Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

Why do manufacturers use a cambelt, which requires costly periodic replacement, when a camchain will last the life of the car?

Is it for reasons of noise?

[ronnyd]

Probably the chain option is more expensive to manufacture and, as always, it,s down to costs.

[05omegav6]

Belts are quieter... makes the engine sound a bit more refined...

Chains could also be considered a service item, they stretch over time, but generally only fail completely if basic, regular oil changes are neglected

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

When it's time to change the cambelt......I prefer a chain.

[Bigron]

Reaching back into the depths of my memory, the BMC A-Series engine as fitted to my Autin A30 (and the Morris Minor?) had a brilliant timing chain arrangement whereby the chain was lubricated via the centre of a wear-adjusting neoprene-faced slipper, meaning that it was always under the correct tension and well lubricated. That was courtesy of Reynolds, the chain people, I think?
If they could get it SO right back then, what is their excuse now? Apart from being cheaper to make and assuring them of a regular service income.........

Ron.

[SteveAvfc.]

Owned a 2.2 Vectra once upon a time and the chained snapped on a trip back from Brum. Called out the recovery services where the not so clever man told me my cambelt had snapped  Maybe he was new to the job pleb!!.

[Magwheels]

The Rover (Buick) v8 was best, chain, no tensioner, never rattled and never failed in normal use.

[aaronjb]

The Rover (Buick) v8 was best, chain, no tensioner, never rattled and never failed in normal use.

Mr DTM will be along in a moment to tell you that every single Rover engine chain has stretched, the timing is out on every engine he's ever seen and they're all firing on less than all 8.. I'm sure that was his opinion of the RV8 last time I saw it mentioned, anyway

[Webby the Bear]

More to the point why are there not more 'safe' engines so that if the belt does go there's no meeting of valves and pistons?

[4x4]

A, if chains were used instead of belts stealers would lose money.
B,safe engines again,why be safe when everything bends when belt snaps,they are designed to be more expensive to repair,again keeps stealers happy 

[aaronjb]

More to the point why are there not more 'safe' engines so that if the belt does go there's no meeting of valves and pistons?

Because you don't get efficiency by building in safety - non interference would mean low compression or inefficient combustion chambers with heavily pocketed pistons etc, and modern engines are pretty much on the ragged edge of what the designers can get away with in the name of fuel economy and saving the environment..

[dbug]

Massive duplex chain on TR4A engine with tensioner good for 100K - when I rebuilt my TR4A engine original tensioner had done 90K and showed hardly any wear, but was replaced with new.

[Webby the Bear]

More to the point why are there not more 'safe' engines so that if the belt does go there's no meeting of valves and pistons?

Because you don't get efficiency by building in safety - non interference would mean low compression or inefficient combustion chambers with heavily pocketed pistons etc, and modern engines are pretty much on the ragged edge of what the designers can get away with in the name of fuel economy and saving the environment..

That's a good explanation Aaron.

I wonder though if the fiat panda can do it why aren't they like that on engines where performance is poor to average like most small cars.

[BazaJT]

Think belts were done for quieter operation-possibly weight saving too?-always preferred a cam chain set up myself,although early Jaguar V8s suffered from chain tensioner problems later cured at introduction of 4.2L engine.

[Webby the Bear]

. . . Plus of course the cost savings and revenue from repairs as Martin pointed out