Inspect engine valves?

Coming up on the 60k maintenance, and I notice the manual calls for
inspection of a bunch of stuff, including engine valves. The rest of
the stuff -- brake lines, fuel lines & connections, drive shaft boot,
etc. -- seems to be relatively simple or at least easily accessed
(i.e., cheap), but engine valves? Taking off valve covers sounds
expensive. And, what am I (they) checking for? "Please inspect the
valves" could get me nothing more than "Yep, they're there, $250 for
labor please."

Why does the owner's manual say to have the valves inspected as part of
routine maintenance and what is actually done during that inspection?

Thanks,
Tristan

Tristan Shout wrote:[color=blue]
> Coming up on the 60k maintenance, and I notice the manual calls for
> inspection of a bunch of stuff, including engine valves. The rest of
> the stuff -- brake lines, fuel lines & connections, drive shaft boot,
> etc. -- seems to be relatively simple or at least easily accessed
> (i.e., cheap), but engine valves? Taking off valve covers sounds
> expensive. And, what am I (they) checking for? "Please inspect the
> valves" could get me nothing more than "Yep, they're there, $250 for
> labor please."
>
> Why does the owner's manual say to have the valves inspected as part of
> routine maintenance and what is actually done during that inspection?
>
> Thanks,
> Tristan
>[/color]

I Wouldn't bother, unless your getting alot ticking/tapping noises in
the head, indicative of excessive valve clearances (shims worn down) or
othe valve releated warn noises.

A compression test can tell you if your valves are sealing properly.
other then that you have nothing to worry about in the area of valves.

"Tristan Shout" <google@thenetdr.com> wrote in message
news:1128660095.854724.60970@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...[color=blue]
> Coming up on the 60k maintenance, and I notice the manual calls for
> inspection of a bunch of stuff, including engine valves. The rest of
> the stuff -- brake lines, fuel lines & connections, drive shaft boot,
> etc. -- seems to be relatively simple or at least easily accessed
> (i.e., cheap), but engine valves? Taking off valve covers sounds
> expensive. And, what am I (they) checking for? "Please inspect the
> valves" could get me nothing more than "Yep, they're there, $250 for
> labor please."
>
> Why does the owner's manual say to have the valves inspected as part of
> routine maintenance and what is actually done during that inspection?
>
> Thanks,
> Tristan
>[/color]
I believe the manual says to have the valve adjustment checked. Properly
adjusted valves will help the engine run more efficiently and quietly. That
said, I doubt if modern engine valves get very far out of adjustment so
unless you year tapping noises, I wouldn't worry until 120K or so.
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply

Tristan Shout wrote:[color=blue]
> Coming up on the 60k maintenance, and I notice the manual calls for
> inspection of a bunch of stuff, including engine valves. The rest of
> the stuff -- brake lines, fuel lines & connections, drive shaft boot,
> etc. -- seems to be relatively simple or at least easily accessed
> (i.e., cheap), but engine valves? Taking off valve covers sounds
> expensive. And, what am I (they) checking for? "Please inspect the
> valves" could get me nothing more than "Yep, they're there, $250 for
> labor please."
>
> Why does the owner's manual say to have the valves inspected as part
> of routine maintenance and what is actually done during that
> inspection?[/color]

At 60K I would hardly worry about the valves. You also did not mention which
car/engine. Just as an added tip, if for some reason they want to replace
your brake lines, do yourself a favor and buy the aftermarket SS lines.

"cd" <urantiacjd@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:434604a2$0$19816$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...[color=blue]
> Tristan Shout wrote:[color=green]
>> Coming up on the 60k maintenance, and I notice the manual calls for
>> inspection of a bunch of stuff, including engine valves. The rest of
>> the stuff -- brake lines, fuel lines & connections, drive shaft boot,
>> etc. -- seems to be relatively simple or at least easily accessed
>> (i.e., cheap), but engine valves? Taking off valve covers sounds
>> expensive. And, what am I (they) checking for? "Please inspect the
>> valves" could get me nothing more than "Yep, they're there, $250 for
>> labor please."
>>
>> Why does the owner's manual say to have the valves inspected as part of
>> routine maintenance and what is actually done during that inspection?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tristan
>>[/color]
>
> I Wouldn't bother, unless your getting alot ticking/tapping noises in the
> head, indicative of excessive valve clearances (shims worn down) or othe
> valve releated warn noises.
>
> A compression test can tell you if your valves are sealing properly. other
> then that you have nothing to worry about in the area of valves.[/color]

RUBBISH. I WOULD bother with this important prescribed inspection. Valve
trains like this one which use shims to adjust valve lash seldom get noisier
with miles. What DOES happen is the valve faces slowly wear which causes
the valve lash clearance to LESSEN. This will result in burned valves. So
waiting for noisy (loose) valves is erroneous. Significant (more than a
quarter thousandths) shim wear is an old wives tale. Compression tests do
NOT tell you anything about valve lash clearance until there is no clearance
left. By then, you've already got valve damage.
--

- Philip

Philip wrote:[color=blue]
> "cd" <urantiacjd@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:434604a2$0$19816$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...[color=green]
>> Tristan Shout wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> Coming up on the 60k maintenance, and I notice the manual calls for
>>> inspection of a bunch of stuff, including engine valves. The rest
>>> of the stuff -- brake lines, fuel lines & connections, drive shaft
>>> boot, etc. -- seems to be relatively simple or at least easily
>>> accessed (i.e., cheap), but engine valves? Taking off valve covers
>>> sounds expensive. And, what am I (they) checking for? "Please
>>> inspect the valves" could get me nothing more than "Yep, they're
>>> there, $250 for labor please."
>>>
>>> Why does the owner's manual say to have the valves inspected as
>>> part of routine maintenance and what is actually done during that
>>> inspection?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tristan
>>>[/color]
>>
>> I Wouldn't bother, unless your getting alot ticking/tapping noises
>> in the head, indicative of excessive valve clearances (shims worn
>> down) or othe valve releated warn noises.
>>
>> A compression test can tell you if your valves are sealing properly.
>> other then that you have nothing to worry about in the area of
>> valves.[/color]
>
> RUBBISH. I WOULD bother with this important prescribed inspection.
> Valve trains like this one which use shims to adjust valve lash
> seldom get noisier with miles. What DOES happen is the valve faces
> slowly wear which causes the valve lash clearance to LESSEN. This
> will result in burned valves. So waiting for noisy (loose) valves is
> erroneous. Significant (more than a quarter thousandths) shim wear
> is an old wives tale. Compression tests do NOT tell you anything
> about valve lash clearance until there is no clearance left. By
> then, you've already got valve damage.[/color]

Good info but do you really think at 60K its needed?

"Tristan Shout" <google@thenetdr.com> wrote in message
news:1128660095.854724.60970@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...[color=blue]
> Coming up on the 60k maintenance, and I notice the manual calls for
> inspection of a bunch of stuff, including engine valves. The rest of
> the stuff -- brake lines, fuel lines & connections, drive shaft boot,
> etc. -- seems to be relatively simple or at least easily accessed
> (i.e., cheap), but engine valves? Taking off valve covers sounds
> expensive. And, what am I (they) checking for? "Please inspect the
> valves" could get me nothing more than "Yep, they're there, $250 for
> labor please."
>
> Why does the owner's manual say to have the valves inspected as part of
> routine maintenance and what is actually done during that inspection?
>
> Thanks,
> Tristan[/color]

Valve clearances should be checked as per the book, especially now-adays.
Because of the removal of lead and other wear reducing additives from the
fuel, valves wear into the head until all the clearance is taken up, then
they are held a tiny bit open and poor running followed by burnt valves
occurs, since this comes in over a long time the degradation is not noticed
till it is too late and you end up needing new valves and head repair work,
all this can be avoided by regular (by the book) valve clearance inspection
and adjustment.

mrcheerful

Right, sorry...it's a 1999 Avalon XL...1MZFE engine.

"Josh" <anony@anonyanonyanony.com.blackhole> wrote in message
news:AtqdnfUt7O-biNveUSdV9g@ptd.net...[color=blue]
> Philip wrote:[color=green]
>> "cd" <urantiacjd@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:434604a2$0$19816$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...[color=darkred]
>>> Tristan Shout wrote:
>>>> Coming up on the 60k maintenance, and I notice the manual calls for
>>>> inspection of a bunch of stuff, including engine valves. The rest
>>>> of the stuff -- brake lines, fuel lines & connections, drive shaft
>>>> boot, etc. -- seems to be relatively simple or at least easily
>>>> accessed (i.e., cheap), but engine valves? Taking off valve covers
>>>> sounds expensive. And, what am I (they) checking for? "Please
>>>> inspect the valves" could get me nothing more than "Yep, they're
>>>> there, $250 for labor please."
>>>>
>>>> Why does the owner's manual say to have the valves inspected as
>>>> part of routine maintenance and what is actually done during that
>>>> inspection?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Tristan
>>>>
>>>
>>> I Wouldn't bother, unless your getting alot ticking/tapping noises
>>> in the head, indicative of excessive valve clearances (shims worn
>>> down) or othe valve releated warn noises.
>>>
>>> A compression test can tell you if your valves are sealing properly.
>>> other then that you have nothing to worry about in the area of
>>> valves.[/color]
>>
>> RUBBISH. I WOULD bother with this important prescribed inspection.
>> Valve trains like this one which use shims to adjust valve lash
>> seldom get noisier with miles. What DOES happen is the valve faces
>> slowly wear which causes the valve lash clearance to LESSEN. This
>> will result in burned valves. So waiting for noisy (loose) valves is
>> erroneous. Significant (more than a quarter thousandths) shim wear
>> is an old wives tale. Compression tests do NOT tell you anything
>> about valve lash clearance until there is no clearance left. By
>> then, you've already got valve damage.[/color]
>
> Good info but do you really think at 60K its needed?[/color]

In My Book, 60k is a long way out in the first place. Remember those
revised oil change intervals Toyota recently made? Do you REALLY believe
automatic transmissions never need fluid changes until they fail?
--

-Philip

"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bDv1f.11407$q1.7950@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
[color=blue][color=green]
> > Good info but do you really think at 60K its needed?[/color]
>
> In My Book, 60k is a long way out in the first place. Remember those
> revised oil change intervals Toyota recently made? Do you REALLY believe
> automatic transmissions never need fluid changes until they fail?[/color]

I have to agree that if Toyota recommends having them checked, they should
be checked. On the other hand, if they don't recommend transmission fluid
changes, I am not sure it pays to have it done. I worry about the
possibility of a transmission failure, so I routinely have my transmission
fluid changed, but my parents never have it changed. Neither me nor my
parents have had a transmission fail in the last 33 years. So who is to say
who is right? I have certainly spent a lot more of transmission fluid than
they have.

Personally if there is something in the maintenance schedule (either normal
or severe service schedule) I usually have it done unless experience leads
me to believe it is safe to ignore. For instance I have not checked the
valves of my farm tractors for 15 years. I used to do it as recommended, but
they never needed adjusting (push rod engines). I talked it over with the
mechanic at the local dealer and he said they rarely needed adjusting, and
when they did, it was usually because they were loose (too much clearance).
So, I just quit checking them. I suppose one day when I have lots of extra
time, I'll do it for grins - it really is easy compared to most modern cars
(OHV, adjusters on the rocker arms - the hardest part is bumping the engine
over to the right place to check a particular valve). On the other hand, I
used to check the valves on my Jensen-Healey every 12,000 miles and there
was always one or two that were tight. After burning an exhaust valve, I
just started setting them loose. For an Audi I owned that used shims, sort
of like Toyota, the adjustment never changed. At 50,000 miles, the valves
all checked exactly in the middle of the acceptable range. This really
impressed me. I guess I am trying to say, you should have the valves checked
per the maintenance schedule unless from experience you learn the adjustment
is very stable.

Regards,

Ed White

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@removemindspring.com> wrote:
snip[color=blue]
> This really
>impressed me. I guess I am trying to say, you should have the valves checked
>per the maintenance schedule unless from experience you learn the adjustment
>is very stable.
>
>Regards,
>
>Ed White
>[/color]

I agree with Ed here...I figure that a vehicle manufacturer knows
one helluva lot more about his vehicle than any driver does so I
ignore what the drivers say and follow religiously the handbook.

It's served me well enough for my pretty long driving 'career'.

I started at 15 and I'm 71 now... :)
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:sl9ek1pnafrgku1br447ccqv03oa7dfee6@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@removemindspring.com> wrote:
> snip[color=green]
>> This really
>>impressed me. I guess I am trying to say, you should have the valves
>>checked
>>per the maintenance schedule unless from experience you learn the
>>adjustment
>>is very stable.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Ed White
>>[/color]
>
> I agree with Ed here...I figure that a vehicle manufacturer knows
> one helluva lot more about his vehicle than any driver does so I
> ignore what the drivers say and follow religiously the handbook.
>
> It's served me well enough for my pretty long driving 'career'.
>
> I started at 15 and I'm 71 now... :)
> --
>
> -Gord.[/color]

If you're following things religiously, take up the Bible.

My experience is the recommended service intervals are the absolute minimum
servicing under ideal conditions. So to ignore these minimums may as well be
neglect under realistic conditions.

--

- Philip

"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
>news:sl9ek1pnafrgku1br447ccqv03oa7dfee6@4ax.com...[color=green]
>> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@removemindspring.com> wrote:
>> snip[color=darkred]
>>> This really
>>>impressed me. I guess I am trying to say, you should have the valves
>>>checked
>>>per the maintenance schedule unless from experience you learn the
>>>adjustment
>>>is very stable.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Ed White
>>>[/color]
>>
>> I agree with Ed here...I figure that a vehicle manufacturer knows
>> one helluva lot more about his vehicle than any driver does so I
>> ignore what the drivers say and follow religiously the handbook.
>>
>> It's served me well enough for my pretty long driving 'career'.
>>
>> I started at 15 and I'm 71 now... :)
>> --
>>
>> -Gord.[/color]
>
>If you're following things religiously, take up the Bible.[/color]

Why? the word 'religiously' doesn't necessarily indicate
'religion' per se... What I meant was (of course) that I comply
with the recommendations more or less on time...
[color=blue]
>My experience is the recommended service intervals are the absolute minimum
>servicing under ideal conditions. So to ignore these minimums may as well be
>neglect under realistic conditions.[/color]

Oh, that's about right I'd say... But neither am I fool enough to
believe that the freakin engine's gonna explode if I go over the
recommended oil change interval by a thousand km either.
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

Yeah, except the book doesn't say "Check valve clearances", it says,
"Inspect engine valves". Maybe they're synonymous, and the only thing
to be done when inspecting the valves is to check the clearances, but
if they meant the former, I wish they'd just say so.

Philip wrote:[color=blue][color=green]
> > I Wouldn't bother, unless your getting alot ticking/tapping noises in the
> > head, indicative of excessive valve clearances (shims worn down) or othe
> > valve releated warn noises.
> >[/color]
> RUBBISH. I WOULD bother with this important prescribed inspection. Valve
> trains like this one which use shims to adjust valve lash[/color]

and the 1MZFE is one of those?

seldom get noisier[color=blue]
> with miles. What DOES happen is the valve faces slowly wear which causes
> the valve lash clearance to LESSEN. This will result in burned valves. So
> waiting for noisy (loose) valves is erroneous. Significant (more than a
> quarter thousandths) shim wear is an old wives tale. Compression tests do
> NOT tell you anything about valve lash clearance until there is no clearance
> left. By then, you've already got valve damage.
> --
>
> - Philip[/color]

I talked to two different dealers' service writers today about this and
both of them seemed perplexed at the idea of checking the valve
clearances. One said they'd do it, but it was very rare that the
valves would need adjustment, and it would cost $450 to find out (i.e.,
to pop the covers) because the intake plenum has to come off first.
The other (the dealer I've been going to the past two years) first
didn't believe valve inspection was called for in the book, and looked
it up while I was on the phone with him to verify. Then he said that
because these have hydraulic lifters (instead of, I believe,
mechanical) it was very rare for them to need adjustment and that I'd
be the first person to have it done since he's been at that dealer.
(And this guy usually tries to upsell me stuff.) Thoughts about the
cost? It seems like the only place I can find people who advocate
doing this are in cyberspace, because everyone I actually talk to about
having it done acts like I'm suggesting paying $450 to verify the car
has four wheels.

Cheers,
Tristan