nklr / tire size

[Don Detloff]

On a 90/90/21 tire, the first 90 is the cross section of the tire in millimeters. The second 90 is the percentage of tire height compared to the cross section. The 21 is the wheel diameter. Example: 90 / 25.4 = 3.54" (cross section) 90 x .90 = 81 / 25.4 = 3.2" (tire height) 21 = 21" wheel diameter. The total diameter of this tire and wheel is 21" + 3.2" + 3.2" = 27.4" The 130/80/17 would be 17" + 4.1" + 4.1" = 25.2" dia. with a 5.2" tire cross section. The 130/90/17 would be 17" + 4.6" + 4.6" = 26.2" dia. with a 5.2" tire cross section. Don Detloff Fair Haven, MI A14 --- In DSN_klr650@egroups.com, "Roy James" wrote:

> I did an archive search and found nothing under tire size. Here's

my

> question. What do the numbers mean? For instance stock front is > 90/90/21 whats the diff between that and a 100/80/21? Whats the

diff

> between 130/80/17 & 130/90/17 ?

[Ted Palmer]

Jaime Pertuz wrote: [...]

> My question is, given the recent work I've done on it, can or > does this condition sound like it might be due to incorrect valve > timing??

Possibly.

> How much can the arrows on the cam sprockets be out of line??

[...] I don't know for sure, but I _suspect_ that then engine might still run if a cam is one tooth out, but don't quote me on it. A worn camchain might put the arrows out by around half a tooth at the cam sprocket.

> I was wondering if because I decarbonized the head, the valve > seats > and all, and adjusted the clearance, but re-used the slightly > stretched cam chain, if this could push the timing just enough out of > wack.

Only if you put something back together wrong. If the engine was running before, I think you goofed something, somewhere.

> Could the valve timing, assuming it was incorrect, but not so bad > as to be causing them to collide with the piston, still keep the > engine from starting?

Umm, "maybe". Them electric starter have got some gearing behind them. Your valves just might be bent and/or stuck already.

> How much of a range of tolearance is there between perfect valve > timing and the point before the engine will now longer run.

Heh, maybe you can tell us soon

> Can this be the cause of my "almost start" situation??

Quite possible.

> Or could this be caused by a small imperfection in valve face to > seat > sealing??

Maybe. But was it all working before?

> Or lastly, could this be a low compression situation caused by > insufficiently torqued cylinder head studs?? Cause when I was > putting > the head back on, I could only get the studs as close as about > 8ft.lbs > away from spec. without them just spinning and not tightening anymore.

!?!?!?!?!?! This sounds way bad. Stripped _camcover_ boltholes I can believe. Stripped head studs? Yikes.

> Anyone got any suggestions???

Not any easy ones. Sounds to me like you would need to pull everything off again and check all your work as well as the condition of the head studs. I suppose you could start with easy things like the fuel flow to the carby first. Mister_T

[Dana Cilley]

> > Or lastly, could this be a low compression situation caused by > > insufficiently torqued cylinder head studs?? Cause when I was > > putting > > the head back on, I could only get the studs as close as about > > 8ft.lbs > > away from spec. without them just spinning and not tightening anymore. > > !?!?!?!?!?! > This sounds way bad. Stripped _camcover_ boltholes I can believe. > Stripped head studs? Yikes. > > > Anyone got any suggestions???

...shouldn't it be inch pounds... not foot pounds?