Setting Correct Squish on Seadoo 787

Note: This site contains eBay affiliate links for which SeaDooForum.com may be compensated
Status
Not open for further replies.

cbn70

New Member
Hello All,
I am looking to set the squish properly before the riding season starts here in Canada. Engine is a 787 from a 96 GSX. A bit of the back story. I bought this machine with a blown engine that was apart. So new crank, counterbalancer, bored and new WSM pistons. Rebuild was last winter and ran all last year and no issues. But would like a bit more power. I just used the stock 5 or 6 hole gasket that came with my gasket set. Could not get the squish anywhere close. Going back in memory it is around .100 or a bit more. So using a 3 hole gasket will help but not get anywhere close to spec. Could the wsm pistons be off? As well, there was a crack in the old crankcase so i ordered one off ebay. Could this be an issue? Talked with a reputable engine builder and he said not surprised, just machine .020 off the deck of the cylinder and use a 3 hole gasket and things will be fine. Has this happened to anyone before? going to pull the engine and do some more checking. what do you think?
 
Did you check your compression?? I checked squish a couple of times and it was around (.68") Now I just measure the old gasket and replace it. Generally I use the (.015") gasket or the (.020") on the bottom of the cylinders. I use WSM pistons also and I was thinking that maybe the dome is shaped a little different. I always get good compression. Just a note, you don't machine the top of the cylinder you machine the bottom.
you got O-Ring grooves to think about.
Getting proper squish might be fun and then see if there is any performance difference. I'm not sure if it will be worth the effort but since when does that matter. Ha ha. Good Luck with yours.
 
Thanks for the reply. I am waiting for some solder to arrive. Then will Check the squish again. Good call on checking compression. Will do that and see where I land.
 
Certainly nothing wrong with checking, testing, and following procedures. LOL That takes all the guess work out of it.
 
Do not machine anything, chances are you are measuring it wrong and yes squish is very important. I have never seen one that couldn't be brought into spec. Make sure you are measuring directly over the piston pin, if the piston rocks at all your measurement will be off.

Group K deep dive.....
Precision Top End Assembly of the Laydown Rave Motors – Squish clearance, the distance between the piston crown and cylinder head at top dead center, is an important specification that is minded by the Rotax factory as well as all high performance engine builders. The Sea Doo manual offers a fairly wide tolerance for squish clearances, however most engine builders prefer closer clearances to help stave off detonation. Most builders measure the squish clearance by sticking a piece of solder through the spark plug hole toward the outside edge of the bore…then momentarily touching the start button so the piston makes several strikes at the solder. This allows the solder to be crushed to the exact thickness that shows the “squish clearance”. At Group K we make a point to take these “squish clearance ” measurements over both ends of the wrist pin. This minimizes the piston’s ability to “rock” and show an inaccurately large clearance. We also take these measurements over both ends of the wrist pin, on both cylinders, to assure uniform clearances. In a perfect world, all four squish measurement will be within .002″ – ,003″. Unfortunately, we have been observing everything but uniform clearances. This is a matter we do not take lightly, since accurate squish clearance is the only way to assure correct deck height setup (a function of the base gasket thickness).

Immediately, we though that the variations were caused by incorrectly cut squish bands on the cylinder head…not so. The bands had a uniform depth and perfect center to center location. We then suspected variations in the locations of the cylinder mounting holes in the crankcases, but they also measured perfectly. In the end, we found two items that caused the variations. The first was that the distance between the two cylinder bores can vary greatly, depending on the assembly procedure. That is, there can be almost 1 mm variation in the center to center distance of the bore diameters based solely on the random location during assembly. Secondly, the cylinder head itself has a great deal of movement leeway (both left to right, and forward to back). All these variations of fit take place because the cylinders and cylinder head are not located to one another with “dowel locating pins” (as most Kawasaki engines are). The absence of these locating pins allows for alot of movement leeway, of both the cylinders and the cylinder head. That results in broad variations in squish clearance measurements. Installing dowel pins is a questionably wise solution because of the great risk that the exhaust manifold faces would not be perfectly parallel (that would cause bore distortion when the exhaust manifold is torqued on).

For now, our best solution is to recommend a “Precision Assembly Procedure” that will make for minimum variations in squish measurements.

Our procedure is based on the following information. The cylinder base bolt patterns in the cases are located 132mm (5.196″) apart. The standard bore diameters of the cylinders are 82.0 – 82.08 mm (3.228″ – 3.231″). This means that the inner distance between the two bores of the torqued on cylinders should be between 49.91 – 49.98 mm (1.965″ – 1.968″) These last measurements can be taken quickly and easily with a set of dial calipers after the cylinders have been torqued on. In most cases, we have found that you can hit this spec range if you install the cylinders as close together as possible. It bears noting that we have seen engines where the water jackets of the cylinders touched before we could reach this specification range. We literally needed to belt sand some material off the aluminum cylinder casting to get the correct spec. Cylinders like this are certainly the exception (not the rule), but they do exist.

Once the cylinders are installed with the acceptable center to center distance, it becomes apparent that the cylinder head itself can move about 2mm (.080″ in any direction over the tops of the bores. This location will also have a profound effect on squish clearance measurements. We got out best results by matching the edge of the head casting, all the way around, as closely as possible to the edges of the cylinder castings. While this doesn’t sound very precise, it works surprisingly well. After torqueing on the head, you can take your four squish clearance measurements to determine if the head needs to be moved slightly one way or the other…it’s not really as tough as it sounds.

Does everyone one who assembles a Rave top end “have” to go through this whole procedure…not necessarily. However we strongly recommend this procedure to anyone preparing a high output Laydown Rave motor. If you find a wide variation in the squish clearances of your freshly assembled engine…it could certainly avert some problems before they get started.

Base Gasket Thickness – “Jon’s Story” – One of our early test boats was an XP that was to be raced in region one offshore. We shipped the kit to the owner, who had it assembled at a local shop. After the break-in, the test rider reported a little better top end, along with average bottom end power. We were concerned because all our other test riders had reported big increases in bottom end as well as peak rpm. After a few unsuccessful attempts to resolve the problem with carb tuning, he came to our shop with the machine. After a quick test ride, we found this XP to have mediocre acceleration and a 6900 rpm peak (that’s 150 rpm short of the norm). Back at the shop we checked out every possible problem. Besides the indicated compression being just a little low, the only other inconsistency was that the squish clearance seemed to be about .010″ (.25mm) too thick. At the time, we didn’t think this was the problem…but it was the only thing we saw that we could “fix”. We removed the .024″ (6 hole) base gasket and replaced it with a .016″ (4 hole) base gasket. The next morning we gave the boat a short break-in…then gassed it. The difference was unbelievable. The boat pulled viciously up to 7040 rpm…just like all our other test boats. No one was more shocked than us, that .008″ of base gasket thickness could turn a weakling into rocket. After this experience, we specified for our assembly instructions that a .038″ – .042″ squish clearance must be maintained on all Group K modified top ends. Since then, we have not experienced this problem again. (Note : This XP won the 90 minute 1200 pro overall at the Havasu Global Offshore Finals)
 
Waiting for the solder to arrive from amazon and once it does I will recheck everything and see where we sit.
 
Cool Story on the boat with the squish measurements. I certainly don't doubt the performance increase. Just a little more compression can really WAKE an engine up. If one is looking for performance then getting everything spot on is a necessity.
 
Cool Story on the boat with the squish measurements. I certainly don't doubt the performance increase. Just a little more compression can really WAKE an engine up. If one is looking for performance then getting everything spot on is a necessity.
On these, because you are moving the cylinder up and down with the base gasket you are also changing the port timing, not just the compression.
 
Hello All,
I am looking to set the squish properly before the riding season starts here in Canada. Engine is a 787 from a 96 GSX. A bit of the back story. I bought this machine with a blown engine that was apart. So new crank, counterbalancer, bored and new WSM pistons. Rebuild was last winter and ran all last year and no issues. But would like a bit more power. I just used the stock 5 or 6 hole gasket that came with my gasket set. Could not get the squish anywhere close. Going back in memory it is around .100 or a bit more. So using a 3 hole gasket will help but not get anywhere close to spec. Could the wsm pistons be off? As well, there was a crack in the old crankcase so i ordered one off ebay. Could this be an issue? Talked with a reputable engine builder and he said not surprised, just machine .020 off the deck of the cylinder and use a 3 hole gasket and things will be fine. Has this happened to anyone before? going to pull the engine and do some more checking. what do you think?
I ran into a similar issue with a WSM 951 piston set. My squish was way too large… in order to bring into spec I needed a 0.3mm base gasket …so I finally pulled the piston… and compared with an OEM piston. The OEM piston was ~0.7mm taller…
Setup: Both pistons connected with the wrist pin…pic included…
I ended up calling WSM… and shared my pics. They reported that the amount was insignificant… and that I should just assemble the engine. They further reported that the seadoo spec was actually too low. They reported that small amount wouldn’t affect the performance significantly…
These are just for recreation… not racing so I’m imagining it won’t matter… I’d love to know if seadoo actually issued an updated spec for squish on the 951’s.
 

Attachments

  • 72F2F9D9-60F3-4A2A-873E-A70636B3CE8E.jpeg
    72F2F9D9-60F3-4A2A-873E-A70636B3CE8E.jpeg
    231.2 KB · Views: 9
Interesting! thanks for the pics, want to check that when i get things apart. Would be very dissapointing if this is what i find. wonder if this is common with pistons for seadoos? between all the different piston manufacturers? What are the "better" pistons to use?
 
I ran into a similar issue with a WSM 951 piston set. My squish was way too large… in order to bring into spec I needed a 0.3mm base gasket …so I finally pulled the piston… and compared with an OEM piston. The OEM piston was ~0.7mm taller…
Setup: Both pistons connected with the wrist pin…pic included…
I ended up calling WSM… and shared my pics. They reported that the amount was insignificant… and that I should just assemble the engine. They further reported that the seadoo spec was actually too low. They reported that small amount wouldn’t affect the performance significantly…
These are just for recreation… not racing so I’m imagining it won’t matter… I’d love to know if seadoo actually issued an updated spec for squish on the 951’s.
 
With Two Strokes, a Millimeter is a Mile...
So the thinner base gasket brought it into spec then?
It would have… but I wasn’t able to locate a 3mm base gasket for the 951. WSM’s advice was to use the 5mm gasket. They report Seadoo’s spec is wrong. I’m going to go back and see if, perhaps, the WSM dome is higher .. such that the displacement is similar to OEM. I’ll check squish again after it’s all torqued down with head gasket… they reported the loss of power won’t be noticeable for recreational riders…
My follow up question is… why would anyone use a part that’s not very close to OEM… I’m imagining it’s something like the value is there… it’s likely good enough…
 
Seadoos have a range of acceptable Squish Measurements...

1680390124408.png
 

Attachments

  • Rotax Squish Gap Check Procedure - 2 Stroke.pdf
    172.7 KB · Views: 7
Do not machine anything, chances are you are measuring it wrong and yes squish is very important. I have never seen one that couldn't be brought into spec. Make sure you are measuring directly over the piston pin, if the piston rocks at all your measurement will be off.

Group K deep dive.....
Precision Top End Assembly of the Laydown Rave Motors – Squish clearance, the distance between the piston crown and cylinder head at top dead center, is an important specification that is minded by the Rotax factory as well as all high performance engine builders. The Sea Doo manual offers a fairly wide tolerance for squish clearances, however most engine builders prefer closer clearances to help stave off detonation. Most builders measure the squish clearance by sticking a piece of solder through the spark plug hole toward the outside edge of the bore…then momentarily touching the start button so the piston makes several strikes at the solder. This allows the solder to be crushed to the exact thickness that shows the “squish clearance”. At Group K we make a point to take these “squish clearance ” measurements over both ends of the wrist pin. This minimizes the piston’s ability to “rock” and show an inaccurately large clearance. We also take these measurements over both ends of the wrist pin, on both cylinders, to assure uniform clearances. In a perfect world, all four squish measurement will be within .002″ – ,003″. Unfortunately, we have been observing everything but uniform clearances. This is a matter we do not take lightly, since accurate squish clearance is the only way to assure correct deck height setup (a function of the base gasket thickness).

Immediately, we though that the variations were caused by incorrectly cut squish bands on the cylinder head…not so. The bands had a uniform depth and perfect center to center location. We then suspected variations in the locations of the cylinder mounting holes in the crankcases, but they also measured perfectly. In the end, we found two items that caused the variations. The first was that the distance between the two cylinder bores can vary greatly, depending on the assembly procedure. That is, there can be almost 1 mm variation in the center to center distance of the bore diameters based solely on the random location during assembly. Secondly, the cylinder head itself has a great deal of movement leeway (both left to right, and forward to back). All these variations of fit take place because the cylinders and cylinder head are not located to one another with “dowel locating pins” (as most Kawasaki engines are). The absence of these locating pins allows for alot of movement leeway, of both the cylinders and the cylinder head. That results in broad variations in squish clearance measurements. Installing dowel pins is a questionably wise solution because of the great risk that the exhaust manifold faces would not be perfectly parallel (that would cause bore distortion when the exhaust manifold is torqued on).

For now, our best solution is to recommend a “Precision Assembly Procedure” that will make for minimum variations in squish measurements.

Our procedure is based on the following information. The cylinder base bolt patterns in the cases are located 132mm (5.196″) apart. The standard bore diameters of the cylinders are 82.0 – 82.08 mm (3.228″ – 3.231″). This means that the inner distance between the two bores of the torqued on cylinders should be between 49.91 – 49.98 mm (1.965″ – 1.968″) These last measurements can be taken quickly and easily with a set of dial calipers after the cylinders have been torqued on. In most cases, we have found that you can hit this spec range if you install the cylinders as close together as possible. It bears noting that we have seen engines where the water jackets of the cylinders touched before we could reach this specification range. We literally needed to belt sand some material off the aluminum cylinder casting to get the correct spec. Cylinders like this are certainly the exception (not the rule), but they do exist.

Once the cylinders are installed with the acceptable center to center distance, it becomes apparent that the cylinder head itself can move about 2mm (.080″ in any direction over the tops of the bores. This location will also have a profound effect on squish clearance measurements. We got out best results by matching the edge of the head casting, all the way around, as closely as possible to the edges of the cylinder castings. While this doesn’t sound very precise, it works surprisingly well. After torqueing on the head, you can take your four squish clearance measurements to determine if the head needs to be moved slightly one way or the other…it’s not really as tough as it sounds.

Does everyone one who assembles a Rave top end “have” to go through this whole procedure…not necessarily. However we strongly recommend this procedure to anyone preparing a high output Laydown Rave motor. If you find a wide variation in the squish clearances of your freshly assembled engine…it could certainly avert some problems before they get started.

Base Gasket Thickness – “Jon’s Story” – One of our early test boats was an XP that was to be raced in region one offshore. We shipped the kit to the owner, who had it assembled at a local shop. After the break-in, the test rider reported a little better top end, along with average bottom end power. We were concerned because all our other test riders had reported big increases in bottom end as well as peak rpm. After a few unsuccessful attempts to resolve the problem with carb tuning, he came to our shop with the machine. After a quick test ride, we found this XP to have mediocre acceleration and a 6900 rpm peak (that’s 150 rpm short of the norm). Back at the shop we checked out every possible problem. Besides the indicated compression being just a little low, the only other inconsistency was that the squish clearance seemed to be about .010″ (.25mm) too thick. At the time, we didn’t think this was the problem…but it was the only thing we saw that we could “fix”. We removed the .024″ (6 hole) base gasket and replaced it with a .016″ (4 hole) base gasket. The next morning we gave the boat a short break-in…then gassed it. The difference was unbelievable. The boat pulled viciously up to 7040 rpm…just like all our other test boats. No one was more shocked than us, that .008″ of base gasket thickness could turn a weakling into rocket. After this experience, we specified for our assembly instructions that a .038″ – .042″ squish clearance must be maintained on all Group K modified top ends. Since then, we have not experienced this problem again. (Note : This XP won the 90 minute 1200 pro overall at the Havasu Global Offshore Finals)
Thanks for posting this. I finally got my solder in.(.065) and went out and did some checking. Apparently yes the cylinder head was not on correctly. (A little embarassed about that). Did the check with the engine in the ski, and was reading about .050 on one cylinder and .048 on the other. Will do some better checking once the engine is out. But doing some quick measurements of the cylinder spacing and that looks to be out as well. Unless my math is off. cylinder bore is 80.5(bored over) So the 132-82.5 should be 49.5 and I am 50. So according to the article i am good for stock bore cylinders but not my bored cylinders. I guess there will be more to come once i pull the engine. Thanks for all the help guys!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top