[batou]

Quote: Originally Posted by roland2003 (original)

Yes, add GTT Tensioner pulley and GTT Twin Bearing Idler to the list , both have effect of reducing drive belt wear.

What was wrong with the standard ones? Apparently they underwent plenty testing and were proven solid parts. What tests did you carry out to show the difference in belt wear?

A healthy engine, good intercooler and plenty of head room fuel wise in the injectors in high gears/rpm should be fine in a mild modded MCS and steer clear of maps that lean the fueling too much.

The oil pump failure on here was a one off, most likely cause by excessive vibration in the crank shaft from prolonged high rpms, I'm just putting two and two together here but I feel removing a vibration damper for a much lighter, un-dampened one (crank pulley) won't help the situation, the alta aluminum to steel shaft fit is even worse imo. Some say thats not true but for me, I think it's there for a reason.

And remember fancy mods and shiny header tanks, hoses and blah blah will never compensate for a mechanically unsympathetic driver!! Learn about your engine and what it doesn't like before you bolt this and that on to help you think the car is invincible.

[roland2003]

GTT idler tensioner pulleys are produced to CLA32 surface finish, hard anodised to reduce wear, and run within .001" total indicator reading, and in the case of the GTT Idler is Twin Bearing design reducing bearing slop. All these features are jointly responsible for reducing belt wear. Stock pulleys in comparison are a very poor pressed steel item rivited together in 2 halfs , runout is typically .004" (ie 4 times GTT runout), and surface finish about CLA 128 (ie poor).
Belt crosses pulley say 10-15000 times a minute, therefore any abrasion is very important to minimise.
Oh shiny tanks..............Yes GTT MCS Header tank should also be a priority on the preventative maintenance list. As you know the stock item can leak or even fall in half causing head gasket failure. I suppose the stock tank also went under lots of testing and was proven a solid part too?

[Bhozar]

Quote: Originally Posted by roland2003 (original)

I suppose the stock tank also went under lots of testing and was proven a solid part too?

I just bought a flat from the guy who designed the plastic tanks and the intercooler horns for the car.... hes a plasterer now.

[batou]

Quote: Originally Posted by roland2003 (original)

GTT idler tensioner pulleys are produced to CLA32 surface finish, hard anodised to reduce wear, and run within .001" total indicator reading, and in the case of the GTT Idler is Twin Bearing design reducing bearing slop. All these features are jointly responsible for reducing belt wear. Stock pulleys in comparison are a very poor pressed steel item rivited together in 2 halfs , runout is typically .004" (ie 4 times GTT runout), and surface finish about CLA 128 (ie poor).
Belt crosses pulley say 10-15000 times a minute, therefore any abrasion is very important to minimise.

So what testing was carried out to show any difference between the two? Just because they are manufactured differently doesn't mean they make an actual noticeable difference. If there was conclusive proof that showed one belt lasted XX,XXXX miles on one pulley and the other lasted X,XXX miles on another pulley that would help?

Quote: Originally Posted by roland2003 (original)

Oh shiny tanks..............Yes GTT MCS Header tank should also be a priority on the preventative maintenance list. As you know the stock item can leak or even fall in half causing head gasket failure.

Yes I know this, the cap is shocking (mine went) and very early header tanks were redesigned... that wasn't my point. My point was that fancy mods and shiny header tanks will never compensate for a mechanically unsympathetic driver. As I'm sure you'll agree knowledge of your engines weaknesses is priceless.

Quote: Originally Posted by roland2003 (original)

I suppose the stock tank also went under lots of testing and was proven a solid part too?

My testing comment was in regards to the pulleys, which actually did under go lots of testing.

... I'm sorry I'm a skeptic Roland, but fancy manufacturing terms without any supporting R&D sound like marketing to an untrained ear. Besides I asked what tests you carried out, I'm not really interested in exactly how they were made

[roland2003]

Im not telling how they are made, just how the spec is improved over stock on 3 counts....Less friction & less runout& less play= reduced wear rate. Its not rocket science.. What do you want me to do, run an engine permantley at a steady rate rpm in nuclear clean test conditions for 3 years then compare belt wear. We are design engineers we know what is required in designing the best pulleys. Mileage testing this product is like RR power testing .... youll probably end up with the wrong conclusion...too many variables.
Two identical setups could last 5000 miles or 75000 miles because of those variables.

[batou]

Quote: Originally Posted by roland2003 (original)

Im not telling how they are made, just how the spec is improved over stock on 3 counts....Less friction & less runout& less play= reduced wear rate. Its not rocket science.. What do you want me to do, run an engine permantley at a steady rate rpm in nuclear clean test conditions for 3 years then compare belt wear. We are design engineers we know what is required in designing the best pulleys. Mileage testing this product is like RR power testing .... youll probably end up with the wrong conclusion...too many variables.
Two identical setups could last 5000 miles or 75000 miles because of those variables.

If the difference is that hard to demonstrate then it can't be that large? As long as the stock ones don't cause it to snap in a very short space of time then changing the belt more frequently is a simple alternative.

Personally I'd rather replace something that will wear out no matter what you do (i.e. the belt) more frequently as apposed to the things that cause it to wear just to decrease the service interval. This is all down to how you maintain your car, I do everything that needs changing early as a form preventative maintenance thats why I'll be changing my belt every 10,000 miles from now on. Improving the belt pulley design is NOT preventative maintenance is simply delaying the inevitable... this will also increase the chances of sudden unexpected failure do to the stress and belts being on for longer. Basically yes the belt surface won't wear out as quick but the actual rubber is still ageing and being exposed to the same weather/road conditions for longer periods.

I'm sorry I have an opinion Roland but thats what the forums for, doesn't mean everyone has to take mine (or your word) as gospel.

Also the OEM belt change is at 50k+ and you recommend a yearly or 12k change? So it will never in essence really be an issue!? If I was just doing the math that would imply the oem/pulley combo is 4 times better lol but we all know it's not that simple

[MINI-Morgan]

Does it help if I say you are both right?? Cause technically you are.......belts will stretch over time anyway and rubber will perish but what if the failure happens sooner due to excessive heat and wear caused by friction to a mating surface. e.g. pullies... or most likely which I think Roland is trying to express is the failure of the idler bearing which was seen quite often years ago. Havent heard of any recently though....

[roland2003]

...Anything that can be done to reduce belt wear& therefore reduce risk of snapping has to be worth considering , as a belt snapping is going to put you on a recovery truck ,a roadside repair is very unlikely to be possible due to specialist tensioner tool required for one.
The GTT TB Idler Pulley is included with all GTT conversioners,and the tensioner pulley an option. Of the approx 500 conversions out there I know of not one belt that has snapped due to wearing out with our system.....
We're not saying the GTT pulleys will stop belt wear, of course it will still wear/stretch but at a reduced rate.

[NeuroBeaker]

Quote: Originally Posted by MINI-Morgan (original)

Does it help if I say you are both right?? Cause technically you are.......

[BigShow]

I say this without knowing how long it takes, but can't you just keep changing the belts at more regular intervals as knowing how much S/C belts cost surely these don't cost that much do they?

[GTT 280]

any comments on oil cooling?

[MINI-Morgan]

Quote: Originally Posted by BigShow300 (original)

I say this without knowing how long it takes, but can't you just keep changing the belts at more regular intervals as knowing how much S/C belts cost surely these don't cost that much do they?

Depends on why you are changing?? cause it might fail or cause its wearing out..... belts last for a long time so once a year for a high milleage MINI is good practice but sooner you need to look at the cause. You wouldnt chance your tyres more often if they keep wearing out suprisingly quick.....you've get the tracking checked.

No matter how often the belt is changed if the bearings fail its game over......... both good theory but work best together. So comes down to what you are trying to protect against. Belt snapping due to belt failure or due to pully failure.

[MINI-Morgan]

Quote: Originally Posted by GTT 280 (original)

any comments on oil cooling?

Yeah get one if your oils getting too hot! Simple as really.....monitor the temps and act accordingly. No point in having one if you dont heat the oil to a dangerous level otherwise in winter your oil will be too cold and then you've just gone the otherway. Also the time to get the oil upto temp can be seriously increased causing additional engine wear.

[roland2003]

Reducing the rate at which the belt wears is the main purpose of the GTT pulleys. As stated above if it prevents one belt failure on your car whilst driving then its worth doing as your going to be on a recovery truck......roadside repair for 99.9% of the population inc AA/RAC is not going to be possible. Belt change inc part ? about £100. Recovery/carhire/ missing your appointment+ the belt change?.......alot more money/inconvenience or both.

[batou]

Think my display must have got screwed as it looked like my posts had gone lol... ahh well. Shame I had to go an rant before refreshing properly lol

I just think theres no point in "uprating" part "A" that supposedly reduces wear on part "B" if your going to change part "B" 4 times earlier than BMW recommend for a car with standard part "A". Especially if you can't show the actual difference, if any "uprating" part "A" makes and the extra cost to fit these looks huge.

[Jaw_F430]

£100 for the belt and to have it changed?!!!

That seems a lot.

[BigShow]

Quote: Originally Posted by MINI-Morgan (original)

Depends on why you are changing?? cause it might fail or cause its wearing out..... belts last for a long time so once a year for a high milleage MINI is good practice but sooner you need to look at the cause. You wouldnt chance your tyres more often if they keep wearing out suprisingly quick.....you've get the tracking checked.

No matter how often the belt is changed if the bearings fail its game over......... both good theory but work best together. So comes down to what you are trying to protect against. Belt snapping due to belt failure or due to pully failure.

I see your point, but if I increase performance I expect my tyres to wear out quicker because I'm driving them quicker and using that same methodolgy to the belts, is the reason they wear out quicker is because I'm driving them quicker?

I can see why you sell these Roland but personally I'm in the camp that at 44k miles as mine is, if it aint broke don't fix it as by removing a working part what else are you upsetting along the way. Belts are a service item so of course I'll replace these much sooner than Mini suggest, same with fluids etc.

[MarkW]

see no ones mentioned regular filter changes or did I miss that???

no point chaging oil and keeping the old filter

[roland2003]

Ive already said this but a couple of you are choosing to ignore it so Ill say again. The purpose of fitting the GTT pulleys is not because the stock pullies will fail (they probably wont ) but to REDUCE THE BELT WEAR, THEREFORE REDUCING RISK OF BELT FAILURE .

[DaFlake]

Quote: Originally Posted by batou (original)

Think my display must have got screwed as it looked like my posts had gone lol... ahh well. Shame I had to go an rant before refreshing properly lol
.

You have not had any posts removed since 14th April for going off topic. Those were removed by use when we saw the thread spinning out. Not sure what you are talking about there.... Please PM me if you need clarification on why the posts were removed or have questions.