TOPIC:

Sounds like you are set, but typically it's best to add 3 teeth to the front sprocket when switching from 630 to 530, that way the stock diameter is maintained.  So in this case, from 15T to 18T.  Something to think about for next time...

Your 5th gear calc is correct.  Mine was wrong, but your original stock 5th gear overall number is incorrect.  Looks like the numbers came from the manual.

On a stock KZ1000 the nuts are captive and the bolts rotate.  This is why the retaining washers are used on the nuts.

I lived in Timmins for a number of years and worked at Kidd.  Are you in Timmins now?

Nessism wrote:

Sounds like you are set, but typically it's best to add 3 teeth to the front sprocket when switching from 630 to 530, that way the stock diameter is maintained.  So in this case, from 15T to 18T.  Something to think about for next time.. 

Thanks Nessism.  I thought the engine sprocket area looked crowded with a 17-tooth 530 in there, but I don't think I took a picture.

But you're quite right as the working circumference of a 15-tooth 630 is the same as an 18-tooth 530

(15)*6/8 =  11.25 and (18)*5/8 = 11.25

If I've geared her too tall, I might try the 18/41 combination.

I appreciate your input
 

hardrockminer wrote:

Your 5th gear calc is correct.  Mine was wrong, but your original stock 5th gear overall number is incorrect.  Looks like the numbers came from the manual.

On a stock KZ1000 the nuts are captive and the bolts rotate.  This is why the retaining washers are used on the nuts.

I lived in Timmins for a number of years and worked at Kidd.  Are you in Timmins now?

Thanks HardRockMiner.

I did comb through some fiche and they show the use of non-flanged nuts and the locking tab segments shared between two bolts.  I didn't successfully  determine where and where these flange nuts came into play.  I'll keep an eye on them.

Not in Timmins, but Sarnia, about as far south as you can get in Canada.  Still too cold for me here.

My father in-law worked Hollinger surface operations, probably the 1940s, then went on to sell mining equipment throughout Canada.

It might have been the Kidd where I had a good scare.  We were testing a rockdrill lubricant.  All air circulation was shut off as the plumb bobs were out for surveying.   When the air came back on the slack bag type air ducts rapidly inflated with a bang.  This monsterous roar was coming at us like a train, but we could see nothing coming, until the duct snapped into shape right beside us.  It took a few drinks later that evening to settle our nerves.

These days I just like the earth's surface, not above or below.

 

hardrockminer wrote:

On a stock KZ1000 the nuts are captive and the bolts rotate.  This is why the retaining washers are used on the nuts.

 

With all due respect this is wrong. The bolts are square headed and are kept from turning by shoulders cast into the inside of the Cush drive/sprocket carrier. If the flange nuts you installed were serrated on the surface that contacts the sprocket then you should be fine. I checked the parts fishe for the 1980G1 and no locking tabs are required. 

Mikaw wrote:

hardrockminer wrote:

On a stock KZ1000 the nuts are captive and the bolts rotate.  This is why the retaining washers are used on the nuts.


 

With all due respect this is wrong. The bolts are square headed and are kept from turning by shoulders cast into the inside of the Cush drive/sprocket carrier. If the flange nuts you installed were serrated on the surface that contacts the sprocket then you should be fine. I checked the parts fishe for the 1980G1 and no locking tabs are required. 

Yup!  I goofed again!  The head of the bolts is held in place and the nuts go on the outside.  The brain gets worse as you get older!

Motorcyclist breakfast in small town Ontario recently, though we all were in cars.

The Kawasaki's PO brought me a combined RR by Shindengen as pictured, an SH230 12.  Not sure what the 8.9 is all about.  The PO is a Kawasaki guy so I expect it came from a Kawasaki, but neither of us know.  ?????

It's diodes tested good with a test lamp, and I think I can wire it in with some connector rework.  It's almost certainly one of the shunt type RRs.

I tried to get my mind around the shunt and series RR pros and cons. 

I'll share what I "think", but certainly can't claim to "know".

Something like the '77 KZ1000 uses the shunt which throws all excess power to ground, but with lights etc all on, there's not much excess.  Most of this excess power is dissipated by the Zener in the RR, hence all its finning.  But current in the stator is maxed out.  Power is heat and  P = I^2R.  R is always low for the stator windings, and there's not much excess I, but that is an exponential.

A modern adventure bike, might just be street ridden, or be used with dual extra big high wattage lights, GPS, heated grips and jacket, etc.  So their alternators have a lot of excess capacity when not loaded up with adventure gear.  So it's best not to just dump this large excess to ground because it's a lot of power.  Hence the series RR makes good sense.  But I guess there's still a Zener in the series RR as it's still heavily finned.  With series regulation, that controlling resistance lets the voltage in the stator windings go up similar to what it does when you test their AC voltage without load.  So Power, P, is also P = IE.  So if we let the voltage E go up so does the power.  But E is not a exponential, so power doesn't climb quickly with E.  One more thing though is that higher E might be more likely to cross through insulators and leak to ground, so that's a disadvantage.

But these are just the musings of someone who's last electrical instruction was 10th Grade electronics, where I sat back and let my partner do all the work.

I'll wire in the Shunt Shindengen to get the old Zed running, and look to a future Series Shindengen if she's a keeper.

Thanks guys............. 

Your explanation of series vs shunt R/R's seems good to me.  I run a series type SH775 on my bike, because it helps protect the stator, and in the end, it's not much more money, if any, than a shunt R/R.  I find them on eBay, test them on my bike, and then resell them for beer money.  Many times I can find them for $40 shipped, which is a no-brainer to me.  

Still waiting for a little Spring heat to invite my strong neighbour over to help separate the frame from the engine.

The bike's tank was in progress for painting when I got the bike.  I think it was well prepared with sanding and no fillers seem to been have used.  The primer is a Rust-Check product and seems to be applied evenly, but with a few dust flecks.  I sprayed some Rust-Check on a few test coupons to test compatibility with future final paint coats.  It appears that the underside of the tank was not prepared, and I might scrub that up a bit and hit it with the same primer.

The petcock was not removed for priming, just as well I suppose to keep the threads clean.

The tank's interior looks pretty good, and not much rust came out when when removing the petcock.  Penny for scale.

I'll likely do my usual trick of filling the tank with pebbles and hot soapy water and shaking things around until thoroughly fatigued.  Repeat that three or four times.  Interestingly the sodium sulfonate detergents in dishwashing liquid are pretty good rust preventatives.  But I'll also cloud the interior with some WD-40.

I'll next get into that petcock to see if it can be salvaged.


 

Here's the petcock disassembled and cleaned up.

Fortunately the filter screen is is good shape, unlike the lever O-ring which has a few bites out of it.

It seems there should be a filter atop the main brass inlet tube.

The two steel pins, that transfer lever rotation to nylon valve insert rotation, have wallowed the nylon holes out a bit, but it's functional.

I suppose a new replica petcock is a better path forward than a rebuild kit ??

Why waste money for a new petcock. Your petcock parts are re-useable, you only need a new o-ring and crush washer.
Pro tip: Put a small round neodym magnet into the depression of the sediment cup to catch rust particles, makes your life easier.

I ended up using the repop fuel petcock that I bought as a backup. The little sort of square depression in the handle part in your picture had corroded through on my stock petcock plus I didn't want to cut the handle off the original petcock to clear the RS 34 carbs.
I think the repop petcock seeps when off so now I wish the original still was useable. I also didn't have the filter sleeve for it. It would be nice to have a good original one to rebuild but I'll likely end up with a Pingel petcock.