Oil sump pickup/strainer

[Justin B.]

For some reason I got bit by the motivation bug this morning, swapped things around in the garage, and rotated the R65RS "Garage Ornament" onto the lift.  I had planned on taking off the sump extender/oil cooler and installing the bigger R100 oil pan for quite some time but have never gotten around to it.  Who knows, if the motivation holds on I may even put in the new clutch!

I had an almost for sure de-motivator when I was removing the oil pickup/strainer, though.  When I broke loose the two bolts that retain the pickup one of them snapped!  After throwing things and cursing for a while I got the drill, center punch, and stud extractors and resigned myself to having to drill the damn thing out.  I center punched the remains of the bolt, chucked up a 1/8" left-hand bit, and just as soon as the bit took a bite the remains of the stud spun right out!  I was for sure that for some reason the bolt must have somehow been frozen.  I have never had a bolt snap off like this that turned freely - but I ain't complaining!!!

I have a question for those of you who have had their oil pan and pickup/strainer off.  I am removing the sump spacer/oil cooler from the 1980 "Garage Ornament" R65RS and intend on replacing the pan with one from an R100, which looks to be just a hair deeper than the stock R65 pan.  The spacer/cooler comes with a spacer (obviously) for the oil pickup to compensate for the additional "depth" of the sump but I am having a hard time deciding whether or not some sort of spacer is required for a pan by itself.

The and ETK show a spacer in the pictorial but it looks like it was used on  pre-1981 on R100s, all after it doesn't show as being used.  The HTK also shows the same spacer but apparently none of the dual shock R65s use it.

I'm not sure what was different about the 1980 and earlier R100 blocks that would require the use of a spacer (or "flange" as it's called in the ETK) but it does not look very thick.  After looking at all of these parts tear-downs I am going to assume (Gawd, there's that word...) that a spacer is not required.

If anybody has evidence or knowledge to the contrary please let me know as it won't be that big a deal to mill me whatever thickness spacer I need, otherwise I will reassemble without any type of spacer.

As soon as this is done the sump extender/oil cooler will be posted in the "Trading Post" before going up on e-Bay.

[airhead]

From what I can make out, and what I have observed on my '76 90/6 and earlier and later models, from '76 onward the sump was deepened by about 20mm. This necessitated the use of a spacer on the pickup to compensate, which ironically is 20mm thick.
After about '81 the block had other modifications and I presume it was then that the oil pickup itself was lowered to suit the now even deeper pans, so a spacer was no longer required.
Though not definitive and only based on heresay and and my own observations, I think that's about the gist of it. The 65's as you know always tend to throw a spanner in the works with their uniqueness and sometimes headed the pack on developments. I sometimes feel they were used as beta testers for preceding models to help iron out the bugs before the new technology was added to the real bikes!! (don't hit me please!!)

Bill....................;-)

[Justin B.]

I agree!   I think I'll probably go the no-spacer route (unless somebody chimes in with some contrary information) as looking through the parts programs didn't show any of the R65 engines using the spacer...

[airhead]

Justin, just went looking and found this,

http://www.largiader.com/tech/oilpan/

They say it was a 10mm spacer, I thought it was 20, but could just as easily be wrong.

Bill...................;-)

[Justin B.]

Interesting, what I took off was the "295" pan and the pan I put on was the "723".  I guess I'm just as confused as before but the way I look at it if I keep the same dipstick and fill it the same I should be all right...