Honda v6 Timing chain
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Honda v6 Timing chain
"DIANNE BARKER" <devaux56@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ID8me.3423$zb.3240@trndny06...
>I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> or gears not belts.
> I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> overhaul use chains.
> There must be something to they not trusting belts.
> Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> maintenance money.
> They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> manufacturers recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for
> that type of service.
> I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt slipped
> and stranded me on the highway.
>
> I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
>
>
Chains can be engineered to last a long time, but very few in passenger cars
are. The last car I had that used a chain needed the chain (actually,
chains) replaced at 90K miles and the car wasn't worth the labor at that
point. Step one was to remove the engine from the car because there wasn't
room to remove the cover in the car.
Before there were belts the stories of jumped and broken chains were as
common as the belt stories today.
Mike
news:ID8me.3423$zb.3240@trndny06...
>I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> or gears not belts.
> I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> overhaul use chains.
> There must be something to they not trusting belts.
> Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> maintenance money.
> They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> manufacturers recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for
> that type of service.
> I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt slipped
> and stranded me on the highway.
>
> I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
>
>
Chains can be engineered to last a long time, but very few in passenger cars
are. The last car I had that used a chain needed the chain (actually,
chains) replaced at 90K miles and the car wasn't worth the labor at that
point. Step one was to remove the engine from the car because there wasn't
room to remove the cover in the car.
Before there were belts the stories of jumped and broken chains were as
common as the belt stories today.
Mike
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Honda v6 Timing chain
"DIANNE BARKER" <devaux56@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ID8me.3423$zb.3240@trndny06...
>I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> or gears not belts.
> I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> overhaul use chains.
> There must be something to they not trusting belts.
> Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> maintenance money.
> They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> manufacturers recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for
> that type of service.
> I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt slipped
> and stranded me on the highway.
>
> I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
>
>
Chains can be engineered to last a long time, but very few in passenger cars
are. The last car I had that used a chain needed the chain (actually,
chains) replaced at 90K miles and the car wasn't worth the labor at that
point. Step one was to remove the engine from the car because there wasn't
room to remove the cover in the car.
Before there were belts the stories of jumped and broken chains were as
common as the belt stories today.
Mike
news:ID8me.3423$zb.3240@trndny06...
>I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> or gears not belts.
> I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> overhaul use chains.
> There must be something to they not trusting belts.
> Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> maintenance money.
> They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> manufacturers recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for
> that type of service.
> I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt slipped
> and stranded me on the highway.
>
> I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
>
>
Chains can be engineered to last a long time, but very few in passenger cars
are. The last car I had that used a chain needed the chain (actually,
chains) replaced at 90K miles and the car wasn't worth the labor at that
point. Step one was to remove the engine from the car because there wasn't
room to remove the cover in the car.
Before there were belts the stories of jumped and broken chains were as
common as the belt stories today.
Mike
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Honda v6 Timing chain
DIANNE BARKER wrote:
> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
> newsLWdnbwowIR6cxbfRVn-2A@speakeasy.net...
>
>>disallow wrote:
>>
>>>Well that sucks. Though I'm not an engineer,
>>>hopefully Honda had their reasons for doing
>>>this, and it wasn't just a cave to pressure from
>>>everyone who is scared of timing belts.
>>>
>>>t
>>>
>>
>>i'll bet you that's exactly what /did/ happen. look at all the whining
>>about belts in recent threads. it's one of those situations where chains
>>have been out of the picture so long, all the new kids have no experience
>>with all their problems and think they're some kind of "great new idea".
>>
>
> I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> or gears not belts.
what engines are those dianne? are you referring to 2500 rpm diesels?
are you talking head mounted or block mounted cams? how long is the
chain run? single row?
> I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> overhaul use chains.
so you /are/ talking about trucks? you're not talking 100bhp/liter 9000
rpm honda engines?
> There must be something to they not trusting belts.
that's the same argument that's kept detroit stuck on solid axles for
about 100 years past their end of life. we don't use horses for
traction any more, so there's no need to use horse-drawn technology on a
car.
> Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> maintenance money.
> They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
manufacturers
> recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for that type of
> service.
to a manufacturer, the cost between a chain & a belt is practically
identical. when you factor in fewer oil seals & simpler gasket
procedures, the chain's probably cheaper.
> I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt
slipped
> and stranded me on the highway.
what manufacturer? be specific. by that logic, no one would every fly
in case a plane crashed.
>
> I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
>
>
as stated in other threads, belts offer the substantial advantage of
much better cam timing. in a higher preformance/low emissions engine,
this matters. unless chain wear can be compensated for with variable
valve timing, belts are the way to go.
> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
> newsLWdnbwowIR6cxbfRVn-2A@speakeasy.net...
>
>>disallow wrote:
>>
>>>Well that sucks. Though I'm not an engineer,
>>>hopefully Honda had their reasons for doing
>>>this, and it wasn't just a cave to pressure from
>>>everyone who is scared of timing belts.
>>>
>>>t
>>>
>>
>>i'll bet you that's exactly what /did/ happen. look at all the whining
>>about belts in recent threads. it's one of those situations where chains
>>have been out of the picture so long, all the new kids have no experience
>>with all their problems and think they're some kind of "great new idea".
>>
>
> I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> or gears not belts.
what engines are those dianne? are you referring to 2500 rpm diesels?
are you talking head mounted or block mounted cams? how long is the
chain run? single row?
> I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> overhaul use chains.
so you /are/ talking about trucks? you're not talking 100bhp/liter 9000
rpm honda engines?
> There must be something to they not trusting belts.
that's the same argument that's kept detroit stuck on solid axles for
about 100 years past their end of life. we don't use horses for
traction any more, so there's no need to use horse-drawn technology on a
car.
> Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> maintenance money.
> They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
manufacturers
> recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for that type of
> service.
to a manufacturer, the cost between a chain & a belt is practically
identical. when you factor in fewer oil seals & simpler gasket
procedures, the chain's probably cheaper.
> I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt
slipped
> and stranded me on the highway.
what manufacturer? be specific. by that logic, no one would every fly
in case a plane crashed.
>
> I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
>
>
as stated in other threads, belts offer the substantial advantage of
much better cam timing. in a higher preformance/low emissions engine,
this matters. unless chain wear can be compensated for with variable
valve timing, belts are the way to go.
#19
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Honda v6 Timing chain
DIANNE BARKER wrote:
> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
> newsLWdnbwowIR6cxbfRVn-2A@speakeasy.net...
>
>>disallow wrote:
>>
>>>Well that sucks. Though I'm not an engineer,
>>>hopefully Honda had their reasons for doing
>>>this, and it wasn't just a cave to pressure from
>>>everyone who is scared of timing belts.
>>>
>>>t
>>>
>>
>>i'll bet you that's exactly what /did/ happen. look at all the whining
>>about belts in recent threads. it's one of those situations where chains
>>have been out of the picture so long, all the new kids have no experience
>>with all their problems and think they're some kind of "great new idea".
>>
>
> I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> or gears not belts.
what engines are those dianne? are you referring to 2500 rpm diesels?
are you talking head mounted or block mounted cams? how long is the
chain run? single row?
> I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> overhaul use chains.
so you /are/ talking about trucks? you're not talking 100bhp/liter 9000
rpm honda engines?
> There must be something to they not trusting belts.
that's the same argument that's kept detroit stuck on solid axles for
about 100 years past their end of life. we don't use horses for
traction any more, so there's no need to use horse-drawn technology on a
car.
> Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> maintenance money.
> They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
manufacturers
> recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for that type of
> service.
to a manufacturer, the cost between a chain & a belt is practically
identical. when you factor in fewer oil seals & simpler gasket
procedures, the chain's probably cheaper.
> I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt
slipped
> and stranded me on the highway.
what manufacturer? be specific. by that logic, no one would every fly
in case a plane crashed.
>
> I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
>
>
as stated in other threads, belts offer the substantial advantage of
much better cam timing. in a higher preformance/low emissions engine,
this matters. unless chain wear can be compensated for with variable
valve timing, belts are the way to go.
> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
> newsLWdnbwowIR6cxbfRVn-2A@speakeasy.net...
>
>>disallow wrote:
>>
>>>Well that sucks. Though I'm not an engineer,
>>>hopefully Honda had their reasons for doing
>>>this, and it wasn't just a cave to pressure from
>>>everyone who is scared of timing belts.
>>>
>>>t
>>>
>>
>>i'll bet you that's exactly what /did/ happen. look at all the whining
>>about belts in recent threads. it's one of those situations where chains
>>have been out of the picture so long, all the new kids have no experience
>>with all their problems and think they're some kind of "great new idea".
>>
>
> I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> or gears not belts.
what engines are those dianne? are you referring to 2500 rpm diesels?
are you talking head mounted or block mounted cams? how long is the
chain run? single row?
> I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> overhaul use chains.
so you /are/ talking about trucks? you're not talking 100bhp/liter 9000
rpm honda engines?
> There must be something to they not trusting belts.
that's the same argument that's kept detroit stuck on solid axles for
about 100 years past their end of life. we don't use horses for
traction any more, so there's no need to use horse-drawn technology on a
car.
> Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> maintenance money.
> They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
manufacturers
> recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for that type of
> service.
to a manufacturer, the cost between a chain & a belt is practically
identical. when you factor in fewer oil seals & simpler gasket
procedures, the chain's probably cheaper.
> I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt
slipped
> and stranded me on the highway.
what manufacturer? be specific. by that logic, no one would every fly
in case a plane crashed.
>
> I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
>
>
as stated in other threads, belts offer the substantial advantage of
much better cam timing. in a higher preformance/low emissions engine,
this matters. unless chain wear can be compensated for with variable
valve timing, belts are the way to go.
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Honda v6 Timing chain
In article <h_GdnaJC4Pvc-ATfRVn-pw@sedona.net>, "Michael Pardee"
<michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:
> "DIANNE BARKER" <devaux56@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:ID8me.3423$zb.3240@trndny06...
> >I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> > or gears not belts.
> > I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> > overhaul use chains.
> > There must be something to they not trusting belts.
> > Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> > maintenance money.
> > They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> > manufacturers recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for
> > that type of service.
> > I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt slipped
> > and stranded me on the highway.
> >
> > I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
> >
> >
> Chains can be engineered to last a long time, but very few in passenger cars
> are. The last car I had that used a chain needed the chain (actually,
> chains) replaced at 90K miles and the car wasn't worth the labor at that
> point. Step one was to remove the engine from the car because there wasn't
> room to remove the cover in the car.
>
> Before there were belts the stories of jumped and broken chains were as
> common as the belt stories today.
>
> Mike
Murphy's law can kick in with belts or chains. It's my belief that in most
cases that a broken belt would do less damage to an engine than a broken
chain. However, I agree with a poster that told me that a broken belt or a
broken chain could destroy an engine in some circumstances.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
<michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:
> "DIANNE BARKER" <devaux56@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:ID8me.3423$zb.3240@trndny06...
> >I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> > or gears not belts.
> > I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> > overhaul use chains.
> > There must be something to they not trusting belts.
> > Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> > maintenance money.
> > They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> > manufacturers recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for
> > that type of service.
> > I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt slipped
> > and stranded me on the highway.
> >
> > I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
> >
> >
> Chains can be engineered to last a long time, but very few in passenger cars
> are. The last car I had that used a chain needed the chain (actually,
> chains) replaced at 90K miles and the car wasn't worth the labor at that
> point. Step one was to remove the engine from the car because there wasn't
> room to remove the cover in the car.
>
> Before there were belts the stories of jumped and broken chains were as
> common as the belt stories today.
>
> Mike
Murphy's law can kick in with belts or chains. It's my belief that in most
cases that a broken belt would do less damage to an engine than a broken
chain. However, I agree with a poster that told me that a broken belt or a
broken chain could destroy an engine in some circumstances.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
#21
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Honda v6 Timing chain
In article <h_GdnaJC4Pvc-ATfRVn-pw@sedona.net>, "Michael Pardee"
<michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:
> "DIANNE BARKER" <devaux56@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:ID8me.3423$zb.3240@trndny06...
> >I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> > or gears not belts.
> > I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> > overhaul use chains.
> > There must be something to they not trusting belts.
> > Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> > maintenance money.
> > They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> > manufacturers recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for
> > that type of service.
> > I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt slipped
> > and stranded me on the highway.
> >
> > I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
> >
> >
> Chains can be engineered to last a long time, but very few in passenger cars
> are. The last car I had that used a chain needed the chain (actually,
> chains) replaced at 90K miles and the car wasn't worth the labor at that
> point. Step one was to remove the engine from the car because there wasn't
> room to remove the cover in the car.
>
> Before there were belts the stories of jumped and broken chains were as
> common as the belt stories today.
>
> Mike
Murphy's law can kick in with belts or chains. It's my belief that in most
cases that a broken belt would do less damage to an engine than a broken
chain. However, I agree with a poster that told me that a broken belt or a
broken chain could destroy an engine in some circumstances.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
<michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:
> "DIANNE BARKER" <devaux56@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:ID8me.3423$zb.3240@trndny06...
> >I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> > or gears not belts.
> > I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> > overhaul use chains.
> > There must be something to they not trusting belts.
> > Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> > maintenance money.
> > They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> > manufacturers recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for
> > that type of service.
> > I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt slipped
> > and stranded me on the highway.
> >
> > I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
> >
> >
> Chains can be engineered to last a long time, but very few in passenger cars
> are. The last car I had that used a chain needed the chain (actually,
> chains) replaced at 90K miles and the car wasn't worth the labor at that
> point. Step one was to remove the engine from the car because there wasn't
> room to remove the cover in the car.
>
> Before there were belts the stories of jumped and broken chains were as
> common as the belt stories today.
>
> Mike
Murphy's law can kick in with belts or chains. It's my belief that in most
cases that a broken belt would do less damage to an engine than a broken
chain. However, I agree with a poster that told me that a broken belt or a
broken chain could destroy an engine in some circumstances.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Honda v6 Timing chain
Doesn't.. MB , Jag, BMW , use chains there must be a reason and I am sure
they are not low revving high torque diesels..
"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:RbCdnb6IHuGoSQTfRVn-2w@speakeasy.net...
> DIANNE BARKER wrote:
>> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
>> newsLWdnbwowIR6cxbfRVn-2A@speakeasy.net...
>>
>>>disallow wrote:
>>>
>>>>Well that sucks. Though I'm not an engineer,
>>>>hopefully Honda had their reasons for doing
>>>>this, and it wasn't just a cave to pressure from
>>>>everyone who is scared of timing belts.
>>>>
>>>>t
>>>>
>>>
>>>i'll bet you that's exactly what /did/ happen. look at all the whining
>>>about belts in recent threads. it's one of those situations where chains
>>>have been out of the picture so long, all the new kids have no experience
>>>with all their problems and think they're some kind of "great new idea".
>>>
>> I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> > or gears not belts.
>
> what engines are those dianne? are you referring to 2500 rpm diesels? are
> you talking head mounted or block mounted cams? how long is the chain
> run? single row?
>
> > I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> > overhaul use chains.
>
> so you /are/ talking about trucks? you're not talking 100bhp/liter 9000
> rpm honda engines?
>
> > There must be something to they not trusting belts.
>
> that's the same argument that's kept detroit stuck on solid axles for
> about 100 years past their end of life. we don't use horses for traction
> any more, so there's no need to use horse-drawn technology on a car.
>
> > Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> > maintenance money.
> > They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> manufacturers
> > recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for that type of
> > service.
>
> to a manufacturer, the cost between a chain & a belt is practically
> identical. when you factor in fewer oil seals & simpler gasket
> procedures, the chain's probably cheaper.
>
> > I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt
> slipped
> > and stranded me on the highway.
>
> what manufacturer? be specific. by that logic, no one would every fly in
> case a plane crashed.
>
> >
> > I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
> >
> >
>
> as stated in other threads, belts offer the substantial advantage of much
> better cam timing. in a higher preformance/low emissions engine, this
> matters. unless chain wear can be compensated for with variable valve
> timing, belts are the way to go.
>
they are not low revving high torque diesels..
"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:RbCdnb6IHuGoSQTfRVn-2w@speakeasy.net...
> DIANNE BARKER wrote:
>> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
>> newsLWdnbwowIR6cxbfRVn-2A@speakeasy.net...
>>
>>>disallow wrote:
>>>
>>>>Well that sucks. Though I'm not an engineer,
>>>>hopefully Honda had their reasons for doing
>>>>this, and it wasn't just a cave to pressure from
>>>>everyone who is scared of timing belts.
>>>>
>>>>t
>>>>
>>>
>>>i'll bet you that's exactly what /did/ happen. look at all the whining
>>>about belts in recent threads. it's one of those situations where chains
>>>have been out of the picture so long, all the new kids have no experience
>>>with all their problems and think they're some kind of "great new idea".
>>>
>> I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> > or gears not belts.
>
> what engines are those dianne? are you referring to 2500 rpm diesels? are
> you talking head mounted or block mounted cams? how long is the chain
> run? single row?
>
> > I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> > overhaul use chains.
>
> so you /are/ talking about trucks? you're not talking 100bhp/liter 9000
> rpm honda engines?
>
> > There must be something to they not trusting belts.
>
> that's the same argument that's kept detroit stuck on solid axles for
> about 100 years past their end of life. we don't use horses for traction
> any more, so there's no need to use horse-drawn technology on a car.
>
> > Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> > maintenance money.
> > They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> manufacturers
> > recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for that type of
> > service.
>
> to a manufacturer, the cost between a chain & a belt is practically
> identical. when you factor in fewer oil seals & simpler gasket
> procedures, the chain's probably cheaper.
>
> > I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt
> slipped
> > and stranded me on the highway.
>
> what manufacturer? be specific. by that logic, no one would every fly in
> case a plane crashed.
>
> >
> > I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
> >
> >
>
> as stated in other threads, belts offer the substantial advantage of much
> better cam timing. in a higher preformance/low emissions engine, this
> matters. unless chain wear can be compensated for with variable valve
> timing, belts are the way to go.
>
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Honda v6 Timing chain
Doesn't.. MB , Jag, BMW , use chains there must be a reason and I am sure
they are not low revving high torque diesels..
"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:RbCdnb6IHuGoSQTfRVn-2w@speakeasy.net...
> DIANNE BARKER wrote:
>> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
>> newsLWdnbwowIR6cxbfRVn-2A@speakeasy.net...
>>
>>>disallow wrote:
>>>
>>>>Well that sucks. Though I'm not an engineer,
>>>>hopefully Honda had their reasons for doing
>>>>this, and it wasn't just a cave to pressure from
>>>>everyone who is scared of timing belts.
>>>>
>>>>t
>>>>
>>>
>>>i'll bet you that's exactly what /did/ happen. look at all the whining
>>>about belts in recent threads. it's one of those situations where chains
>>>have been out of the picture so long, all the new kids have no experience
>>>with all their problems and think they're some kind of "great new idea".
>>>
>> I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> > or gears not belts.
>
> what engines are those dianne? are you referring to 2500 rpm diesels? are
> you talking head mounted or block mounted cams? how long is the chain
> run? single row?
>
> > I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> > overhaul use chains.
>
> so you /are/ talking about trucks? you're not talking 100bhp/liter 9000
> rpm honda engines?
>
> > There must be something to they not trusting belts.
>
> that's the same argument that's kept detroit stuck on solid axles for
> about 100 years past their end of life. we don't use horses for traction
> any more, so there's no need to use horse-drawn technology on a car.
>
> > Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> > maintenance money.
> > They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> manufacturers
> > recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for that type of
> > service.
>
> to a manufacturer, the cost between a chain & a belt is practically
> identical. when you factor in fewer oil seals & simpler gasket
> procedures, the chain's probably cheaper.
>
> > I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt
> slipped
> > and stranded me on the highway.
>
> what manufacturer? be specific. by that logic, no one would every fly in
> case a plane crashed.
>
> >
> > I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
> >
> >
>
> as stated in other threads, belts offer the substantial advantage of much
> better cam timing. in a higher preformance/low emissions engine, this
> matters. unless chain wear can be compensated for with variable valve
> timing, belts are the way to go.
>
they are not low revving high torque diesels..
"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:RbCdnb6IHuGoSQTfRVn-2w@speakeasy.net...
> DIANNE BARKER wrote:
>> "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
>> newsLWdnbwowIR6cxbfRVn-2A@speakeasy.net...
>>
>>>disallow wrote:
>>>
>>>>Well that sucks. Though I'm not an engineer,
>>>>hopefully Honda had their reasons for doing
>>>>this, and it wasn't just a cave to pressure from
>>>>everyone who is scared of timing belts.
>>>>
>>>>t
>>>>
>>>
>>>i'll bet you that's exactly what /did/ happen. look at all the whining
>>>about belts in recent threads. it's one of those situations where chains
>>>have been out of the picture so long, all the new kids have no experience
>>>with all their problems and think they're some kind of "great new idea".
>>>
>> I wonder why the best engines in the world use chains.
> > or gears not belts.
>
> what engines are those dianne? are you referring to 2500 rpm diesels? are
> you talking head mounted or block mounted cams? how long is the chain
> run? single row?
>
> > I wonder why all of those trucks that do 500,000 miles before a major
> > overhaul use chains.
>
> so you /are/ talking about trucks? you're not talking 100bhp/liter 9000
> rpm honda engines?
>
> > There must be something to they not trusting belts.
>
> that's the same argument that's kept detroit stuck on solid axles for
> about 100 years past their end of life. we don't use horses for traction
> any more, so there's no need to use horse-drawn technology on a car.
>
> > Belts are cheaper , quieter and the dealers are guaranteed some schedule
> > maintenance money.
> > They must be replaced at a range of 60 to 100 K miles based on
> manufacturers
> > recommendation usually owners take them into the dealer for that type of
> > service.
>
> to a manufacturer, the cost between a chain & a belt is practically
> identical. when you factor in fewer oil seals & simpler gasket
> procedures, the chain's probably cheaper.
>
> > I had a new car in 1974 and 50 miles from the dealership the belt
> slipped
> > and stranded me on the highway.
>
> what manufacturer? be specific. by that logic, no one would every fly in
> case a plane crashed.
>
> >
> > I hope Honda starts to put them on the V6's soon.
> >
> >
>
> as stated in other threads, belts offer the substantial advantage of much
> better cam timing. in a higher preformance/low emissions engine, this
> matters. unless chain wear can be compensated for with variable valve
> timing, belts are the way to go.
>
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Bruno G
Honda Accord
0
06-04-2008 11:24 AM
Sharon D
Other Honda Models
1
03-13-2008 02:59 PM
mercy o
honda / acura
1
06-27-2007 11:42 PM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)