Identifying the defective oil fed tensioner kits

hbkramer · 06-05-2006, 02:07 PM

I am now just installing the new oil fed tensioners in my 79 SC . In addition to the gap( approx.125" on the idler shaft when using the aluminun spacer and new tensioner causing me frustration, i am now wondering if the tensioners I purchased at Hershey last yr are good or bad. i hv primed them and they appear ok,but I cant button this puppy up until I am alot more satisfied that things are correct
The new oil fed tensioner has p/n 930 105 547 OR and GF +201 960.

Is there a way to identify the defective ones out there?.
I am thinking that it almost makes sense to put the mechanical tensioners(that had collars) back in !!!
Also is there a fail safe mod for the oil fed tensioners similar to the collar on the mechanical tensioners.
This tensioner issue is becomming a head game out here.
Does anyone have data and facts to take the mystery/guess work out of this?Oh ,and throwing $400 more at updated idler arms isn't going to cut it for me.If I sound frustrated ,I am !!
Thanks

hbkramer · 06-09-2006, 12:24 PM

friday pm bump ,has anyone else seen this gap/(space on the idler shaft) while doing the tensioner install and questioned it??
Thanks
again

tshih · tshih's Garage

To help you keep the (blood tension down) and the chain tensioner up, I'm not sure what you mean by 0.125" gap. Bruce Andersen said the proper update kit should have the later idler arm (get a good one at swap meet or used part source) with the larger bronze bushing, 2 new carrera tensioners (which come with a locking grenade pin), and new oil lines with bracket support that dampens vibration post 1987). The way to test these oil fed tensioners is to pull the pin and try to push the plunger down back into the body by hand. The good ones need to be put into a vice before you can retract the plunger and reinstall the pin prior to installation into your motor.

hbkramer · 06-10-2006, 06:39 AM

Tshih thanks for the smile , blood tension is gone...hey it's only metal.

To explian better, the new spacer actulaay has radial endplay(float) of .125" when it is assembled between the ideler shaft and the new oil fed tensioner .The old 901 tensioner fit tight to the old idler arm. throwing $300-400 at new idler sproket arms doesn't make me a happy camper.Why isn't the spacer sized to give the same interference fit of the old assembly??

john walker's workshop · 06-11-2006, 09:58 AM

the arm/idler needs to float to find it's center. don't worry about it.

hbkramer · 06-11-2006, 07:53 PM

John,
Thanks for your comments. It gives me "some "peace of mind.
The issue for me is to do it correctly,so i dont have to worry about a skipping chain hammering my engine due to a poor fitting aftermarket spacer.

In thinking about your comment on "float" I see your point, but are you sure the idler sproket arm (under any circumstances) would not jump/mis allign in the approx .125 " between the sproket arm and the tensioner?? I couldn't afford to have the engine re-done and the thought of an ill fitting spacer doing my 3.o l in would really suck !!

I am still worrying about it. Ok i am still anally worring about it.

I think I will have spacers machined that will give me the same top arm width dim. as the old 901 tensioner dim
Then I can go back to driving it.

Anyone have a set of post 80 Idler arms they aren't using f/s.
Thanks
Bruce

aigel · aigel's Garage

As it was mentioned above, you should spring in for the later (1980 and up?) idler arm. This arm has a wider base (eliminating the need for the spacer!) and a bushing. Both will prevent the arm from binding on the shaft. If you just use the spacer and keep the narrow arm, you will still run a high risk of chain tensioning failure. That narrow arm was responsible for many fatal engine failures at least as much as the non fed tensioners!

George