When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I looked at all the pictures of S2 tensioner I could find online and compared it to mine. It appears identical apart from some S2 tensioners that appear to have steel base part.
OK YOU GUYS ARE BOTH RIGHT.
YOU CAN USE AN S2 TENSIONER TO AN 8 VALVE SET UP, BUT YOU CANNOT USE A 951 TENSIONER TO THE S2 SET UP,IT HAS A LONGER ARM..
From another thread..
Can anyone with S2 tensioner please measure the lenght?
bumping this thread up for curiosity as i am looking for a tensioner...
noticed this detail though...aside from the slightly different PN and 2v/4v casting, look at the location of the bolt for the tensioner roller on the end of the arm - 2v looks further out, 4v is closer to the arm.
guessing the different head changed the belt path a little bit.
what's weird though is the 2v has a higher number -9 than the 4v -8. so the pictured 2v is a higher revision/later design than the 4v.
obviously the 2v/4v are stampings after the fact...maybe the parts are the same, but the location of the bolt hole determines 2v vs 4v application.
bumping this thread up for curiosity as i am looking for a tensioner...
noticed this detail though...aside from the slightly different PN and 2v/4v casting, look at the location of the bolt for the tensioner roller on the end of the arm - 2v looks further out, 4v is closer to the arm.
guessing the different head changed the belt path a little bit.
what's weird though is the 2v has a higher number -9 than the 4v -8. so the pictured 2v is a higher revision/later design than the 4v.
obviously the 2v/4v are stampings after the fact...maybe the parts are the same, but the location of the bolt hole determines 2v vs 4v application.
I suspect more investigation is needed to determine the differences in the two tensioners. The 2V/4V markings on the pivot arm are CAST into the arm, rather than stamped; indicating the arms are different. Best to tread lightly if you're considering using the 2V tensioner on your 4V engine. It looks like Lart has them available. I have some too if you strike out with him.
Thinking about it, the only reason I can think of a difference is because the 4V crank drive gear is larger diameter than the 2V gear.
The water pump is the same, so the nearby belt routing is the same.
Larger 4V gear would move the belt horizontally the width difference, which could be compensated with a larger tensioner sprocket, or the same size sprocket moved outward...
Will have to put 2V and 4V tensioner rollers side by side (or can anyone measure OD of the teeth on one)?
Voith
This is a picture of mine off my 968. The 1989 NA , turbo and S2 used the style you have indicated.
Nice engine!
Originally Posted by V2Rocket
bumping this thread up for curiosity as i am looking for a tensioner...
noticed this detail though...aside from the slightly different PN and 2v/4v casting, look at the location of the bolt for the tensioner roller on the end of the arm - 2v looks further out, 4v is closer to the arm.
guessing the different head changed the belt path a little bit.
what's weird though is the 2v has a higher number -9 than the 4v -8. so the pictured 2v is a higher revision/later design than the 4v.
obviously the 2v/4v are stampings after the fact...maybe the parts are the same, but the location of the bolt hole determines 2v vs 4v application.
Great observation, I was eyeballing both from internet pictures for quite some time and didn't spot this difference.
How hard would it be to adapt hydraulic 968 tensioner to 2.7 block? If I have to buy another tensioner, wouldn't it make sense to just go with the best option available?
Great observation, I was eyeballing both from internet pictures for quite some time and didn't spot this difference.
How hard would it be to adapt hydraulic 968 tensioner to 2.7 block? If I have to buy another tensioner, wouldn't it make sense to just go with the best option available?
People have differing opinions on what the best option is, the spring tensioner seems to have a lot of fans. I personally like the engineering behind the hydraulic tensioner and the fact that it is more actively managing the tension, the tensioner itself is replaceable for new and the fact that the cambelt is automatically tensioned correctly with no need for adjustment.
Going back to the beginning of this thread I cant see if anyone touched on this but in that original PET the part # differences I believe are because all of the 8 valve NA and turbo cars from '87 model to mid '88 had the cast steel version of that spring tensioner it was heavy, the 16 valve cars had the alloy version and somewhere in '88 I noticed all the engines have the alloy lighter version!
Going back to the beginning of this thread I cant see if anyone touched on this but in that original PET the part # differences I believe are because all of the 8 valve NA and turbo cars from '87 model to mid '88 had the cast steel version of that spring tensioner it was heavy, the 16 valve cars had the alloy version and somewhere in '88 I noticed all the engines have the alloy lighter version!
Some 89 951's I have taken apart came with the heavy steel tensioner
Bringing closure to this thread.
i have a 4V and 2V tensioner side by side.
The springs are identical in diameter, coil count and wire thickness-- they should be identical spring rate, which is odd considering the much bigger belt on 4V.
However... the 4V lever length from pivot bolt to pulley bolt is ~1/4" longer than the 2V...4.0" vs 3.75".
This matches up to my earlier thought about the larger diameter 4V crank gear moving the belt horizontally outwards.
So, a 4V tensioner will work on a 2V, but the tension value might be off because the pulley isnt in the right spot.
But you shouldn't use a 2V tensioner on a 4V engine, the belt will likely be loose.
09-25-2015, 09:46 AM
