sbright wrote:
> I'm not sure about that socket thing on a running pulley thing.. besides the
> belt is usualy not the culprit, but rather a wobbley pulley. Look for fine
> black dust and follow it to where you think it originated.
>
> Wouldn't it be nice if they did away with the whole belt driven accessories
> thing? Seems like somebody could have come up with a better solution to
> this old technology.. I know about electric water pumps.. but I always
> wonder if they could develop a mechanical way (gear driven) to power the
> alternator, power steering, etc.
>
> -Stan
Dave, thanks for the info--I'll not panic when looking at the balancer.

I tend to agree with Stan though. Sticking a wrench or breaker bar down
there scares me too. I'm not as steady handed as I once was. Stan, you
sound like you've been influenced by either the Swiss or the Krauts,
with a need for very precise gears.

Back in the '70s I was one of the technical monitors on a NavAir project
(your tax dollars at work) that compared speed reduction and drive
devices using belts, gears, worms, harmonic drives and a couple of
electric schemes. I was the guy with clean hands who peeked in on the
project for 2 years, then wrote the one-page exec summary and walked out
the door. When all (dollars, weight, reliability, bulk, power losses,
support, restoration/repair and some other trivia) was considered, belts
came off very well. Belt losses are more than the typical 1%
per-gear-in-mesh at most practical ratios but when total support
(weight, lube overhead, shielding from dirt, ease of inspection,
prediction of failure, etc.) comes into play, the belt usually wins.
Major exception was at very high belt velocities where belts lift from
the pulleys and/or get overheated. I think we're going to be stuck with
belts for a lot of years to come. That said, in the last 30 years there
have been some great advances in molded plastic gears so the landscape
might change.

I'm wondering what the belt velocities in the C5 are in comparison to
other serpentine installations. Someday, I'll stick a ruler down there
and compare it to the C4 and Mama's land barge--neither of those seem to
have serpentine problems.

First owner replaced the belt in my C5 about 8 months ago--don't know
why. Looks as though it lasted about 36 months and 20K miles.) That's
about 1/2 what I got out of the first belt in my C4 (didn't fail or
squeak but looked awful -- old age with lots of small chunks missing).
No squeaks in the C5 yet; but, when I hear a squeak, my first ploy will
be a gentle rub with a chunk of paraffin --that used to work well with
vee belts lots of years ago. (Then when the slippage occurs, I can get
out the solvent and start cleaning pulleys <{:-0 ). One more
opportunity for a self-inflicted wound!

Oh yeah, and it would be well to use Dad's "sonic agulominator" (golf
club shaft).

Outta here -- gotta go make a buck.
--
…PJ
’89 HookerCar, ’02 E-blu 6-spd Coupe

>
> "Dave" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> I have a 2000 C5 w/ about 50k. I read some posts here and elsewhere about
>> a persistent "squeak, squeak squeak" under the hood. One fellow, Steve,
>> said it was the crank pulley/harmonic balancer being wobbley. I checked it
>> out, stopped by the dealer, and wanted to share what I found.
>>
>> All C5 harmonic balancers are wobbley. It probably isn't that -- which is
>> a good thing because out of warranty repair is $650.
>>
>> Check the AC belt -- that's what it was in my case. I'm in the process of
>> getting a new "gatorback" belt (cross groved). It could also be the main
>> serpentine belt or even the tensioner. To find the difference, put a
>> socket on the tensioner belt when the engine is running (tighten) -- be
>> careful -- and see if the extra tension causes the noise to go away. If
>> not, remove the AC belt (cut it) and start the engine. If the sound is
>> gone, you know that was the cause. (It is time to replace the belt
>> anyway - my opinion).
>>
>> Hope that helps the next guy.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>
>