Re: Ur-Q hydraulic head conversion questions...

[JustaxPHX@aol.com]

> Given Jeff's report about the similarities between the heads (I didn't have
>  both available simultaneously to do a side to side comparo) could it be 
that
>  there was some sort of materials change that reduced the problem?  Could
>  there be some other design change to the internal passages on the head on
>  the MC to make the problem less likely?  

The original plan was to have this head rebuilt and install it on my 200q -- 
it appears that I've got a burned exhaust valve on cylinder number three -- 
and then rebuild the head off my 200q and put *that* one on my Ur-Q.  I was 
hoping to keep the necessary downtime to a minium since the 200q is my only 
running car at the moment.  As such, I didn't put much effort into making a 
detailed comparison between the MC and Ur-Q heads but definitely intend to do 
so once I've got the original 200 head off the car.
  
>  One thing that I know is that there is a big difference in the shapes of 
the
>  piston crowns on the two engines ... I really doubt that would have 
anything
>  to do with this problem though.  

I've noticed this as well but my preliminary measurements suggest there won't 
be a clearance problem, at least not with the stock cam and alignment 
settings.  We'll see...

JG