Rubber Faced Chain Tensioner?
- Thread starter Dan1950
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2021
- Messages
- 1,389
That's what I thought. Just didn't know if there were any problems with these holding up.
Mine had the plain tensioner on it so I replaced it with the rubber faced one while I was in there.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2005
- Messages
- 2,689
that tells you something that they no longer supply the steel ones. One of the nice things about the rubber type is that you can slightly over tighten the chain and the rubber gives a little buffer, especially if you have a tight spot on the chain run when you check at various spots.
You can't do that with steel on steel. These are also available for the Atlas/ P11 engines.
Using the rubberized chain tensioner and the Andy chain timing chain is what I would recommend.
You can't do that with steel on steel. These are also available for the Atlas/ P11 engines.
Using the rubberized chain tensioner and the Andy chain timing chain is what I would recommend.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2021
- Messages
- 1,389
I could see that the rubber gave a little cushion to the chain tension. I figured that would be a good feature.
- Joined
- May 7, 2005
- Messages
- 6,825
The rubber wears quickly where the outer plates run over it producing 2 grooves, until the rollers start to roll over the unworn central area and then the wear reduces significantly. The earlier steel one did the same but took a lot longer and introduced steel swarf into the crankcase, fine if you have a filter in the return, not so if no filter.
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2009
- Messages
- 1,218
I have a few used steel versions of these and seen wear from the sideplates, but not from the rollers.
I agree with Kommando that on the rubber version, once the rollers make contact, further wear would be minimal.
I agree with Kommando that on the rubber version, once the rollers make contact, further wear would be minimal.