[s-cars] Timing belt vs Gears vs Chain

[Gabriel Caldwell]

Just to give a bit of context to that information; the reason Audi went
with a chain on the B6 S4 was to shorten the engine enough to fit in the
engine bay.

Gabriel Caldwell


-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Black [mailto:tblack5 at cogeco.ca] 
Sent: June 21, 2004 1:25 PM
To: Dave Forgie; Eric_R_Kissell at whirlpool.com
Cc: s-car-list at audifans.com; quattro at audifans.com
Subject: Re: [s-cars] Timing belt vs Gears vs Chain

Give me a chain any day. Many manufacturers are reverting to timing
chains,
among them Audi in the NeuS4 V8. The new Mazdas, which means Ford may be
just behind them. I have never heard of a chain breaking or stretching
sufficiently to even make a measurable change to the timing. I would
think
that one could not say the same for a timing belt. The Porsche 911 air
cooled engines had an abnormally long timing belt with no problems with
stretch that I am aware of, and that includes the 3.0l RSR engine, with
which I have more than a passing knowledge, having worked as #1 mech for
a
racing team for four years (73 - 77).
My $0.02.
Tom Black.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Forgie" <forgied at direct.ca>
To: <Eric_R_Kissell at whirlpool.com>
Cc: <quattro at audifans.com>; <s-car-list at audifans.com>
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 11:25 AM
Subject: [s-cars] Timing belt vs Gears vs Chain


> Gentlemen:  There is nothing wrong with the toothed rubber timing
belt.
It is
> light. Is only one moving part. It is relatively inexpensive.  Gears
or
chains
> are heavier.  Have more moving parts and would be much more expensive.
Do
you
> think a chain wouldn't wear and break (into many little pieces of
shrapnel)?
> Do you think gears (if you could figure out a way to span about 18
inches
with
> them) wouldn't wear and have all sorts of "lash" problems (it would
give a
> whole new meaning to "variable valve timing" (it would be randomly
variable -
> always a good thing (NOT!))).  Rubber timing belts need to be changed
before
> they fail and they need to be protected from outside damage.
>
> This debate should not be about the timing belt.  It should be about
protecting
> the timing belt from damage if/when the serpentine belt
breaks/disintegrates.
>
> Dave F.
>
> Eric_R_Kissell at whirlpool.com wrote:
>
> > "Calvin & Diana Craig" <calvinlc at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Of course all this would be solved if the damn manufacturer wasn't
too
> > cheap
> > >to use a chain or timing gears in the first place.
> >
> > Which opens the door for a debate as to why Audi (& Volkswagen)
chose a
> > timing belt rather than a chain or gears.
> >
> > What are the advantages of a timing belt over other options?
> >
> > What are the disadvantages of a timing belt over other options?
> >
> > In my job that we have to balance all of the design criteria and
cost is
> > only one consideration. Has Audi chosen the timing belt alternative
for
any
> > reason other than cost? Is the cost actually less than other
alternatives?
> >
> > Eric
>
> _______________________________________________
> S-CAR-List mailing list
> S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>


_______________________________________________
S-CAR-List mailing list
S-CAR-List at audifans.com
http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list