While the manual gives a side clearance of .002 - .004 for rod side clearance, there is no wear limit stated. I know the rod I'm looking at has had a long and sketchy life, but it is smooth and there is no radial play. However, the side clearance is way more than that. At what point do you give up on it? I think the 93 specs call for .006 - .008 for what appears to be the same rod.
I also notice that the rod kit shown by Hodakaparts has a different thrust washer design. The original star washer doesn't look impressive in terms of area compared to this. Was premature wear a problem for the original?
Ace 100 rod side clearance
-
- Posts: 308
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:13 am
Re: Ace 100 rod side clearance
I'll give you my opinion, for what it's worth:
If you are satisfied that radial play is "ok" I would do nothing.
You are correct that there's a different spec for the iron cylinder Rat vs. the Ace.
I've only rebuilt two Ace cranks, but pressing to a +/-.001" tolerance is similar to chasing smoke.
The smoke got away from me.
But I probably kept it to +.005".
After all my work (and money spent) the crank pin, roller bearing & rod I took out looked pretty darn good.
But it was an interesting challenge.
If you are satisfied that radial play is "ok" I would do nothing.
You are correct that there's a different spec for the iron cylinder Rat vs. the Ace.
I've only rebuilt two Ace cranks, but pressing to a +/-.001" tolerance is similar to chasing smoke.
The smoke got away from me.
But I probably kept it to +.005".
After all my work (and money spent) the crank pin, roller bearing & rod I took out looked pretty darn good.
But it was an interesting challenge.
Re: Ace 100 rod side clearance
Thanks for the reply, Al. I've never been that concerned about side clearance. I'm suspecting that the extra clearance on the Rat was for oil access and ventilation.
I have a 90 crank that has 1/16" side to side play at the small end despite having maybe .015" side clearance and no radial play. A 100 crank has similar clearance and no radial play but 5/64" side to side which feels too loose for my taste. I know that it's - like everything else in the motor - getting tired, but the question is whether its serviceable or not worth using. The nice cranks I have are busy inside motors so I don't have an example for comparison.
I guess what I'm looking for is some spec that can tell me if I'm being too fussy or not. As you say, pressing a crank is pretty demanding even if the manual makes it sound straightforward.
Is there a typical 'waggle factor' on these rods?
I have a 90 crank that has 1/16" side to side play at the small end despite having maybe .015" side clearance and no radial play. A 100 crank has similar clearance and no radial play but 5/64" side to side which feels too loose for my taste. I know that it's - like everything else in the motor - getting tired, but the question is whether its serviceable or not worth using. The nice cranks I have are busy inside motors so I don't have an example for comparison.
I guess what I'm looking for is some spec that can tell me if I'm being too fussy or not. As you say, pressing a crank is pretty demanding even if the manual makes it sound straightforward.
Is there a typical 'waggle factor' on these rods?
Summerland, B.C.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests