QUOTE(Albert B @ Apr 16 2017, 07:23 AM)
85,000 km; 92,500km
This is the first time I heard of using the markings
as the basis of changing the belt.
I would not use such a method as there is no technical
basis to link the attrition rate of the ink to the wear/fatigue
rate of the rubber etc of the belt. Some photos from the net
show a badly worn belt with markings still in good condition.
If there is such a link the manufacturer would have made use
of it as a guide for replacement, similar to the wear indicators
for disc pad and tyre thread.
The 100,000 km replacement interval for timing belts seems
almost to be a universal figure; I believe this is a nice round figure
after taking into account lab tests, statistical variation, safety factor,
allowance for things like idling or low gear usage ... Probably a good
portion of the timing belts can last far more than this figure, so the
manufacturer just say that if you change before 100k km, you will
be ok. A belt at 90,000 plus km seems not much different from a new
one.
There are also checking guidelines when you open the cover to
inspect the belt, so this plus the 100k figure should be reliable for
this purpose.
The worrying thing would be fake versions of reputable brands.
Thanks for the info.This is the first time I heard of using the markings
as the basis of changing the belt.
I would not use such a method as there is no technical
basis to link the attrition rate of the ink to the wear/fatigue
rate of the rubber etc of the belt. Some photos from the net
show a badly worn belt with markings still in good condition.
If there is such a link the manufacturer would have made use
of it as a guide for replacement, similar to the wear indicators
for disc pad and tyre thread.
The 100,000 km replacement interval for timing belts seems
almost to be a universal figure; I believe this is a nice round figure
after taking into account lab tests, statistical variation, safety factor,
allowance for things like idling or low gear usage ... Probably a good
portion of the timing belts can last far more than this figure, so the
manufacturer just say that if you change before 100k km, you will
be ok. A belt at 90,000 plus km seems not much different from a new
one.
There are also checking guidelines when you open the cover to
inspect the belt, so this plus the 100k figure should be reliable for
this purpose.
The worrying thing would be fake versions of reputable brands.
Yes, your new belt and the old one at 90,000 km doesn't
seem to have much of a difference, at least at the sides.
My last belt - I quickly changed it when I found out it was at 105,000 km
- the lettering had all gone, but the inner rubber and sides still looked good.
However, when I took out this old belt again last week for a closer examination,
I noted that on one of the teeth, the tiny metal strands (or was it nylon) were
fraying out.
Maybe that was minor, but I guess these strands ran along the whole belt
and would start peeling out further along its length with time.
I was told by James that Mitsuboshi belts were rated at 80,000 km, so
change at 60,000.
Moreover, Mitsuboshi is known to have fake ones on the market.
There was one guy called Wan on these forums selling parts online -
I called him a few years ago and he said his Bosch belts, made in
Singapore, are rated at 100,000 km. I think he was charging quite cheap
- only $50 or so ?
Have you had experience with Dayco belts ? Where are they made ?
Apr 18 2017, 08:20 AM

Quote


0.0240sec
0.73
6 queries
GZIP Disabled