i just purchased an emax valve and just for shnits and giggles i took it apart and looked at everything in comparison to my best xvalve.
I heard that the emax was the best performing xvalve that the person had at the time he owned it and i am curious as to if any of the differences of the emax to my other xvalve would contribute to that.
first off, i took out the on off and noticed a quad o-ring with another oring around it instead of two white o-rings one inside of the other. this threw me off... is this suppose to be like this?
yes, this is because it is an e-mag valve made of aluminum. Emag valves had quad o-rings so the emax just carried that feature with it. Some say the quad o-ring holds up to more abuse so i would say that it is better
next i took the lvl 10 bolt off and noticed a black bumper that was epoxied to the powertube. I took this off using a polishing wheel and a dremel (im good with them, dont worry :)) and i put on a standard bumper... was that a good choice or a bad one or neither?
neither, i originally thought it would be bad and that there was a reason for the bumper to be glued on, then i realized that even if it were a black bumper the only thing it does it prevent the bolt from slamming on the powertube.
next, i took a look at the on/off from behind the front half of the valve (removed the internals of the front half) and looked through it. The emax had a direct hole that went straight through to the front dump chamber, the xvalve had the same hole through the on/off but was to the side and im guessing doesnt get as good as an airflow as being directly straight on.
Has little to no effect, the air flow is not restricted because the area around the on/off is recessed slightly so that even if the hole doesnt line up properly there is still plenty of room for air to move around and get into the hole and through to the dump chamber quickly.
Lastly, i took out the pin from the xvalve i had which was a .700 and swapped it for the standard .712 emag length (which i think is standard). Now my emax has the shorter pin which always gave me more reactivity. Was this a bad idea or a good one.
good one... unless you are someone who doesnt like RT effect (those exist?
?)
Reason for all these questions is because i know emax valves are technically just xvalves but i see differences in them. Lasty, i screwed in the male fitting for my SS hose into the emax and found that the threading was harder to do than with my xvalve. The xvalve seemed "looser" than the emax and like the emax had a tighter more airtight fit.
Am i crazy? or are there actually differences in the emax vs an xvalve. If these are real differences and the emax performs better than the xvalve, would it be safe to do the same "mods" to the xvalve i have?
I heard that the emax was the best performing xvalve that the person had at the time he owned it and i am curious as to if any of the differences of the emax to my other xvalve would contribute to that.
first off, i took out the on off and noticed a quad o-ring with another oring around it instead of two white o-rings one inside of the other. this threw me off... is this suppose to be like this?
yes, this is because it is an e-mag valve made of aluminum. Emag valves had quad o-rings so the emax just carried that feature with it. Some say the quad o-ring holds up to more abuse so i would say that it is better
next i took the lvl 10 bolt off and noticed a black bumper that was epoxied to the powertube. I took this off using a polishing wheel and a dremel (im good with them, dont worry :)) and i put on a standard bumper... was that a good choice or a bad one or neither?
neither, i originally thought it would be bad and that there was a reason for the bumper to be glued on, then i realized that even if it were a black bumper the only thing it does it prevent the bolt from slamming on the powertube.
next, i took a look at the on/off from behind the front half of the valve (removed the internals of the front half) and looked through it. The emax had a direct hole that went straight through to the front dump chamber, the xvalve had the same hole through the on/off but was to the side and im guessing doesnt get as good as an airflow as being directly straight on.
Has little to no effect, the air flow is not restricted because the area around the on/off is recessed slightly so that even if the hole doesnt line up properly there is still plenty of room for air to move around and get into the hole and through to the dump chamber quickly.
Lastly, i took out the pin from the xvalve i had which was a .700 and swapped it for the standard .712 emag length (which i think is standard). Now my emax has the shorter pin which always gave me more reactivity. Was this a bad idea or a good one.
good one... unless you are someone who doesnt like RT effect (those exist?
?)Reason for all these questions is because i know emax valves are technically just xvalves but i see differences in them. Lasty, i screwed in the male fitting for my SS hose into the emax and found that the threading was harder to do than with my xvalve. The xvalve seemed "looser" than the emax and like the emax had a tighter more airtight fit.
Am i crazy? or are there actually differences in the emax vs an xvalve. If these are real differences and the emax performs better than the xvalve, would it be safe to do the same "mods" to the xvalve i have?
Comment