Re: [lro] 2.25 Compression

From: Jim Hall (jimfoo@purplemountain.net)
Date: Mon Jan 13 2003 - 08:33:08 EST

Next message: David Scheidt: "Re: [lro] 2.25 Compression"

Previous message: John Cranfield: "Re: [lro] 2.25 Compression"
In reply to: John Cranfield: "Re: [lro] 2.25 Compression"
Next in thread: Easton Trevor A: "RE: [lro] 2.25 Compression"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Actually shimming is the answer to that problem because as the whole
rocker assembly moves up, the screws will have to be turned in to take
up the additional clearance.

John Cranfield wrote:
>
> It is possible that there will be interferance between the valve cover
> and tips of the valve adjustment screws. This very close at the best of
> times.
> John and Muddy
>
> "John M. Baker" wrote:
> >
> > Any drawbacks to shimming the rocker towers vs. installing shorter pushrods
> > when shaving heads?
> >
> > John
> > Bangkok
> > 1975 SIII 109 2.25 Petrol
> > _______________________________________________
> > LRO mailing list
> > LRO@land-rover.team.net
> > http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> LRO@land-rover.team.net
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

-- 
Jim Hall
1966 88" Elephant Chaser
http://webs.purplemountain.net/jimfoo/Foospage.htm
"You know, I never really damaged my Rover 'till I started wheeling 
with Jim." Mitch Stockdale
_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
LRO@land-rover.team.net
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

Next message: David Scheidt: "Re: [lro] 2.25 Compression"
Previous message: John Cranfield: "Re: [lro] 2.25 Compression"
In reply to: John Cranfield: "Re: [lro] 2.25 Compression"
Next in thread: Easton Trevor A: "RE: [lro] 2.25 Compression"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Jan 13 2003 - 08:37:34 EST