Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Antique and Collectibles / Studebaker / September 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Valve clearance?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Wizard of Oz - 16 Sep 2006 22:49 GMT
In the manual it states .018" clearance for the L-Head six but on the side
covers for the valves it has stamped in clearance cold .016".

I had a fluctuation in the vacuum readings at idle so wanted to adjust the
valve clearance. There appeared to be less clearance than spec. This is
probably due to me lapping in the valves when the engine was torn down. I
checked the clearance then and it was a little tight. I wanted to let the
engine settle in and now has come time to go over it all again.

Which is correct? Who has experience with these?

Wiz.
Wizard of Oz - 17 Sep 2006 00:46 GMT
Vacuum fluctuation has gone but at .018" there is a definite tappet noise.
I can live with it if it is best for the engine.

For reference there is 31K miles on the engine.

Wiz.

> In the manual it states .018" clearance for the L-Head six but on the side
> covers for the valves it has stamped in clearance cold .016".
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> Wiz.
midlant@earthlink.net - 17 Sep 2006 01:34 GMT
I would go for the cold temp setting. That is probably what .018 hot
ends up at when the engine cools.
(On a V8, .024 seems to work well cold.)
I have suggested several times that those who set them hot let the
engine cool overnight and then measure the cold clearance and let the
rest of us know.
No one seemed interested in doing it! (Or maybe no NGer has set his
valves in the past few years.)

(a somewhat bitter) Karl

> Vacuum fluctuation has gone but at .018" there is a definite tappet noise.
> I can live with it if it is best for the engine.
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> >
> > Wiz.
Nate Nagel - 17 Sep 2006 01:34 GMT
I still can't figure out how to set them hot and running without setting
the engine on fire!

nate

(guess I might need some rebuilt rocker shaft assemblies)

> I would go for the cold temp setting. That is probably what .018 hot
> ends up at when the engine cools.
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>>>
>>>Wiz.

Signature

replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

John Poulos - 17 Sep 2006 02:28 GMT
Use my cut away valve cover.

> I still can't figure out how to set them hot and running without setting
> the engine on fire!
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
>>>>
>>>> Wiz.

Signature

JP/Maryland
Studebaker On the Net http://stude.com
My Ebay items:http://www.stude.com/EBAY/
65 Daytona Sports Sedan (sold)
64 Daytona HT
63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk (Black)
63 R1 GT Hawk
63 Avanti R1
63 Avanti R2
63 Daytona convert
62 Lark 2 door
60 Hawk
60 Lark Convert
52 Starliner (sold)
51 Commander

Paul Johnson - 17 Sep 2006 03:39 GMT
>I still can't figure out how to set them hot and running without setting
>the engine on fire!

Engine on fire is one of your lesser problems.  Think about your fingers and
knuckles <G>.  Actually, what a lot of mechanics did was made cutaway valve
covers as JP mentioned.  They  cut up a valve cover leaving the flanges, the
gaskets and the ribs where the studs got through, but making enough room to
reach all the adjusting screws.  That way the oil (most of it) would still
flow back into the pan.  I have two of these devices, one from a late
painted valve cover and the other from a damaged R-3/4 valve cover (sob).
Paul Johnson
Dwain G. - 17 Sep 2006 04:32 GMT
You might like a go-no-go feeler gauge for that job.
This March 1959 Service Bulletin explains the contradicting clearance
specs:
http://home.comcast.net/~jdwain/valve.jpg
Wizard of Oz - 17 Sep 2006 06:06 GMT
Thanks Dwain,

Again you came through.

Wiz.

> You might like a go-no-go feeler gauge for that job.
> This March 1959 Service Bulletin explains the contradicting clearance
> specs:
> http://home.comcast.net/~jdwain/valve.jpg
midlant@earthlink.net - 17 Sep 2006 20:12 GMT
Hoe about OHV 6 cold settings (even though the oil problem is not like
on the V8s?)
Karl

> Thanks Dwain,
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> > specs:
> > http://home.comcast.net/~jdwain/valve.jpg
Dwain G. - 18 Sep 2006 03:18 GMT
> Hoe about OHV 6 cold settings (even though the oil problem is not like
> on the V8s?)
> Karl
______________________________________________________

No revisions that I know of from the shop manual specs of .023"-.025" hot,
.025"-.027" cold. I'd start with the most clearance in order to give the
valves as much cooling time on their seats as possible. If it makes an
objectionable clatter, then go .001" or .002" tighter.
I see the shop manual only gives hot settings on the '64 engines. I'm not
aware of any explanation for that change.
midlant@earthlink.net - 18 Sep 2006 21:20 GMT
Thanks for the info.

Karl

> > Hoe about OHV 6 cold settings (even though the oil problem is not like
> > on the V8s?)
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> I see the shop manual only gives hot settings on the '64 engines. I'm not
> aware of any explanation for that change.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.