Timing prices ??? Update

tomsheppard · Post by **tomsheppard** » 17 Jul 2004, 02:51

Nisk! Ettore would have had nothing to do with belts. His engines had lovely gear driven camshafts.
Belt was first used in the Fiat 124 of the mid sixties.

jeremy · Post by **jeremy** » 17 Jul 2004, 14:02

Tom
Its interesting that in the middle 60's the timing belt didn't need changeing and was considered more reliable than a chain! I quote from the AutoCar of 19th October 1967 on the introduction of the Vauxhall Victor FE: . . .
'A lot of development was going on with various methods of driving the camshaft. It was found that chains needed a lot of careful attention at under 20,000 mile intervals to keep them quiet, and rubber-toothed belts were just beginning to become available. Vauxhall were quick to learn all they could about rubber belts and they broke 3 test rigs, but never a belt!'
Wonderful engine resulted. I have fond memories of an 1800 Firenza we owned - we used to go out in a 4.2 Jaguar for economy!
jeremy

uhn113x · Post by **uhn113x** » 17 Jul 2004, 14:32

I do not like belts - even though half of my fleet has them. Cost was the main reason for their invention. Gears are much better, even chains; at least you can hear when they are worn.
GSA has two belts, but I have not heard of one letting go!

Stuart McB · Post by **Stuart McB** » 17 Jul 2004, 23:02

Only since I could afford a newer car has the idea of regular belt changes figured in the service schedule. As a kid my Austin Maxi 1750 HLS (twin HS6's) had a rattle on the timming chain and this resulted in a new tensioner being fitted at the huge price of £5.50 inc VAT at the main Austin dealer. Saying that I was only earning £25 P/W at the time. But I have noticed that most of the vehicle makers are now reverting back to chains instead of belts. This may be because they are now so cheap to fitt. 10 years ago you couldn't get a belt fitted for under a couple of hundred quid. So it now makes sence to start skinning JOE public for some thing else.