Do you have a copy of my valve adjust spreadsheet?

[Steve]

Several of you do. If you do, let me/us know how it works for you.

It has been almost 2 months since I released the first version, and have sent it to 24 people.
Strangely enough, not one has given me any feedback.

Please, I need to know if it's working for you guys. If it's not working, let me know what I need to change.

If you feel your feedback does not need to be viewed on this board, please PM me or send an e-mail.


.

[renobruce]

Can I have a copy? I'll give you some feedback. :-D

[scotto58]

Steve,

I haven't had the chance to use it yet but it looks like it will work very well. I will let you know when I've actually used it.

Scott

[DanTheMan]

Could you PM one to me? I'll be in position to use it very soon.
Thanks...:-D

[Steve]

Could you PM one to me?

No, can't PM it. But, thanks to the e-mail address in your profile, YOU'VE GOT MAIL (with an attachment). 8-[


.

[Steve]

Can I have a copy? I'll give you some feedback. :-D

Thanks to the e-mail address in your profile, YOU'VE GOT MAIL (with an attachment). 8-[


.

[hikermikem]

It has been almost 2 months since I released the first version, and have sent it to 24 people.
Strangely enough, not one has given me any feedback.

Please, I need to know if it's working for you guys. If it's not working, let me know what I need to change..

Hi Steve,

You sent me this spreadsheet a couple of weeks ago - it works very well.

I agree with your decision point for the using the next size shim (up or down) at .025mm - right in the middle of the shim size increments of .05mm.

I modifed my ideal clearance number from .05mm to .07mm to suit my preference, but I assume eveyone will have their own take on that.

The only suggestion I might offer for the next release would be to somehow address those "X" shim values, where the +/- .025mm might not be desirable.

It's a great tool to not only avoid those pesky math errors, but to keep track of all the adjustments you're making.

Thanks for sharing it!

Mike

[KSP]

Steve, I have not yet used it but I hope to this winter when I go through the bike. It looked good to me when I was just checking it out though.

[Nessism]

Hi Steve,

Please send your spreadsheet to nessism@sbcglobal.net Going to do some valve work this weekend.

Thanks.

[Steve]

Mike,

Thanks for the feedback. The only reason for choosing the mid-point was the easy math for the tolerance. There are no fields locked, so you are free to enter your own preferences.

Concerning the X shims...do you have digital calipers? Measure the shim, enter the actual value.
I just tried it, using 2.40, 2.42, 2.45 with the same clearance of 0.004" and it showed those same numbers on the next page. It also used those numbers in the calculations and suggested another X shim, because, the way it's written, it just adds or subtracts 0.05 mm based on the last shim. The red and green still show up to suggest a size up or down, but you will have to decide if a standard shim will do. Because of the variability of the X shims, I don't know how I could work them into a fixed equation and have it revert back to standard shim sizes.


.

[BassCliff]

Debug

Mr. Steve,

I just punched in the numbers from my valve clearance check last month. Here is what I observed:

Your spreadsheet is a fine tool. It's a good guide, a nice record keeping resource and I appreciate your skill at Excel (I have none at all) and your efforts to help the community.

I realize that in theory, theory and practice are the same. But in practice, they're not. For example:

In Practice: My #1 exhaust clearance measured less than .04mm (the smallest gauge I had in the feeler set). I couldn't tell the exact clearance, but .04mm would not fit between the shim and cam lobe. I wanted to change the shim.

In Theory: When I entered an estimate of .01mm in the #1 intake field and 2.70 in the Current Shim field, the calculation said to use a 2.65. That's very cool.

In Practice: I replaced the 2.70mm shim with a 2.65 and when I measured, the .04mm feeler gauge still would not fit. I went down to a 2.60 and then measured a .09mm clearance. Close enough for an exhaust valve. (I can only surmise that, on this particular valve, the clearance was near 0.00mm hence the necessity of going down two shim sizes.)

In Theory: When I enter 0 (zero) in any of the clearance fields, the spreadsheet doesn't seem to make any of the calculations.

This shouldn't be a critical issue because you should always measure the new clearances and document them after changing shims. But there may be extreme cases where you might start with no clearance at all.

I added a new row below both of the "Final Shim" fields to document the "Final Clearance". You would think that, for example, if you went down one shim size on a .03mm clearance, you'd end up with .08mm. But in practice I did not find that to always be the case. So I think a "Final Clearance" row for documentation purposes might come in handy on your next revision.

Yes, all the calculation variables - x-size shims, expected vs. measured clearance results, using calipers to find those 2.68mm shims (to really "dial in" the clearances), etc - are difficult to put into a spreadsheet. But I think you've created a very good tool. Being able to set our own "optimum" clearance is a nice plus. Thanks for leaving the sheet open. About all I can suggest is to add a "Final Clearance" row to record the actual measurements after shim replacement.

Nice work, Mr. Steve. :-D

Thank you for your indulgence,

BassCliff

[mriddle]

Mike,

Thanks for the feedback. The only reason for choosing the mid-point was the easy math for the tolerance. There are no fields locked, so you are free to enter your own preferences.

Concerning the X shims...do you have digital calipers? Measure the shim, enter the actual value.
I just tried it, using 2.40, 2.42, 2.45 with the same clearance of 0.004" and it showed those same numbers on the next page. It also used those numbers in the calculations and suggested another X shim, because, the way it's written, it just adds or subtracts 0.05 mm based on the last shim. The red and green still show up to suggest a size up or down, but you will have to decide if a standard shim will do. Because of the variability of the X shims, I don't know how I could work them into a fixed equation and have it revert back to standard shim sizes.


.

I tinker with EXCEL some and would be happy to lend a hand if you like.. just PM me.

You could ask users to suggest features that they would like here.


Mike

[Steve]

You could ask users to suggest features that they would like here.

That's basically what I have done, Mike. I have sent out over two dozen copies in the last two months, and what you see above is the first feedback I have received.

I realize that in theory, theory and practice are the same. But in practice, they're not.

Very close. Should read:
In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, it will probably blow up. :shock:

In Theory: ... When I entered an estimate of .01mm in the #1 intake field and 2.70 in the Current Shim field, the calculation said to use a 2.65. That's very cool.

In Practice: I replaced the 2.70mm shim with a 2.65 and when I measured, the .04mm feeler gauge still would not fit. I went down to a 2.60 and then measured a .09mm clearance. Close enough for an exhaust valve. (I can only surmise that, on this particular valve, the clearance was near 0.00mm hence the necessity of going down two shim sizes.)

Yeah, I could have put another test in the formula to see if the clearance exceded the next shim size, but, like you observed, you were not able to measure it anyway, so there was no apparent benefit. If your clearance is more than one size too loose, the measurement should make it apparent, in spite of what the suggested shim is. I also figured that if we adjust the valves on a regular basis, you probably won't need to change more than one size anyway, so I restricted it to one size difference.

In Theory: When I enter 0 (zero) in any of the clearance fields, the spreadsheet doesn't seem to make any of the calculations.

This shouldn't be a critical issue because you should always measure the new clearances and document them after changing shims. But there may be extreme cases where you might start with no clearance at all.

This is an idiosyncracy of conditional formatting. Just to keep the appearance of a clean sheet, some of the fields are formatted so that if the value is ZERO, it prints it in white letters. It's awfully hard to actually measure a zero clearance, so I did not allow for that.

I added a new row below both of the "Final Shim" fields to document the "Final Clearance". You would think that, for example, if you went down one shim size on a .03mm clearance, you'd end up with .08mm. But in practice I did not find that to always be the case. So I think a "Final Clearance" row for documentation purposes might come in handy on your next revision.

Thanks. This is the kind of suggestion I am looking for. \\/
I will insert that and probably even carry it over to the next sheet as "Previous clearance" so it would be easier to see if it changed, or how much.

Your spreadsheet is a fine tool. It's a good guide, a nice record keeping resource and I appreciate your skill at Excel (I have none at all) and your efforts to help the community.

Thanks for the input. It is suggestions like this that can help me improve the product.
My 'skills' at Excel are merely budding. Just a couple of years ago, I could only do a very basic spreadsheet. It has only been recently that I have really gotten into the formulas and conditional formatting.

I tinker with EXCEL some and would be happy to lend a hand if you like.. just PM me.

Thanks for the offer, Mike. I will see if I can manage the suggestions above, if not, I will be in touch.


.

[Steve]

OK, Cliff, now ya done it. :shock:

Going through and adding the features you suggested, I found some other formatting mistakes.
Seems that the final shim BLUE formatting is not working the way I wanted.
I guess I'll be working on fixing that, too.


.

[BassCliff]

More bugs

OK, Cliff, now ya done it. :shock:

Going through and adding the features you suggested, I found some other formatting mistakes.
Seems that the final shim BLUE formatting is not working the way I wanted.
I guess I'll be working on fixing that, too.

Ha! That's why you should never by the "x.0" ("point zero") version of anything. Wait for the updates/service pack/bug fixes! :-D

Can you say "perpetual beta version"? :-D

Seriously though, I know you'll get the bugs worked out. Thanks for your time.

Thank you for your indulgence,

BassCliff