RE: V6 mechanical tensioner

[Bruce Murray <bmurray@domain.elided>]

Well said Roger,

The mechanical tensioner has always seemed to me to be a fragile design and 
one that I would not voluntarily put on a car.
It clearly is more difficult to set up properly than the hydraulic design 
so it needs to be done very carefully by someone with specific experience.
Also the mechanical unit fails in a rather critical and sudden manner, 
apparently leading to a lot of secondary damage.
The hydraulic unit fails much more gracefully by leaking oil, thus giving 
notice of its need for repair.
Roger's words encourage me because the mechanical tensioned 164 I inherited 
was done by a large Ferrari/ALFA dealership who apparently has the 
necessary skill to do the job right. At least its lasted for 20,000 miles 
so far.
I must confess that I have a spare hydraulic unit ready to go which I am 
thinking about retro-fitting at the next belt service interval.

Bruce Murray
164L  186,000 miles, hydraulic from new
164S  53000 miles, mechanical and fingers crossed




> From: rogerlaf <rogerlaf@domain.elided>
>
>
> I ran a 164L for 6 years and 100K miles with a mechanical
> TB tensioner and I performed the hydraulic to mechanical tensioner
> conversion on a 3.0 Milano I owned prior to the 164L without any problems.
>
>
> Are we setting the pointers on these mechanical tensioners using the CORRECT
> PROCEDURE AND TORQUE SETTING? I did and never had a problem.
>
>
> Just asking!
> Best to all,
> Roger
--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided