Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

On 31/03/2025 at 12:02 AM, Duncan said:

Aside from the fact it is likely fuel related if it is black, the symptoms otherwise sound like worn valve stem seals. Oil gets past the worn seals when the engine is off and burns when the engine starts. If it happens on deceleration while driving (puffs of white smoke) that is another valve stem seal symptom because oil gets sucked form the head into the combustion chamber under vacuum with the throttle closed.

They can be replaced in the car if you have some way to keep the valves closed while working (eg compressed air into cylinders) but is much easier with head off.

Can't you put the pistons to TDC and then do the valve seals? Or will the drop down too far to pull them back up?

34 minutes ago, sunsetR33 said:

Can't you put the pistons to TDC and then do the valve seals? Or will the drop down too far to pull them back up?

The old approach was to fill the cylinder/chamber with a length of rope pushed in through the sparkplug hole. The new approach is to connect compressed air to the sparkplug hole and fill it with enough pressure to push the valves up.

Doing either of these things with the head on and the engine in the car is a lot less pleasant than doing it properly.

I get that taking off the head is best but that's a bit much for "just" valve seals. I was just under the impression that one would be able to rotate to TDC and be able to temporarily drop the valve without losing it and effectively having to remove the head to then recover it. I never knew people actually pushed rope into the cylinder to do valve seals hahaha

So just to confirm, just going to TDC will not work? In that case I know when I do valve seals I'll maybe just remove the head and do some other things while I'm there, or just wait until I do an engine build.

I don't know, I've never done it that way, but

1. While it is an interference engine, there is still clearance between the valves and the piston at all points in the regular timing cycle

2. There is not a lot of distance before you can't catch the top of the valve stem any more

I don't know if 2 is greater or less than 1. But

3. If it doesn't work out you are f**ked, engine is coming out to disassemble so it is a big bet.

9 hours ago, sunsetR33 said:

I get that taking off the head is best but that's a bit much for "just" valve seals. I was just under the impression that one would be able to rotate to TDC and be able to temporarily drop the valve without losing it and effectively having to remove the head to then recover it. I never knew people actually pushed rope into the cylinder to do valve seals hahaha

So just to confirm, just going to TDC will not work? In that case I know when I do valve seals I'll maybe just remove the head and do some other things while I'm there, or just wait until I do an engine build.

Even with the piston at TDC there was room for it to drop, but I don't think it can drop fully into the cylinder, the problem you have is that you need something pushing against the valve to hold it up so you have enough room to put the new stem seal on and the spring etc. 

I used compressed air only because putting rope in the cylinder seemed a bit risky to me, I know people have done it countless times before like this.

Overall it's a pain in the ass job. Honestly you'd probably be better off taking the head off because the risk of dropping something in the engine and the finicky-ness of it all is very stressful.

If you are going to attempt it though i 10000% recommend a 36050 valve spring/keeper tool. I had both the traditional lever type and after doing 1 cylinder it was absolute pain to get those valve keepers in place, even with 2 people.

That 36050 is amazing, you do have to push hard to get them in place but it works perfectly almost every time.

Back to my actual issue I think my engine is just tired and old and the rings have gone bad. The comp numbers (cold, no oil) were:

Cyl 1 -129psi

Cyl 2 - 133psi

Cyl 3 - 138psi

Cyl 4 - 137psi

Cyl 5 - 157psi

Cyl 6 - 142psi

 

Cylinder 5 and 6 having the most carbon on them.

  • Like 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Welcome to !
    • As I've said elsewhere, I am using the stock intercooler piping path in the engine bay, and a return flow cooler, and making ~250 rwkW (without any effort put into trying to turn it up past there just yet) and expect to be able to make some more, and frankly, I would be perfectly happy with 260-270rwKW. This is peak road Skyline usability territory. You go past there and, sure, the car will snap necks more when it's on boost, but it will also break shit all the time, cost a (even larger) fortune in tyres, etc etc. Anyway, I also do not like the over-the-fan pipe path, and you don't have to do it.
    • I see, honestly I’m not too fussed about the looks. The only reason to go plenum is to make the piping easier instead of the classic over the rad etc. 
    • Not easy to quantify wrt something like how many fractions of a second slower it would be over 0-100. But given that a 250-300rwkW car is able to do that launch sprint in 5-6 sec (and faster with appropriate tyres, and surface)..... giving up as much as a second would feel like torture. A ~450HP capable turbo is not going to make lots of boost in the 2000-3000 rpm range. So, whilst with some boost on hand it will be faster accelerating in that rev range than your engine currently is NA, it will not feel like a fast car until the boost is solidly in. You know what your car feels like right now when you open it up at 2000rpm. if you've ever been in an actual fast car, you will appreciate that the NARB25 is.... not exciting. Well, add some boost and it will be better. But shorten the intake runners and it might not be better at all. It might come out better, but it could end up feeling the same. For me, it's not the 0-X km/h sprints that matter. It is easy to fry the tyres with anything over 200 rwkW. You can't use all the power available in 1st and 2nd anyway, you have to modulate the throttle. What matters is how the car reacts when you're driving in traffic in 4th or 5th and have maybe 2000 rpm on board, and you want/need to add some speed quickly, and don't have time for the downshift. It won't make boost, it will be all NA (at the speeds we're talking about - remember how fast you're going at 2000 in 4th! and don't plan on breaking the limit by too much.) So giving away NA torque is not what I would consider practical for a street car. And retaining that NA torque builds boost faster which makes the car faster. The flashy plenum is not actually better, unless you're looking at a track car where you can keep it on the boil all the time.  
    • So how much difference does it make you think? Like 1 second in the 0-100?  I was have smaller turbo so hopefully that spools quick GTX2871.  currently it’s NA so you can imagine pretty slow, but I do want fast accusation a little as there’s not many places I’ll be driving where I go over 80 even near me. So 0-60 and 0-80 targets   
×
×
  • Create New...