PorKen

No. The 1/4" plate only uses the 1/8" plate for spacing. Bolts loosened/were loose, first.

Again with the P-A behaviour.

The second fastener issue was with the bolt supplied with the tensioner pulley from the manufacturer.

PKTs now come with a stronger, through bolt and nut for both pulley and lever and previous versions can be easily upgraded.

GregBBRD

It would seem obvious, perhaps only to me, that if you would have listened to people who saw the original hardware was unusable crap, you would have been able to avoid at least one engine from failing....and a troublesome recall.

This is the same thing I've been saying for about 6 pages, on this thread......and has caused me to completely give up on you about your stuff.....there's something in your personality that just won't allow you to listen.

SeanR

I have to ask about this vibration issue you have been speaking of. As one of the failures was on an engine that I was the caretaker, I can assure it it was not having any vibration issues at any time that the PKT was on it. Are you referring to the track car that broke or is there a 3rd one we don't know about?

PorKen

You might however, understand the difference between a drop of light oil on a bolt, in a clean, dry, hole, vs. a old-engine-oil-oily bolt in a dirty oily hole as appeared to have been the case.


Only to you. If Jim C, for example had taken issue with the design of the PKT during the 70K miles that he used it, why didn't he modify it to his own taste?

No one said the original hardware was suspect. The original design had a through bolt and nut, like the PKT-B now has, but it was decided to use the hardware included with the lever and pulley for customer convenience.

"There you go again." Stop with the listening already. You have made it abundantly clear that you, Jim B &C, et al, are not impartial speakers on behalf of any of my products, further, that any of yous have anything new to say.


No third.

If there were no previous damage to the bolt threads, then the cleaniless of the bolt, hole, and bracket on the 2nd belt install might be a factor.

PorKen

I wanted to write an informative post to summarize factory cam settings versus advance/retard, but all this piling on has chewed up the time allotted. At any rate, I have talked about cam settings ad nauseum in many threads before, including one long one with Kibort.

Mainly, Greg needs to before using the PK32v'r (or PKT).


I do have to get some major things done during the next week or two, starting this weekend, so I will be signing off this (rather pointless) thread now, permanently.


Aloha!

jcorenman

Ken, you might want to rethink that. This is Jim Mayzurk's GTS we're talking about here, it looked pretty darned good to me. But that aside, you are not suggesting that it has to be clean to function properly?

It's not stronger if the two plates remain welded together?

Actually, the reason for my measured comment was that the details regarding that particular failure came from you and Roger. I did not feel that it was my story to tell, but it is an important story I think. So shut up already with the P/A crap.

And by "issue" we mean a shear fracture of the M8 machine screw that attached the tension pulley to the bracket, correct? We need to think a little about what that means-- the static load on that tension pulley is only 100 pounds or so.

GregBBRD

I can read that manual until I go blind and it's not going to change that crude reference notch for the cam belt, that can be moved back and forth several cam degrees, into a accurate measuring spot, is it?

And there's a major misprint in the PKT:

I can't find where it says to throw the whole fricking thing into the trash can and use the stock tensioner.

mark kibort

I remember that..... sometimes its the obvious that is missed. I wasnt going all the way around with rotating the engine with the gauge attached with my makeshift measuring system . Taking a short cut that gave the off readings.