Templar X 250

[Raptssan]

Im anxious to see what the differences are between the templar and the x.

[riddlerap]

Originally Posted by Raptssan

Im anxious to see what the differences are between the templar and the x.

They've been discussed a few pages or so back.

Off top the X has a bigger wheelbase, bigger gas tank, adjustable suspension.. those were the big differences for me. Also I think a better carb.

[AjjAxx84]

Originally Posted by Raptssan

Im anxious to see what the differences are between the templar and the x.

Bigger frame, adjustable front/rear suspension, bigger front brake, bigger gas tank, way better seat, engine guard, rear fender rack.

[Nutcracker]

Originally Posted by Thumper

I set exhaust at ~0.006" and intake ~0.005"
Range that will work is more like 0.005 to 0.007" exhaust, and 0.004" to 0.006" intake.
I use these values for the Storm as well. Unless I find beleievable authority, these gaps are not too narrow.

If you have an authoritative reference otherwise, I would like to know.

Word is that exhaust valves get hotter and can tighten up, which can lead to blow by if the valve doesn't fully close. This is why the gap is ~wider. If the valve doesn't fully close, it can burn a gap and damage the sealing surface.

These are values measured in inches. My feeler gauge has both on them, so
for instance, 0.007" is 0.178mm

The conversion is simply multiply the inch value by 25.4 to get the final figure in millimeters. To convert, multiply the inch gap by 25.4 millimeters. Specifically, 1 millimeter equates to 0.0393700787 inches.

Please feel free to share you thoughts on these values. This motor runs GREAT at these settings, but I don't ride for long times- 30 minute sessions in the trails, with awesome performance. And the motor starts up instantly if I stall or temporarily shut down.

Interesting on valve settings. Okierider is correct coming from Henner on .002 inch (.05mm). I too ran my valves open more similar to your .007 with zero change in performance until I had valve chatter under load that caused me to change the settings. This engine (ZS172FMM3-A) has been around since early 2000s in UK. Recommendations are to set valves at .06mm intake & .008mm exhaust.

Russian forums talk about the same stuff as us here but they have more experience and rely on there machines more than a hobby. An interesting possible difference I see there 2 layer head gasket vs our 3 layer.

Who knows if it's factual or BS but the increase in gasket thickness allows for a decrease in compression providing the Chinese an inexpensive way to meet lower NOX gas / EPA requirements to import to US. It could be the earlier engines are assembled differently than new models.

The reason I mention the head gasket is in theory it would allow for a larger valve gap.

Maybe more importantly is to ensure your at TDC on this motor because it does have a decompression valve. Make sure you line up the markings in the sight hole on flywheel and the timing gear marks by removing the timing gear cover for insurance.

Tusk makes a great feeler gauge that's tapered easily fits under the rocker Valves will post link.

Tusk Tapered Feeler Gauge Set https://a.co/d/8rZAzEx

[riddlerap]

Ended up getting a 07 KLR650. Satisfied, but someday I think I will dip into the Chinese bikes just for fun. Something more off-road oriented potentially.

[Thumper]

[QUOTE=Nutcracker;381594]...
...
"... our 3 layer head gasket."

-I haven't had the head off, or compared compression ratios (I haven't looked for/can't find their gasket specs or compression specs), but compression/NOx rationale makes sense:

"Who knows if it's factual or BS but the increase in gasket thickness allows for a decrease in compression providing the Chinese an inexpensive way to meet lower NOX gas / EPA requirements to import to US. It could be the earlier engines are assembled differently than new models."

-On valve clearance consequences due to thicker head gasket:

"The reason I mention the head gasket is in theory it would allow for a larger valve gap."

-Actually, a thicker head gasket allows tighter valve adjustment settings (not larger valve gap). The head is farther from the piston. Thinner head gasket puts the valve CLOSER to the piston, doesn't it? So USA spec thick gasket means we should be able to get away with tighter valve gaps (Henner recommendations).

"Maybe more importantly is to ensure your at TDC on this motor because it does have a decompression valve."

-No compression release valve on the X, USA version, as far as I know. I thought there was when I originally looked at photos, but the tiny lever over the clutch lever is the choke. In fact, when warm, the starter has to be held to push through compression pauses (but instantly starts once past the compression). Where is the compression release valve?

-I havent noticed any clatter at my valve gap settings, but if you are right about the thicker head gasket, then they can definitely be set closer/tighter.

[Nutcracker]

-No compression release valve on the X, USA version, as far as I know. I thought there was when I originally looked at photos, but the tiny lever over the clutch lever is the choke. In fact, when warm, the starter has to be held to push through compression pauses (but instantly starts once past the compression). Where is the compression release valve?

-I havent noticed any clatter at my valve gap settings, but if you are right about the thicker head gasket, then they can definitely be set closer/tighter.[/QUOTE]


The engine has an automatic internal centrifugal driven decompressor from the camshaft. Typical Japanese motors engage decompressor under 300 RPM I'm guessing this works the same. You can feel the sequence while slowly pushing the kick starter by hand.

I'm not sure it makes a difference setting valves just ensure markings line up and piston is on top. Just a very small gap.

[Nutcracker]

-Actually, a thicker head gasket allows tighter valve adjustment settings (not larger valve gap). The head is farther from the piston. Thinner head gasket puts the valve CLOSER to the piston, doesn't it? So USA spec thick gasket means we should be able to get away with tighter valve gaps (Henner recommendations).

Yes your correct. I believe this is why you see the difference in valve specs. I'm leaning towards trusting Henner but having the exhaust valve set equal to intake is foreign. Wish I had a specs manual for this engine. I don't understand thermal dynamics and expansion tolerances we just need the engineers schematics and measuring. Maybe there's a manual out there.

[Thumper]

-If this auto compression release is on the camshaft, this engine has single overhead camshaft, so it would be inside that space over the cylinder. If it has this, I wonder if it can be seen inside the cam gear window?

EDIT: MY MISTAKE,THERE IS NO DECOMPRESSION VALVE. Not automatic, not manual. Try kick starting it and you will NOTICE!

-This engine has significant compression pause during starts, especially when it begins turning on compression stroke (commonly does since it often gets halted there when shut off). But it pushes past the compression and starts quickly. I suppose it could be a weak battery, but it has never let me down, and there is that compression pause I experience so often (seems like a compression pause... pushes through it and starts).

That is a new one for me! I appreciate the headsup. Obviously, holding the valves open has to be a slight lift to avoid interference!!

I will look into this. I'd like to learn more, since this is counterintuitive to me- If the valve is held open below 300rpm (and therefore, during valve adjustment), it seems that must affect the gap: There should be none, right... I mean, how can the valve (exhaust?) be held open without zero gap?

But I am careful to set the gap with the Timing mark aligned.

Originally Posted by Nutcracker

-No compression release valve on the X, USA version, as far as I know. I thought there was when I originally looked at photos, but the tiny lever over the clutch lever is the choke. In fact, when warm, the starter has to be held to push through compression pauses (but instantly starts once past the compression). Where is the compression release valve?

-I havent noticed any clatter at my valve gap settings, but if you are right about the thicker head gasket, then they can definitely be set closer/tighter.

The engine has an automatic internal centrifugal driven decompressor from the camshaft. Typical Japanese motors engage decompressor under 300 RPM I'm guessing this works the same. You can feel the sequence while slowly pushing the kick starter by hand.

I'm not sure it makes a difference setting valves just ensure markings line up and piston is on top. Just a very small gap.[/QUOTE]

[Thumper]

Sometime in mid-June the lower sprocket cover bolt brought ~3-4mm of threads with it when I removed it to inspect the size/spec of the front sprocket:
https://www.chinariders.net/showpost...32&postcount=3

I finally dug into this. It turns out that the sprocket cover bolts were just too short. Here is the one that brought out the threads with it (lower bolt). I discovered that there was 6-7mm of GOOD threads in the block. A 40mm new 6M bolt fixed it! I mean, it was a relief that I did not have to helicoil or something:


The upper bolt was also undersized. I replaced the original ~25mm bolt with a 30mm bolt. The sprocket cover is reinstalled over a new JTR 270-14T. I also replace the rear sprocket with a 39T sprocket. The bike easily gets past 60mph on the road now.

[Okierider]

Did you end up having to grind on the bike to get the 14 to fit?

[Thumper]

Originally Posted by Okierider

Did you end up having to grind on the bike to get the 14 to fit?

Yes. In fact, I took the section out. Here it is with the 14T JTR270 on the shaft with the old OEM 520 chain partially wrapped. It stopped right there.

But I took a look at the sprocket cover and it still protects that area pretty well.



The sprocket cover has the same concentric guard in front of the chain, but it is not as close to the sprocket, and doesn't need any mods. Also, the chain can bind hitting the case until you tighten the sprocket holder on, which pulls the sprocket away from the engine.

I ended up with an RK 520SO (oring). Removed 6 full links (12 roller shafts) which ended up OK, but could have removed 7.

The master link was a challenge, because the outer plate does not slip over the pins to set the clip. I though it was the o-rings making it difficult, but I had to use the chain break tool to push the pins through the holes on the plate. Yep. That tight
Weird. I am going to get another master link, remove one more link and refit.

[AjjAxx84]

Originally Posted by Thumper

Yes. In fact, I took the section out. Here it is with the 14T JTR270 on the shaft with the old OEM 520 chain partially wrapped. It stopped right there.

But I took a look at the sprocket cover and it still protects that area pretty well.



The sprocket cover has the same concentric guard in front of the chain, but it is not as close to the sprocket, and doesn't need any mods. Also, the chain can bind hitting the case until you tighten the sprocket holder on, which pulls the sprocket away from the engine.

I ended up with an RK 520SO (oring). Removed 6 full links (12 roller shafts) which ended up OK, but could have removed 7.

The master link was a challenge, because the outer plate does not slip over the pins to set the clip. I though it was the o-rings making it difficult, but I had to use the chain break tool to push the pins through the holes on the plate. Yep. That tight
Weird. I am going to get another master link, remove one more link and refit.

Do you have a picture of how much you had to grind off for reference?

[Okierider]

Originally Posted by Thumper

Yes. In fact, I took the section out. Here it is with the 14T JTR270 on the shaft with the old OEM 520 chain partially wrapped. It stopped right there.

But I took a look at the sprocket cover and it still protects that area pretty well.



The sprocket cover has the same concentric guard in front of the chain, but it is not as close to the sprocket, and doesn't need any mods. Also, the chain can bind hitting the case until you tighten the sprocket holder on, which pulls the sprocket away from the engine.

I ended up with an RK 520SO (oring). Removed 6 full links (12 roller shafts) which ended up OK, but could have removed 7.

The master link was a challenge, because the outer plate does not slip over the pins to set the clip. I though it was the o-rings making it difficult, but I had to use the chain break tool to push the pins through the holes on the plate. Yep. That tight
Weird. I am going to get another master link, remove one more link and refit.

My master link did the same thing-very tight. Had been good for around 300 miles so far.
So I don’t really understand why one would need to alter the front sprocket-isn’t the same thing accomplished by altering the rear? What does going up or down 1 tooth in front do that going up or down 3 in the back doesn’t?

[Huck369]

Originally Posted by Okierider

My master link did the same thing-very tight. Had been good for around 300 miles so far.
So I don’t really understand why one would need to alter the front sprocket-isn’t the same thing accomplished by altering the rear? What does going up or down 1 tooth in front do that going up or down 3 in the back doesn’t?

The front sprocket wears faster than the rear sprocket, because it has to go around 3 time (ish) for every 1 time the rear sprocket goes around, so the more teeth on the front, and fewer on the rear will make them more closer to the same