Early T500 Port Measurements, Anyone have for later T500?

[Vintageman]

Hello,

I picked up a set of early T500 cylinders. You know, the ones without the intake port aluminum casting divider.

I am not sure of year. The pistons are standard size with several grooves below rings. Each of the two ring slots has two rings in it (that's a first time see for me) The transfer sections are fully open at bottom not windowed. I do not know the year.

My interest is to see the porting difference if any versus later T500/GT500.

Can someone or has someone measured the ports in a later T500/GT500 with intake divider please?

Is this the intake divider the only difference between early and late with respect to ports?

I measured the port heights with respect to top of cast liner. I used a piece of paper even with top of liner and traced out one port at a time. Even though I tried to be as accurate as possible it is hard and there must be error… +/- ½ mm ? I made my measurements in English units and converted to mm below

Here are my results:

Exhaust Top = 1.58” or 40 mm
Exhaust Bottom = 2.60” or 66 mm
Exhaust width = 1.81” or 46 mm

Transfer Top = 2.0” or 50.8 mm
Transfer bottom = 2.6” or 66.0 mm
Transfer width = 1.5” or 38.1 mm

Intake top = 3.09” or 78.5 mm
Intake bottom = 4.13" or 104.9 mm
Intake width = 2.08” or 52.8 mm

Thanks

[Vintageman]

There is a difference in Intake port shape between the early and late T500 cylinders

See the eBay post ->
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Suzuki-T-500-Cy ... 22&vxp=mtr" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The fourth picture looking at intake port from bottom of this later cylinder shows its shape
I have an early style cylinder in my hand and compare the two qualitatively

The early intake port window bottoms are virtually straight/ horizontal/ squared. That is the two windows are more like rectangles.

As you can see they changed the bottoms to be round half-moons. It looks like the very bottom of the concave is equal to the bottom of the early one ( I would need to measure to be sure, by sure looks that way), But the early one runs lower the hole distance and the late one casting arcs up both sides. That being the case Suzuki effectively raised the port bottom quite a bit .

I saved ebay pic on my PC for now. My digital camera is broke, but I will try to take a pic of my early bottom same position and distance when I can. Soon I will have both a late and early in my hands side by side

Please tell me have to post a picture here from my PC.
Else I think the” Img” button works if I post my pics to web like Photobucket first?

Thanks

[brewsky]

Hello,

Each of the two ring slots has two rings in it (that's a first time see for me) Thanks

Are you sure the rings are 2 piece?

Mine ('74) looked like it till I removed them, but just have a groove in the middle.

Will try to get some measurements today.

[brewsky]

Please tell me have to post a picture here from my PC.
Else I think the” Img” button works if I post my pics to web like Photobucket first?

Thanks

I just use the "browse" button at the bottom of the reply, find the file for the pic and "add the file"

[Vintageman]

brewsky,

Yes, just one ring really that looks like two

I try the browse -> add the file and get error

"The image must be at least 0 pixels wide, 0 pixels high and at most 1200 pixels wide and 1200 pixels high. The submitted image is 1600 pixels wide and 1200 pixels high."

But when i look at properties on Ebay and how I copied it to my pc it is only 922 x 692 pixels (315573 bytes) Oh well.

I tried another camera I have, but my kids (17 and 20 years old) took memory card which they of course deny.

It would be nice if you could take pics of the later intake port. The one on ebay is decent, but nice to save some more.

Yes maybe other differnce in ports too so worth measuring late.


It was not easy. It took me multiple tries to trace on paper and just focused on one port at a time

[Vintageman]

brewsky,

Yes, just one ring really that looks like two

I try the browse -> add the file and get error

"The image must be at least 0 pixels wide, 0 pixels high and at most 1200 pixels wide and 1200 pixels high. The submitted image is 1600 pixels wide and 1200 pixels high."

But when i look at properties on Ebay and how I copied it to my pc it is only 922 x 692 pixels (315573 bytes) Oh well.

I tried another camera I have, but my kids (17 and 20 years old) took memory card which they of course deny.

It would be nice if you could take pics of the later intake port. The one on ebay is decent, but nice to save some more.

Yes maybe other differnce in ports too so worth measuring late.


It was not easy. It took me multiple tries to trace on paper and just focused on one port at a time

[tz375]

The ebay barrels may have been ported at some point. The floor of the port looks as if it it is very low - almost reaches the oil feed hole in fact.

[brewsky]

Your measurements copied with mine beside in RED

Here are my results:

Exhaust Top = 1.58” or 40 mm 40.9mm
Exhaust Bottom = 2.60” or 66 mm 65.0
Exhaust width = 1.81” or 46 mm 47.2

Transfer Top = 2.0” or 50.8 mm 51.3
Transfer bottom = 2.6” or 66.0 mm 65.5
Transfer width = 1.5” or 38.1 mm 37.6

Intake top = 3.09” or 78.5 mm 79.0
Intake bottom = 4.13" or 104.9 mm 101.6
Intake width = 2.08” or 52.8 mm 55.1

Measured directly with calipers (except widths, which were paper transfer measurement)

[brewsky]

'74 intake port pics: OOPS!...needed to re-size these....
Trying again:

[brewsky]

brewsky,


I try the browse -> add the file and get error

"The image must be at least 0 pixels wide, 0 pixels high and at most 1200 pixels wide and 1200 pixels high. The submitted image is 1600 pixels wide and 1200 pixels high."

But when i look at properties on Ebay and how I copied it to my pc it is only 922 x 692 pixels (315573 bytes) Oh well.

I tried another camera I have, but my kids (17 and 20 years old) took memory card which they of course deny.

Try opening up your pics on your PC with PAINT, go to "image", "stretch/skew", then "stretch" and select 50% for both horizontal and vertical, save the pic with a different name and try to attach the modified version to your post.

Make sure you use the "save as" and select JPEG when saving the modified pic from PAINT

[Vintageman]

Brewsky and Tz

Brewsky
Does your 74 intake port have the aluminum divider?
Your ports are rectangle. Oil hole placement similar
Our dimensions are very similar (+/-1mm) until we get to intake.

Tz375;
I see your point about possible port or clean up anyways. I thought oil hole is closer too. But as I looked at the center divider where it turned vertical on ebay it is much further from hole than the right cylinder in my hand. Also vertical section appeared much shorter. If they cut that much an arc on mine they should have hit it.
But It hard to tell from pic. You may be right since brewskys are rectangle

Brewsky you or I may have error in intake measurements

I did mine again both cylinders, paper trace. put headside down on flate table and paper against it steady. Used calipers to measure paper traces.->

Left Cylinder:
Intake top 3.055” or 77.5mm
Intake Bottom 4.125” or 104.8mm
Intake width 2.070’ or 52.6 mm

Right Cylinder:
Intake top 3.080” or 78.2mm
Intake Bottom 4.150” or 105.4mm
Intake width 2.085’ or 52.6 mm

[brewsky]

My measurements were only repeatable to within 0.25mm and were with a cheap caliper.

It does look like your intake opens about 3.3 mm earlier and is about 3.8 mm taller total.

[Vintageman]

Brewsky;

I think we matched very well on all ports but intake. That gives some confidence with our measuring

I would guess I have +/-1 mm error....ports are not perfectly staight

Does your 74 intake port have the aluminum divider? Just want to be 100% sure.

Mine does not but don't know year

Yours ports are are bit wider 2.5 mm.

Not confident there is really a difference , due to our errors plus Suzuki mfg variations

Would need more sample to see if this difference holds

It does give me new respect for matching and cleaning up ports/castings
Oh well

I did ask the guy on ebay if his were ported an d awaiting reply Probally were.

Thanks

[brewsky]

The intake divider is cast with the cylinder and the liner is also divided.
The liner encroaches into the port opening and probably should be matched better.

[ConnerVT]

I did ask the guy on ebay if his were ported an d awaiting reply Probally were.

Copied from the eBay posting:

Suzuki T 500 Cylinder Assembly. Includes Left and Right: cylinders, heads, piston and rings, wrist pins and bearings, carburetor boots, and head bolts.

Cylinder walls are fairly smooth. Has had some mild port work done.

Using calipers, the bores measure 2.755. The pistons measure 2.751.

These were removed from a complete engine that has not run in approx. 10 years. Prior to disassembly, WD40 was sprayed into the spark plug hole and a compression tester was installed. The engine was then kicked through three times. Both sides made 120 psi compression.