timing belts are crap

green123

from another thread Originally Posted by unkel

"All cars should have chains though. My Micra had a chain. My Porsche has a belt "

so why not just use timing chains on all cars and save all the hassle ?

whats the advantage of using belts ?

blackbox

Timing Chains are crap.

They stretch (interfering eith timing)

They rattle

They break

All cars should have timing belts.

eringobragh

blackbox wrote: »

Timing Chains are crap.

They stretch (interfering eith timing)

They break

SO Timing Belts don't break? :rolleyes:

groupb

I think belts used to be regarded as quieter. Chains can stretch/break too. My mx5 has a belt but its a non interferance engine.

mike65

Belts are crap they give no warning, chains do (if you know what the look/listen for)

Mike.

groupb

blackbox wrote: »

Timing Chains are crap.

They stretch (interfering eith timing)

They rattle

They break

All cars should have timing belts.

It causes quite a bit of "interferance" when pistons meet valves.

Anan1

Belts are quieter.

mike65

Never understood that argument, having owned cars with both I can declare both equally un-noisey.

Mike.

Plug

Belts are quiter than chains, they dont rattle, they dont stretch over time and they are cheaper. Once you change your timing belt over your recommend milage then nothing will happen.
I also think that a belt has a less rotating mass on the engine therefore delivering more power or else its the other way around.

jon1981

is there a website or anything that lists cars that have timing chain or belts? i prefer to have the piece of mind with a chain

eringobragh

My timing chains done 180,000 and still going strong. I don't find it noisy either

Darwin

A few examples I know of that have timing chains are a lot of Fords (Ka, Puma, Focus) and the new BMW engine used in the Cooper S and 207 GT/GTi...I'm sure there's loads more

kona

dont chains have a tensioner???? so they dont strech and ruin the timing??

and with the amount of milage the average ca does before being scrapped/sold on, a chain will last this distance. a belt will not.

Plug

kona wrote: »

dont chains have a tensioner???? so they dont strech and ruin the timing??

I dont think they have a tensioner but they do stretch and thats the sad reality.

kona

Plug wrote: »

I dont think they have a tensioner but they do stretch and thats the sad reality.

afaik the chain on my mini has a tensioner, i must check this before i get complacent!!:D

colm_mcm

Most VVT-i engines have chains, but a few (like the RX300) have belts.

mike65

Chains have tensioners or at leasts Mercs do, the duplex chain is bomb proof (are Mercs still made with dulpex chains?). Replace the tensioner every 80,000 miles are you're grand.

Mike.

Plug

kona wrote: »

afaik the chain on my mini has a tensioner, i must check this before i get complacent!!:D

Ok see the first black thing I think there is a tensioner on the left of that but maybe I'm wrong, you can see the same thing on the third black thing.
Anyone know what the black things are called?

kona

mike65 wrote: »

Chains have tensioners or at leasts Mercs do, the duplex chain is bomb proof (are Mercs still made with dulpex chains?). Replace the tensioner every 80,000 miles are you're grand.

Mike.

yup my mini has a duplex timing chain, and a tensioner, but its not a standard A-series so i dont know if they left the factory with a duplex and a tensioner, i reckon it has one as it doesnt rattle as much as other engines ive heard!.

kona

Plug wrote: »

Ok see the first black thing I think there is a tensioner on the left of that but maybe I'm wrong, you can see the same thing on the third black thing.
Anyone know what the black things are called?

id say those black things stop chain slap.

lol the mini aint that complicated, its basically a 2 double teeth pulleys and 2 chains lol.

bet a tenner thats a over engineerd german yoke!!!

mike65

That has two tensioners the "bolt" like thing on the left side of tensioner arms.

Mike.

Plug

kona wrote: »

id say those black things stop chain slap.

Yeah thats what there for but I wonder if there the tensioner aswel?

lol the mini aint that complicated, its basically a 2 double teeth pulleys and 2 chains lol.

bet a tenner thats a over engineerd german yoke!!!

You'd be right there! But wrong about over enginnered. The more its emginnered the better:cool:

Plug

mike65 wrote: »

That has two tensioners the "bolt" like thing on the left side of tensioner arms.

Mike.

Yes, my spider senses thingled when I saw them.

kona

Plug wrote: »

Yeah thats what there for but I wonder if there the tensioner aswel?


You'd be right there! But wrong about over enginnered. The more its emginnered the better:cool:

tell BMC that:D:D
just spent 3 hours today , unseizing a handbrake, and adjusting it. then questioning the engineering wisdom of leaving everything metal un treated and open to the elements:D, then turning the adjusting bolt was fun!!!

and who puts a dizzy on the front of a engine behind a gaping grill???

stupid english no wonder BMC went to the dogs.

BenFoldsFive

Wasnt Issigonis Turkish?

kona wrote: »

tell BMC that:D:D
just spent 3 hours today , unseizing a handbrake, and adjusting it. then questioning the engineering wisdom of leaving everything metal un treated and open to the elements:D, then turning the adjusting bolt was fun!!!

and who puts a dizzy on the front of a engine behind a gaping grill???

stupid english no wonder BMC went to the dogs.

Run_to_da_hills

The best engines made were side valves! No complicated timing belts, chains or pushrods, and no dropping of valves and bursting pistons or bending rods if the timing fails!. Timing belts are a racket for main dealers to make a killing on major services by conditioning you that "Genuine parts" must be fitted. Timing chains are noisy and awkward to fit and pushrods can bend. With sidevalve technology the timing is set once and for all, it cannot slip and if it dose go out, ie one of the timing gears strips, highly unlikely, it will have no damaging effect on the engine. Morris and Ford used these engines for years when cars were real cars instead of the rubbish that they are producing to-day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flathead_engine

kona

BenFoldsFive wrote: »

Wasnt Issigonis Turkish?

yup, but that muppet lord stokes was english!!
who makes 2 cars to compete with each other!!!
issigonis just designed the car, not the bits that went on it. he was a stubborn bloke too, didnt want john cooper to tune the mini:D:D

BMC designed the A-series, and the transverse design of the mini unit, on MGs the dizzy is at the side!!!
but i suppose this is because the engine is mounted differently.
best 8v engine imo, will do 185 bhp with a few mods.

best idea has to be the rotary engine, pity they aint durable

Timmaay

Run_to_da_hills, here's why we dont use side valve engines, from your own link:rolleyes::

On the downside, the flathead also requires the airflow to make at least a 90-degree turn to enter the cylinder, which makes it less efficient, colloquially called poorer "breathing". Breathing was not greatly important for early production cars because engines could not run long and reliably at high speed, and all engines had poor combustion anyway, so this was a minor concern given the benefits in simplicity. The maximum compression ratio is also low at only about 7:1, further reducing efficiency (although it means the engine can run on low-octane fuel).

A more serious concern is exhaust, which often follows a more complicated path to leave the engine. This virtually guarantees the engine will overheat under sustained heavy use

Basically, they're rubbish, I'll take the small risk of snapping a belt/chain and dropping a valve for the better power/fuel efficency/reliability of OHVs.

zilog_jones

What happens when a timing chain breaks in a pushrod engine? I assume it's a lot less likely to happen than in one of those newfangled yokes, due to the chain being a lot smaller.

Are there any pushrods left besides the big american V8s? I know the Ka hasn't had them since 2003, but what about Skoda? Anyone else still living in the past?

Plug

When a it breaks the valves hit the pistons and CAABOOM!:eek:

Run_to_da_hills

Timmaay wrote: »

Run_to_da_hills, here's why we dont use side valve engines, from your own link:rolleyes::


Basically, they're rubbish, I'll take the small risk of snapping a belt/chain and dropping a valve for the better power/fuel efficency/reliability of OHVs.

I have a 1939 flathead motorcycle since the 1982 and still have it roadworthy, It has never overheated, siezed or left me on the side of the road with dropped valves. It depends on how these engines are treated, if they are gunned by some moran flat out they will obviously burn out exhaust valves as with any engine if mistreated.

If I was given a bike to travel across the world I would choose this configuration of engine because any back street workshop in India or Pakistan equipped with a vicegrip, hammer and chizel can work on it not like the modern junk that requires a "computer" to get it going.