6G Celicas Forums

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> "zero interference head"? BS or NOT?
post May 17, 2007 - 6:22 AM
+Quote Post
SlickRick



Enthusiast
***
Joined Feb 18, '07
From So Cal
Currently Offline

Reputation: 3 (100%)




so i had a head gasket replaced and now i have no compression in the #4 cyl. i took it to another shop and they said it might be a bent valve, then they asked me if some1 tried 2 start it with the cams in wrong. and thats exactly what the guys that tried 2 fix it were doing when i was at there shop. so i told the guys who did the work and they said it could not b there fualt bcuz its a "zero interference head" and that the cams dont come down enough to bend the valves. BS or NOT?

This post has been edited by SlickRick: May 17, 2007 - 6:23 AM


--------------------
Your signature is not allowed on 6GC - Defgeph
 
Start new topic
Replies
post May 17, 2007 - 7:16 AM
+Quote Post
Racer_J



Enthusiast
**
Joined May 16, '07
From Newcastle UK
Currently Offline

Reputation: 0 (0%)




As far as I'm aware, the 3SGE (Not BEAMS) has e "Zero Inerference" configuration. The valves don't extend far enough down into the combustion chamber to physically touch the cylinders. The cylinders also have a recessed feature in the top to avoid and interference condition, should the timing belt snap for example.

I've always been led to believe that low compression on an engine can be caused by shot piston rings? Maybe you should get those looked at?


IPB Image


--------------------
IPB Image

Posts in this topic


Reply to this topicStart new topic
6 User(s) are reading this topic (6 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: January 13th, 2025 - 3:17 PM