further questions about CCT replacement
09-10-2012, 10:17 AM
#1
Senior Member
SuperSport
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Santa Fe, New Mexico
Posts: 582
further questions about CCT replacement
I've been reading the various threads on CCT replacement, and the thing that stand out more than the pitfalls of not replacing OEM tensioners or the issue of careful replacement is, why doesn't anyone simply replace the OEM unit spring? If the spring is the weak part, why not simply replace the spring? I'm sure a more robust spring can be found somewhere. It's not an issue with cost or mechanical ability to replace. Just another one of those ideas that pass for thought.
09-10-2012, 10:25 AM
#2
Banned
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake View Terrace, CA
Posts: 5,942
Or just replace the auto units every 30K miles and have no issues..... at least that has been the case with my bike.
All I have ever run is the auto units and like I have said a few times, my bike has 90K on it and is still running fine.
All I have ever run is the auto units and like I have said a few times, my bike has 90K on it and is still running fine.
09-10-2012, 10:48 AM
#3
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 700
The spring is the stressed member of the cct. The stock one is more than capable of handling the load, however after several million engine rotations the spring breaks down. A bigger spring will still fail, it may last a little longer but it won't be permanent.
You can put larger brakes on a car and while they may last longer, they will still need to be replaced.
You can put larger brakes on a car and while they may last longer, they will still need to be replaced.
09-10-2012, 10:58 AM
#4
Senior Member
SuperSport
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Santa Fe, New Mexico
Posts: 582
I cannot find it just now, but I recently read a thread that addressed this issue with one writer being very adamant about using the spring unit. He worked for the company that supplies the springs, if I read the post right. He put forth the idea that a static tensioner is inferior to the unit that adjusts tension with the chain. I wish I could locate that thread again. I do not agree with his premise but it is interesting. That's what lead me to consider the spring issue. I have the manual CCT's and will be installing them as soon as I am able.
09-10-2012, 12:15 PM
#5
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 700
Well a static tensioner is inferior, no doubt about that. If there was an auto unit that did not have the reputation of failure like the OEM unit I am sure more people would use them. The reasons I chose the manual units are cost and reliability. You can get manual tensioners for <$100, and they can last a life time. Auto units need replacing (every 30k per 854hawk, however most units fail before then, 17k personally), and with auto ccts you are looking at $70 a pair, give or take a few dollars. So it is safe to say that 8541 has spent $140 on two sets of auto units and has had to replace then twice. He could have bought manual tensioners and only had to tear the bike down once and saved $40, even more from future units.
Manual seems to be the only way to go for me. 8541 obviously has a system down to make the OEM units last, but not everyone is as fortunate. I prefer to adjust a manual unit periodically than have the head grenade and have to do scull rebuild.
Manual seems to be the only way to go for me. 8541 obviously has a system down to make the OEM units last, but not everyone is as fortunate. I prefer to adjust a manual unit periodically than have the head grenade and have to do scull rebuild.
09-10-2012, 12:45 PM
#6
Well take off, eh.
SuperBike
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: QC, Canada
Posts: 1,201
You're all right. My question to all is, did Honda take care of this issue
in later models, 2003 + ?? I do believe having read something on this in a bike magasine or something like that in the past.
If anyone knows something about this, let me know if I'm right.
in later models, 2003 + ?? I do believe having read something on this in a bike magasine or something like that in the past.
If anyone knows something about this, let me know if I'm right.
09-10-2012, 01:01 PM
#7
Senior Member
Superstock
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles & Winston Salem
Posts: 433
I heard that the 2005 models are the absolute worst for CCT failures!!!!! Just looking at them in the garage and they can fail!!!! Something to do with the Titanium paint color?
Just joking!
I have owned a number of Superhawks. 2 x 2005, and I think a 2 x 1998 models. All with the stock cct's all taken to the track, all wheelied, all left idling on the sidestands for extended periods and not one of them has failed? WTF are you guys doing to make this happen? After reading many times on this board how people mess up on changing out the stock one's I have left what is not broke alone. I'm sure this thread will go pretty long, as we have done this before.
Just joking!
I have owned a number of Superhawks. 2 x 2005, and I think a 2 x 1998 models. All with the stock cct's all taken to the track, all wheelied, all left idling on the sidestands for extended periods and not one of them has failed? WTF are you guys doing to make this happen? After reading many times on this board how people mess up on changing out the stock one's I have left what is not broke alone. I'm sure this thread will go pretty long, as we have done this before.
09-10-2012, 01:19 PM
#8
Well take off, eh.
SuperBike
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: QC, Canada
Posts: 1,201
Kind of agree with you. My '98, 88 000km, never even looked at the CCT's once. My '05, 16 000km so far.....but then again, it's not much. Ah yes, need to convert, 55 000mi and 10 000mi.
If it's the Titanium color that causes failure, then I'm safe. Mine is now orange. Hated that Ti color, had no feeling.
09-10-2012, 01:55 PM
#9
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Westerly, RI
Posts: 1,216
We addressed some of this in my engine thread, when it was noted that Roger Ditchfield ran autos on his race engines. It was probably Hawk that said he had spoken with Roger, and e understanding is to not to do prolonged decelerations.
09-10-2012, 02:59 PM
#10
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,869
This is my train of thought:
First, let's put some hypotheticals out there. Let's say that 1 in 10 OEM tensioners break over their lifetime (it's likely less, but the number is significant enough to make it a known failure of this bike). Let's also say that we have absolutely no idea why they fail (stay with me here!) If these are both held true, then 9 out of 10 bikes that are maintained with any theoretical preventative cct maintenance will support whatever their owner thinks the reason for failure is regardless of it being correct or not. Now, one in ten bikes failing is A LOT of bikes for all intents and purposes. But, there will be even more people who hold theories that are supported via the health of their own bike. When, if the first two hypotheticals are true, they are actually just lucky (they had a 9/10 chance of being right anyway).
Now, I am not trying to discredit Roger Ditchfield, 8541Hawk, the service manual (replace at 32k miles) or anyone else here. And I'm not saying that I think we've no idea how they fail... There are a lot of factors that come into play.
I also don't want to kill the spirit of discovery and discussion of metal and explosions, but realistically there is the argument that simple manual tensioners work great, won't fail, and in essence have already solved this OEM cct issue by side-stepping it. I also have seen way too many threads saying something along the lines of "My CCT failed. I was at xxxxx miles and thought I'd be fine for the summer, but I should have replaced them sooner". So when I had OEM tensioners, my thought was, do I want to bet a motor rebuild on which theory is correct? Or just go with the manuals (knowing that I could mess up the install, but at least the bike wouldn't be broken due to negligence)
First, let's put some hypotheticals out there. Let's say that 1 in 10 OEM tensioners break over their lifetime (it's likely less, but the number is significant enough to make it a known failure of this bike). Let's also say that we have absolutely no idea why they fail (stay with me here!) If these are both held true, then 9 out of 10 bikes that are maintained with any theoretical preventative cct maintenance will support whatever their owner thinks the reason for failure is regardless of it being correct or not. Now, one in ten bikes failing is A LOT of bikes for all intents and purposes. But, there will be even more people who hold theories that are supported via the health of their own bike. When, if the first two hypotheticals are true, they are actually just lucky (they had a 9/10 chance of being right anyway).
Now, I am not trying to discredit Roger Ditchfield, 8541Hawk, the service manual (replace at 32k miles) or anyone else here. And I'm not saying that I think we've no idea how they fail... There are a lot of factors that come into play.
I also don't want to kill the spirit of discovery and discussion of metal and explosions, but realistically there is the argument that simple manual tensioners work great, won't fail, and in essence have already solved this OEM cct issue by side-stepping it. I also have seen way too many threads saying something along the lines of "My CCT failed. I was at xxxxx miles and thought I'd be fine for the summer, but I should have replaced them sooner". So when I had OEM tensioners, my thought was, do I want to bet a motor rebuild on which theory is correct? Or just go with the manuals (knowing that I could mess up the install, but at least the bike wouldn't be broken due to negligence)
09-10-2012, 06:09 PM
#11
Senior Member
SuperSport
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Santa Fe, New Mexico
Posts: 582
This is my train of thought:
First, let's put some hypotheticals out there. Let's say that 1 in 10 OEM tensioners break over their lifetime (it's likely less, but the number is significant enough to make it a known failure of this bike). Let's also say that we have absolutely no idea why they fail (stay with me here!) If these are both held true, then 9 out of 10 bikes that are maintained with any theoretical preventative cct maintenance will support whatever their owner thinks the reason for failure is regardless of it being correct or not. Now, one in ten bikes failing is A LOT of bikes for all intents and purposes. But, there will be even more people who hold theories that are supported via the health of their own bike. When, if the first two hypotheticals are true, they are actually just lucky (they had a 9/10 chance of being right anyway).
Now, I am not trying to discredit Roger Ditchfield, 8541Hawk, the service manual (replace at 32k miles) or anyone else here. And I'm not saying that I think we've no idea how they fail... There are a lot of factors that come into play.
I also don't want to kill the spirit of discovery and discussion of metal and explosions, but realistically there is the argument that simple manual tensioners work great, won't fail, and in essence have already solved this OEM cct issue by side-stepping it. I also have seen way too many threads saying something along the lines of "My CCT failed. I was at xxxxx miles and thought I'd be fine for the summer, but I should have replaced them sooner". So when I had OEM tensioners, my thought was, do I want to bet a motor rebuild on which theory is correct? Or just go with the manuals (knowing that I could mess up the install, but at least the bike wouldn't be broken due to negligence)
First, let's put some hypotheticals out there. Let's say that 1 in 10 OEM tensioners break over their lifetime (it's likely less, but the number is significant enough to make it a known failure of this bike). Let's also say that we have absolutely no idea why they fail (stay with me here!) If these are both held true, then 9 out of 10 bikes that are maintained with any theoretical preventative cct maintenance will support whatever their owner thinks the reason for failure is regardless of it being correct or not. Now, one in ten bikes failing is A LOT of bikes for all intents and purposes. But, there will be even more people who hold theories that are supported via the health of their own bike. When, if the first two hypotheticals are true, they are actually just lucky (they had a 9/10 chance of being right anyway).
Now, I am not trying to discredit Roger Ditchfield, 8541Hawk, the service manual (replace at 32k miles) or anyone else here. And I'm not saying that I think we've no idea how they fail... There are a lot of factors that come into play.
I also don't want to kill the spirit of discovery and discussion of metal and explosions, but realistically there is the argument that simple manual tensioners work great, won't fail, and in essence have already solved this OEM cct issue by side-stepping it. I also have seen way too many threads saying something along the lines of "My CCT failed. I was at xxxxx miles and thought I'd be fine for the summer, but I should have replaced them sooner". So when I had OEM tensioners, my thought was, do I want to bet a motor rebuild on which theory is correct? Or just go with the manuals (knowing that I could mess up the install, but at least the bike wouldn't be broken due to negligence)
09-10-2012, 07:45 PM
#12
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 700
Well auto tensioners fail all the time. My buddies zx6 has a failed one on it right now. The difference is the 4 cylinder engines provide equal tension throughout the chain, so if one fails the chain still has enough tension on it from the other cylinder cams to keep it from jumping. With the vtwin each cylinder has a dedicated chain and tensioner so the cylinders can not rely on the other.
Its not a bad design, its actually a pretty decent one. Its the utilization that makes it bad, and why Honda continued to use them despite knowledge of the issue is beyond me.
Its not a bad design, its actually a pretty decent one. Its the utilization that makes it bad, and why Honda continued to use them despite knowledge of the issue is beyond me.
09-22-2012, 05:05 PM
#13
Junior Member
Squid
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1
Hi guys, My vtr1000 firestorm has done 68,000 still with original OEM CCT, I`m thinking I`m running on borrowed time, I`ve changed oil very regular from new I bought it Aug 1997 new, doing trackdays on it now. Your getting me worried!!!!!!!!
09-23-2012, 06:02 AM
#14
Administrator
MotoGP
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kempner, TX
Posts: 4,402
sounds your perfectly suited to using OEM CCT's,,, Order up a new set and toss um on for piece of mind.
Or install a set of manual CCT's and for get about um till next engine rebuild.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
viperkillertt
Technical Discussion
0
01-31-2008 04:01 PM
duran
Technical Discussion
16
08-27-2007 07:57 AM
