Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Dan, if it were as you say the Saitos would not come with the .004" guage in the tool kit. this cam was never run with anything other than .004" clearance and there is not abnormal wear of any kind. This cam could be put back in service even though it was in service from 1991 until 2009. I only replaced it because I had busted the 1.50s cylinder and had it apart. You should stop posting the unsubstantiated notions that confuse people.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Barry, three might be OK, I tried mine at .002 using the Enya copper guage and it lost about 500 rpm. If the Saito cams have accel and decel ramps then closer is the wrong way to go. The ramps need room to do their work without upsetting valve timing. You can see the feathered edge of the wear pattern that the cam follower is easing into its job at .004" exactly as it is supposed to.

SrTelemaster150

Ever since I took the time to actually read the manual which states ".04mm to .1mm" (.00157 to .00397" for valve lash, I have used a .0015" gauge to set my lash. Tightening down te locknut increase the lash slightly. My engines typically turn slightly above Saito spec' om 15% Cool Power W/glow ignition so I am not loosing RPM.

Saito would not spec' .04mm (.00157") if it was incorrect.

You can set your valves @ the maximum spec if you want, I choose to use the minimum spec for the imcreased power & reduced wear.

Again I refer to Bill Robison's methods & teachings. He advocated .0005" lash on early engines & .0015" for the later cams W/the ramps.

Rudolph Hart

Every time i feel argumentive nowadays i rush right outside and mow the lawn for a bit.You always seem to feel more chilled out once you get back inside

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

I offered some empirical evidence to support my position where is yours?

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

I was going to run my new Saito .65 today to do a final check on the LS needle but that is not going to happen. It looks like this in Burrginia. I installed a new Taipan 4c plug and want to see if that changed anything.

hsukaria

Thanks Hobbsy, I'll remember that.

hsukaria

Looks like that field behind your property is perfect for flying!

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

I have considered that but the guy who owns it has a wife who is an extreme greeny who hates deer hunters and just about anybody else who does something for fun. I have seriously considered flying my LT 25 powered by a Saito .30, maybe they wouldn't hear it. That little guy has a deeper throb than some of the bigger Saitos.

hsukaria

That little Saito might be quieter than some electrics I've heard.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

It has surprising power turning a Graupner 10x5.5 or a 10.5x5 at 10.000 plus. Well, almost in the case of the 10x5.5. Picture 3 and 4 are with a Bolly 10x5.5, not a bad idle for the little feller. My typer is really messing up this am.

SrTelemaster150

What imperical evidence?

Just because you claim a 500 RPM loss doesn't make it imperical.

Your's is no more "imperical" than mine. If I can get 8850RPM W/an 18X8 prop from a N/A Saito FA180 W/the vave lash set W/a .0015" feeler guage, then there is NO evidence that setting the valves thus decreases RPM. I even got 800 W/glow ignition on a bone stock FA180 running 15% Cool Power. That's about 150 RPM & .1HP more than factry spec. No apparent loss of power there.

You have your opinion. I, Saito engineers & Bill Robison have another & that is that .00157" valve lash is acceptable & in the case of myself & Bill Robison, preferable.

I tend to believe the Saito engineers & the teacings of Bill Robison not tommention my personal experience over your opinions.

For one thing, your suggestion that the .004" gauge be used as "touching but not dragging" is a bit strange. Just how is it that you determine that the gauge is "touching" if you can't feel it drag? Once you tighten down the locknut, you are definately going to exceed the maximum valve lash spec' using that pracgtice!

Why do you think they call them "feeler" gauges?

If the readers are undecided, then I suggest that they try both values & if the .002" lash adjustment doesn't result in a loss of power over the .004" setting, then .002" would be preferable as the minimal lash will result in better cam lobe/tappet life.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

I was referring to the picture and the ideal wear pattern.

hsukaria

Tell that greeny neighbor that the glow fuel is mostly methanol, which is a renewable resource. That should make her happy.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Now that's a plan.

SrTelemaster150

I never said that the maximum valve lash setting would result in "abnormal wear". I said that it would result in increased wear. Your picture only shows the tips of the lobes W/clarity. The wear pattern on the heels of the lobes would differ W/varying valve lash. From the looks of the intake lobe, the tappets is not making good contact until it is up on the side of the lobe.

Over a long period of time, the more valve lash, the more wear. It's a mtter of physics. Since the tappet will encounter the cam lobe furthur up the ramp, there will be a different "angle of attack" so to speak.

I would suspect that Saito spec's .00157" as the minimum to allow for the ramps resulting in the tappet hitting the lobe @near zero clearance.

Adding .002" more lash just means the tappet will have that much additional clearance.

I'm going in to have my left knee replaced this afternoon. By the time I am recovered, it will be warm enough to do some testing.

Perhaps some tests done W/valve lash set @ .0005" (cigarette pack cellophane) as well as W/the .0015" feeler gauge & W/a .004" gauge will show the power difference, if any.

hsukaria

The fact that we are discussing the valve lash between .002" and .004" only proves how good Saitos are. Other engine threads would be discussing "why doesn't this engine start" or "why did my engine die" or some other calamity.

Good luck on your knee replacement, SrTelemaster150. I hope it all goes well.

RH

I've come across what I believe to be a used FA 120 4C engine. Unfortunately the model label on the right side of the engine casing is missing. From the specification listings for the Saito engines it appears that the 120 150 and 180 body are the same. The only difference being the displacement and a very slight difference in height and weight as shown in the chart at the bottom of the page here:

http://saito-engines.info/specifications.html

Can anyone suggest a way to figure out which model it is without breaking it down and measuring the bore?

While I'm on the subject of used Saitos, I also have an FA 100 with a broken rocker arm. Is Horizon a good source for these parts? Are there other sources?

Rick...

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Rick, I'll return in about 10 minutes with a measurement of my 1.50 It is not quite the 112mm it shows for the 1.50 but close enough to judge yours maybe.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Well Dan I must apologize profusely or a lot. I got under my work bench on my hands and knees and dug out the original instructions for my early .80 and early 1.50. Lo and behold they both say .03 to .1 mm which approximately = .00118" to .00397. Again I apologize and wish you well on you operation.

AeroFinn

Ok Thanks SrTele

I got the rocker shafts loosened. The hint to use heat did the trick!

Actually I didn't dare to put the cylinder & rockers in the wife's oven (as it's just been replaced a week ago so it would have been a poor attempt to commit a suicide..) so I used a heat gun instead. A pretty much of heat was needed before the rocker shafts got loosened. As a trade-off the one of the rockers changed in coulour due to the heat. Maybe my fault & too much heat eventually, I don't know.

I guess I should have ordered new ones had I known the fuss the get them loosened. Anyways, I'm going to try them as I don't have any spare ones at hand and I don't want to wait another one or two weeks to order and receive new ones.

I guess the blueish colour indicates the rocker was subject to excessive heat and may have gotten "softer" after having cooled down -> prone to excessive wear? Well, it won't break anything inside the engine in anyways so "pas de problème"

Will continue with the exhaust valve & cleaning before re-assembling the engine

-Artto

Cougar429

My Feedback: (3)

I have been running my early gen Saitos, (without the quiet cam profile) on between one to two thou clearance. Easy to check as I cut a strip from a shim each thickness and ink marked them for thickness. The one thou should fit and slide with the valve closed and the two thou will bind. Quick and dirty and works fine.

If everything I learned means anything, you need some clearance as you are checking cold. When the engine is at temp that clearance can close up. If set too tight cold you run the risk of incomplete valve closure, especially on the exhaust. Short life expectancy for the valve face and/or seat.

Hobbsy, we woke to the same thing this morning. Had to clean off the car to go to work. Remote start is a must here. As for your neighbor, another argument would be to ask her if she cooks with alcohol. If so no more wasteful than powering a Saito.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Cougar, i will continue to use the feeler guage that came with the engine just because that's what my engine sense says to do. As you can see the Saito gauge is slightly under .004"

Cougar429

My Feedback: (3)

Unfortunately I never lucked out that way and had to make my own. What is supplied would obviously work. From what I gather on your mic you have slightly under .004".

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Sorry, you beat me to the slightly under .004" thought, it must be a great mind thing or the planet alignment.