[NSRCA-discussion] YS160 vs YS170

[Ed Miller]

The YS160 appears to use the same valve spring by p/n that has been in use 
since the NC/SC/FZ/L with the introduction of the automotive style split 
valve keepers.
Ed M.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Pavlick" <jpavlick at idseng.com>
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] YS160 vs YS170


> Probably not. I've heard of a few exhaust valve spring failures on the 160 
> too. <LOL>
>
>  John Pavlick
>
> Ed Miller <edbon85 at tds.net> wrote:
>  Can someone that has run them both give a synopsis of the differences, 
> pros,
> cons, etc. comparing the YS160 and YS170DZ ??? I find it hard to believe 
> .1
> cu in. increase in displacement amounts to much if any power increase. 
> I've
> heard of exhaust valve spring failures on the 170. Does it use different
> valve
> springs that the 160 ??
> Ed M.
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion