Alfa Romeo Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts
T

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Can anyone who perhaps has proper engineering knowledge of these things enlighten me as to the advantages of cam belts over chains?

It seems to me that as they are more prone to breaking than chains ever were (e.g. on the old twin cam engine), there must be some technical reason that they are preferred these days, other than simply ease of servicing (ease? :mad: )

Any thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,920 Posts
think its because they are quieter!
think id rather have a noisey chain turning my engine over rather than a belt that could easily let go at any point, arr should have bought an 8V :mad: :D
 
W

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
It seemed me to anyway to coincide with the change from OHV to OHC but it doesnt explain the Alfa's. I suspect its about economy and ease of maintenance but that seems to be backfiring with higher costs and lower reliability these days.

Proper engineering reason....no idea!

wrinx
 
F

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Chains are for old tractor engines...

Belts are far quieter and efficent... untill they snap....

Ive only ever snapped one belt in 14 years of driving cars... just had to stick a new one on and off i went again...

Belts are here to stay... get used to it
 
W

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
EErrr, chatting to Speedy and apparantly some vauxhalls are going back to chains wink

wrinx
 
B

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Also belts are external to the engine, whereas chains are internal as they require lubrication.
To change the chain you have to split the engine.
Give me a chain anyday, everytime the car hits the rev limiter I have a cold sweat.
 
M

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee !!!!!
I have a chain...it's luuurvelly :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,299 Posts
I'm not sure it's got much to do with engineering. I would imagine:

A) Belts are just about up to the job - engineering critera met;
B) Belts are much cheaper than chains;
C) Belts generate work for the dealers, both from servicing and the odd spectacular failure.

But surely the manufacturers are only interested in producing the best engineered car they can? Surely these companies are not run by accountants? Oh well, dream on.... :D
 
J

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
dont shoot me... :(

bmw always used chains then they went to belts now all the new ones are chains again...personaly i much perfer chains but as mentioned they cost a lot more to fit.
modern chains dont make a sound.
 
R

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Belts must be quieter, easier to package and easier to change. Chains will be noisier, bulkier and be more fiddly to change.

Also chains need lubrication or they will wear out. They also need a beefed up tensioner to keep them tight.

A chain going west can do far more damage than a belt KIA and a loose, poorly tensioned chain will soon eat it's way out of your block.

What I want to know is why nobody does gear-driven cams, a la Honda VFR motorbike. Blinking indestrucible.

And possibly eye-wateringly expensive to make.

Ralf S.
 
J

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
they do...landrover do isuzu do and i belive also some bmw also do.

the main reason for not doing gears is because most engines are OHC so the crank gears and the cam gears are to far appart..the ones i mentioned are diesel.(woohhoo).
 
M

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
But JB, the clatter of these smoke belching monsters would drown out any chain rattle anyway.... :p wink
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top