KV6 teenage timing belt exposed at last!

[tantallon]

[QUOTE=klarzy;2621115]hmmmm.... I often thank Marinabrian... not because I am a sycophant, not because I am inept or without experience, I thank him because his posts are:

1. Helpful
2. Detailed and explanatory
3. Relating to fact and or best practice
4. Based on gained knowledge or proven experience
5. A damn sight more acceptable than "I think therefore it is"

Yes, he is often outspoken, and can be a bit of a pain on some subjects..
But find me a single member on here who has solved more mystery's, found more ways to prolong the life of members cars, gone out of his way to help people in strife where the scrapyard was the next step and generally been quoted in the majority of help posts as the person to make contact with for assistance and I will add salt and pepper to my Panama and tuck in to lunch...

Oh, and by the way.... Do you really think the world is round...?[/QUOTE
HERE HERE!]

[marinabrian]

Originally Posted by SD1too

Logical proof has been provided.

I don't. I have presented the evidence, with explanations, and have made it clear that the final decision rests with each member. I recommend adherence to the 90,000 miles schedule.

Also, you really don't need to keep writing lengthy essays on how wonderful you are. Rest assured that your small group of followers will "thank" you if you tell them that the earth is flat! The rest of us look on in amazement and despair.

Simon

Dear oh dear, that sounds rather like sour grapes Simon.

I suggest you spend less time talking about the job and actually performing it.

Then and only then will you know what you are actually capable of, the last time I carried out this particular task it took me six hours, not six days or six weeks

The only "logical proof" you have provided is in a case study of one car, you have been lucky, nothing more, and nothing less.

Now get the spanners out and put your money where your mouth is

Brian

[rab60bit]

It's really a shame two respected members have become so bitter - about a technical issue!!
Why not agree to disagree on this one point - you both make your arguments well and there doesn't appear to be a better informed arbiter to break the impasse; virtual kiss' and hugs all round and leave it at that.
I'll offer up myself as someone you can both disagree with and I promise not to continue the discussion.
Back in the 70's I was a project manager for a company making machinery that was sold all over the world, quite big stuff too - just before I joined the company the then existing product was 50' long, 20' wide/high and about 15 tons all gang driven by chain. I joined the company to support the 'new' model machine - twice as fast, longer, higher/wider and over 20 tons, again all gang driven by a multitude of Gates T10 belts.
Regardless of version these machines usually operated non-stop for 350 days/year (approx. 8400 hours) and were only stopped around 10 days for annual maintenance during which all the belts were changed - regardless of condition. There was a variety of belt lengths (0.7M to almost 4M and a couple were even double sided) and the majority had serpentine routing. Any single belt failure would result in high value loss of end product which would have to be condemned (and expensive down-time to carry out repairs, thus loss of production).
The machines worked in controlled conditions because of the product they processed, 60-65RH and 20-24C but it could be a hostile micro climate for the belts with all sorts of strange light fraction lubricant droplets present in the atmosphere.
I'll leave the mathematicians amongst us to calculate what 8400 hours equates to in an average of days driving time/miles covered but even long distance truck drivers can only clock up something less than 30% (8/5/330) of these machines daily workload of 24/7/350!!
Out of a population in the low 1000's of machines world wide - we never lost a belt - except when users didn't observe the maintenance schedule which was rare because of the potential finacial losses.
Gates couldn't keep up with our specific production requirements and I worked closely with Dayco so they could be certified as an alternative supplier, likewise Pirelli (who never managed it!!). This was the early/mid 70's - anyone recall when the first mass production whole/partial belt drive motor car engine came onto the market?
The belt duty for an internal combustion engine is different in one significant way from 'my' industrial beasts, the Otto cycle has some nasty lumps/hollows of loads/balance and that factor combined with the variable speed requirements of road use plus a 'harsh' working enviroment places some additional demands on a toothed belt.
IMHO - the key reason why our belts fail is not wear/tear, tooth bottoming or even edge fraying. It's the plastic tension pulley and/or other tensioner bearings fail first - result, instantaneous debris interference choke/loss of mesh/belt tension surge which then quickly takes the belt along down the dark 'valve clash' tunnel with them.
In my experience belts do not just snap, they have lots of redundancy. Even with damaged edges, worn tooth side walls/worn pulleys (yes I've seen them up to 50% erroded...) and crazed/chipped rubber backing the belt continues to do it's job. In other words belt conditions as described by members - you ain't seen nothing! - but as actual timing for our engines is very important, the application is less forgiving.
My wife has told me sto stop going on so that's my contribution finished - and don't forget to kiss and make up boys.

[Simondi]

Thread closed fot the moment.

Happy to reopen once tempers etc have subsided.