggage, Galfer lines, chain oiler, Rizoma bar, cat-eye turn signals above headlights, grip heaters, factory lower fairings, air box mod w/high flow filter, Cometic thin head gasket, FazerPhil large gas tank mod (in progress).
rdcusmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 08:03 PM   #17
justin125
Registered User
 
justin125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 272
It's nice to see someone who actually enjoys modifying their gen1 fz. Keep it up and keep the info coming.
justin125 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2016, 11:21 AM   #18
WileyLogHomes
Need a Log Home?
 
WileyLogHomes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Roanoke VA
Posts: 2,311
You forgot the part where Desmo is the worst mod ever
__________________
07 FZ1 lots of goodies
www.WileyLogHomes.com
WileyLogHomes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2016, 01:14 PM   #19
longeze
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 594
Hi again,
I'm glad to see that there's still some interest in further developing and refining our bikes. Thanks for contributing your thoughts! In keeping with my initial primary objective to provide a sort of 1 stop "recipe" for people who want to get some gains beyond jetting and a pipe without spending big bucks and who don't have time, patience or interest to sort through the thousands of pages relevant and often conflicting subject matter on the web (not to mention endless information in hard copy and other media offline), I'd like to address that relevant data first before addressing comments and getting myself too far off track.

----

These are my notes and comments for you on modifying the timing encoder, some of which is copied from this website where if you search on it you'll find pix and greater detail of this easy mod:

TIMING ENCODER: Scribe a horiz line thru center of pin (to align the file), then scribe a vertical line .020" to the left of the left vertical edge of the slot to advance timing 2.5deg.
0.01625" would = dist for 2deg ie 0.008"/deg;Timing Encoder: Scribe a horiz line thru pin cntr (4 a guide), then scribe a vert line .032" to the left of the left vertical edge of the slot to advance timing 4deg(best low end performance. 2deg=best mpg). 0.01625" would = dist for 2deg ie 0.008"/deg;
Formula to derive distance to move a given number of degrees at a certain radius = (Deg*Sin) * Radius
----

If you're going to raise compression by use of a thinner head gasket or milling the head(angle milling is the much preferred method), you can rely on these minimum safe values provided you measure things reasonably accurately:
Squish(~P-H) >= 0.027"
Intake Piston to Valve(P-V) clearance >= 0.035"
Exhaust P-V >= 0.050"
----
For the head gasket, I had one custom made for me to my spec by Cometic. Their phone number is: 800-752-9850 or 440-354-0777.
My Cometic gasket part# is: H0846SP5010S. It's 0.010" X 74mm.
The Yamaha R1 and FZ1 gaskets are all 75mm bore diameter. I wanted to match my gasket to the actual FZ1 bore size of 74mm to reclaim some lost squish area.
Heres the Cometic part# for a 0.010" X 75mm gasket: H0846010S.
The Cometic. Part# for the R1 0.018" X 75mm race gasket: H0846018S
Just so you know, Ivan recommends the standard R1 race gasket. That's why there's chocolate and vanilla I guess.
I calculated my gasket to raise static compression ratio from 11.4:1 to 12.56:1
0.654cc =vol difference between a 74mm & 75mm gasket assuming a loss of .022" thickness(from 0.032" to 0.010") as well. It's free VE so worth doing I think.
----

Make a degree wheel mount out of a 10mm X 1.25 X 4" bolt and a couple nuts and a bunch of washers or make a spacer out of a piece of small tube. Search on "degree wheel" here and you'll find clear instructions and pix.
----

Here are my (commented)notes I used for my calculated and measured values to slot my cam sprockets and figure cam timing values. You may want to check my math for yourselves as is always good practice. The published guideline by Ivan and others is that every 0.007" you take off the head or gasket = 2 degrees of retarded cam timing. In the end, I found this to be slightly inaccurate. I was able to compensate for the inaccuracy by swapping around different combinations of the cam bolt locations and cam gears(since I slotted each sprocket differently). If you don't have a mill and an index table to slot the cam sprockets don't sweat it, just use a file or dremel type tool and go slow and all will be right with the world. I calculated the offset from the center-line of the holes for the amount I intended to elongate them and it proved negligible, so just slot them as straight as you can and call it good. The I.D. of the sprocket is located on a boss on the camshaft so keeping the sprockets centered on the cams isn't really a concern.

CAM TIMING FORMULA:
Set dial ind. on the cam heel @ 0" @ TDC. Rotate crank til 0.050" indicated. Read deg wheel #. Rotate crank all the way around almost 2X until 0.050" BEFORE TDC. Read degree wheel #. SUBTRACT the lower of the two numbers from the higher one. (40 - 18) = 22 Next add 180 to the result and divide that by 2. 22 + 180= 202/2= 101. 101 is your intake cam timing number.
-------

My FZ1 measurements: cam gear small bolt hole dia = 0.286", cam gear large bolt hole dia = 0.296" ;
-----

from 106in 102ex per ivans baseline and retarded 6deg from a 0.032" std gasket to 0.010" gasket = 112in 96ex.
To get 105IN 100EX =CAM adv IN 3.5deg, EX 2deg. or EX 4.5deg to get to 105EX at the crank. Therefore:
*** sin 3.5deg*0.9445 radius= 0.058" offset for INTAKE bolt holes to be removed from clockwise most edge of holes.
***sin 2.0deg*0.9445 radius= 0.033" offset 4 EX bolt holes( OR 0.074" to extend range to 105deg on the EX cam timing) to be removed from clockwise most edge of holes.(note: 0.0535" for 102.5 deg ex CAM timing)
------

Intake cam full ccw to sprocket = 16.5 deg gives > 0.050" P-V clearance at closest point
------

Here are some procedural comments for you:

When(If?) you decide to polish your piston crowns, raise the piston just short of the top of its stroke and note the position of it in the bore. Now lower the piston down in the bore an inch or two and lay a thin bead of grease along the cylinder wall at the point where the piston crown was up in the bore. Now raise the piston to Top Dead Center(TDC) and you will have created a grease seal around the piston and rings to catch any debris before it gets down in the bores. When you're done polishing the piston crowns just lower the pistons down in their bores and carefully wipe the grease away. The scotchbrite buffs for dremel tools work really well to clean up and polish the pistons. It might have taken me all of 10 minutes per piston (if that) to bring them to a mirror finish. If you use lubricant like WD40 or wax or Carmex the buffs last longer. The same is true for your burrs when grinding on the heads.

For accurate Squish measurement use 3 strips of solder at 3 different locations on the crown of the piston 1 of which is aligned with the wrist pin. Use solder that is slightly larger than the value you're anticipating. Some say to put grease on the solder to help keep it from sticking to things. I used WD40 with no issues since I didn't want to have a film of grease affect the measured result. Remove the solder and measure the thickness with a Micrometer or dial caliper(if you don't mind being slightly inaccurate). Of course Plastigauge would be ideal I would imagine but unnecessary IMHO. There is some debate about the center intake valve face being the point closest to the piston. Off the cuff I'd say that makes some sense since the center valve is aligned with the part of the piston crown furthest from the axis of rotation of the wrist pin. I didn't worry too much about it since my allowances afforded me plenty of safety to accomodate a few thousandths either way. I wanted to make certain that if(when) the rods stretch and the crank & rod bearing/bushing clearances increase that there will be issues.

To measure P-V, please don't use clay as some suggest. It gives inconsistent results. Install a test spring on an intake and on an exhaust valve so you can put a dial indicator on the upper spring retainer/washer and depress the valve by hand while the cam has the valve at maximum lift(fully open). Just measure the travel from the point when the valve is resting on the cam lobe at max lift to the point where it touches the piston crown - that's all there is to it. Easy! Another benefit of doing it that way is that you don't need to use a valve spring compressor to assemble/disassemble the test springs onto the valves, making the procedure even less time consuming. It is also incorrectly published that you need to drop the engine to do this. You don't. It may be that the Gen2 bikes require it but on Gen 1 bikes the engine can remain in situ. While I think of it, it is also incorrectly published that again you need to drop the engine to remove the cylinder head. This is also untrue. You only need to remove the outer most exhaust stud before trying to lift the head off the studs. I'm sorry I no longer recall if it was the left or the right most stud (left I think) but it will be obvious when you look at it. Be careful when removing and replacing(R&R) the head. STERN WARNING!!! It would be all too easy to touch the face of the head against the studs sticking up out of the block. This would be really bad as you will scratch the surface of the head and create a possible head gasket leak or worse. Please be REALLY careful okay? Best by far to have someone help you to make sure you're safe.

While I think of it, here's another tip for those who haven't been down this road before.. When you assemble the keepers or collets onto the valve stem while compressing the spring, put a tiny bit of grease on the collets to hold them onto the valve stem. I also found it easiest to use a long needle-nose pliers to offer up the collets to the valve stem and a smaller flat blade screwdriver to push the keeper down into the recess in the valve stem and out of the jaws of the pliers. Some of you may have fingers tiny enough not to need to do that, but mine are much too large and my vision isn't good enough to get away with doing it that way. Anyway, I fouind that this method saved me a good deal of time. When removing the collets, using a very small magnet when compressing the spring works very well.

I do apologize to those of you who have "been around the block" with all this, but the less experienced people who haven't seen this stuff before can really get themselves into a world of hurt as they drop collets into the head or gouge the crap out of their freshly milled head etc. Thanks for your patience.

If you want to go with Ivans cam timing numbers, he recommends lobe centers at:
Intake 105(best low and mid range torque) to 108(best top end).
Exhaust at 100.
Ivan prefers to set his cam timing at 108 Intake & 100 Exhaust and recommends a total lobe center of 104 degrees (108 + 100) / 2 = 104.

Tim Radley(builds and tunes superbike engines) suggested starting at 105 Intake & 105 Exhaust and going from there on the older R1 engines similar to ours. He goes on to say "1 degree increase is typically 0.1mm = 0.0039" change in clearance".
Radley also said: "The 163rwhp 02 R1 I did was at 102/104 timing. It doesn't tend to make big differences to the numbers more so to the delivery. I tried that inlet cam at 106. Was a bit better at peak, moved curve to the right. The newer ones i would run at 105 for a roadbike. I think the stock cams at 100 would rob you some top end but your mid should be good, but that is just an opinion."

FWIW, I have my intake cam set at 104.5 and with my other mods, the top end is stronger than ever. I'm just saying that if you choose to follow the path I took (raising compression, porting etc etc) that using this cam timing value won't make your bike slower than it was before so you won't be giving up that top end rush. On my bike though, it's now more of a strong steady push that just keeps getting stronger as the revs build rather than a "hit" at > 7000RPM. This is a trait I prefer to help keep the rear wheel under me when standing the bike up to accelerate out of a corner. Smooth and progressive is good in my world. Just so you'll be aware of both sides of the issue, there are several people I've communicated with(beside Ivan) who advocate for and are running 108 Intake Lobe Centers on their bikes and really like it. You might even get better MPG that way. It's just that 104.5 intake timing is more consistent with my design objective and I have the P-V clearance to run it. I've also read that on drag racing engines at least, the closer you can get the intake valves to the piston crowns, the more HP you can develop. This makes perfect sense from an intuitive perspective in terms of Volumetric Efficiency(VE).

I noticed when I measure my cam sprockets that the two holes in each sprocket were of different sizes by 0.010" as were the ground shoulders on the bolts different sizes by 0.010". I punch marked my bolts to identify the ones with the larger diameter shoulders so I could keep them straight. My supposition is that this allows slight variation in cam timing to allow for changes in manufacturing tolerances(a virtue I exploited as you may have read).

WHEW - Now that I've got all that out of the way, I can get back to divide and conquer...

Last edited by longeze; 06-19-2016 at 08:02 PM. Reason: Correct inaccurate quote of my final intake cam timing.
longeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2016, 01:17 PM   #20
longeze
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 594
Now then, about port dividers.. It may come as no surprise to many of you that people are "divided" on the issue (sorry). The deal is that if you search online, you'll find endless pix of guys "beautiful" port work prominently featuring razor sharp edges on the port dividers often both on the intake side(yikes!!) and the exhaust. If you study NACA wing profiles you'll find that at least for subsonic flows such as appear in our ports that razor sharp leading edges are not the lowest drag form. You want the air to stay attached and a leading edge without camber doesn't do that for you. What you're after is a rounded leading edge or at least flatter on one side and more cambered toward the other if you're trying to bias flow, with maybe a thinner profile if drag reduction is your goal. In the interests of retaining and hopefully improving the bottom end, I made a concerted effort in my port work to remove as little material as possible consistent with the changes in shape I wanted to accomplish.

As many of you may know, for a road bike at least, a funnel shape to the ports is desirable. Think of a carburetor venturi and imagine that the choke point (the area around the valve guide in the port) is the narrowest part. For the intakes, the port should start out at the diameter of the carb throat (more or less) and taper down to the choke point which according to those who've extensively studied the issue should be about 85% of the valve curtain area (the area of a cylinder formed by the valve lift as the height of the cylinder and the diameter of the valve seat opening as the cylinders' major diameter). Motoman would be the dissenting opinion stating 65% as the desired objective. If you're not familiar with his work with High Velocity Porting, you might want to check this out:

http://www.r1-forum.com/forums/103-0...r-project.html
(It's ridiculously long and loaded with conflicting information but a fun and very informative read about the R1 none-the-less.)
and this:
http://mototuneusa.com/think_fast_intake_porting.htm
and this:
http://mototuneusa.com/success_stories.htm Read or scroll near the last 1/3rd of the page.

NOTE: { I started out my quest for more performance with my FZ1 with the intention of pouring some epoxy in my ports to help the bottom end but after taking my scooter apart and examining my ports I decided I wouldn't need it and would try it first without filling them and see what I got. I'm happy with my choice. }

Our engines are somewhat lacking in this regard(funnel shaped ports), so to remove more material from the dividers would only make matters worse and reduce VE at moderate RPM at least. I'm not trying to build an all out drag bike. So, that's why I rounded the leading edges of the my intake port dividers and only slightly narrowed them. I removed some material in the shoulders of the Short Side Radius(SSR) to slow the airflow slightly in an effort to match the speed of the air traveling over the SSR with that which is moving along the outer top wall. A mismatch of air speed causes unwanted turbulence and drag. I used 60 grit emery strips to accomplish that, working from the cylinder head side to shape them. Further, I also took as little material as necessary to effect a streamlined shape off the valve guides, rather than remove them as many do - tempting as it was to cut the suckers off flush. I left the guides intact in a further effort to retain and improve VE and bottom end torque. Those guides are taking up space in the ports right about where I want it.

On the exhaust side a better case can be made for knife edging the dividers. Once again I elected not to, again in an effort to keep things close and ensure as high a velocity as I could, figuring in the small area where things open up as the individual runners join, that the low pressure will help the streams join anyway and as the flow is slowing down as it passes the anti reversion lip and enters the exhaust header I don't see the trade off of knife edging the divider vs an upstream increase in effluent section area as a good one. Honestly, these are only things that can be truly resolved either computationally with CFD or on a flow or wet flow bench. I don't have enough time in my life to find the answer although I am curious. I have to live with taking my best guess - I guess. As I mentioned, I did flat face the trailing edges of the valve guides. When the reversion wave hits it, my thinking is that the flat plate drag of those surfaces will not only slow the reversion flow but also create turbulance further impeding upstream unwanted flow. A free one way valve )

Just a couple more notes about port texturing... I read a series of articles from both drag race and Nascar engine builders each of whom worked in the big show shops and they advocated for a very rough texture in BOTH intake and exhaust ports citing decrease in ET's and MPG improvements when incorporating a more textured surface. Some say that if the ports are well designed that they're unnecessary and that fuel does not fall out of suspension in shorter ports. My bias in belief is to think that it most definitely does. My airplane left vapor trails at 200kts routinely. The influent charge in your intake ports is often moving at least half again faster likely compressing the fuel out of suspension I'd wager. Again, people are divided on this issue so draw your own conclusions. Here's a few links on the subject of Somender Singh grooves and others to help you make up your own mind. I regret to tell you that I can't put my finger on the links I referenced by the Nascar and Drag race guys so these will have to do:

http://rexresearch.com/singh/singh.htm
http://www.herningg.com/projects/groovyheads.html
http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/sh...wre-Lynz-Tools
http://www.allpar.com/fix/holler/head-porting2.html
https://www.google.com/search?q=Powr...w=1360&bih=655

Now on the the COMMENTS and REMARKS section of our program...

Last edited by longeze; 06-13-2016 at 03:04 PM.
longeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   FZ1OA Message Board > FZ1 & Fazer Owners Association > Exhausts, Carburetion & Performance > Gen 1 Exhausts, Carburetion & Performance


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:28 AM.


Questions? Comments?
Click on name below to contact via PM
Rabeet (Admin) Desmo (Admin)

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Website and Message Board Contents Copyright 2001-2007 FZ1OA
The marks YAMAHA® and FZ1® are used under license from Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A.
The information on this web site is NOT approved or endorsed by Yamaha Motor Corporation in any way.
Page generated in 0.26039 seconds with 10 queries