not if the workshop manual procedure is followed correctly. excess belt tension is a very /very/ bad thing. the cam bearing runs directly against the aluminum of the cylinder head - there is no additional or replaceable bearing material. if the belt tension is excessive, the cam will touch the metal, not run on its usual hydrodynamic oil cushion, and then proceed to munch through the head. the only remedy then is head replacement - go to a junk yard and you will see examples of this for yourself. correctly followed, factory procedure will set the correct tension every time. stick with the factory procedure. untrue. for the reasons stated above. that said, the tensioner /does/ need to be be carefully prepared and the surfaces cleaned for there to be no "sticktion" or mistakes,.but otherwise, when done correctly, the factory procedure will set the correct belt tension each and every time. adding to that tension, by any means or with any random second-guessing, or because of some misinformed impression that has no basis in fact, is a very expensive mistake. and very bad advice which you should not be making.
i always found using 1/2" drive tools for this job to be frightening because of the torque wind-up. any tool breakage, and that is easily possible with breaking torques well in excess of 300Nm, could lead to serious injury. i recommend 3/4" drive instead - virtually eliminates wind-up, and thus is much much safer. i think it also worth mentioning that impact tools are a better solution. while they're not cheap, they do make the job a lot quicker and safer. there are a number of cordless divers available now with very high output torques, and they are, in my opinion, a great investment if you work on your own vehicle. and high value applications go well beyond crank pulley bolts. e.g. rusted exhaust bolts. normally, they would be broken or need cutting off involving considerable expense, time and frustration. with an impact driver, they come right off.
When I freed my 2003 Civic's pulley bolt a few weeks ago (in preparation for replacing the TB later this summer), I happened on a technique that makes me feel very safe when using the 1/2-inch drive socket, extensions, and breaker bar: Apply force to the end of the pipe extension (placed over the breaker bar) in impulses. Do not apply force steadily. I used a Pittsburgh Tool 19 mm socket and it was fine. I have never broken a 1/2-inch drive tool in the several times I have freed pulley bolts on my Civics. But it is true that many report they have. 3/4-inch drive would be nice, but because of the success I personally have had with the 1/2-inch drive tools, I have opted to stick with 1/2- inch drive. For those with more money and less experience (or maybe a buddy with 3/4-inch drive tools?), yes, 3/4-inch drive is preferable.
He's measuring the oil level for a different purpose than that meant by the owner's manual. Hence his way makes complete sense. We disagree.
Just for you, moron. |^^^^^^^^^^^\||____ | The STFU Truck |||""'|""\__,_ | _____________ l||__|__|__|)| (@)@)"""""""**(@)(@)**|(@) RFT!!! Dave Kelsen
how can it possibly make sense to disregard a calibration? would you think it's ok if your local gas station started using their own "calibration" on their gas pumps rather than the one agreed on for standard measure???
for the 2003 civic, it seems honda have the problem much more under control - my experience is that the breaking torque is much more in line with originally applied torque - so 1/2" drive is probably fine. but for the earlier vintage civics, 88-91 for instance, the breaking torque can be insane, and any tool, like a 1/2" drive with an 18" extension that can wind up 45° or more before the bolt lets go, is a serious injury looking for somewhere to happen.
For some reason I'm not seeing jim's posts, just people's replies to them, so I'm replying to jim through Elle's post... To set the record straight here, I am measuring CONSUMPTION, not LEVEL. My measurements do necessarily require me to make note of the level observed, but I am not using my checks for that. In any case, there is absolutely nothing wrong with using my method for checking the level. The reason why Honda specifies the oil-checking method they do is to keep people from accidentally OVERFILLING the crankcase.
so if you're measuring the span distance across the golden gate bridge, it's ok to start measuring in sausalito as long as you keep starting from the same spot? and overfilling is precisely what you can do if you dip cold and your filter drain-back valve is functioning correctly. oil expands when it reaches operating temperature. filled to the top when cold means over-full when hot.
The "calibration" for the purpose of the owner's manual to me is a "go- no go" one. It is not intended to indicate how much oil is in the engine and sump with much accuracy.
The bolt uses a super fine thread pitch regardless of whether it is a 01-05 Civic or 90s Civic. Also, the nominal diameter is the same for both the 01-05 and 90s Civics. What is different is that the bolt head takes a 19 mm socket for the 01-05 Civic. For many 90s Civics, the bolt head takes a 17 mm socket. Also the bolt is longer for the newer Civics. My estimate for freeing the bolt on my '03 Civic the other week is still, like my 90s Civics, around 600 ft-lbs. I estimated this using the length of my extension pipe and applying my body weight to the end. I do not like the windup of the 1/2-inch drive sockets and extensions but the impulse method seems to largely spare a person the risk of recoil.
Do you recommend replacing the tensioner spring 'as a matter of course' based on the general principal that springs in service can get weak over time?
so again, how does it make sense to disregard a calibration that serves to account for temperature and filter drain back - both of which can lead to "no go" condition differences between hot per the book, or under some other random condition which is not? agreed, but that is not the point - see the purpose of "go- no go" above.
nope. the modulus of the steel is not time-dependent so the "general principle" of "weakening" is a popular misconception. the only factors that can "weaken" springs are wear [effective length change], fatigue and high temperatures. since this spring only moves when the belt is being tensioned - at ~100k miles between operations, wear is not a factor. same for fatigue also. finally, this spring doesn't operate at a temperature that will soften it [although that doesn't affect modulus], so again, the answer is "no" in any degree.
but the pulley wheels are secured differently. in later models, the pulley and crank are splined. the 88-91, there is only a woodruff key. that allows small angular motion of the pulley and the bolt tightens in use. evidence of angular motion visible here: <http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/2911225312/> compared to a later [splined] model here: <http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/2911226802/> worth contrasting is the evidence that honda use thread lock on the later model also: with thread lock <http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/2911225318/> without impact drivers [impulse] save a whole bunch of time and sweat also.
Tegger's approach carefully considers temperature. Any drainback effects are averaged out using his approach.
I am convinced it is simply the super fine thread enmeshing due to the naturally cyclic operation of the engine. Your photos do not persuade one way or the other AFAIC. To get an impact driver that works reliably on the pulley bolt costs a whole lot.
What about sympathetic side to side vibration of the spring when the engine is operation? Granted there is not a lot length change, but there is a lot of cycles. Is the side to side movement so tiny as to not matter?
