1935 ES2 tappet settings?

Thanks Peter,

I do have a photocopied manual but it is for a later model of an ES2 with enclosed rockers. Your 30's manual should be more accurate. I'll try those settings tonight and see how it runs.

Regards,

Graham

Previously wrote:

Dear Graham,

According to my original 1930s Norton manual the clearances should be:-

Inlet .002" cold

Exhaust .004" cold

Of course they will be larger with the engine hot.

Regards,

Peter Bolton

Peter,

This is what I was afraid of, conflicting advice but I think, I'll just have to try both methods and see what happens. Before I dismantled things (to seal the pushrod tubes) I checked the clearances at cold and they were considerably larger than two and four thou and obvoiusly larger than zero and the bike went quite well, so I'll try both settings. At least with exposed valves they are easy to get to.

Thanks again,

Graham

What a lot of people don't realise is that over the years Norton changed engine designs, so, amazingly, the 1927 ES2 is not much like the 1932 ES2 or the 1938 ES2, 1948 ES2 or the 1962 ES2, so to find a book that says something is valid for all ES2's or all 16H's is a very broad statement. I soon found this out when I first started trying to piece together my 1946 Model 18. People were offering expertise & advise, saying they were all the same, when all they knew was fifties era engines. Advise was given in good faith and taken thankfully, because there was always something to be learned, but you need to do some research and not take evry piece of advice literally, my own included.

The big difference between the pre 1937 OHV engines and the post 1937 OHV engines, is the early engines had exposed valves with the valve clearance adjuster at the end of the rocker arm over the valve stem with no adjustment on the pushrods. The later engines had enclosed valves with no access to the valve stems at all, so clearance (or the lack of it) was adjusted by adjustable pushrods at the rocker cover. The later clearnce was nill with only rotational movement of the pushrod being the measure.

I have a photocopy of a 1935 manual that gives the tappet clearance at .002" for inlet & .004" for exhaust. There is a chart in Edgar Franks book on page 14 which shows the same for the 1932 engine. At the bottom of Edgars chart is written "Unless the above data is amended in the subsequent text it remains unaltered.

It's a good book as he works his way year by year through the engine developments. Look out for it, is invaluable for the early Norton owner. The first time he amends the timing setting is 1938 when valves were fully enclosed and he describes setting nill clearance by adjusting the push rods. It'd be a good bet your valve clearance should be .002" for inlet & .004" for exhaust.

I'm putting together a 1936 engine at the moment.

Bob

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

I've had my ES2 for about a month now and with a bit of advice from Mike Pemberton have hopefully sorted the oil leaks from the pushrod tubes, although I have had difficulty in finding out who can supply seals of the correct type but silicon seams to be the answer?

The tappets need adjusting, but I do not know the correct settings, can anyone help?

Thanks in anticipation, Graham

Hi Graham,

P L Garratt's Norton maintenance book says that all ES2's have nil clearance with a cold engine. The normal method to achieve this is to set the engine so the valve is completely closed and adjust so that the pushrod is free to rotate, but no up and down clearance can be detected,

Best of luck, Rob Gittins.

Rob,

Thanks for the information, I'm going to have to try a couple of variations on a theme I think, as I've had two different bits of advice but I'll give them a try and see which one works best.

Regards,

Graham

Bob,

Thanks for the information, I used the settings last night, took the bike for a run and it's goingmuch better than before, I've sealed the pushrod tube leaks and the only thing that is leaking now is the oil pressure indicator between the pushrod tubes.

I must try and get hold of Edgar Franks book, it sounds as though it could be useful.

Many thanks,

Graham

Previously wrote:

Dear Graham,

According to my original 1930s Norton manual the clearances should be:-

Inlet .002" cold

Exhaust .004" cold

Of course they will be larger with the engine hot.

Regards,

Peter Bolton

mr Bolton , sir , is that a little misleading

' of couse they will be larger when hot .... does that meanthe gaps will be larger ? i thought heat closed things up and reduced the gap , obviously not if they run zero clearance at cold, one learns something new every day, thanks.

Interestingly, my experience has been that the gap does not really change hot or cold. When I first bought my Commando over 30 years ago I played with the tappet settings quite a lot to try and get the best setting, being very conscious of too tight a setting on the zorst valve could easily lead to a burnt valve. Hot or cold once set they don't really change. Same on the ES2. The later models, with nill clearance set on the push rods, check it hot, check it cold, still the same. Remember, all the bits expand & contract together with temperature change.

Bob

Previously wrote:

Interestingly, my experience has been that the gap does not really change hot or cold. When I first bought my Commando over 30 years ago I played with the tappet settings quite a lot to try and get the best setting, being very conscious of too tight a setting on the zorst valve could easily lead to a burnt valve. Hot or cold once set they don't really change. Same on the ES2. The later models, with nill clearance set on the push rods, check it hot, check it cold, still the same. Remember, all the bits expand & contract together with temperature change.

Bob

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

mr Bolton , sir , is that a little misleading

' of couse they will be larger when hot .... does that meanthe gaps will be larger ? i thought heat closed things up and reduced the gap , obviously not if they run zero clearance at cold, one learns something new every day, thanks.

Dear Adrian,

Let me quote verbatim from the manual page 17, "These clearances will be slightly larger when engine is warm". Unquote.

I was only trying to help.

Regards,

Peter Bolton

you were helping for sure , you educated me after thinking the opposite for .... god knows many years , sorry , was not criticising and obviously need to watch what i say and the way i say, my apologies sir , sincerely.

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

Interestingly, my experience has been that the gap does not really change hot or cold. When I first bought my Commando over 30 years ago I played with the tappet settings quite a lot to try and get the best setting, being very conscious of too tight a setting on the zorst valve could easily lead to a burnt valve. Hot or cold once set they don't really change. Same on the ES2. The later models, with nill clearance set on the push rods, check it hot, check it cold, still the same. Remember, all the bits expand & contract together with temperature change.

Bob

Hi. Its part of the designers job to manage the differential expansion of the various materials use,

Aluminium has over twice the coefficient of expansion of cast iron. Its far to simplistic to say things just expand when they get hot.

Ron.

I remember our motor cycle mechanic always slackening off the exhaust tappet on the 6T'severy few thousand miles , guessing now it was all down to valve pocketing rather than theexpansion and contaction of heated metals. i thought i was 'with it ' too, not so sure now.

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

Interestingly, my experience has been that the gap does not really change hot or cold. When I first bought my Commando over 30 years ago I played with the tappet settings quite a lot to try and get the best setting, being very conscious of too tight a setting on the zorst valve could easily lead to a burnt valve. Hot or cold once set they don't really change. Same on the ES2. The later models, with nill clearance set on the push rods, check it hot, check it cold, still the same. Remember, all the bits expand & contract together with temperature change.

Bob

Hi. Its part of the designers job to manage the differential expansion of the various materials use,

Aluminium has over twice the coefficient of expansion of cast iron. Its far to simplistic to say things just expand when they get hot.

Ron.

Not much aluminium in the top end of a '35 ES2! You could call it simplistic, we're not talking a railway line 100klm long, laying in the hot sun by day, freezing in the night, but the tappet clearances on these engines don't really change. This includes my Commando with aluminium con rods, head and whatever alloy is in the pushrods. When you add it all up, over the distance it might make .001" if your lucky. Now consider cam bush wear, cam lobe wear, rocker arm bush wear, dimpling of the valve stem and whatever else can flap about etc etc and bring things into proportion. There is far greater difference in finding the correct tappet setting, be it nil clearance, .002", .004" .006" or .010" A few microns here or there from different co efficients of expansion is nothing.....over this distance, especially after a designer has managed things anyway. It's more about proportioin, relativity and reality.......than armchair engineering theory. The engine already runs better.

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

Interestingly, my experience has been that the gap does not really change hot or cold. When I first bought my Commando over 30 years ago I played with the tappet settings quite a lot to try and get the best setting, being very conscious of too tight a setting on the zorst valve could easily lead to a burnt valve. Hot or cold once set they don't really change. Same on the ES2. The later models, with nill clearance set on the push rods, check it hot, check it cold, still the same. Remember, all the bits expand & contract together with temperature change.

Bob

Hi. Its part of the designers job to manage the differential expansion of the various materials use,

Aluminium has over twice the coefficient of expansion of cast iron. Its far to simplistic to say things just expand when they get hot.

Ron.

Not much aluminium in the top end of a '35 ES2! You could call it simplistic, we're not talking a railway line 100klm long, laying in the hot sun by day, freezing in the night, but the tappet clearances on these engines don't really change. This includes my Commando with aluminium con rods, head and whatever alloy is in the pushrods. When you add it all up, over the distance it might make .001" if your lucky. Now consider cam bush wear, cam lobe wear, rocker arm bush wear, dimpling of the valve stem and whatever else can flap about etc etc and bring things into proportion. There is far greater difference in finding the correct tappet setting, be it nil clearance, .002", .004" .006" or .010" A few microns here or there from different co efficients of expansion is nothing.....over this distance, especially after a designer has managed things anyway. It's more about proportioin, relativity and reality.......than armchair engineering theory. The engine already runs better.

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

Interestingly, my experience has been that the gap does not really change hot or cold. When I first bought my Commando over 30 years ago I played with the tappet settings quite a lot to try and get the best setting, being very conscious of too tight a setting on the zorst valve could easily lead to a burnt valve. Hot or cold once set they don't really change. Same on the ES2. The later models, with nill clearance set on the push rods, check it hot, check it cold, still the same. Remember, all the bits expand & contract together with temperature change.

Bob

Hi. Its part of the designers job to manage the differential expansion of the various materials use,

Aluminium has over twice the coefficient of expansion of cast iron. Its far to simplistic to say things just expand when they get hot.

Ron.

Not much aluminium in the top end of a '35 ES2! You could call it simplistic, we're not talking a railway line 100klm long, laying in the hot sun by day, freezing in the night, but the tappet clearances on these engines don't really change. This includes my Commando with aluminium con rods, head and whatever alloy is in the pushrods. When you add it all up, over the distance it might make .001" if your lucky. Now consider cam bush wear, cam lobe wear, rocker arm bush wear, dimpling of the valve stem and whatever else can flap about etc etc and bring things into proportion. There is far greater difference in finding the correct tappet setting, be it nil clearance, .002", .004" .006" or .010" A few microns here or there from different co efficients of expansion is nothing.....over this distance, especially after a designer has managed things anyway. It's more about proportioin, relativity and reality.......than armchair engineering theory. The engine already runs better.

You run with micron clearance between piston and bore if you like, not me.