The Saab Network Now Mailing List FAQ
| |
|
[ Prev by Date ] [ Next by Date ] Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
Chains vs. belts, was 1996 900 SE V6
Posted by terrickj (more from terrickj) on Sat, 8 Jan 2000 13:10:04
>It doesn't matter if it is a different engine in the 9-5, (it could be
>a Ford!) it is still a 'V-6' and the assertion stated (somewhat
>misguided) was that they stopped selling the NG900 V6
>because consumers didn't want it....
>
>If that were the case, why would their attitude change for the 9-5?
That would have to do with the target markets the different models are
aimed at. The 9-5 is positioned to compete with the BMW 5 series, the
Volvo S80, the Audi A8, etc. A 4 cylinder just won't cut it with someone
not familiar with Saab when compared with those competitors. The 9-3,
OTOH, is slotted in a category where a 4-cylinder engine isn't considered a
drawback.
>
>
>Maybe the belt would last 60,000 miles, I guess they're playing it safe
>and they cover the cost of the first few.
No, from what I've read on TSN the early V6's demonstrated very often that
the belts were unlikely to last very far past 30k.
>And how long will a chain last?
Seriously, almost indefinitely. My 88 SPG is at 188k with no indication of
the need to replace the chain. And that is an important point; a belt will
fail catastrophically with absolutely no warning, while a chain will almost
always give ample warning before it lets go.
>And what is the cost of replacing a chain, guides and sprockets when
>it does go?
For anyone who takes more than a passing interest in maintaining their car,
the chain and guides are more likely to be replaced as part of a larger
job, like a tranny rebuild, so the actual cost is not much more than the
parts themselves. Otherwise, on an interference-fit engine, the cost of
valves and pistons is the real expense when either a belt or a chain fail
with the engine running.
>They do each have their pros and cons. I don't think
>belts are inherently bad. The average American consumer can't seem
>to fathom the idea that there is some maintenance that MUST
>be done at a certain interval.
I couldn't agree with you more.
>
>FWIW I used to replace my RS2000 cam belts at 40,000km,
>just in case. Of course on the Pinto engine it is about a 10
>minute job, if that!! A belt on a V engine is more work.
>
>Many high performance engines (e.g. Cosworth) use a belt,
>too. They even retrofitted a belt drive to an engine (BDA)
>that was originally chain driven (in pushrod 8 valve guise)!
For a production engine, the actual cost of the belt vs. the chain is
probably the major consideration, and we know that a high-volume
manufacturer will make such decisions based literally on nickels and dimes.
For a performance engine a belt's inherent lightness would be an advantage
over a chain. The primary reason for using a chain in today's economy
would probably be based solely on packaging; a chain requires less space
than a belt.
Hey, the mailman just brought NINES #243. Time to do some reading!
Jack Terrick
87 900S
88 SPG
89 SPG
95 9000CS
Posts in this Thread:
StateOfNine.com
 |
SaabClub.com
 |
Jak Stoll Performance
 |
M Car Covers
 |
Ad Available
 |
  
This is a moderated FAQ - Posting is a privilege, not a right.
Unsolicited commercial postings are not allowed (no Spam). Please, no For Sale or Wanted postings, SERIOUSLY.
Classifieds are to be listed in The Saab Network Classifieds pages.
This is a problem solving forum for over 250,000 Saab owners, so expect to see
problems discussed here even though our cars are generally very reliable. This is not an anything goes
type of forum. TSN has been a moderated forum since 1988. For usage guidelines, see the
TSN Mission and Purpose Page. Please remember that you are
not anonymous
Your address is: 216.73.216.173 - Using Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; ClaudeBot/1.0; +claudebot@anthropic.com) - Logged.
|