PDA

View Full Version : Yamaha Tech Squish band diameter, Yamaha 2.6L



jarkko
10-19-2015, 11:41 AM
Hi

Thought of asking about Yamaha squish bands because I have been looking at several 2.6 L 150...225 Yamaha heads today and many of them have different squish band diameters. Some 150 and 225 ones have around the same diameters but the total depth of the chambers is different. So the depth differentiates the volumes. One 150Hp was around 69 ml and one 225Hp was around 60 ml (top ones compared only). Maybe the same shape core has been used in both 150 and 225 casting processes. But... If I remember right the older 220 and 225 heads had smaller diameter cups in the chambers. Don't want to go and disassemble one to double check. And some 175 heads also have smaller diameter cups than the mentioned 225 ones.

There has been several messages here at S&F on what is the best head type for an old 2.6L Yamaha. Some say Excel heads, some Special heads. Now, if heads were to be machined down to the same volumes which one would then be better? I suppose there's many aspects to be considered like other modifications done to the engine. But if the final volumes were identical, would you go for the narrow and deep cup or the wide and shallow cup? I have been thinking about piston cooling, detonation, mixing of the air fuel mixture in the 2 different approaches - what has been there driving the changes over the years in the design and what would be the best core for machining some test heads, wide or narrow cup ones? I would not like to go through testing them all :). I'll let you all know if I do any testing.

Thanks, JJ

rude tim
10-23-2015, 05:10 PM
Squish angle, area and the radious leading into the bowl all make a dfference in squish velocity. Generaly speeking a wider squish area is better for lower RPM and thinner squish area is for higher RPM. Yamaha Racing says that an 1/8 radious leading into the bowl makes more power but it is more prone to detonation. Typically you want the head to have 1.5 to 3 degrees more angle than the piston has.

jarkko
12-01-2015, 01:59 PM
Hi. Here's a a picture of a shaved 220 special head, another one of a modified 225 Excel and one of a modified 225 2.6L of the 90s. The last photo's cup is like that of the second photo's top one. The sides of the bowls are to be finished but the 220 has originally the biggest radius and the 225 of the 90s the biggest bowl diameter.


332510 332511 332512

All these modified chambers are of same volumes now and the squish areas are all quite thin. Which way around is it, is the bigger radius more prone to cause detonation or a smaller one?

Thanks

rude tim
12-01-2015, 03:32 PM
Hi. Here's a a picture of a shaved 220 special head, another one of a modified 225 Excel and one of a modified 225 2.6L of the 90s. The last photo's cup is like that of the second photo's top one. The sides of the bowls are to be finished but the 220 has originally the biggest radius and the 225 of the 90s the biggest bowl diameter.


332510 332511 332512

All these modified chambers are of same volumes now and the squish areas are all quite thin. Which way around is it, is the bigger radius more prone to cause detonation or a smaller one?

Thanks

the smaller radius is less prone to detonation.

Markus
12-02-2015, 03:27 PM
220 Special heads were the best, followed by 225 Excel.

So the gurus said, but most of them are sadly dead now. (Ray and Wayne)

87gtNOS
12-14-2015, 04:11 PM
link to a pic of my Kottman heads....1997 Prov150 heads
http://www.screamandfly.com/showthread.php?204736-my-97-ProV150-to-200-build!/page3


(http://www.screamandfly.com/showthread.php?204736-my-97-ProV150-to-200-build!/page3)