Hi backroomers, not been on for some time, but now that
'the nights are drawing in'
I thought that I'd pay a visit.
Chain driven cams are well though of by the motoring press. If they are indeed so much better than belt driven cams, why do all maufactures not use them?
And, does anyone have a one of the new Renualt 3.0 V6 diesel Espaces? if so what are they like?
Paul
Paul {Forest of Bowland}
|
|
Chains are a bit heavier, cost more to make and fit and a bit noisier. But I'd have one every time, given the option. I've yet to hear of one breaking. They'll usually rattle like hell long before they go, giving you plenty of warning.
|
If you want real durability, gear-driven cams are the answer! I've heard of (someone mentioned on here, I think) slack chains jumping a tooth, thus messing up the timing in the same way as a snapped belt, with dire consequences.
Cheers, SS
|
|
It all boils down to cost.
|
|
|
|
Evidently, 70% of cars from Japan will have timing chains by the end of 2005 as the government there want to improve the reliability of their engines. At the moment it is only 30%.
Regarding Renault timing/cam-belts. See my post under technical matters as my Megane cam-belt has gone after only 64k and 3.5 years!
I think I may buy Japanese in future!
|
|
|
Chain driven cams are by far better than cam belt.But that only applies if the oil/filter is changed at or before specified times.cambelts are a bigger problem as they are not always set up correctly ie adjustment is not always right.if one is set just a bit too tight.although no noise is made the belt is being overstretched causing premature wear.this in turn knocks out the tensioner and water pump.I would go for chain driven anytime as they are more reliable and will outlast cambelt many times over.
--
Was mech1
|
|
|
