Consider buying American!

wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:07:20 -0800, jim beam
> > wrote:
>
>>> It is why you have TWO separate brake systems. (at least before the
>>> ABS system) You can lose your brakes without a 100% chance of
>>> totalling your car but if I lose this belt I have been guaranteed a
>>> 100% chance of totalling my engine.
>> wrong answer. dual circuit is because of hydraulic problems, not rubber
>> problems.
> Hydraulic problemns are usually "rubber problems", either failed cups
> in the cylinders

for calipers, that's usually rust, not rubber. rubber can wear, [master
cylinders] but you'd expect that.

again, dual circuit is in case of hydraulic fluid loss, like if road
debris cuts a hose.


> or hoses.

i've got 19 year old hoses on my honda. no problems.


> I have seen rusted out steel lines (I am in
> Florida) but that is the exception.
>
>

wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:16:17 -0800, jim beam
> > wrote:
>
>> 46/30 = 1.53 years per vehicle. and you're bleating about reliability
>> of belt driven cams??? how do you find the time to drive them the
>> mileage necessary for it to be a concern???
>
>
> four drivers

so then you're bull****ting!

wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 09:43:55 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
> > wrote:
>
>>> A lot of manufacturers have, what they didn't do is squeeze out a few
>>> extra HP by running the engine at 8000 RPM
>> Most car diesel engines are interference types.
>
> How many have timing belts

a lot of the euro diesels. or they did last time i was there.

wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 06:03:51 -0800, jim beam
> > wrote:
>
>> paradoxically, no. that motor will be maintained and kept running
>> almost indefinitely because it's "just a service item". chains otoh are
>> "engine rebuild" and most consumers throw in the towel at that point and
>> buy a new vehicle - just what a bean counter wants.
>>
>
> A chain is not any harder to replace than the belt on a Honda that
> doesn't have a removable wheel well like my Prelude. At least you can
> get a straight shot at the front of the motor when you pull the
> radiator

eh? what's hard about a belt change on the prelude? a/c compressor
lifts out of the way, power steering lifts out of the way, wheel well
cowling unclips, engine mount unbolts...

admittedly, a chain on some vehicles is not that bad, but you have to
[should] replace the cogs as well as the chain, and on some vehicles
like nissan, it's a major strip-down.

for people that just drive a car for 100k miles, and don't care about
slow degradation, chains are for you. if you want high mileage and
precision, belts are the only way to go.

wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 09:45:38 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
> > wrote:
>
>> In article > ,
>> jim beam > wrote:
>>> as for the belt, look at the service history. and if you don't believe
>>> that, just replace the belt. the part is about $35. if you do it
>>> yourself, have the tools and know your business, you can do it in just
>>> over an hour.
>> Since you appear to be a Honda type does this apply to every Honda?
>> Somehow I doubt it...
>
> I have a standing $800 bet with him it doesn't apply to a 97 Prelude.

you never said "prelude" wisenheimer. you didn't specify /any/ vehicle.

"I will give you the $800 if I can watch you do this in 90 minutes
(quite a bit over an hour) , if you run over it's free."

swing by my place and i'll change the belt on my crx in under an hour.
i'll take the money in hundreds please.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

>The low compression used for most turbos means their
>efficiency is poor.

When off-boost, which is a minority of the time.

jim beam wrote:

>unless you're drifting,
>there is no disadvantage with fwd.

LOL

Idiot.

"dizzy" > wrote in message ...
> jim beam wrote:
>
>>there
>>are many advantages to fwd for normal driving - that's why so many
>>vehicles use it.
>
> Correct.
>
> On the other hand, statements like Just Me's "Unless you're
> into throttle steer and serious performance driving, RWD has no
> advantages" are NOT correct.

Would you care to elaborate on RWD advantages
over FWD in passenger cars driven on a regular road?

In article >,
jim beam > wrote:
> Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> > In article > ,
> > jim beam > wrote:
> >>> There's at least one Vauxhall (GM) available in the UK where the
> >>> engine has to come out to change the belt. If this is the case it
> >>> would be little more overall cost to change a chain. And in practice
> >>> less since it would have a greatly longer life.
> >>>
> >
> >> how much longer is "greatly longer"? put numbers to it.
> >
> > On average over 4 times longer than a belt. Some may never need
> > changing throughout the service life of the engine.

> 1. it's more like 1.5 times.

Don't be silly. The newsgroups are full of cars breaking cam belts - but
how often do you hear of a chain going? There may well be some belts with
a service interval of 100,000 miles but they're not the norm.

> 2. "service life of the engine" is the whole point of going back to
> chains - "uneconomic to repair" means new car.

It's no big deal to change the chain(s) on many engines - easier than
belts on some.

> belts keep an engine going as long as it'll run.

And when they break the engine is scrap?

> chains, especially long run chains on
> overhead cams, turn the engine into an inefficient, polluting p.o.s.

Now you are being silly.


> >
> >> and define the degree of wear considered "acceptable".
> >
> > If it's quiet with the engine hot?
> >

> ridiculous.

Have you ever worked on an engine?

--
*7up is good for you, signed snow white*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 23:59:08 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
> wrote:

>
> Don't be silly. The newsgroups are full of cars breaking cam belts - but
>how often do you hear of a chain going?

I never had a chain go, but I did have a chain tensioner go on a
Toyota 22R.

The failed tensioner let the chain skip, doing similar damage to what
a broken belt might have done.