I guess there's two ways to look at the glass: half full vs. half empty. To
me, the water pump driven by the timing belt seemed like a great durability
improvement - no worries about idiots running the car with the w.p. belt
broken!

And the oil pump driven off the crankshaft nose (a'la old AMCs) also seems
to be a smart move. all the new stuff is that way, no?

But, no question, for every action there's a reaction...

Rick
"Joe" > wrote in message
...
> Whoops I meant 3.5's. That was stupid of me.
>
> "Joe" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I would have to agree that it's not really right (I'm an engineer too).
I
> > have a couple of 3.3's, and they're the same way. My dad has one, and
his
> > water pump locked up without warning and killed the timing belt. I don't
> > recall ever seeing a locked up water pump before, so I think it was a
> freak
> > thing. Since the old 3.3's are freewheeling, it was fairly harmless. On
a
> > later model it would be the pits.
> >
> > I certainly understand what they're going through from my own
experience.
> > Still, I don't think the EPA has outlawed timing chains and gears, nor
do
> > they require oil pumps, water pumps, balance shafts and other
belt-driven
> > equipment to further entangle whatever's driving the camshaft.
> >
> > "Anthony" > wrote in message
> > . ..
> > > "Richard Ehrenberg" > wrote in
> > > :
> > >
> > > > Actually, I know those engineers. Trust me, they didn't want a
"crash"
> > > > motor any more than you do. They were forced into it by the EPA.
Those
> > > > neat little valve clearance notches in the pistons proved to be a
> > > > "reservoir" of hydrocarbons that are 'hidden' and won't burn. I.e.,
> > > > smog. They had to go.
> > > >
> > > > But they tried their best. There IS enough clearance so that a belt
> > > > that has jumped two teeth will NOT cause a crash. And even a
one-tooth
> > > > jump turns on the Czech engine light so you know something's amiss.
> > > > And they REALLY broke their stones to get 100K belt life on the
DOHC.
> > > >
> > > > I just did a belt on mine - not a hard job at all. But don't even
> > > > think about it without the FSM and a torque wrench handy! I suggest
> > > > replacing the hydraulic tensioner also, and carefully checking
> > > > (feeling for roughness) the bearings in the tensioner and idler
> > > > pullies.
> > > >
> > > > Rick Ehrenberg
> > > >
> > >
> > > Rick,
> > > The interference of the valves/pistons is not the concern. I fully
> > > understand the impact of valve reliefs on emissions. My issue is with
> > > running ancillary equipment from the timing belt. I realize it makes
> > > packaging nice and compact, reduces parts in the engine assembly, etc,
> > > but the combination of failure prone ancillary equipment in the timing
> > > structure and an interference engine do not go well together.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Anthony
> > >
> > > You can't 'idiot proof' anything....every time you try, they just make
> > > better idiots.
> > >
> > > Remove sp to reply via email
> >
> >
>
>