Author Topic: Rollerization not necessary?  (Read 23118 times)

Offline Litre1000

  • Hatchling
  • **
  • Posts: 107
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #30 on: May 25, 2018, 07:14:05 PM »
This shop that has the Stelvio primarily sells Harleys. They have 1/3 of the showroom dedicated to European bikes. So, they don’t specialize in MG’s. If they have knowledge regarding this issue, I’ll bet a hotdog they beat the guy up about his bike not being rollerized. Saying something about how it’s gonna be hard to sell, blah, blah, blah....
I’ve had dealers try to beat me up over my tires being too worn and how they can’t give me what I want, because they’re gonna have to put tires on it before they put it on the floor. And then I notice many of their used bikes have REALLY worn tires on them .....
Dealerships..[emoji848]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline LBC Tenni

  • Hatchling
  • **
  • Posts: 122
  • Location: Long Beach, CA
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #31 on: May 25, 2018, 07:30:04 PM »
6000 miles eh?  Here is what mine looked like at that same point. Hard to believe they could still be in the dark about this. So they are either idiots or crooks, quite possibly both.





2011 GRiSO SE8V Tenni

Offline Litre1000

  • Hatchling
  • **
  • Posts: 107
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #32 on: May 25, 2018, 07:39:56 PM »
6000 miles eh?  Here is what mine looked like at that same point. Hard to believe they could still be in the dark about this. So they are either idiots or crooks, quite possibly both.






I’m really not surprised to see your tappets in that condition at such a low mileage. My research has taught me this is spread throughout the entire production run of these initial units. Sure, there was a change. But I wonder if a small company like MG builds a set amount of engines, and then spreads them over several model years? Which explains why it was a several year issue?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #33 on: May 25, 2018, 08:27:44 PM »
Errr? No. Sorry but they aren’t that small. You don’t understand the problem, it’s not as simple as it seems.

Wildguzzi.com

Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #33 on: May 25, 2018, 08:27:44 PM »

Offline jacksonracingcomau

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2359
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #34 on: May 25, 2018, 08:48:02 PM »
One of the big problems has always been that until things get really quite bad performance and overall running are seemingly unaffected. After six years of rollerising anything that comes through the shop I�ve learnt to detect some early tell-tales but for the layman you�d probably not notice until they start to rattle and by then it�s far too late.

For some reason I never saw early failures in the shop. I knew they were happening, even the then dealer in Canberra was experiencing them but they were sticking the same mineral 10/40 they used in Ford Falcons into them so I was unsurprised! Sadly it appeared that in reality it was just luck and, I think, the sort of usage they were getting. As soon as I saw a failed one that I�d serviced from new I started inspecting every one that came into the shop and to my horror found that my assumptions had been completely wrong and the failure rate was 100%! That was six years ago now and since that time I�ve dedicated a lot of time and effort to trying to get the word out. It�s a tough business as even now there are a host of people who have never heard of the problem and unfortunately a lot of shops that are either in denial or don�t care.

Thing is inspecting the tappets requires the cambox to be removed, a simple, fifteen minute task. Sadly, for whatever reason it seems that many shops are either reluctant or incapable of performing this very simple procedure and worse yet lie to the customer saying they have and their was either �No damage� or �Acceptable wear�. There is no such thing as �Acceptable wear!�

Anything with flats should be inspected and rollerised. No exceptions. To suggest otherwise is to choose to live in a fools paradise.

Timeline of your discovery different on the internet
Not quite 3 years ago you wrote this
http://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=77697.0

At the time you were surprised your own had failed at 50000 +miles
So surely not impossible others have done same
They just do not post here

bpreynolds

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #35 on: May 25, 2018, 09:13:57 PM »
Folks.  Should this really, truly surprise anyone here with a good bit of dealer experience?  I�ve gotten pushback on this issue even from dealers who LOVE the bikes, let alone multi brand dealers who don�t even view Guzzis as anything but leftover inventory from a brand they now know was a mistake to ever pickup and won�t be carrying next year.  These latter folks aren�t Mr. Roper by a long shot and while you shouldn�t give them your Guzzi business, I personally can almost understand them shooing folks off about it.  I vaguely recall this job, depending on the kit, takes Pete about 5ish hours?  This is from someone who is well practiced and versed at it.  How long you think it�s gonna take that Ninja mechanic to do it?  You think they are gonna wanna do it when they got more profitable jobs piling up behind it in service area where they�ll be making parts and labor profit on those?  Maybe I�m just too soiled on so many bad dealers over the years but not only does what the op was told NOT surprise me; rather, it is actually what I WOULD expect a non-Guzzi enthusiast dealer to say. 
« Last Edit: May 25, 2018, 09:15:44 PM by bpreynolds »

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #36 on: May 25, 2018, 11:30:03 PM »
Timeline of your discovery different on the internet
Not quite 3 years ago you wrote this
http://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=77697.0

At the time you were surprised your own had failed at 50000 +miles
So surely not impossible others have done same
They just do not post here

Yes, and I’d been regularly inspecting bikes for long before that I’d guess but there again I’m not trying to prove anything. It amazes me that you have the time to pursue this petty vendetta against me.

In the end it turned out I’d waited too long as my motor had already lunched it’s bottom end and I had to replace it whollus bollus. As I’ve stated many times before my belief in the integrity of the flat tappet design was wrong. My defence of it was something I regret and have tried to encourage others not to make the same mistake. There is no shame in being wrong. What is shameful is living in a world of denial and trying to convince others you are right in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Pete

Offline Paul Brooking

  • Gosling
  • ***
  • *
  • Posts: 357
  • Location: Adelaide South Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #37 on: May 26, 2018, 12:46:28 AM »
Pete
I know this will be a "how long is a piece of string" discussion but ....
In your considered opinion...
If the Stelvio in question was bought for, say, $10k (Australian)
What would a roller kit cost?
Are the kits available?
How many chargeable hours to install?
How many non-chargeable hours would the mechanic need to absorb?

Converting to $US would give the OP a handle on the real value of a non-rollerised (and hopefully salvageable) Stelvio/Griso/Norge

I realise that you would need to get the bike at a very low price to make it a commercial consideration, but with end of production for the CARC range it maybe a reality for someone looking to pick up good condition non-rollerised bike




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #38 on: May 26, 2018, 05:44:32 AM »
If anyone spent $10k Oz on a flat tappet Stelvio they’d have to be off their rocker. The fully loaded big tank NTX listed above is less than that. Also anyone thinking of buying it and bringing it over here is dreaming. You can’t.

As for the actual cost of rollerising etc? That very much depends on who and where.

Pete

Rough Edge racing

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #39 on: May 26, 2018, 05:53:18 AM »
  So..Is the failure a result of lifter failure or both cam and lifter? Could this have been prevented by different materials and or heat treating? Will a high ZDDP oil prevent this as it helps to prevent lifter/cam failures on performance OHV non roller cam V8 engines?

Offline Paul Brooking

  • Gosling
  • ***
  • *
  • Posts: 357
  • Location: Adelaide South Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #40 on: May 26, 2018, 05:57:39 AM »
If anyone spent $10k Oz on a flat tappet Stelvio they’d have to be off their rocker. The fully loaded big tank NTX listed above is less than that. Also anyone thinking of buying it and bringing it over here is dreaming. You can’t.

As for the actual cost of rollerising etc? That very much depends on who and where.

Pete
LOL Pete
Let’s say I was looking at a unrollerised 8v bike in Australia.
I am confident that I can install the kit.
There are several rollerised 8v’s being advertised at the moment for between $12k & $14k.
What I am trying to get a handle on is:
If the factory says no to any claim, then how much will it cost me to buy a kit?
How much would someone like yourself charge to supply and install to someone who isn’t confident to undertake the job.
Somewhere between those three prices is the value of an unrollerised 8v.
(Assuming the bike is salvageable and the flat tappet issue hasn’t done additional damage)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #41 on: May 26, 2018, 06:00:56 AM »
The cost will depend on model and year. OK, I’ll go through it again, but not tonight as I’m about to go to sleep.

Offline Paul Brooking

  • Gosling
  • ***
  • *
  • Posts: 357
  • Location: Adelaide South Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #42 on: May 26, 2018, 06:01:37 AM »
The cost will depend on model and year. OK, I’ll go through it again, but not tonight as I’m about to go to sleep.
Cheers Pete
Much appreciated
Sleep well


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline dave1068

  • Gaggle Mentor
  • ****
  • Posts: 761
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #43 on: May 26, 2018, 06:40:21 AM »
Just as an aside, I remember when I bought my 2009 Stelvio as a leftover in 2011, the dealer volunteered to me that the cam/cam follower work was done. Years later my fork seals went, the o rings on the wheels were cracked and another issue with the pinch bolts. The dealer documented everything but the MG dealer rep was not overly helpful so I wrote a letter to the CEO of Piaggio and everything was covered and they even put on the new updated forks.

Even with all that, theres now this tappet issues which im not sure all dealers are familiar with as are many bike owners prior to 2012 models are.

If this was broadcast more it might bring the issue to light and force MG to address this issue kind of like how VW paid out big money over their most recent issue-
Dave
-2020 Moto Guzzi V85tt travel

Offline Paul Brooking

  • Gosling
  • ***
  • *
  • Posts: 357
  • Location: Adelaide South Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #44 on: May 26, 2018, 06:46:15 AM »
I agree that they might Dave1098
However I’ve fallen so much in love with the 8v motor that I am looking to add to my Stelvio NTX for a commuter / weekend warrior bike. Happy to buy a rollerised 8v at the right price but as a second bike I am also looking forward to the challenge of bringing it up to speed myself.
Neither the Stelvio or the potential new bike are seen as an investment, just a shrewdly bought brace of pure enjoyment and self satisfaction


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Lannis

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 26507
  • Location: Central Virginia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #45 on: May 26, 2018, 07:19:22 AM »
LOL Pete
Let�s say I was looking at a unrollerised 8v bike in Australia.
I am confident that I can install the kit.


Hi Paul, I can give you the USA numbers for an '09 Stelvio in 2016.

To buy the "C" kit (the most complex one but required for the 2009) would have been $1450.    However, my shop negotiated it for free.

To install the kit and download the new map, my shop charged 9 hours @ $90/hour, or about $800.  Some say it can be done for fewer hours; this was my shop's very first one, they did a good careful job, and 10K miles later it's quiet, pulling hard, and running well.

Lannis
"Hard pounding, this, gentlemen; let's see who pounds the longest".

Offline Paul Brooking

  • Gosling
  • ***
  • *
  • Posts: 357
  • Location: Adelaide South Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #46 on: May 26, 2018, 07:26:26 AM »
Hi Paul, I can give you the USA numbers for an '09 Stelvio in 2016.

To buy the "C" kit (the most complex one but required for the 2009) would have been $1450.    However, my shop negotiated it for free.

To install the kit and download the new map, my shop charged 9 hours @ $90/hour, or about $800.  Some say it can be done for fewer hours; this was my shop's very first one, they did a good careful job, and 10K miles later it's quiet, pulling hard, and running well.

Lannis
Thanks Lannis

Hopefully I can get a good project bike at a price that is not in the “tell him he’s dreaming” price range. (Australian film reference).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Wayne Orwig

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 13912
    • Hog Mountain weather
  • Location: Hog Mountain
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #47 on: May 26, 2018, 09:44:35 AM »
  So..Is the failure a result of lifter failure or both cam and lifter? Could this have been prevented by different materials and or heat treating? Will a high ZDDP oil prevent this as it helps to prevent lifter/cam failures on performance OHV non roller cam V8 engines?

When my 2009 Stelvio was new, I had to wait a week to ride it, because there was a recall to upgrade the lifters to DLC coated lifters. And if I rode it, the lifters AND the cams had to be replaced. As we now know, the DLC was not an upgrade. There were other issue, like maybe too much spring pressure, or something.
Mine lasted over 50,000 miles. I was using a ZDDP additive at every oil change. I thought I was golden.
For some people, if they had a problem, the replacement cam and lifter would often fail again quickly.
Then suddenly, at over 50,000 miles, my valve clearances changed. Oops. It was gone.
And the more people talked about it, and the more people checked, the more we found that there is DLC damage, often well before 10,000 miles. And sending that DLC through the motor is not a good thing.

IMHO, they are running the spring pressure and cam profile just a bit over what the materials can stand. Roller lifters cure the issue. They should have been rollers from day one.
Scientist have discovered that people will believe anything, if you first say "Scientists have discovered...."

Rough Edge racing

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #48 on: May 26, 2018, 10:00:23 AM »
When my 2009 Stelvio was new, I had to wait a week to ride it, because there was a recall to upgrade the lifters to DLC coated lifters. And if I rode it, the lifters AND the cams had to be replaced. As we now know, the DLC was not an upgrade. There were other issue, like maybe too much spring pressure, or something.
Mine lasted over 50,000 miles. I was using a ZDDP additive at every oil change. I thought I was golden.
For some people, if they had a problem, the replacement cam and lifter would often fail again quickly.
Then suddenly, at over 50,000 miles, my valve clearances changed. Oops. It was gone.
And the more people talked about it, and the more people checked, the more we found that there is DLC damage, often well before 10,000 miles. And sending that DLC through the motor is not a good thing.

IMHO, they are running the spring pressure and cam profile just a bit over what the materials can stand. Roller lifters cure the issue. They should have been rollers from day one.

 Ok thanks.. with flat tappet  OHV  US auto engine the lifters are ground to a slight dome shaped surface and not flat...This,along with the lifters being off set to the cam lobe and or a slight lobe taper is done for lifter rotation while the engine is running for even wear patterns...And because of this, during the initial camshaft brake in period, the lifter to cam lobe contact is almost a point so to speak with high pressure loading and requires proper lubrication...That the deal about running a flat tappet engine for 20 minutes at 2000 rpm after a cam /lifter change to insure plenty of oil.....High lift auto flat tappet cams can survive if all goes well during the break in period.. If not, the cam and or lifters will fail within 500-1000 miles...
  I'm not saying this similar to the Guzzi, just mentioning it from experience....The Chevy LS V8 and Dodge Hemi are the only OHV "performance" engines left and they have roller lifters...

Offline Wayne Orwig

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 13912
    • Hog Mountain weather
  • Location: Hog Mountain
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #49 on: May 26, 2018, 10:39:22 AM »
..That the deal about running a flat tappet engine for 20 minutes at 2000 rpm after a cam /lifter change to insure plenty of oil.....High lift auto flat tappet cams can survive if all goes well during the break in period.. If not, the cam and or lifters will fail within 500-1000 miles...

I've heard that the ZDDP does a lot of the work during that breakin period.
And I suspect the DLC coating does not go through that breakin. So the ZDDP is probably meaningless. But I wanted to try something. I'm sure some salesman for the DLC coating made a nice commission. But now is long gone.
Scientist have discovered that people will believe anything, if you first say "Scientists have discovered...."

Rough Edge racing

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #50 on: May 26, 2018, 10:54:30 AM »
I've heard that the ZDDP does a lot of the work during that breakin period.
And I suspect the DLC coating does not go through that breakin. So the ZDDP is probably meaningless. But I wanted to try something. I'm sure some salesman for the DLC coating made a nice commission. But now is long gone.

 Yes, ZDDP is essential for cam life with high performance stuff during and after break in..I prefer, right or wrong, to use an oil with enough ZDDP in the additive package rather than a supplement... Some oil chemists claim that pour in ZDDP additives can upset the balance of the existing additive packages....The amounts various detergents, moly and so on are varied depending on the zinc and phosphorous amounts in the oil.. Opps ,sorry to turn this into an oil thread ................... .....

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #51 on: May 26, 2018, 10:19:05 PM »
Yes, ZDDP is essential for cam life with high performance stuff during and after break in..I prefer, right or wrong, to use an oil with enough ZDDP in the additive package rather than a supplement... Some oil chemists claim that pour in ZDDP additives can upset the balance of the existing additive packages....The amounts various detergents, moly and so on are varied depending on the zinc and phosphorous amounts in the oil.. Opps ,sorry to turn this into an oil thread ................... .....

In this case the ZDDP issue is a red herring. In fact some studies have found it can actually be counter effective in the interface between DLC and other materials. FWIW the oil I have been using for the life of the 8V has had a high ZDDP content and it hasn’t saved the system.

My research would seem to indicate that the problem is not rooted in the lubrication per se but is down to a purely mechanical inadequacy.

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #52 on: May 26, 2018, 11:12:45 PM »
LOL Pete
Let�s say I was looking at a unrollerised 8v bike in Australia.
I am confident that I can install the kit.
There are several rollerised 8v�s being advertised at the moment for between $12k & $14k.
What I am trying to get a handle on is:
If the factory says no to any claim, then how much will it cost me to buy a kit?
How much would someone like yourself charge to supply and install to someone who isn�t confident to undertake the job.
Somewhere between those three prices is the value of an unrollerised 8v.
(Assuming the bike is salvageable and the flat tappet issue hasn�t done additional damage)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To address the question of cost one has to understand the various machines, their different needs and the choices on offer.

Firstly let’s look at the machines.

The Griso, Stelvio and 1200 Sport from 2008-2010 mostly use the ‘C’ kit although there are a few 2009 plated models that take a ‘B’ kit too so the actual numbers are rubbery. From the middle of 2010 the Norge also came on line and to the best of my knowledge those made between mid 2010 and the end of 2011, with the exception of the 1200 Sports, all use the ‘B’ kit.

From the end of 2011 through to the end of manufacture of flat tappet models in mid 2012 they all, once again with the exception of the 1200 Sports, need the ‘A’ kit. Sports from this later period need the ‘D’ kit.

So what are the differences and how do you know for sure which kit you require? Well it’s really quite easy.

First look at the inner face of the cylinder head that faces into the valley of the motor. Close to the banjo that feeds the cooling oil to the head galleries there is a manufacturing date stamp. This looks like a small ‘Sun’ with a number stamped in the middle and twelve sections around it that have punch marks in. By counting the punch marks you can ascertain the month of manufacture. On early models, the black paint of the head will be unblemished and these machines will require a ‘C’ kit.

If though, in the paint there is a drill mark like so.



It will need either a ‘B’ or an ‘A’ kit if it is post mid 2011.

Now the way to make certain you get the right kit for bikes with the drill mark in the paint, (1200 Sports are different. We’ll cover them at the end.) you need to know what sealing method is used on the rocker covers to prevent oil escaping into the plug tube.

On early and mid period bikes, that is those requiring both a ‘C’ kit and the later ‘B’ kit there is a ‘Long’ plug tube that pokes up from the cylinder head, through the rocker carrier/cambox casting and then seals in the rocker cover by means of an o-ring and the cover appears like this.



On later engines that require an ‘A’ kit the rocker carrier/cambox casting is machined differently and there is only a ‘Short’ plug tube that goes between the head and the rocker carrier casting and the top of the casting is sealed to the rocker cover by a circular neoprene gasket of the same cross-section as the rocker cover gasket itself.

Like so.



So, to recap. On all apart from 1200 Sport if there is no drill mark in the paint? ‘C’ kit. If there is a drill mark in the paint lift the rocker cover and see if it needs an ‘A’ or a ‘B’ kit.

With the 1200 Sports none were ever manufactured with roller top ends and likewise none ever had the required shims inserted under the inlet valve seats so they all require the heads removing which is the big difference in the work required for a’C’ or ‘D’ kit compared to an ‘A’ or ‘B’. Because they didn’t have the shims the heads likewise are not marked with a drill mark in the paint BUT the final run of Sports used the later rocker cover/Short plug tube combination and for these models only there is the stand alone ‘D’ kit.

I gotta go and do chores right now but a bit later I’ll explain the differences and relative costs for both purchase and installation of the various kits.

Pete

Offline Paul Brooking

  • Gosling
  • ***
  • *
  • Posts: 357
  • Location: Adelaide South Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #53 on: May 26, 2018, 11:40:24 PM »
Outstanding Pete, just outstanding.
Thank you
Bookmarked for future reference


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #54 on: May 27, 2018, 01:10:22 AM »
Getting on to what is included and involved in the various kits they all include tha major componentry off the fully assembled camboxes complete with cam, roller tappets, preload system etc. and the hemispherical ‘Pads’ and earth tang that fits on the central rocker retaining plate bolts. The original rockers and adjusters have to be swapped from the flat tappet camboxes/rocker supports and the hemispherical ‘Pads’ inserted in the rockers, otherwise they are a straight drop-in. Also included in all the kits are are rocker cover gaskets, o-rings for the plug tubes and in the case of ‘A’ and ‘D’  kits the circular neoprene ring gaskets for sealing the plug hole in the rocker casting to the rocker cover.

After this you get to the other ‘Extra’ bits included in the ‘C’ and ‘D’ kits.

Because on these models the heads have to come off to insert the shims under the inlet valve spring seats you also receive four shims, four valve guide oil seals, inlet and exhaust gaskets and six head gaskets! Why six? Because the squish is set using differentialy thicknessed head gaskets. You only use two, the other ones are surplus to requirements.

Moving on to cost things start to get a bit weird. As far as I can make out all of the kits needed cost the same at about $1500US. I have no idea what the importer in Oz charges but they don’t keep them in stock and the supply timeline seems to be in the region of six to eight weeks at the shortest. I bring kits in direct from Europe and endeavour to keep both an ‘A’ and a ‘B’ kit along with all the parts required to *Extend* them to a ‘C’ or ‘D’ kit on the shelf although at the moment I am awaiting both as I sold my stock last week and the next ‘B’ kit which should be here in a few days is already spoken for so the ‘Stock’ timeline is, hopefully, about three weeks. (It takes three days for parts to get here from Europe. It then takes 14-21 days for the scroll beetles at Border Force to process them and get them to me :rolleyes: ). Pricing is weird.

‘A’ kit-$AU 1269.38

‘B’ kit-$AU 998.32

‘C’ kit- $AU 1850.02

‘D’ kit-$AU North of $2,000!!!

Those are exclusive of freight and GST but as you can see there is a huge and weird dichotomy between the price of even the ‘A’ and ‘B’ kits! I have no idea why? What is silly though is the difference between the ‘Head off’ and ‘Head on’ kits. My answer to this is simple. If I have a customer who has a bike that requires a ‘C’ or a ‘D’ kit I simply supply the required ‘A’ or ‘B’ kit and all the individual parts needed to convert it to a ‘C’ or ‘D’ kit. I supply all three thicknesses of head gasket and simply ask that the unused ones be sent back. Since they are by far the most expensive parts of the ‘Extras’ than in and of itself is a saving of over $200AU. Incidentally the cost to the customer will be the same if they buy direct. I make my profit on trade discount. That’s how business works.

Now, as for the time requirements for fitting this will once again vary from model to model. On all of them you have to remove the tank to access the RH cylinder’s cam chain tensioner. On models like big tank Stelvios and Griso’s this is easy-peasy. On Sports, Norges you need to remove the airbox as well which is a bit of an embuggerance and on small tank Stelvios you need to disassemble all the fiddle little plastic bits and panels to get to the tank which is a king sized pain in the arse and Norges have their much easier to remove plastics to remove or work around.

Times for a Griso or big tank Stelvio are easy, about four and a half hours, a bit more if you let us drop the sump, replace the sump spacer gasket and give it a good scry and clean out which we recommend for a ‘B’ or ‘A’ kit. For a ‘C’ kit? Add another hour and a bit. Needless to say if it doesn’t go smoothly costs will escalate.

For Sports? Add an hour and a half/ two hours roughly for airbox out and heads off, for Norges, as long as they don’t need the heads off about an hour and a bit extra. For a small tank Stelvio? (Shudder!) chuck on a couple of hours at least because some of the fasteners are bound to be seized and there are a zillion tiny screws and grommets that are all aneurism inducingly awful and tedious!

I don’t doubt that there are people who can claim to do it quicker. Maybe they can! Sorry, don’t give a shit. Michael and I are as quick as we can be while still being careful. We also have a LOT of practice. A first timer attempting it may well take considerably longer.

I’ll review this later and see what I’ve missed. For now it’s beer o’clock! :thumb:

Pete

Offline Paul Brooking

  • Gosling
  • ***
  • *
  • Posts: 357
  • Location: Adelaide South Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #55 on: May 27, 2018, 01:14:53 AM »
Thanks Pete [emoji106][emoji106][emoji106][emoji106]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #56 on: May 27, 2018, 04:00:12 AM »
You’re welcome. Any questions? Fire away.

Pete

Rough Edge racing

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #57 on: May 27, 2018, 05:20:35 AM »
In this case the ZDDP issue is a red herring. In fact some studies have found it can actually be counter effective in the interface between DLC and other materials. FWIW the oil I have been using for the life of the 8V has had a high ZDDP content and it hasn�t saved the system.

My research would seem to indicate that the problem is not rooted in the lubrication per se but is down to a purely mechanical inadequacy.

 Ok, I'm getting a better picture of this problem...MG put the hard coating on the lifters to avoid premature wear but it's the coating that failed .....I took a look at the head design closely for the first time....Are the timing belts on "short" replacement schedule like Ducati?

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #58 on: May 27, 2018, 05:33:31 AM »
No belts on the Nuovo Hi-cam. Look at the failed components. Look at the valve springs.

Rough Edge racing

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #59 on: May 27, 2018, 06:41:24 AM »
  OK, there's no belt drive on the engines with the failures?  There's more than one four valve type engine?

 

20 Ounce Stainless Steel Double Insulated Tumbler
Buy a quality tumbler and support the forum at the same time!
Better than a YETI! BPA and Lead free.
Advertise Here