-
Enjoy XS650.com? Consider making a donation to help support the site.
XS650.com receives a small share of sales from some links on this page, but direct donations have a much greater impact on keeping this site going.
win some, lose some -- 1971 XS1B
- Thread starter DogBunny
- Start date
Well as luck would have it, I read that article Bob references above (or one like it) years ago and gave it a shot.
Best I could come up with was a 28% solution from Ace hardware.
Didn't work. After about 8hrs it was definitely starting to eat the chrome, but I'd guess the timeline would be days or weeks. 30 to 40% might stand a better chance.
I've also put aluminum in it. Not good. It'll start to eat the aluminum within about 15-30 minutes.
You might have better luck than me, but I recommend extreme caution.
Best I could come up with was a 28% solution from Ace hardware.
Didn't work. After about 8hrs it was definitely starting to eat the chrome, but I'd guess the timeline would be days or weeks. 30 to 40% might stand a better chance.
I've also put aluminum in it. Not good. It'll start to eat the aluminum within about 15-30 minutes.
You might have better luck than me, but I recommend extreme caution.
Try calling a chrome shop and ask how they do it?
they reverse the electrolysis in the acid bath.
Usually dedicated tank just for this process. dunno about what that does to aluminum.
I've had some very nice aluminum parts that had been plated.
Usually dedicated tank just for this process. dunno about what that does to aluminum.
I've had some very nice aluminum parts that had been plated.
Last edited:
Good point. The current literally pulls the chrome off. It's not entirely dependent on the acid.
Just recalled... @Kevin Werner sent me the fenders off his red bike for paint last year. He had sent 'em out to the chromers and had 'em de-chromed. The surface of the steel was rough... very rough. You could tell the acid they used ate away some of it. It took extra coats of epoxy filler to get a paintable finish. My thought is if it'll do that to steel, aluminum likely don't stand a chance.
Don't know if that's representative of all chrome shops, but they did it to those.
Thanks for that.
I looked into acid quite a bit. The problem is there are two steel posts on the back side of the brake plate, and the axle hole is steel lined. So you'd have acid eroding chrome, steel, and aluminum, all at different rates. Seems too chaotic and uncontrollable to me.
https://www.amazon.com/Polly-Plasti...a778cb&ref_=pd_hp_d_atf_ci_mcx_mr_ca_hp_atf_d
I'm leaning towards this. Mixed with grease, and used on a sisal wheel. Three grades of SiC, one pound each of coarse and medium, and 1/2 pound of fine. Would allow experimentation with the different grades to see what works. Either completely remove the chrome, or polish it.
Take the left-over 1/2 pound of fine aluminum oxide powder, mix it with oil and/or wax, and make my own White Diamond aluminum polish.
they reverse the electrolysis in the acid bath.
Usually dedicated tank just for the this process. dunno about what that does to aluminum.
I've had some very nice aluminum parts that had been plated.
It has to be something I can do myself. And not overly complicated/dangerous/poisonous. The plate does not have to be perfect, I just have to at least get rid of the rough, blasted-looking finish.Good point. The current literally pulls the chrome off. It's not entirely dependent on the acid.
Just recalled... @Kevin Werner sent me the fenders off his red bike for paint last year. He had sent 'em out to the chromers and had 'em de-chromed. The surface of the steel was rough... very rough. You could tell the acid they used ate away some of it. It took extra coats of epoxy filler to get a paintable finish. My thought is if it'll do that to steel, aluminum likely don't stand a chance.
Don't know if that's representative of all chrome shops, but they did it to those.
Just curious, what does SiC stand for?
Years ago when my uncles business started removing rust from bathtubs they used muriatic acid and a HUGE problem was even the fumes would strip the chrome off the bathroom hardware (even stuff not in the tub). Now this wasn’t super nice triple plated car show chrome, but chrome nonetheless.
It may be worth a shot.
It may be worth a shot.
https://www.google.com/search?q=sil...CDMwMjlqMGo0qAIAsAIB&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
According to Google, SiC is how you abbreviate silicon carbide, or it's the chemical symbol, or something...
Muriatic acid and hydrochloric acid are one in the same for all practical purposes.
I am finally putting the engine back together.
The following illustrates why I hate engine work. People with OCD (me), should not work on engines.
Preparing to install the valves. Take a quick look at Hans J. Pahl's book four tips. On page 103, at the top, it says "The inner and outer valve springs are installed in a certain orientation." Well, that's interesting. Never heard that before. Then, I take a look at the diagram, figure 7-50. Does this make sense to anyone? After much ruminating, I finally conclude that what the diagram is trying to say is that the END of the spring (my added red circle), is supposed to be clocked a certain way in the cylinder head.
Question: Has anyone ever, EVER, paid any attention to how they clocked their valve springs? OCD minds demand to know.
In an attempt to get some clarification on this, this video was the only thing I found. Which was no help at all. No mention of clocking the ends of the springs at all. Instead, the video states that the valve springs are progressive, and it makes a difference which end is up when you install them. Well guess what? I look at my valve springs, and they are NOT progressive. More confusion. After looking at part numbers, I finally conclude that 1970 to 1973 valve springs are not progressive. That didn't happen until 1974 or later.
BTW, no mention of progressive valve springs, nor which way is up in the Hans J. Pahl book.
And the slog continues...
The following illustrates why I hate engine work. People with OCD (me), should not work on engines.
Preparing to install the valves. Take a quick look at Hans J. Pahl's book four tips. On page 103, at the top, it says "The inner and outer valve springs are installed in a certain orientation." Well, that's interesting. Never heard that before. Then, I take a look at the diagram, figure 7-50. Does this make sense to anyone? After much ruminating, I finally conclude that what the diagram is trying to say is that the END of the spring (my added red circle), is supposed to be clocked a certain way in the cylinder head.
Question: Has anyone ever, EVER, paid any attention to how they clocked their valve springs? OCD minds demand to know.
BTW, no mention of progressive valve springs, nor which way is up in the Hans J. Pahl book.
And the slog continues...
A little valve spring theory is in order methinks...
A spring, like anything else in the Universe has a natural resonant frequency. It's the point where the vibration of the spring will start to feed on itself. A kid on a swing is the only analogy I can think of at the moment. Once the swing reaches resonance, it take almost no effort on the kids part to maintain the swings momentum. Any added force beyond that will cause the swing to eventually spit the kid out.
If (when) a valve spring reaches resonance, you'll get valve float, which kills power and the ability to rev to a high rpm. Not only that, but on an interference engine such as ours, it'll likely be catastrophic when the valve and piston try to occupy the same space.
Progressive springs are designed to mitigate resonance. Because one end is wound tighter than the other, the entire spring will never reach resonance (or a harmonic of it's resonant frequency) across it's entire length "at the same time." That minimizes the resonance problem.
To completely mitigate the resonance problem, we use two springs, each wound at a different pitch from each other. So when one spring approaches resonance, the other still hold the valve firmly seated.... belt and suspenders is what we're doing.
What I do is install the springs so that the inner and outer coil rotate opposite directions. If they are progressive, I'll make sure the outer spring has the tight coils down on the head and the inner spring coil wound opposite. That's your best bet to avoid resonance and the resulting valve float.
As far as clocking, William, it doesn't matter in the least. Soon as that engine fires, the springs will start a slow rotation. All your hard work clocking 'em correctly will be for naught.
Great info, and thanks for the response. I have never seen this addressed before.
Do the springs rotate as a pair, and always keep the same relationship to each other? Maybe what Pahl thinks is important is that the ends of the springs be clocked approximately 100 degree apart???
I'm a little confused here... The inners and outers are wound in opposite directions... there is no way possible to install them and NOT have the windings spiral in opposite directions. Am I missing something?
Okay, I like this. But, then, what in the world was Hans J. Pahl getting at with his diagram???
Do the springs rotate as a pair, and always keep the same relationship to each other? Maybe what Pahl thinks is important is that the ends of the springs be clocked approximately 100 degree apart???
To be honest, I've no idea what he means. However you clock 'em, they won't stay that way for long. Even if they did, I can't think of a single reason why it would matter.
My bad. Funny how your mind thinks one thing, and your fingers type another...
I make sure the progressive coils are opposite. I put the tight winding down on the outer, and up on the inners.
In other words, as much as you can, make the outer and inner as different as possible so that hopefully, the resonance characteristics are different.
Okay, thanks again, great stuff.
Okay, this bothered me so badly that I had to call 2M. I'm telling you when it comes to all things mechanical, that man has a mind like a steel trap. First off, he remembered this post by mrriggs:To be honest, I've no idea what he means. However you clock 'em, they won't stay that way for long. Even if they did, I can't think of a single reason why it would matter.
https://www.xs650.com/threads/valve-goes-in-and-out-of-adjustment-randomly.28536/page-2#post-321810
That post was written in a thread that I started!!! And, of course completely forgot. Here's the spintron vid from the post, really excellent, showing a rotating valve spring:
Got the top end back together.
While cleaning the cases I found this gouge (it's deeper than the pic indicates) with a raised burr around it. Definitely not done by me. I filed the burr down and filled the gouge in with JB-Weld. The rest of the case gasket surface was a little chewed up, but nothing that needed addressing.
Also -- never noticed this before -- one more early engine difference, surely documented before. The 70-71 case has an added guide clip to hold the alternator wires away from the chain. In 1974 a tab was added to the chain guide (around the shift shaft) that serves the same purpose, and the clip was eliminated.
While preparing the XS1B case cover, I discovered that the early oil pump (red arrow) differs from later pumps. It has a check valve and a relief hole. Just curious what everyone thinks of this. Better? Unnecessary? Keep it? Replace the early one with a later one?
Bonus trivia: The bolts that hold the oil sump strainer (green arrow) are drilled for safety wire. That's how mine on the XS1B are. I saw that once before somewhere on the Forum in someone's safety wire thread (I think), but didn't realize that the bolts came drilled that way from the factory.
Bonus trivia #2: The early diagram shows a slightly different sump strainer (blue arrow). But that's not what I have -- I have the later one. Anyone ever see that early strainer?
