KV6 timing belts: is the tensioner the problem?

[bl52krz]

Originally Posted by SD1too

Thank you vey much Borg Warner for posting that link. Gates' view is as follows:



In illustration number 8 Gates shows a belt with the shading pattern which has occured on my 19 year old part. It is interesting to note that they don't recognise that as a fault despite some forum members claiming that it is. Gates is interested only in the wear to the edge of the belt which I did not have.

Simon

Simon. Gates also state that the belts should be changed at the manufactures recommended intervals. Yes?

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by marinabrian

Phil, the manufacturer states, belt replacement is required at 90,000 miles or six years, whichever occurs first.

So based upon that statement, yes your belts are due for replacement, a job if you are paying a professional to carry out will cost circa £450.

Broken down into a cost per year, is £50, or 95 pence per week.

The result of timing belt failure in any interference engine is catastrophic, not nice to pick up the pieces from, and I have in the case of a KV6

Just hold that thought

Brian

I got that thought Brian, even though I am many miles away ....thank you for giving me the heads up .....

I had a belt go, whilst driving over the Dartford Bridge in an MG TF in 2004. It made a horrible grating noise. Fortunately I stopped and the car was rescued to a local garage who carried out the repairs. An unpleasant and costly experience. The car wasn’t that old and had only done around 48,000 when the belt went. Not long after, the car suffered HGF, but MGR covered it under the warranty.

[Sheraton]

How'do folks

I'm still picking up my experience as i go here so take my input accordingly

My recent timing issues (k18) - seem to have been the result of a failing tensioner - not under "normal" driving conditions tho i have to add - i feel i was a bit harsh coming on and off throttle in 2nd gear (that would be another topic for discussion ) - if i had been motorway cruising and the tensioner failed i'm sure the belt would have been shredded and i'd have assumed "belt failure" due to wear (the belt/tensioner are less than 2 years fitted)


r.e Belt Change Intervals - I'm of the thinking - Manufacturers recommended change intervals in "Mileage" or "Years" is set at a reasonable Marker to allow a decent tolerance to last beyond this "Limit" - In some cases i'm sure a belt could double a Manufacturers recommendation - However i'm sure there are also cases where failure occurs before half of their expected lifetime (maybe due to tensioner/pulley failure ) - i'm sure age and mileage are not the only considerations when giving a "Universal expected lifespan" of the belts - i'd think climate temp/humidity, thermal cycling etc.. and from my own experience operator input all play a part in considering "How often should a timing belt be replaced ?"

"How long will a timing belt last ?" - I don't want to find out





Paul.

[SD1too]

Originally Posted by bl52krz

Simon. Gates also state that the belts should be changed at the manufactures recommended intervals. Yes?

Yes David, they don’t offer an opinion of their own so that gets us no further forward. They don’t want to take responsibility.

But this thread is meant to be about the tensioner pulley’s effect upon potential belt failure but there doesn’t seem to be much thought about that.

Simon

[murphyv310]

Hi.
May I add my two pence worth to this thread.
I fully stand by Brian here he is 100% correct with not a bit of argument about his advice.
I was in a very fortunate position when working for my previous employer to service the floor scrubbers in Gates factory in Dumfries. They are a totally committed workforce and they take pride in the product.
I got a tour of the factory on one occasion and the process is quite amazing.
The belt for the KV6 is a generic type, it conforms to a standard width and pitch of the teeth, they come off the line in huge rolls then they are basically cut and very carefully and bonded in such a way that you'd never be able to see any join nor any compromise of strength.
What I was told by Gates is they cannot put a defined time on life as each belt can be used in different operating systems...... what they do specify though is shelf life and I'm sure i was told it is quite short 4 or 5 years, mind it was 5 years ago that I had my tour.
So if the shelf life is 4 years then quite clearly service life wont be much longer than that, so the 6 year rule makes sense, My Panda also has a 6 year service replacement time.
If you have taken a belt out of the box it is always has a "set" of how its been stored. Also if you ever resurrect an engine that's been lying for a number of years and turn it over then you can clearly see the "dent" in the belt where its be sitting on the tensioner or idler. Do to this an old belt will break when the engine starts. This happened to a mate of mine with a Uno that had been lying for a long time and the belt snapped at the point it was in contact with the idler, fortunately the FIRE engine in the Uno was non contact.

So Simon you are plainly wrong and I sincerely hope no one is daft enough to listen to this nonsense.
The club should also put a disclaimer up on these threads to inform the readers that "The club does not agree with the content of the thread....... use it with caution" thus rendering any such legal action pointless.



https://lakesareaauto.com/two-reason...ng-belt-fails/

[Dallas]

Originally Posted by SD1too

But this thread is meant to be about the tensioner pulley’s effect upon potential belt failure but there doesn’t seem to be much thought about that.

Simon

Hi Simon, When I had a new belt kit fitted to my 190, the old tensioner had lasted less than 20,000 miles before it started to clatter. I would imagine if the tensioner was left to carry on, this would have had an impact on the survival of the belt.

I suppose this is why many replacement parts are sold as kits, several components working together involved doing the same job is best recommended to replaced all related parts... I suppose.

I'm not sure if there's any truth in this or not, but I've read on here before that the 190 is prone to suffer certain engine component failure more so than the other engine variants.

[kaiser]

Higher power variants of engines will normally be weaker than the lower power versions, unless you beef up the internals in the critical areas.

I also think it is safe to say, that the V6, being a new engine with few built, has not had the advantage of years of experience and improvements.

It is a known issue that the super charged units did not last well at all, so all in all, Rover should have gone out and bought a decent engine from somebody who can actually make good engines.
To try and make your own engine, you must have a good reason. It must either be very good, very efficient, very light, very compact or very cheap.

For what it is, the V6 is only very light, but nothing special in any other case, not perhaps a bad engine, but not a good one either, and the world would not have looked any different, had this engine never been made at all.

I would venture to say, that Rover would have done better, keeping the old V8 for their bigger engined cars, and worked hard on the 1.8, to make it more durable.

Just my kind of thinking.

[p2roverman]

Going off at a complete tangent here, what about replacing the belt with a chain? Well, why not? Plenty of other V engines have chain driven valve gear, certainly last generation engines like the Triumph Stag.

I envisage a standard double roller chain, gears are dead cheap, though would need the bosses machining, again cheap if batch done. Whether the tensioner has to be as current, or be a fixed adjustable type, or spring-loaded, or an even simpler spring steel blade would need some thought. But this could be the only viable way to keep the KV6 engine running in years to come if the belts become unavaialble, or too long on the shelf to risk using. Thoughts?

[Les4048]

Originally Posted by p2roverman

Going off at a complete tangent here, what about replacing the belt with a chain? Well, why not? Plenty of other V engines have chain driven valve gear, certainly last generation engines like the Triumph Stag.

I envisage a standard double roller chain, gears are dead cheap, though would need the bosses machining, again cheap if batch done. Whether the tensioner has to be as current, or be a fixed adjustable type, or spring-loaded, or an even simpler spring steel blade would need some thought. But this could be the only viable way to keep the KV6 engine running in years to come if the belts become unavaialble, or too long on the shelf to risk using. Thoughts?

Chains need fed with oil hence why they run inside an enclosed timing cover. Anyway a retrograde step as the belt is supposed to be quieter and lighter

[trikey]

Originally Posted by freelancer

Might it be worth considering sending the "used" belt that SD1 is about to replace back to Gates or similar for an independent Vernier measurement and assessment?

If Simon wants to post the belt to me, ill have our QA department measure it on the CMM and shadowgraph to obtain accurate data.