240 General: New (to me) 1980 Volvo 244

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

He's got a good point Alan - you also don't know if it was corectly retensioned at 600 miles after fitment.

Given the cost as Stephen says, i think it would be a wise move. I had thought of suggesting it myself but was still thinking over the pros and cons.

Purely for your own peace of mind and the sake of a few quid for either a Gates, Dayco or Volvo belt, i'd suggest changing it and then after 600 miles retensioning as per the HBoF.

I’d just replied to Stephen when I saw your last post Dave. As you will see, I weighed up the pros and cons this morn and decided not to bother this time.

I’ll have a look at how the crank bolt comes off in the manual after this week’s episode of ‘Better Call Saul’.

Many thanks,

Alan

PS. It looks (to me) that I would not need a special tool to get the crank pulley off - the manual seems to say it is held on by 6 bolts - so no need to undo the crank bolt?

I'm still thinking I'll leave the cam belt this time - get the water pump sorted, which I think will resolve the last of the thermal management issues.

PPS. Thermal paste for the ignitor module sorted out in a spare moment today Dave - many thanks.

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Othen

I’d just replied to Stephen when I saw your last post Dave. As you will see, I weighed up the pros and cons this morn and decided not to bother this time.

I’ll have a look at how the crank bolt comes off in the manual after this week’s episode of ‘Better Call Saul’.

Many thanks,

Alan

PS. It looks (to me) that I would not need a special tool to get the crank pulley off - the manual seems to say it is held on by 6 bolts - so no need to undo the crank bolt?

I'm still thinking I'll leave the cam belt this time - get the water pump sorted, which I think will resolve the last of the thermal management issues.

PPS. Thermal paste for the ignitor module sorted out in a spare moment today Dave - many thanks.

... but this article says the crank bolt has to come off to remove the pulley - confusion reigns:

http://www.volvoclubofbc.com/technical/tech2005.html

I'm not too keen on wedging a pry bar into the auto box flywheel - but I've used the rope trick (well, bungee cord with the end cut off into a spark plug hole) many times on bikes to lock the engine, so it would not be impossible without the special Volvo tool.

I'm still tending not to bother changing the cam belt this year because I don't think there is enough risk to make it worthwhile. I'm planning on keeping the Royal Barge so I'll factor it into the care and maintenance schedule in a few year's time.

[Stephen Edwin]

The point is that when a cambelt fails it fails. And that belt is an unknown quantity.
.
I suspect your engine will not need the special tool to remove the crankshaft pulley. Just look at the pulley to see. If it is held by one big central bolt, you need to remove that bolt. But. Anyway if there is such a bolt to be removed the tool to hold the crankshaft can be borrowed from Loki. Or the tool can be avoided by following Clifford's cut the lower cover method.

Or you could hope that the belt does not break when the engine is running. Hey ho.

Good luck.



.

[john.wigley]

I'm inclined to agree re changing the belt Stephen, but in mitigation isn't the engine non-interference? Not that you would want a broken belt, of course!

Regards, John.

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Stephen Edwin

The point is that when a cambelt fails it fails. And that belt is an unknown quantity.
.
I suspect your engine will not need the special tool to remove the crankshaft pulley. Just look at the pulley to see. If it is held by one big central bolt, you need to remove that bolt. But. Anyway if there is such a bolt to be removed the tool to hold the crankshaft can be borrowed from Loki. Or the tool can be avoided by following Clifford's cut the lower cover method.

Or you could hope that the belt does not break when the engine is running. Hey ho.

Good luck.



.

You must think me very foolish indeed.

Ho hum.

:-)

[Clifford Pope]

The method of lower pulley attachment depends on the engine model. I had a B21 and the pulley was attached by a ring of 6 small bolts, to the flange on the end of the crankshaft. These were not gorilla-tight. I can't remember how I stopped the crank from turning, possible simply wedging the fan belt, or putting a bar across wedged between the other bolts, or perhaps the rope trick. It was very straightforward and easy.

My later cars were B200 or B230F, with of course the single big bolt.

I'd just add that I have more recently experimented with a scrap engine to see out of interest whether I could undo the bolt. After a struggle I succeeded, but that was by no means the end of the matter.
Getting the bolt undone does not remove the pulley, which remained rusted solid onto the crankshaft. I tried increasingly more brutal methods, including heat from a blowtorch and a six-foot breaker bar.
Nothing budged it, until finally I borrowed a heavy-duty puller.

The pulley broke. Even had it worked, it still required the engine to be removed from the car for access.

[Stephen Edwin]

Originally Posted by john.wigley

I'm inclined to agree re changing the belt Stephen, but in mitigation isn't the engine non-interference? Not that you would want a broken belt, of course!

Regards, John.

Aha. Yes. But yes but yes. I'd like to avoid the interference can of worms debates thanks.

Yes one just doesn't want a broken belt. I agree totally.



.

[Stephen Edwin]

So. Clifford. As you know, I try to think and not quickly. Now. Does the cut lower cover method work if the pulley is held by multiple machine screws?

TIA.

.

[Laird Scooby]

I tried to get back on here yesterday to reply Alan but for some reason, every link to the forum said "Server not found".

Gave up and left it until now. First, you know you have a recently changed cam belt. Second, you don't know if it was retensioned at 600 miles.

Doesn't sound like a big deal but there was a case recently on the 7/9xx forum where someone neglected to do that and the cam belt stripped its teeth, resulting in 8 bent valves. Like Stephen i'm not going to get into the interference/non-interference debate save to another member who had owned a car with the same engine from new also reported bent valves when their timing belt went.

Also on the last 740 i had with the B230E engine, someone had changed the timing belt and not done the 600 mile adjustment. I couldn't understand why when i needed the engine to work it always seemed to say "That hill? Me? Forget it!".

Then i decided to check the belt, all seemed good on the timing marks until i started it up and saw the belt whip. It was about as loose as it could have been while still maintaining just enough contact not to jump.

On that car, the crank pulley was secured by the single bolt. Not having an impact wrench at the time, i found the right colour socket for the pulley bolt, my T-bat and lump hammer. Holding the T-bar simultaneously on the bolt and under slight anti-clockwise tension, i clouted the end of the T-bar with the lump hammer in an anti-clockwise direction. That released the "lock" on the bolt so i could turn it easily.
Plugs out to turn the engine over (clockwise on the crank pulley bolt) to TDC on #1, plugs back in and leads back on, gentle tap to undo the pulley bolt so it was finger tight then aux belts off, top timing cover off, slackened the timing belt tensioner lock nut and levered the adjuster out of the way and nipped the adjuster lock nut up to hold it.

Pulled the crank pulley off, checked the timing marks were still as they should be, removed the timing belt and fiteed the new one starting at the crank then anticlockwise to the auxiliary shaft, camshaft, round the tensioner and then released the tensioner locknut.
Refitted the lower timing cover, crank pulley and crank pulley bolt with just the ratchet.
Two full clockwise turns on the crank pulley to rotate the engine two full turns and rechecked the timing marks, slackened the tensioner locknut and let it do its thing then put everything back together as it should be.

Using a long screwdriver to wedge in the alternator pulley to prevent it turning and then pressed on the alternators belts (two on the one i had) then torqued the crank pulley to the correct figure.
Remvoed the screwdriver from the alternator pulley and started up - all good.
Noted the mileage and then 600 miles later, got it to TDC on #1, removed the plug/grommet in the upper timing cover, in with a socket and slackened the tensioner locknut so the tensioner could retension the belt. Tightened the locnut, refitted the plug and job done.

Getting the engine to TDC on #1 for this is important, it's not just a convenience thing.

Whether your engine is interference or not, you don't want the inconvenience of the belt stripping teeth, breaking or whatever and as you can't be sure it was retensioned at 600 miles, i'd strongly advise you to renew the cam belt ASAP as there is a growing number of problems caused by the PO being Arfur - Arfur Job that is!

[Stephen Edwin]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

..... First, you know you have a recently changed cam belt......

Do we know that??? We know the PO had an interesting approach ....


In such scenarios, my approach is, check the car. Check it check it check it. Some things. Just change and renew init.




Disclaimer. I have not fully perused David's post.


.

.