Strange, but true! No-one has shown any data to verify that the stock tensioner does actually 'detension' by any significant amount, according to engine heat. (Cue Msr. Kibort.)

There are two problems with the last sentence.

1. All of those engines had a stock tensioner.
2. All of those line items can be and usually are attributed to improper belt tension, be it too high, or too low.

SO, in effect, ever-y engine in that list that you have seen/heard a failure on was a direct result of having used the stock tensioner.


All the more reason to have a self-adjusting and dampening belt management system, a la the PKT-B.

 

Hi Roger,

I'm talking about the first and second version of the Porkensioner. Not talking about the original Porsche tensioner.
I don't know much about the original tensioner but I switched to the Porkensionner few years ago and not thinking going back to stock tensioner soon. Not everyone thinks the same and that's fine. That's what Rennlist is all about.

On the original one, I only need to remove one bolt on the bracket and the pulley is gone. Then be able to remove the pump.
With the black version, I can't see how you can remove the bolt and holding the nut at the same time with the bracket in place. That said if of course both bracket version base are the same. Don't know that.

As far as I'm concern, the first version was perfect as it was.
Just saying.

Thank you.

 

Ken:

Did you read post #3?

I was willing to just let it go and deal with this problem quietly, but no, you had to start in.....

At least you are predictable!

Here's your problem, in a nutshell:

People purchased your tensioner system, mainly due to your claims that it was proven, it required no maintenance, and there were no belt adjustments required.

Now there is an updated version, with replacement parts and instructions on how to "update" the "old version".

People that have had their units for years and have put a few miles on their vehicle, may not feel like they need compensation to completely redo their job, but the people who have had their units for very short periods of time or for very low mileage, now need to go back in, remove the belt and the tensioner, update the tensioner, and re-install the belt and tensioner. That's called "starting over"! Yes, avoid those troublesome belt adjustments, start completely over, instead! Spend a whole day, instead of an hour re-adjusting the belt.

There's a great value!

The "rub", for you, is that these people are going to want to be reimbursed for what this costs, to do over!

You might "skate" on the home people, who you think their time is worthless, but the people that paid to have this disaster installed are going to have to pay again to redo the job!

And here's the really tough part, for you....

They don't have to go beyond this Forum, to find evidence that you were told about the problems and arrogantly ignored....no, completely badgered, the people who tried to warn you!

I can easily find that Jim Corenman warned you....and I can easily find that I warned you about using inferior hardware and your lack of testing.

Hell, when I got Rob Edward's unit to install, I threw away all the Home Depot hardware you supplied and replaced it with "graded" hardware, before I found out there was no accurate way to set the cam timing, and threw the whole thing away. And I told you that!

There's not a small claims court, in the country, that won't find you negligent and award anyone that desires to file a claim, the cost of doing the job over.

I've installed one unit, because a customer insisted I use it. He called me last Thursday, asking what needed to be done to insure there wouldn't be a failure....and wanted to know who was paying to have the work redone.....

I bet you are glad that you took my advice and got product liability insurance on this thing!

I'm assuming that you have discussed this problem with said insurance company and they have advised you to offer update instructions and pieces, before there are more engine failures, just to reduce their exposure.

Do they want claims send directly to them? If so, can you advise me and everyone here the person to contact, the phone number, and the policy number?

Thanks for your honesty in getting the failure mode understood and for making updated parts and instructions available. Although this severely "compromises" you and your insurance company, it was the right thing to do!

 

Greg sometimes the stuff you write on here makes me think you're not a very nice person.

You're quick to jump on faults that people have with their inventions, and at the end of the day it seems like alot of the stuff you make fails or don't work as intended. (Personal experience)

You are considered the "uber" specialist when it comes to 928s, that is the impression I get on this forum. But I think the lack of constructive comments and the "I told you so" attitude on this thread makes me think that you are only in this for yourself and people that try to do something differently get bashed quite badly by you.

Ken is trying to help the community. I for one appreciate this and the amount of time he has spent on this project.

 

When were we made aware of this update? I don't think I got an email or anything did I?

 

C'mon boys, this is a small community of true Porsche enthusiasts (anyone who buys and maintains a 928 is a 'true' Porsche guy) and I think the wealth of knowledge here could go a long way towards making our cars better if the guys in the know put their heads together. Sh$tcanning each other isn't working.

 

Bertrand,
I do understand now and yes you are correct. In my defense I was thinking that why would anyone want to take everything apart and not use the opportunity to remove and inspect the water pump.
Roger

 

What do the problems with using the stock tensioner have to do with the new PKT hardware, exactly?

Everyone can see that your post was an excuse to rant, as you made no mention of the topic you brought up.


Updating the pulley and lever bolts is not required and there is no need to update until it is convenient to do so - at belt change.

I have not updated anything on my '86 or '88 for example and don't lose any sleep over it.


Through bolts are stronger, but this change was mainly done to make the brackets easier to manufacture.

 

I do have very high standards and do expect people to use sound engineering principles, when making pieces for others to use.

I am vocal when simple, basic standards are not used. To use substandard non-graded "Home Depot" hardware on a piece that is so essential to engine operation and which can have catastrophic results when it fails, warrants me interceding, in my mind.

Ken had two distinct paths to follow, after the hardware issue was raised....realize the hardware was inferior and for literally pennies, upgrade it....or ignore the warnings, make snide comments (look up snide in the dictionary) and let his ego guide what he delivered as a product.

It seems pretty obvious which path he chose.

Many people, here on Rennlist are neither engineers, professional mechanics, or even know the difference between one piece of hardware and the next piece.

If "sounding" the alarm and warning people that problems are definately going to occur makes me a "not very nice person"....I think I can live with that.

Because of Ken's incredibly snide way of responding to me (read the thread about my new exhaust, for a continuos sample of his "snideness"), I do tend to become irritated and defensive. There is no doubt about that.

As far as my own products....I do have an occasional problem....usually caused by home mechanics, who "attack" things with an "axe" instead of using sound judgement. Does their lack of judgement, skill, and sometimes even common sense make my product defective? I don't think so, but I invariably will replace the piece, completely on a good will basis, so that person can continue on and finish that job.

If that makes me a "not very nice person"....I will have to live with that, also.

 

I'm honestly really confused, now.

I was lead to believe that because there had been catastrophic engine failures, from breakage, Roger had issued a bulletin to all purchasers and offers a free hardware package to "upgrade" the old design to the new design (although I never received said bulletin.)

Now you say that there is no issue with the old design and that if people desire, they can do the "upgrade" at some random point in the future.

When it comes right down to it, there's only two distinct choices.

Which one is it?

Upgrade to avoid catastrophic failure or forget it and run it?

 

Has one of the PK Tensioners failed due to the original hardware choice? Documented cases only please. I did some quick googling and didn't find anything.

 

Quote from the notice.
"As a precautionary measure we ask that at your earliest convenience that you check the tightness of the three main bolts holding the PKensioner bracket to the block. If you find they are loose in any way please report back to us."

That's the gist of it.

 

This is false. All included hardware is and has been 10.9 grade.



Luv this pic! Look at the bearing on that pulley!




Speaking of that thread, you should probably get back there and keep trying to justify charging 6000 dollars for <30 rwhp.

 

I realize that you have a terrible reading comprehension problem, but it's 44rwhp....so far!. We can't test in the cooler temperatures that you were testing in, nor do we desire to test on a cold engine with a cold radiator, nor are we drawing in unrealistic cold air, so my dyno results are real.....these are power numbers that anyone with a good '85/'86 engine with good injection components can achieve.

That's over a 60 flywheel horsepower increase! Already! And I've retuned and am ready to return to the dyno, Monday morning.

I think everyone here realizes that a complete stainless exhaust system, hand tig welded out of mandrel bends, merged collectors, 3/8" stainless flanges, stainless mufflers, etc. isn't cheap. However, if you compare what I'm offering to what other people offer for other vehicles, you will see that I'm making this stuff as economical as possible, for the 928 community (many stainless header only systems for Mercedes are over 10K!)

And at least it isn't a set of chips that do absolutely nothing, or a supercharger system that won't pass 1957 Federal emission standards....

And it's one hell of a lot cheaper and easier than finding a GTS engine, freshening it, changing the vehicle's electrics, and installing it....for less power!

 

I vote for a boxing match.

GREG VS KEN

Coming soon to pay per view.