You are beyond hope, IPD.Quote:
Originally Posted by IPD
You are beyond hope, IPD.Quote:
Originally Posted by IPD
lol at your logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaroth
and yes, tyla, if you subscribe to the same 2+2 = 3 math that zaroth does, then i am certainly beyond hope.
Your logic is that a solid piece of rubber and a piece of rubber held together by different layers of materials decay at the same rate and by the same means. I think will stick with my logic.
I posted evidence that I was correct. I would love to see yours.
let me make myself clear, as i don't think you understand what my point was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaroth
ANY rubber, exposed to air (and not kept immersed in some type of oil or preserver) will begin to deteriorate over time--even if you do not see visible cracking in it. now of course different ambient conditions, different blends of rubber, and different applications will see some variation in durability out of any given rubber part--but the concept runs true for all rubber.
now if, as tyla suggested, you have an OEM pulley that's old, but uncracked--and you choose to use it, that's fine. odds are it has some life left in it. i would expect in any application to anticipate a longer service-life from an oily, squeeky, glossy rubber part--vs. one that appears structurally sound, but appears to be as dry as the gobi desert.
unless you're one of those people who likes checking your pulley every other weekend just because you have nothing better to do--then by all means, scrimp on whatever you wish. for those who--like me--desire a more "fire and forget" approach, buy new, buy OEM, and just expect to replace in 10 years--needed or not.
i replace my timing belt every 60k like my life depends on it. technically you could argue that's not necessary either--and you would be correct. i just do not plan on keeping my car under that much scrutiny so that i can run everything to the bleeding edge.
And I completely agree with you on all of those points. They are all valid and make 100% sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by IPD
My point, which I think you may have misunderstood, Is that using a tire vs a pulley is not a valid comparison because in a pulley the rubber itself is getting dry and brittle over time and in a tire the internal structure of the tire is breaking down weakening the tire.
The same thing isn't happening between the two so using one to compare to the other makes no sense.
Hence why a tire that has been unused for >3 years would not be used and why a pulley on a shelf for three years would be installed with no worries by most people. Two entirely different situations.
I completely agree with what you are saying, just not how you are trying to say it. I think the pulley vs engine mount was a good comparison. Not perfect, but pretty good.
I'm in the Shreveport, LA area and I'd find it really funny if anyone else was even remotely close to where I am. lol - Thanks for the effort. Do you really know anyone near here that would help and actually knows how to do the timing stuff?Quote:
Originally Posted by mb3000
I really don't need a 60k service besides just the timing belt itself. Plugs, wires, belts etc.. are all good... honestly what i'd like to do is upgrade my lifters to 99's, but thats another thread.
I just read 4 pages of complete waste of time........ REALLY GUYS? 4 pages of an argument about when to replace your TIRES?
Its pretty simple: Rubber ages and wears faster than metal. I bet a good rule of thumb for the average daily driver would be: Replace the crankshaft pulley (harmonic dampener) every 100k miles.
Please take the argument out of this thread and lets get back on topic.
Shout out to BigTyla - I'm still rockin your ground wire kit from a long long time ago. lol
Well, I bought the 3SX solid crank pulley last week from 3SX themselves (haven't received it yet). I am trusting that those who have posted on here are right and that their engines are still truckin along with no big problems or noticeable vibration/noise from using the solid vs the stock harm.dampener.... but then I saw this that someone posted in here: http://www.3sgto.org/f13/destroying-...ulleys-63.html and thats pretty much scientific analysis (in a PDF linked in that thread) that we need the dampeners..... and now I feel like I just bought a really nice looking paper weight from 3SX.
I don't think UnknownVR4's question ever got answered in that thread either (http://www.3sgto.org/f13/destroying-...ulleys-63.html) - that if you have a lighter weight pulley, does that throw off the balance of the crankshaft/engine? Is that a silly question?
I guess I can try the solid for a little while and if I don't like how it rides/sounds I can just go back to stock, but the age of the rubber does concern me...... again... take the tire argument somewhere else please.... and I will add.. we're not just talking about the age of rubber as we are (I'd imagine) the age of adhesive or whatever bonding agent/process was used to mold the rubber and the pulley/ring together.
i've never known a damper to fail from adherence. every one that i've seen has failed from aged rubber. same thing for engine mounts.Quote:
Originally Posted by ProwlerGT
The harmonic dampener is there for a reason, yes. In the long-term in will promote engine longevity compared to a non-dampened pulley.Quote:
Originally Posted by ProwlerGT
Changing the weight of the pulley and/or flywheel will affect the external balance of the crankshaft, but not the internal balance. Internal balance is the dominant driver of engine longevity compared to external balance.
I ran a 3SX pulley for 50,000 miles FYI. Never had a problem with it.
I let go of this logic a long time ago, its too costly, especially with this platform. Proper diagnosis is essential with the 3/s and any other car with pricey parts. There have been way too many intelligent forum goers that get burnt out with this platform just because they threw too much time and money into replacing parts instead of understanding the problem. I think in spite of that we should promote a more brotherly relationship with the forum members in such a way that will save them money in the long run!Quote:
Originally Posted by IPD
This is the OP's DD, correct? If he was running in the dakar then i would say change the frikin pulley. If this is just his grocery getter i would say save the money for the groceries..
I believe our cranks are balanced individually w/o flywheel and/or pulley. If you were to replace the fw/pulley with a non oem piece then so long as that piece is balanced it wouldn't alter the cranks balance. Now there are bottom ends that are balanced with fw/pulley installed and swapping those would upset the balance but iirc ours is not one of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by prowlergt
There is another problem in going with lightweight fw/pulley; you are reducing the overall mass of the rotating assembly and when you do that you reduce bottom ends ability to absorb shock(ie: hit a big piece of metal with a hammer. hit a small piece of metal with a hammer. observe) Its not only the rubber in the dampener that is doing work. Manufactures calculate the necessary mass of the pulley as part of the pie to promote the motors longevity. Just some food for thought.
Next time you rip off your girdle, snap a few pics! I wanna see what your bottom end looks like... :boobs:Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtyla