Jump to content
  • Welcome to 205GTIDrivers.com!

    Hello dear visitor! Feel free to browse but we invite you to register completely free of charge in order to enjoy the full functionality of the website.

kyepan

[engine_work] Xu9j4 Mi-16 Rebuild

Recommended Posts

kyepan

yesterday evening i got the crank pulley undone using the block of wood technique, was going to take the head off, but only had an hour so i removed the crank pulley, cleaned it up, bagged and tagged. Also removed most of the bolts holding on the thermostat housing, one of the hex bolts is very badly rounded, so i'll need another from somewhere, perhaps i may use the thermostat housing from the engine in the car.

 

This is the broken tab that the crank pulley locking pin goes in between... so this is the bit i need. anyone with one spare, please shout.

2010-01-28185716.jpg

 

Also have a look down the throats of the inlet ports on the head, do the guides look like they've had work on them? or the throats themselves?. That's quite a sharp edge where they split.

2010-01-28194223.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kyepan

yesterday evening i got the crank pulley undone using the block of wood technique, was going to take the head off, but only had an hour so i removed the crank pulley, cleaned it up, bagged and tagged. Also removed most of the bolts holding on the thermostat housing, one of the hex bolts is very badly rounded, so i'll need another from somewhere, perhaps i may use the thermostat housing from the engine in the car.

 

This is the broken tab that the crank pulley locking pin goes in between... so this is the bit i need. anyone with one spare, please shout.

2010-01-28185716.jpg

 

Also have a look down the throats of the inlet ports on the head, do the guides look like they've had work on them? or the throats themselves?. That's quite a sharp edge where they split.

2010-01-28194223.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
petert

Ports have definitely been massaged. Guides look original, but it's the fit inside that counts, not the outside appearance. If worn, it's impossible to cut concentric seats and valves will struggle to seal properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kyepan
Ports have definitely been massaged. Guides look original, but it's the fit inside that counts, not the outside appearance. If worn, it's impossible to cut concentric seats and valves will struggle to seal properly.

so measurement of wear on the guides in important then, that's one of the measurements on my list, is the internal measurement on a micrometer small enough to do that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

I do believe you'd drop the valves off the seat and measure the side to side movement with a dial gauge against the side of the valve head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James_m
405 1.9 mi16, "HSG gasket plate", part #0514 81 it would seem. 0514 57 for a 2.0 XU10J4.

 

Strangely i broke mine on my XU9J4 and found the XU10J4 part to be identical and fit with no problems.

Who knows with Peugeot's weird and wonderful parts catalogue :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kyepan
Strangely i broke mine on my XU9J4 and found the XU10J4 part to be identical and fit with no problems.

Who knows with Peugeot's weird and wonderful parts catalogue :)

that does not suprise me!

 

today we (ant and i) stripped the engine down, and on the whole it would appear to be in very good condition.

 

Liners were fairly new, not lipped, but there was some corrosion because the engine had been standing, these need honing.

Pistons also looked very new, not much carbon, standard though

waterways were very corroded, with lots of scale, it would seem the car has been run on water and not kept full of coolant.

Water pump was shagged for the same reason.

Head came off, could not tell if it already had three angle valve seats, will strip the head later.

Big end bearings looked in very good

However the main bearings had picked up a bit, one noticable mark on the crank, but on the whole not bad.

 

Only took a couple of hours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kyepan

Quick question, measured one of the bores last night and came back with a fairly even reading of 83.5mm

 

There are still light honing marks on the area that doesn't see piston contact..which also measures 83.5

 

So am i correct in thinking that either.

 

1) i am measuring it wrong with the bore gauge.

 

process i used, was to set the bore gauge against the micrometer, zero it so it can expand and give a reading. then pop it in the bore and check the different at different heights and rotations.

 

2) the liners have been overbored by .5mm

 

what do you guys think?

 

Cheers

 

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

any markings on the piston crowns? the ones I have here have a tolerance grade indicated by a letter stamped into them :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kyepan
any markings on the piston crowns? the ones I have here have a tolerance grade indicated by a letter stamped into them :)

i'll have a look see tonight.. do you know what letter indicates what grade, or is that something the rebuild manual?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DrSarty

I'll go out on a limb: overbore.

 

You know me J, (no expert), but 0.5mm is a lot in engine terms surely? Manufacturing tolerances would surely be a lot tighter than that on such a component. I'm sure you can measure accurately, so perhaps these are 83.5mm liners?

 

But as WP suggested, the answer will probably lie in the piston markings as it will indicate what's been used to fit into your liners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kyepan
I'll go out on a limb: overbore.

 

You know me J, (no expert), but 0.5mm is a lot in engine terms surely? Manufacturing tolerances would surely be a lot tighter than that on such a component. I'm sure you can measure accurately, so perhaps these are 83.5mm liners?

 

But as WP suggested, the answer will probably lie in the piston markings as it will indicate what's been used to fit into your liners.

tolerance is probably more like a tenth of that 0.05mm or something like that, so yes if i've been using the measuring stick right, it's too much to be wear.

 

Trying to find out if standard oversized pistons are available, or if they are likely to be forged items, Anthony didn't seem to yelp with excitement when we took them out.. So i'm guessing they may have been standard items.

 

I did search, but only seemed to come up with references to forged items.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
petert

If they have an X or a Z in the crown they're a standard 83.00mm piston, indicating their deck height measurement. Further, if standard, they'll have either A, B or C stamped in them indicating their toleranced size. A being the smallest piston, C being the largest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kyepan
If they have an X or a Z in the crown they're a standard 83.00mm piston, indicating their deck height measurement. Further, if standard, they'll have either A, B or C stamped in them indicating their toleranced size. A being the smallest piston, C being the largest.

thanks peter, i've got propper digital verneirs now to check this out.

 

this evening i've continued stripping the head, cams came out last night, and tonight i tried to use the valve spring compressor for the first time, it's too small and doesn't make it round the head casting. clearly it's for little engines with vertical valves like minis....

 

slightly concerned about the state of the inlet cam, it has some surface rust. The cam journals are in general fairly good. two points i need to raise, i'll put photos up later.

 

Inlet cam, belt end, journal number five (so the first one) looks quite badly damaged for 1/4 of the journal surface, it looks like a much less knackered version of my ex's 323 that welded the cam shaft into the journal.

 

also exhaust cam journal at flywheel end journal number one has picked up along one line, it looks ok othewise.

 

Depending on the quality of the photos, does this mean the head is scrap, or can the raised sections be flattened off with some gentle polishing?

 

Also if anyone has a spring compressor suitable that i could borrow or buy, please yell.

 

cheers

 

j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul_13

Yelled in the form of a text :)

 

Get a socket, amd use a hammer to free off the collets they can get stuck.

Edited by Paul_13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kyepan

link to photos

 

photos of the bearing surface... for your consideration.

4761435860_14608f4cc4.jpg

 

 

4760797895_4e0427b759.jpg

 

 

4760803855_1391286925.jpg

 

 

4761438964_6538fcb1bc.jpg

 

 

and the other one that has picked up.

4761431294_4e65455e62.jpg

 

the head has had some light work to the throats and valve stems, would like to know if it is scrap, or what my options are.

 

cheers justin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthony

I'd personally say that should be fine, as there's plenty of "good" journal surface there - just make sure that there's no high points on the scored area, or if there is, remove them with a bit of emery or something.

 

My valve spring compressor is still on loan to someone on the forum, but when I get it back, you're welcome to borrow it :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul_13

It's alright Anthony he's borrowed mine :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kyepan

Quick question, despite searching fairly hard, i can't find out what people (generally DrS) soak lifters in.... is it carb cleaner, and if so how long and what depth does the liquid need to be. Then... why do you bang the centers out again? i can understand refacing the surface but not the removal of the Center thing.

 

I remember a post to some video clips, but can't for the life of me find it... I even used Google search, name search.... etc, it must have got archived or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kyepan

Today the head went to Paul Gardias for some work, nice chap, very welcoming.

 

He immediately spotted it needed welding, due to corrosion, and was blowing on one cylinder. he also commented that the corrosion on the head showed it had been run without coolant. The corrosion then expanded and pushed the head away from the block. Keep your coolant ratios correct sports fans.

 

 

We discussed the damaged journal, and worst case, he would line bore it. We also discussed valve springs, as mine are of varying length, so tonight i'll be measuring them for your reading pleasure, un compressed. If anyone knows how to measure them in a compressed state i would be interested.

 

so a photo... here are the springs, lifters, collets etc..

4780268941_20d08bb459.jpg

 

 

and then the service manual...

 

4780927812_55c0fb6c13.jpg

d1 is the uncompressed

d2 is compressed

 

what are p1 and p2?

 

d1 : mm = 38.8.... i'm over a centimeter out... wtf?

 

all measured against d1

 

Inlet valve spring 1 = 46.8 mm

Inlet valve spring 2 = 46.8 mm

Inlet valve spring 3 = 47.66 mm

Inlet valve spring 4 = 47.23 mm

Inlet valve spring 5 = 47.37 mm

Inlet valve spring 6 = 46.42 mm

Inlet valve spring 7 = 46.73 mm

Inlet valve spring 8 = 46.49 mm

 

Exhaust valve spring 1 = 47.82 mm

Exhaust valve spring 2 = 46.73 mm

Exhaust valve spring 3 = 46.52 mm

Exhaust valve spring 4 = 46.81 mm

Exhaust valve spring 5 = 46.63 mm

Exhaust valve spring 6 = 46.76 mm

Exhaust valve spring 7 = 46.62 mm

Exhaust valve spring 8 = 46.9 mm

 

also the variance is over a mm, and some of the valves have thicker washers.

 

thin washers on all but inlet 2 & 3 are 0.63mm

inlet 2 is 1.12mm

inlet 3 is 1.09mm

 

any knowledgable heads know why my springs are a cm longer, and why some washers might be different?

 

edit - think i've just figured it out.. p1 and p2 are the number of newtons applied to check... probably in preload state and compressed state, correct?

 

cheers

 

J

Edited by kyepan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
welshpug

My understanding would be as follows;

 

P1 is DaNm of force applied.

 

D1 the resulting spring length.

 

P2, DaNm of force applied,

 

D2 resulting length of spring.

 

edit, missed your edit :blush:

 

The shims would be to compensate for varying valve seat heights to give the same compressed height of the springs.

Edited by welshpug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
petert

38.8mm is the installed height. 29.6mm is the compressed height. ie 38.8 - 9.2 (std. lift) = 29.6

 

I'd just put an extra shim under each spring. That usually puts them back in spec. after a long life and rebuild. I've tested many springs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

×