Service Manual Error-Power Valve Identification

[firsthere]

What is the result from following the manual with this incorrect information? Would it be readily noticeable when checking for proper PV opening and closing.

[Vossman]

]If you had the valves reversed they would still open and close as that is driven off the exhaust advancer but since they are reversed they would severely restrict high end performance. Should be very noticeable when riding.
I don’t think is a copywriter violation but if it is mods please remove

[ericr]

Having done this myself, I can say that the result is an engine that runs, but not well. There's little low-end torque and the bike stalls easily. Since the sub-valve operation is reversed, port velocity is likely much reduced at low rpm's and volume is reduced at high rpm.

It's more noticeable on the 200 than the 220. I did it to both. I thought it was jetting related until I found out about the manual error. The errors exist on the first 2 years of the H-series manual, 1994-1995.

Unless you look through the exhaust port, and are knowledgeable about how the valves should look, the operation of the mechanism appears normal.

[firsthere]

Reason asked is, I have recently finished a topend and replate. The power valves were bagged and labeled left and right but the manual was also followed to a certain extent. I can't recall exactly which took precedence at this point. The PV's were triple checked in operation with both sides in time, opening and closing flush. The bike (200) has good lowend, just a slight flat spot about 7/8 up on the powerband then pulls out of it to redline. Overall it runs well.

[Vossman]

Sounds like you put them in right then. Maybe a jetting change would get rid of the stumble.

[Slick_Nick]

Having done this myself, I can say that the result is an engine that runs, but not well. There's little low-end torque and the bike stalls easily. Since the sub-valve operation is reversed, port velocity is likely much reduced at low rpm's and volume is reduced at high rpm.

It's more noticeable on the 200 than the 220. I did it to both. I thought it was jetting related until I found out about the manual error. The errors exist on the first 2 years of the H-series manual, 1994-1995.

Unless you look through the exhaust port, and are knowledgeable about how the valves should look, the operation of the mechanism appears normal.

Is there some sort of revision number printed in the newer manuals which indicates which ones have the error fixed? I believe I have a newer manual from 2000 or so, but just wanted to make sure.

[KDXGarage]

viewtopic.php?f=77&t=23346

-01 and -02 are the incorrect ones. -03 and newer are corrected.

[ericr]

Having done this myself, I can say that the result is an engine that runs, but not well. There's little low-end torque and the bike stalls easily. Since the sub-valve operation is reversed, port velocity is likely much reduced at low rpm's and volume is reduced at high rpm.

It's more noticeable on the 200 than the 220. I did it to both. I thought it was jetting related until I found out about the manual error. The errors exist on the first 2 years of the H-series manual, 1994-1995.

Unless you look through the exhaust port, and are knowledgeable about how the valves should look, the operation of the mechanism appears normal.

Is there some sort of revision number printed in the newer manuals which indicates which ones have the error fixed? I believe I have a newer manual from 2000 or so, but just wanted to make sure.

First and second editions were 1994 and 1995. The -01 and -02 are the suffixes for the part number for the manual, not the years.