JE928Sx4.

He only does the mail list. No time.

borland

I hear he's working on a model built into the cam belt cover.

That way you don't need to remove the S4 distributor cap and cover to adjust the belt tightness.

JE928Sx4.

It's been suggested but Jay is not working on one.

Jay sends his thanks to everyone. You can contact him at jkempf@tds.net if you have any questions about the tool.

Tony,

Jay likes the Shark Avatar.

Regards,
JE

John Struthers

Somehow I ended up with two of the tools.
Still, that's a lot cheaoer than the factory tool.
Mule? Zebra? I thought it was a full-sized girl in spandex...
Christ! I propositioned her(?) for cryin' out loud...

H2

After having 3 different mechanics give me 3 different answers about belt tension (They all used 9201 tools), I bought the Kempf tool. When one mechanic insisted that his expensive 9201 tool showed the Kempf tool to be "off"...I bought a 9201 tool myself (used..$400). It's in great shape and has the calibration bar with it. According to a side-by-side comparison (after several hours of experimenting with every possible approach to be absolutely sure), it is my experience that the 5.02 belt setting is at the top edge of the Kempf tool gap...or perhaps slightly more. Using the center of the Kempf tool gap as a reference shouldn't be a problem but if you set your belt at the lower edge of the gap, I'd think you'd be getting closer to danger (based on my experience). I'd be delighted if someone could prove me wrong.

On the other hand, the Kempf gauge is a 1,000 times easier to use and settings are replicable about everytime...whereas the 9201 gauge is a real challenge (genuine pain in the rear) to use correctly on the 928 Tbelt's limited space. I fully suspect that 5 mechanics could get 5 different settings...and if they were in a hurry, they could easily get it wrong. It happened to me with a mechanic who bragged that he had the "$600 Porsche Tbelt tool". For a short time, he actually had set the belt at 8.0. Sooo, being an **** perfectionist...I use the Kempf gauge first...then back it up with the 9201 to see if I did it right. But, for me (no liability implied) I set my belt at the upper end of the notch on the Kempf gauge. Like I said, I'd be pleased if someone could prove me wrong. But at this point, I nor Jay is aware of any 928 that's failed because of a bad reading because of the Kempf gauge. BTW, he's a great guy and I fully support and laud his Tbelt tool along with the other 1000 or so people who use it. It's people like him and Mr. Ott (Ott exhaust) that make 928 ownership much easier and more fun.

Harvey
85S

heinrich

Harv, it is well-known that thew Kempf tool (for 32V) needs to read at the very top. As I recall the 16V cars need to read more in the middle of the window .... The Kempf tool isn't off at all, that window is very tiny and I've found that a small crank on the tens bolt makes a big difference with readings .... Works

Vilhuer

Very interesting topic. Pic with 4 Kempf's and 9201 posted earlier was taken some weeks ago when we had test session where we checked those 4 Kempf's against factory tool, Jager Engineering sound file and some other not so scientific methods. Results look fine except they do NOT support "Kempf tool (for 32V) needs to read at the very top" statement. Plan was to write our findings for public scrutiny & ridicule but haven't had the time yet. So far have only managed to do writeup in finnish language Porsche forum. Quess now have to do it in here also to get to the bottom of this. More later...

Erkka

1992 928 GTS 5-speed, still plenty of time to perfect belt measuring process
Oak Green Metallic 22L
Classic Gray MX

H2

Erkka,

I think your findings would be very welcomed. If there is a Kempf gauge reading difference between 16V and 32V Tbelts (even if slight)...and/or the factory recommended 9201 tool, that would be good to verify once and for all with replicated but different tests to avoid confusion on an important topic (It's the scientific method). It sounds like your group has gone the xtra mile.

I hope you used the calibration bar between 9201 tests....AND used the same side of the 9201 tool flats each time you performed a test. I've found that one side of the flats gives a slightly different reading than the other side (on my gauge anyway)..so I've marked the flat sides to use each time so I get consistency in readings with the 9201. That is, mark the flats that touch the bar/belt...use the calibration bar...then check the belt with the tool flats oriented the same as calibrated.

**** or perfectionist or both? I've been called much worse. One thing I'm sure that your tests brought out is that the Kempf tool is MANY TIMES EASIER TO USE than the 9201....but accuracy is paramount in a 928. I'm looking forward to what you say.

Harvey
'85S 32V

heinrich

Sheesh .. Erkka of course the Finnish version of the gap is different ... you guys are all upside-down up there ....

UKKid35

I too am very happy that Jay Kempf has provided so many owners with an affordable and user friendly alternative to the 9201, even though I haven't used it myself.

I have used the Phil Risby Perspex gauge, and plan to use the Jager method next, as I suspect that this is the most accurate of all.

Old & New

Kid,

You got big cahones.

Last time I suggested that method, I got skewered. And here you are doing it right in the middle of a Kempf commemoration thread!

UKKid35

No doubt I'll get my comeuppance when my brand new belt fails...

dr bob

I guess that one of the joys of using any one method is that you can validate your original findings with another. jager has a great idea, since the resonant frequency of the vibrating section is very predictable/repeatable. But my ears aren't as well calibrated as either the 9201 or the Kempf tool, so I'd be out there with the microphone attached to the frequency counter or the o'scope I guess.

One of my professional cohorts doesn't really have as much faith in my programming as I do, especially when it comes to critical turbine and boiler controls. I've got him to the "Trust, but Verify" stage after years of no-failures experience. Maybe that's what you need here. Maybe next time I have the covers off and the Kempf tool on the belt, I'll "ping" it with the freq counter nearby and get a reading. Can't hurt...

Sab

I just got the tool yesterday and will be doing the procedure soon.
Does the fan assy have to come out or can it be done with it in place?

Garth S

Sab,
Depends which procedure: TB check & retension only needs the top right ( Passenger ) cam cover off. Assuming you plan the whole TB/H2O pump replacement procedure, the fans come out.