Re: The pulley

[steveb@newkla.kla.com (Steven Buchholz)]

> >Let me clarify my "pulley" situation a little bit. The notch is broken off
> >the pulley, but I did pull it apart and align the pulley where the notch
> >should be. The pulley is on flush and I torqued the bolt with a 1/2" bar
> >breaker bar and a 3' pipe REAL tight. So I think it's on there correctly (if
> >you discount my initial mistake). Someone else said they would rather go a
> >little tight on the timing belt rather than loose. I definitely leaned
> >towards the loose side which I am hoping is my noise and I just need to
> >re-tension the belt a little bit....
> 
> Just how does one break a woodruff key that can handle over 6000psi?  The 
> lower crank pully has nothing to do with timing belt tension.  The 
> Woodruff key is there for a reason to prevent the crank from turning 
> while the cam  is'nt.  THe MC motor is a Interference engine, Meaning 
> your heading for a BIG buck repair.  Stop driving the car and fix the 
> problem.  As Scott said: LIKE NOW!

... just a minute ... are we talking about the pulley/balancer that bolts
on the end of the crankshaft?  As I recall the only pulleys that are on 
the removable part are the ones that connect to the accessories, at least
that's the way it was on my '83.  The teeth for the cam belt were not a
part that came off with the pulley.  If all he did was to break the flat
extension that engages the pulley I don't think that there would be that
much danger of munching valves into pistons ... but then things may have
changed between the '83 and the newer cars.

The specified tightness in the Bentley is the cam belt is tightened to the
point where you can rotate the belt 90 degrees in the middle of the long
section (from water pump to cam?), which isn't that tight.  

Here again, all of this is for my '83, YMMV.

Steve Buchholz
s_buchho@kla.com
San Jose, CA (USA)