# New design for oil pump chain tensioner



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

*New design for oil pump chain tensioner (Advanced theorem) Will be for sale soon!*

* Before anyone reads this thread*, I'd like it to be noted that this entire idea is born out of _a real problem with the 1.8t engine_. Whether or not your oil pump chain tensioner has failed or shown wear at low use, this entire thread was created to help people to get a little more life out of their engine. Every opportunity has been taken to try and keep the conversation civil, but there are numerous trolls who cannot respect that I'm trying to do something positive for the VW community. I've edited many of my comments to delete much of the non-technical conversation in the hope of keeping it completely sane.

I was told that I could not sell the units on the VW Vortex without BUYING advertising, but after communicating with the VW Votex through an intermediary, *I have withdrawn my interest in buying ad space and sponsoring a forum due to the fact that the Vortex no longer has the technically inclined minds that it once had*. That said, *I will be offering them for sale soon* and you can purchase one directly through me through PM or on one of the Facebook forums mentioned. *Thank you for your interest.*


I didn't post it over here originally, here is the Facebook page where it breaks down the logic, but it has cured the sludge issue that is caused by reduced oil pressure at higher speeds, it's actually added life to oil and it's eliminated one of the biggest POS OEM parts that has ever been installed on a 1.8t engine, the oil-pump tensioner! Here's the body of the text from the Facebook page for those who don't "facebook".

Lots of text, but WORTH the read!

My car is no monster, but it lays down about 340HP with a TFSI stroker kit, Frankenturbo system with the stage 2 ecu tune and a few other minor weight reduction and power additions...but the damned thing kept snapping off that asinine VW OEM oil pump chain tensioner. After replacing the pump with two other brand new parts, I realized that it was the RPM jump that was causing the damage. My only two options were to drive less "enthusiastically" or upgrade that piece of ****.

After about a week of laying out design after design on paper, I finally got off my ass and made a part up to my standards. I don't have a camera with me, but I essentially did away with the stock tensioner and went to a custom made, dual-wheel floating tensioner. I had asked EVERYBODY that I trust this week about the down side...and the only one that I got was "it's unproven, but is mechanically sound". I've attached a diagram of how I was explaining it prior to building it. The chain is red, the gear and cog are blue and the two metal plates and the poly wheels are the tensioner body.

Here's what I found.

A.) The floating design puts vastly stronger tension at the upper end of the RPM range where the stock piece gets hammered as centrifugal force pushed the chain outward and away from the drive cog.

B.) The floating design functions without a spring, but has stainless ball bearings within the wheels that hold up to ENORMOUS stress and rotational speed.

C.) The floating design actually, very gently pulls the slack in the middle of the chain together creating a longer "contact patch" where the chain actually sits in the teeth of each gear and thus reduced slippage at high rotation speed.

D.) The floating design is accessible from the oil pan without the need to remove the entire main seal housing alleviating the need to remove the crankshaft bolt, timing belt and accessory belt damper so that it can be inspected for wear or replaced altogether.

E.) The floating design boosted the QPM oil pump flow rate by over 30% (HOLY ****!!!) which means more oil when the engine needs it most.

F.) Finally, the floating design has roller wheels to create the desired tension, but if one of the wheels should ever fail, the #8 hardware fasteners act as a back-up so that you're not stranded someplace.

So, while I was kind of ***** footing around at first, I was sick and ****ing tired of replacing my oil pump, tensioner, crankshaft bolt, cog, seal housing and damper, then putting it all back together every time I laid down a launch.

Sorry for the "novel", but I'm happy as hell and wanted to share this with folks, especially those folks who I bugged the **** out of while building the thing! I don't have a schematic, but it's kind of hard to **** up two pieces of 16 gauge steel plate, two bolts and nuts and two preloaded poly wheels with bearings. I currently have "patent pending" status


----------



## Elcroato (May 21, 2002)

Interesting, I had no idea this was an issue. I'm pursing a BT build so this is certainly something to look at.


----------



## AmIdYfReAk (Nov 8, 2006)

Why does my bull**** meter peg at danger to manifold at the first paragraph?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

AmIdYfReAk said:


> Why does my bull**** meter peg at danger to manifold at the first paragraph?


I have no idea, but it's a solid idea that has made a big difference in the way that oil flows through any 1.8t. Maybe if you asked a specific question I could answer your concerns?


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

> E.) The floating design boosted the QPM oil pump flow rate by over 30% (HOLY ****!!!) which means more oil when the engine needs it most.


I don't see how this is possible. The oil pump runs off the crank speed. These are chain driven gears which means nothing can possibly slip and change that speed.

Could you elaborate on this claim?


----------



## .Ant (Jun 7, 2011)

groggory said:


> I don't see how this is possible. The oil pump runs off the crank speed. These are chain driven gears which means nothing can possibly slip and change that speed.
> 
> Could you elaborate on this claim?


Good point. 

And additionally remark on how you measured the oil flow. 

Not trying to diminish the idea, just would like to understand better. If claims are true than this is pretty cool.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> I realized that it was the RPM jump that was causing the damage.


What RPM jump? Many of us run much higher than stock rev limit/redlines, and have no oil flow issues.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

groggory said:


> I don't see how this is possible. The oil pump runs off the crank speed. These are chain driven gears which means nothing can possibly slip and change that speed.
> 
> Could you elaborate on this claim?


 Actually, you're assumption is incorrect. The OEM system was specifically made to allow for slippage since the system is not kept in time. The plastic tensioner used in the OEM system is not designed as a lifetime component, but VW does not have a replacement interval for the part simply stating that it "should be replaced at the time of the engine seals"...but I assure you, they NEVER last that long in higher performance engine. As the RPM speed increases, the OEM system can, and quite frequently does slip due to the outward thrust of the chain's weight from centrifugal force. The tensioner was measured at less than 14ft lb Nm torque when new and can be as low as 6ft lb Nm after 100k miles due to head fatigue leading to significant slipping of the chain and reduction of flow from the pump. The new tensioner is a constant-contact device that not only does not clip, but actually adds a great deal of strength at the higher rotational speeds, the exact opposite of what the OEM unit seems to do.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> Actually, you're assumption is incorrect. The OEM system was specifically made to allow for slippage since the system is not kept in time. The plastic tensioner used in the OEM system is not designed as a lifetime component, but VW does not have a replacement interval for the part simply stating that it "should be replaced at the time of the engine seals"...but I assure you, *they NEVER last that long in higher performance engine*. As the RPM speed increases, the OEM system can, and quite frequently does slip due to the outward thrust of the chain's weight from centrifugal force. The tensioner was measured at less than 14ft lb Nm torque when new and can be as low as 6ft lb Nm after 100k miles due to *head fatigue* leading to *significant slipping of the chain* and reduction of flow from the pump. The new tensioner is a constant-contact device that not only does not clip, but actually adds a great deal of strength at the higher rotational speeds, the exact opposite of what the OEM unit seems to do.


They've never failed in any of my motors, and a toothed chain doesn't "slip." Where/how are you measuring this torque? Because it sounds like you're talking about bolt tension on the single bolt holding the tensioner arm to the block. Exactly how much is a "ft lb Nm?"


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

.Ant said:


> Good point.
> 
> And additionally remark on how you measured the oil flow.
> 
> Not trying to diminish the idea, just would like to understand better. If claims are true than this is pretty cool.


 We had to fab an oil cooler style bypass with brass and aluminum fittings that essentially fed oil through a Badger brand fluid measuring device typically used in hard-connected home and commercial heating oil lines to maintain and check line pressure. Badger products are very reliable and are very well respected when it comes to fluid an gas metering. When the engine was measured at idle (roughly 1,050RPM with the current ECU mods), the flow was identical, but as we accelerated to the 3,500-5,200 range, the OEM tensioner system oil flow rate dropped to less than one-half of the system with the aftermarket part. Now, that's during times of smooth acceleration. At times of hard acceleration, the oil flow was seen at times to drop well below one-third of the aftermarket system flow. The aftermarket system not only kept the flow rate constant, but didn't suffer the starvation that is almost always typical in transverse motors when we downshifted and under heavy cornering.

We're developing literature to physically show the testing as part of the initial pitch, but I've decided to start offering the part for the VW engines first since that was what it was specifically designed to work on.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> What RPM jump? Many of us run much higher than stock rev limit/redlines, and have no oil flow issues.


My guess is that you have never KNOWN that you have oil issues, but it's an inherent design flaw in the 1.8t engines. The "sludge" problem that most attribute to dirty oil is more likely a problem caused by weakened flow at key points in the RPM range. I'm not talking about running at a consistent RPM rate. I'm specifically speaking about launches and dramatic shifts in RPM.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> My guess is that you have never KNOWN that you have oil issues, but it's an inherent design flaw in the 1.8t engines. The "sludge" problem that most attribute to dirty oil is more likely a problem caused by weakened flow at key points in the RPM range. I'm not talking about running at a consistent RPM rate. I'm specifically speaking about launches and dramatic shifts in RPM.


Wait a minute, first it was pressure, now it's flow rate. You realize pressure isn't regulated by the chain tension, right? 400+ drag launches on a 50K mile motor built by me with no bearing wear on teardown, no sludge issues, and no sign of "chain slippage." Get your snake oil, right here!


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> They've never failed in any of my motors, and a toothed chain doesn't "slip." Where/how are you measuring this torque? Because it sounds like you're talking about bolt tension on the single bolt holding the tensioner arm to the block. Exactly how much is a "ft lb Nm?"



Yes, every single oil pump chain slips to a certain degree in OEM form. I've run over 11 different tests vehicles and every single one has slipped. It was supposed to allow the for slippage under higher rotational speeds, but in higher performance engines, it doesn't provide the safeguard that the OEM system was designed for and actually harms the engine. When your cam chain tensioner goes out. THIS IS WHY. This tensioner keeps a constant flow of oil whereas the OEM simply doesn't, nor was it designed to...and that would be fine if you leave your engine stock.

N-m = Newtons measured via torque wrench. Can be expressed either "lbf·ft" or "ft lb N-m". Typically lbf-ft is metered by force, but can also be measured with applied pressure in a situation where you're gauging flow rates and setting tension of things like diverter valve springs. I'm specifically talking about the spring resistance of the coiled spring on the OEM tensioner. That tensioner resistance can be measured in numerous ways, but torque seems to be the most easily translatable and easily measured.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> Yes, every single oil pump chain slips to a certain degree in OEM form. I've run over 11 different tests vehicles and every single one has slipped. It was supposed to allow the for slippage under higher rotational speeds, but in higher performance engines, it doesn't provide the safeguard that the OEM system was designed for and actually harms the engine. When your cam chain tensioner goes out. THIS IS WHY. This tensioner keeps a constant flow of oil whereas the OEM simply doesn't, nor was it designed to...and that would be fine if you leave your engine stock.
> 
> N-m = Newtons measured via torque wrench. Can be expressed either "lbf·ft" or "ft lb N-m". Typically lbf-ft is metered by force, but can also be measured with applied pressure in a situation where you're gauging flow rates and setting tension of things like diverter valve springs. I'm specifically talking about the spring resistance of the coiled spring on the OEM tensioner. That tensioner resistance can be measured in numerous ways, but torque seems to be the most easily translatable and easily measured.


:laugh: So when you increase this tension on the oil pump chain, which can't physically slip at all, the increase in pressure and flow rate magically causes the pressure relief valves in the OEM pump, filter housing, and the oil filter to stay closed, thereby reaping the magic benefits of the increased Newton meter pound feet force on the oil pump chain, preventing the slipping that isn't physically possible? Am I understanding this correctly?


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

Here are some OEM 1.8t oil pump pictures, just to add something to this thread

Gear on crank is a press-fit.

Wonderful link on the oil system in the 1.8t

From above link...

most late model 1.8t engines use a Gerator style oil pump. Basically the pump has a 6 tooth gear which rotates eccentrically inside of a 7 tooth internal gear ring. (fig-11) For every 30° of pump shaft rotation a cavity is formed between the two gears and the sidewalls of the pump housing. Because the components of the oil pump are precision machined and clearances between the teeth of the gears are typically less than .075mm a vacuum is created each time a cavity is formed. The volume of this cavity is approximately 2800 mm^3 or 0.0028 liters. As the gears continue to rotate the cavity collapses forcing oil to the pump outlet. 










For every revolution of the pump the 7 cavities are formed and collapsed, so the pump displacement per revolution is 0.019 liters. Also note that the pump is driven by a chain sprocket from the crankshaft at 70% of the crankshaft speed. So for every revolution of the crankshaft the theoretical displacement capacity of the pump is therefore 0.014 liters. If you multiply this by 6500 rpm our pump theoretically could move oil at a rate of 89.1 liters/min!

All gearator pumps have a general efficiency rating which is really governed by the amount of leakage (or fluid slip) past the internal pump clearances between the gear teeth and sidewall, which reduce the overall flow. Typically this number for a new pump is 85%. Additionally the density of the fluid being pumped will also change the total amount of fluid displacement. The fluid density of 5w30 at 100dec C is 860 kg/m^3. When you take all of this into account a normal pump should be capable of flowing about 65 liters/min. (fig-12)










It is important to note that Positive Displacement Pumps are “constant flow machines” that is they will produce the same flow at a given speed (RPM) no matter what the discharge pressure. This is the reason that the oil pump has a spring loaded ball relief valve. If the flow requirements of the engine are lower than the flow output of the pump at any given time, the additional flow bypasses the engine and is dumped straight back to the oil pan.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> Wait a minute, first it was pressure, now it's flow rate. You realize pressure isn't regulated by the chain tension, right? 400+ drag launches on a 50K mile motor built by me with no bearing wear on teardown, no sludge issues, and no sign of "chain slippage." Get your snake oil, right here!


 No, I'm talking about BOTH. Pressure is NOT regulated by chain tension, but flow through your engine certainly is. When the pump sprocket doesn't turn at higher RPMs, NO OIL is pulled into the system. Not a big deal in a lot of cases, but when you're running a modified engine, the OEM tensioner simply DOES NOT maintain chain tension consistently. If you have run ANY launches, then you know that everything I've said is mechanically sound. Higher rotational speed on an OEM tensioner over time is not enough to maintain proper oil flow. Period. It's not snake oil. It's mechanical engineering...and isn't really in question by most people's standards. I didn't just decide to design, build and test the **** out of this thing because I thought it would be a neat idea. I did it because of a known problem. Low oil pressure and flow kill engines. Low oil flow is caused by a weak fluid transfer system with a minimally effective gear-fed oil pump driven from a crankshaft cog that tied to the oil pump via a chain that maintains chain tension via a $2 piece of plastic that fails quite frequently on built engines. Maybe yours does not, and I'm glad to hear that, but many do. Those that don't realize that the reduction in flow is occurring can't attest to something that doesn't show up on your dashboard...but if you want to test the theory, tank your OEM chain tensioner off and measure the coiled spring resistance. Then weight the chain itself. The weight of the chain and the lower oil pump gear by themselves is enough to pull the tensioner past the point that it would ever go inside the engine....and it only gets worse with heat fatigue and time.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> :laugh: So when you increase this tension on the oil pump chain, which can't physically slip at all, the increase in pressure and flow rate magically causes the pressure relief valves in the OEM pump, filter housing, and the oil filter to stay closed, thereby reaping the magic benefits of the increased Newton meter pound feet force on the oil pump chain, preventing the slipping that isn't physically possible? Am I understanding this correctly?


 I don't know why this is such a complex thing for you to grasp, but I'm trying to explain that your chain DOES slip. When it slips, oil isn't propelled through the engine. That's not a debatable thing. That's fact. When the oil pump does not turn the sprocket, no oil is magically sucked up into your engine. If that chain slips under high rotational forces....and yours must be the only one on earth that does not...but under normal circumstances, that chain has enough slack to slip off the sprocket just enough to reduce contact momentarily. Will that change anything instantaneously? Probably not, but if you go launch after launch, or drive a built engine then YOU WILL experience some degree of slipping and therefore some degree of reduced oil flow. Do you understand that or is there a better way for me to say it? I'm just trying to convey a mechanical concept. If there were NO potential for slippage in the chain, there'd be no reason to have an OEM tensioner either...but VW obviously knew of the potential of the stock chain to move without maintaining tension without a tensioner. My contention is that their solution is not the best possible system for people who don't like the idea of trusting the lifeblood of their engine to a ****ty Chinese made tensioner connected to a coiled-up coat hanger...


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

This is the OEM system and the problem is extremely easy to see.










This is the difference in the new style tesioner. It provides EVEN, CONSISTENT tension and pushes the chain inward creating a more solid connection between the chain and both the oil pump drive gear AND the oil pump sprocket. Does that help any?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> I don't know why this is such a complex thing for you to grasp, *but I'm trying to explain that your chain DOES slip.*


It's not complex at all, but you're "explaining" something that doesn't happen. Where's your proof that the chain slips? You're making ridiculous claims like....



munkittrick said:


> but if you go launch after launch, or drive a built engine then YOU WILL experience some degree of slipping and therefore some degree of reduced oil flow


.

I have launched repeatedly, hot lapping at test and tune events. I have built motors and driven them. Launching repeatedly and merely driving a built engine doesn't empirically cause chain slippage. The fact that the the crankshaft is "pulling" the slack in the chain away from the pump sprocket and against the tensioner arm gives you all the tension you need on the pump, but keep trying to explain your magical device...... 

You're claiming the chain physically jumps teeth on the oil pump sprocket, which is not possible. It's a chain, not a belt, it doesn't stretch. :screwy:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> It's not complex at all, but you're "explaining" something that doesn't happen. Where's your proof that the chain slips? You're making ridiculous claims like....
> 
> .
> 
> ...



I'm only pointing out that the OEM tensioner fails to maintain proper tension as compared to the aftermarket part and does so at the cost of performance and lifespan of EVERY engine. It's kind of humorous that you point out the exact situation where the majority of people have a problem but claim that yours does not. Maybe YOU'RE the one with some kind of magical device. If you can prove that your chain has never, ever slipped, I'll gladly give you one of these devices so that you can make fun of it in-person. I'm not saying that the stock tensioner will fail under every circumstance or every situation, but it IS and empirical fact that they DO NOT provide even tension and DO slip while causing a very common, albeit not widely understood problem; that being reduced oil flow contributing to sludge build-up and cam-chain tensioner failure. I don't blame you for not understanding, but I don't know how you can possibly argue that better tension, more reliable parts and added adjustability/flexibility add to the life and performance of any engine at a very minor cost increase for a part that DOES what it claims.


----------



## suffocatemymind (Dec 10, 2007)

I thought you had to have an advertiser account to advertise on VWVortex?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

suffocatemymind said:


> I thought you had to have an advertiser account to advertise on VWVortex?


Yeah, you do.


----------



## dspl1236 (May 30, 2007)

:sly: :screwy:


I like the idea, but I do not think this would "fix" oiling issues or sludge. Your grasping at straws if you think this is a fix. I feel bad for everyone on facebook trying to buy this. How many miles have you put on one of these? What happens if and when this fails? What if i use conventional engine oil and drive my car hard and just turn it off without letting it cool down after some racing? Can I now drive 20k-30k between oil changes since this will prevent slugging? How are you testing for chain slip? Where is your 30% flow improvement numbers? Are you the guy whom does his own oil pressure relief valves?

I can see a chain stretching and jumping time on a 4.2 V8 when the cam cam chains are like 2-3ft in length....not 9-12in.

if the oil pump screen is blocked....that will cause oil flow issues...

opcorn:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> I'm only pointing out that the OEM tensioner fails to maintain proper tension as compared to the aftermarket part and does so at the cost of performance and lifespan of EVERY engine. It's kind of humorous that you point out the exact situation where the majority of people have a problem but claim that yours does not. Maybe YOU'RE the one with some kind of magical device. If you can prove that your chain has never, ever slipped, I'll gladly give you one of these devices so that you can make fun of it in-person. I'm not saying that the stock tensioner will fail under every circumstance or every situation, *but it IS and empirical fact that they DO NOT provide even tension and DO slip* while causing a very common, albeit not widely understood problem; that being reduced oil flow contributing to sludge build-up and cam-chain tensioner failure. I don't blame you for not understanding, but I don't know how you can possibly argue that better tension, more reliable parts and added adjustability/flexibility add to the life and performance of any engine at a very minor cost increase for a part that DOES what it claims.


I'm an automotive engineer, I work for a major OEM. I understand what you are claiming very clearly. The problem is you are claiming a problem that doesn't exist exists on every engine. I'm not the one attempting to spread a product of my own design, therefore, the burden is on you. I can only verify that I've never ever had any engine damage caused by lack of oil flow or a drop in pressure. I've melted pistons, broken a rod, dropped a valve, but never spun a bearing or suffered a cam seizure due to lack of oil flow. You however, claims this happens on every engine. I've never had an ounce of sludge in any of my 1.8T's because I run synthetic oil and change it on time. I've also never had a cam tensioner failure. This is all in over 600K miles of driving, 600+ drag launches, I've lost count of HPDE's, and over several engines I've built. The point is, the problems you're claiming your product will fix aren't related to the imaginary oil pump chain slipping that you've convinced yourself is the root of all evil on 1.8T's. The balls in your court.......I don't need to prove my chain has never slipped because I have none of the symptoms you're claiming happen to all motors with this slip. You're either a really bad troll, a bad engineer, or just a shady salesman. It could be all three. Where is the empirical evidence from the bold above?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

dspl1236 said:


> :sly: :screwy:
> 
> 
> I like the idea, but I do not think this would "fix" oiling issues or sludge. Your grasping at straws if you think this is a fix. I feel bad for everyone on facebook trying to buy this. How many miles have you put on one of these? What happens if and when this fails? What if i use conventional engine oil and drive my car hard and just turn it off without letting it cool down after some racing? Can I now drive 20k-30k between oil changes since this will prevent slugging?
> ...


1.) Don't feel bad for anyone. Everyone who has bought one has nothing but good things to say thus far.

2.) The one installed on one of my personal vehicles has just passed 12k. The other with the ceramic guts just passed 4K. After inspecting it for wear, there was none and the chain as well as both the gear and sprocket are still in new condition .

3.) There is almost zero chance of grade #8 fasteners breaking and since I opted to use 16 gauge stainless steel and Teflon spacers, it would be a very, very unlikely failure. However, if any portion of it does fail, I replace the part. It could be argued that this system, taken for heavy industrial designs for heavy duty use is almost assuredly 20x times stronger then OEM.

4.) This doesn't circumvent proper maintenance in any way. As Volkswagen never recommends conventional oil, I'd imagine that would be a real issue, but to answer your question about this part, every piece of it is resistant to oil, friction, stress, rotational and lateral torque...and will maintain tension on the chain as described. This will not _prevent_ sludging due to ****ty maintenance practices, but for those of us who have maintained proper intervals and used quality parts, it will help to maintain more consistent oil flow. Eliminating one of the best known causes for oil sludge is a pretty good start to building a solid engine.

5.) The chain was made OEM to have a bit of slack. In stock engines, it serves a purpose as the pressed on gear inside the oil pumps are known to wear and begin to catch after about 80k. When you upgrade every other part of your engine, it kind of makes sense to do so with the piece that actually feeds the lubrication to the moving parts.

6.) Of course a blocked oil screen would impact oil flow...but when the thing clogging it is tiny fragments of your oil pump chain tensioner...the screen did its job while the OEM tensioner did not.


----------



## dspl1236 (May 30, 2007)

munkittrick said:


> 1.)
> 
> 4.) This doesn't circumvent proper maintenance in any way.* As Volkswagen never recommends conventional oil, I'd imagine that would be a real issue,* but to answer your question about this part, every piece of it is resistant to oil, friction, stress, rotational and lateral torque...and will maintain tension on the chain as described. This will not _prevent_ sludging due to ****ty maintenance practices, but for those of us who have maintained proper intervals and used quality parts, it will help to maintain more consistent oil flow. Eliminating one of the best known causes for oil sludge is a pretty good start to building a solid engine.


It was a real issue because it happened. When the AEB 058 1.8t came out in the B5 Passat and A4...it was never stated to use synthetic oil. Therefor most oil changes were done with the cheapest oil a consumer could buy....and they still do. due to the hotter running turbo engine...conventional oil would coke up causing sludge and oil passages to get blocked. Dealers now recommend a larger oil filter and synthetic oils. This was a non-chain drive oil pump engine. All future 1.8's all state the use of synthetic oils to prevent this from happening again. VW had law suits and replaced lots of engines because of this. The early 1.8t had a sludge stigma because of this.


----------



## suffocatemymind (Dec 10, 2007)

munkittrick said:


> Yeah, you do.


This whole thread is an advertisement.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> I'm an automotive engineer, I work for a major OEM. I understand what you are claiming very clearly. The problem is you are claiming a problem that doesn't exist exists on every engine. I'm not the one attempting to spread a product of my own design, therefore, the burden is on you. I can only verify that I've never ever had any engine damage caused by lack of oil flow or a drop in pressure. I've melted pistons, broken a rod, dropped a valve, but never spun a bearing or suffered a cam seizure due to lack of oil flow. You however, claims this happens on every engine. I've never had an ounce of sludge in any of my 1.8T's because I run synthetic oil and change it on time. I've also never had a cam tensioner failure. This is all in over 600K miles of driving, 600+ drag launches, I've lost count of HPDE's, and over several engines I've built. The point is, the problems you're claiming your product will fix aren't related to the imaginary oil pump chain slipping that you've convinced yourself is the root of all evil on 1.8T's. The balls in your court.......I don't need to prove my chain has never slipped because I have none of the symptoms you're claiming happen to all motors with this slip. You're either a really bad troll, a bad engineer, or just a shady salesman. It could be all three. Where is the empirical evidence from the bold above?


"I understand what you are claiming very clearly."
I think that I'll simply disagree on that, as you are attempting to debunk something that I've seen numerous times.


"The problem is you are claiming a problem that doesn't exist exists on every engine."
Point noted, but I didn't say that it was for every engine. It was created to help a known issue in performance engines or upgraded motors.


"I've also never had a cam tensioner failure."
You, sir, are not in rare company...but this is not necessarily for every situation or every person/build. I'm simply pointing out...again, that a superior part will almost always provide a superior result. I build these things from the crankshaft up, and I know how to get the most out of my upgrades....but I also know that my own oil pump tensioner has failed numerous times. New parts, old parts....it doesn't matter...there are still common failures at this weak point way more often than there should be. If you can cut out one opportunity for failure, you've made progress.

"The point is, the problems you're claiming your product will fix aren't related to the imaginary oil pump chain slipping that you've convinced yourself is the root of all evil on 1.8T's."
Again, point noted....but I'm not claiming that this is a cure all for everyone...only people who need something stronger and better than OEM. I don't imagine that you could explain why there is an OEM tensioner at all, could you? Maybe the chain comes with a bit of slack? If you've ever built one of these as you claim, then you'll have a very hard time telling me that your chain has no slack whatsoever. If you only see this very real problem as imaginary, then clearly, this is not an option for your magical car.

"You're either a really bad troll, a bad engineer, or just a shady salesman. It could be all three."
So, it's now down to this? I sincerely doubt your credentials at this point...but your character is pretty clear. Thanks so much, but I'd prefer to speak with the people who have had a tensioner crumble or a tensioner spring break. There are numerous forums that show crumbled bits of tensioner in otherwise well maintained engine oil pans. This didn't just fall out of the sky. Those damned things fail. Personally, I find the engineering on the plastic oil pump tensioner a far bigger problem than this part.

Here's a write-up that examines the issue hands-on
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showthread.php/535742-Plastic-bits-in-the-oil?p=8643651&viewfull=1#post8643651











Listen, I didn't come here to participate in a middle-school pissing war. I brought a solution to a problem, and regardless of your experience, it's an actual problem. You either get it, or you don't. Dissecting a good idea with antagonistic taunts and spouting off about your heavily overrated and highly suspect "auto technician" credentials doesn't change its value to those who need a solution. If you don't like the design...that's perfectly fine...but you don't speak for everyone...and I'm not interested in selling anyone anything that they don't need.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

suffocatemymind said:


> This whole thread is an advertisement.


It was originally supposed to be the description of a means to an end. While it is at this point a debate on every facet of the design, it was initially created to explain that I had found a solution to my design and its beneficial qualities. That said, I did speak with a Mod about a advertiser account and asked him to modify this thread to comply with the rules.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

dspl1236 said:


> :sly: :screwy:
> 
> 
> I like the idea, but I do not think this would "fix" oiling issues or sludge. Your grasping at straws if you think this is a fix. I feel bad for everyone on facebook trying to buy this. How many miles have you put on one of these? What happens if and when this fails? What if i use conventional engine oil and drive my car hard and just turn it off without letting it cool down after some racing? Can I now drive 20k-30k between oil changes since this will prevent slugging? How are you testing for chain slip? Where is your 30% flow improvement numbers? Are you the guy whom does his own oil pressure relief valves?


Would you mind removing the image that you posted from Facebook? I'm trying to clear out the "sale" items in this thread. Thanks.


----------



## NaSMK4 (Dec 12, 2011)

i saw this on facebook and laughed out loud when i read about it... this is pure non sense if u buy this... well... then im going to laugh at you the only way i could see this possibly being worth buying is if its cheaper than an oem tensioner and it works better... after your tensioner fails which they seldom almost never fail................. but hell i guess every part does run the risk of having a manufacturer defect or possibly breaking sometimes due to wear and tear but really i find this item to be unnecessary... the oem one works just fine im pushing 400hp i havent had mine fail but hell maybe im the moron who doesnt know! just my 2 cents!:laugh: until then ill be sitting here to see concrete proof that this is worth buying over an oem tensioner... opcorn:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

NaSMK4 said:


> i saw this on facebook and laughed out loud when i read about it... this is pure non sense if u buy this and install it just know we are all laughing at you.


 I love when people laugh. I tend to laugh a lot too. Especially when I realize that I'm speaking to someone without any concept of mechanical design, who yet feels compelled to comment on the "non sense" simply because it went over his head. This particular part is brand new in this application...but it's taken from an industry that depends on higher end components in an effort to circumvent engine failure under some of the harshest conditions in the world. It's almost comical that you decided to comment given that you seem so ill informed. Laugh at me, with me or to me...you still seem well short of the capacity to contradict facts about the item in question. I'm thinking that you might deserve the snickering laugh than I do...but I appreciate your....whatever...


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

snakeoil :bs:

Your claim that the chain slips at high rpm is completely made up. Only way it can slip is if it snaps leading to 0 oilpressure. 

Perhaps this is one of those funnythreads where you suddenly say April fools? In October...


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> snakeoil :bs:
> 
> Your claim that the chain slips at high rpm is completely made up. Only way it can slip is if it snaps leading to 0 oilpressure.
> 
> Perhaps this is one of those funnythreads where you suddenly say April fools? In October...


Appreciate your input, but please educate yourself on the subject prior to commenting. It's insulting that you have such a limited knowledge library from which to base your rant on considering that you're not even aware of the internals of the 1.8t oil pump and highly common chain tensioner issue. Next time that you're under your car, remove the stock tensioner and pull the chain. It'll slip. It's not much...but it slips. The ****ty OEM tensioner doesn't fail while the car is sitting still....but at least you'll be able to understand how that system works.

I'll let you make up the jokes. I'm just here for the science...but....your comment is comical if not tragic.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Yup, snakeoil from a scam artist. ic:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> Yup, snakeoil from a scam artist. ic:


Yep, ignorance from the resident paint huffer.


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

I applaud innovation and thinking outside the box, but I am also a skeptic here.

Would you be willing to share info on your testing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

groggory said:


> I applaud innovation and thinking outside the box, but I am also a skeptic here.
> 
> Would you be willing to share info on your testing?
> 
> ...


 I had every intention of doing so, but I'm rather disinclined to provide the monkeys with any more forward thinking ideas that might discombobulate their tiny bubbles. I can appreciate skepticism, but these other clowns are clearly the foremost thinkers in their respective minds...and I'd rather spend my efforts in developing sales literature and a pool of people who, at the very least recognize that there is a problem. If no one here gets the concept, that's okay, but I'd rather just go back to thinking of new ideas for my own enjoyment.

Groggory, I sent you a PM a while ago. Didn't get a reply.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

munkittrick said:


> I had every intention of doing so, but I'm rather disinclined to provide the monkeys with any more forward thinking ideas that might discombobulate their tiny bubbles. I can appreciate skepticism, but these other clowns are clearly the foremost thinkers in their respective minds...and I'd rather spend my efforts in developing sales literature and a pool of people who, at the very least recognize that there is a problem. If no one here gets the concept, that's okay, but I'd rather just go back to thinking of new ideas for my own enjoyment.
> 
> Groggory, I sent you a PM a while ago. Didn't get a reply.


We laugh at you because we see through your bluff. Completely transparent. While you still graps to this idea that someone here is stupid enough to buy your BS product you seem to forget there's alot of knowledge in this forum who smell your kind a mile away. Just to claim you loose oil pressure at high rpm due oil chain slipping on the drive indicates you have no knowledge about engineering or this engine whatsoever. 

I support your notion about going back to thinking up a new scam. Good luck. :wave:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> We laugh at you because we see through your bluff. Completely transparent. While you still graps to this idea that someone here is stupid enough to buy your BS product you seem to forget there's alot of knowledge in this forum who smell your kind a mile away. Just to claim you loose oil pressure at high rpm due oil chain slipping on the drive indicates you have no knowledge about engineering or this engine whatsoever.
> 
> I support your notion about going back to thinking up a new scam. Good luck. :wave:


 No, you laugh due to insufficient understanding on your part. I, on the other hand laugh at you to keep from crying at how simple you seem to be. I understand fluid dynamics and mechanical pumps very well. Pity that you clearly do not. I don't claim to lose oil pressure at higher RPMs. We lose *oil flow* at higher RPMs due to lack of tension in the tensioner. That's a fact. Period. If you lost *oil pressure*, you'd be ****ed. Over time, you most certainly CAN lose oil pressure due to blockages and bits of crushed plastic tensioner in the pick-up screen. If you weren't such a "knowledgeable" guy, you'd understand that getting rid of the POS tensioner means that it isn't there to fall apart. [Whoosh]. Went right by you, huh?


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

How do you suggest you loose oil flow without the chain skipping teeth? Do you even understand that the oil pressure and flow is connected? 

You do know this is not lego cars , right?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> How do you suggest you loose oil flow without the chain skipping teeth? Do you even understand that the oil pressure and flow is connected?
> 
> You do know this is not lego cars , right?


YES! I do understand. THAT'S what I've been saying. When the chain skips teeth...the oil pump sprocket does not turn, and like it or not, it DOES skip when the stock tensioner fails. Doubt me? Give it a try. You lose that plastic tensioner and the chain and you lose flow. When you lose flow....the pressure of the system as a whole drops. ANY drop in pressure or flow is bad. Now that we've got you up to speed on that, I just have to get you comprehend that 16 gauge steel is harder than injection molded plastic parts. I knew you could do it!


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

So you are claiming the chain is skipping the teeth of the drive at high rpm and this leads to loss of performance. Ok, :facepalm:

I don't even...

If your chain strips off the teeth of the drive you have 0 oil pressure = catastrophic failure. Or perhaps you suggest it only strips off a few teeth here and there... look at the design and try to visualise how incredible stupid you sound. 

This is a chain and a chaindrive, not a belt slipping over a charger. I don't think you understand how this works. 

"E.) The floating design boosted the QPM oil pump flow rate by over 30% (HOLY ****!!!) which means more oil when the engine needs it most."

- Right there is your problem. You don't understand how the chain and drive works. You don't gain oil pressure just by changing out the tensioner. If the chain fails and rips off teeth, or chain snaps you have a catastrophic failure. Nothing in between.

But hey, I suggest you install you wondertensioner and see how that works for ya :laugh:

I'm out.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

20v master said:


> It's not complex at all, but you're "explaining" something that doesn't happen. Where's your proof that the chain slips? You're making ridiculous claims like....
> 
> .
> 
> ...


Exactly what this guy said. ^^ 

In fact this thread remind me of that guy who bought nos (Sports drink) and put in his tank to make it go faster. That's you right there with your magical slippage :laugh:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> So you are claiming the chain is skipping the teeth of the drive at high rpm and this leads to loss of performance. Ok, :facepalm:
> 
> I don't even...
> 
> ...



It's not a claim when it's factual. Jesus Christ, you're thick! The chain slips....In other words, it SKIPS teeth, rotationally....not that it falls off the sprocket dumbass. That WOULD be zero oil pressure! The chain rests on the upper oil pump drive gear. That's a continuous connection regardless if the engine is on or off. When you start the engine, the chain rotates the lower oil pump sprocket and pull oil into the engine. The OEM tensioner pushes on ONE SIDE OF THE CHAIN ONLY...and VW put it on the opposite of the prime side so that the potential for the chain to slip over a tooth or ten is entirely possible even if the OEM tensioner is in great shape and there is almost no wear on any of the teeth. If the OEM tensioner were to crumble....as they often do...YOU'D have a chain that would NOT rotate at full speed and would slip over teeth rotationally, effectively fluttering and costing oil flow and pressure. That can happen many times in a matter of minutes. This device puts pressure on BOTH sides of the chain pushing it inward so that more of the gear touches the chain no matter how fast your engine turns. It's not as if it were rocket science. OEM part is ****. Get rid of it and replace with better, more efficient part that has ancillary benefits. I had such high hopes for you...


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

munkittrick said:


> It's not a claim when it's factual. Jesus Christ, you're thick! The chain slips....In other words, it SKIPS teeth, rotationally....not that it falls off the sprocket dumbass. That WOULD be zero oil pressure! The chain rests on the upper oil pump drive gear. That's a continuous connection regardless if the engine is on or off. When you start the engine, the chain rotates the lower oil pump sprocket and pull oil into the engine. The OEM tensioner pushes on ONE SIDE OF THE CHAIN ONLY...and VW put it on the opposite of the prime side so that the potential for the chain to slip over a tooth or ten is entirely possible even if the OEM tensioner is in great shape and there is almost no wear on any of the teeth. If the OEM tensioner were to crumble....as they often do...YOU'D have a chain that would NOT rotate at full speed and would slip over teeth rotationally, effectively fluttering and costing oil flow and pressure. That can happen many times in a matter of minutes. This device puts pressure on BOTH sides of the chain pushing it inward so that more of the gear touches the chain no matter how fast your engine turns. It's not as if it were rocket science. OEM part is ****. Get rid of it and replace with better, more efficient part that has ancillary benefits. I had such high hopes for you...


No, it wont skip teeth. That's all in your imagination. If it did you'd have a totalled engine. Remove the tensioner all together and even at 10k rpm the chain wont slip unless the teeth are grinded all the way down. You'll see this if you ever built this engine.


You sir, made all this fuss only to promote yourself as quack with poor manners trying to sell snake oil.

I bid you farewell. :wave:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> No, it wont skip teeth. That's all in your imagination. If it did you'd have a totalled engine. Remove the tensioner all together and even at 10k rpm the chain wont slip unless the teeth are grinded all the way down. You'll see this if you ever built this engine.
> 
> 
> You sir, made all this fuss only to promote yourself as quack with poor manners trying to sell snake oil.
> ...



Okay Captain Derp. They slip over teeth all the effin' time...but you feel free to live on your little island of Facts Don't Matter. You are crazy if you don't think that the chain skips over teeth at any rotational speed based on tension. Even with brand new parts...they slip... I'll clean up my "manners" if you'll put down your tinfoil hat and listen to facts. If you think that the oil pump chain cannot slip, you're truly, truly a special kind of stupid.

It's not a promotion for me dumbass. It's the hope that no one else has to deal with a failed tensioner. I have a few thousand bucks into my engine and I built it from the block up....so I know every single part. It would appear that you don't even know the consistent facts about the oil pump system of the engine in general, so it's probably better if you head back to your drawing board and come up with some other non-fact so that you can fail more with your assessment of a new idea for this engine.

But hey, you go and have a great night!:facepalm:


----------



## suffocatemymind (Dec 10, 2007)

You might want to reconsider your tone and name calling when talking to potential customers. If all of these people are skeptical of your design (and rightfully so haha), maybe you should provide some actual, factual, and at least believable evidence rather than getting all worked up on a forum.

Unless you have a good service recovery plan, I think you lost us. At least you have plenty of spares in the event of another failure.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

suffocatemymind said:


> If all of these people are skeptical of your design (and rightfully so haha), *maybe you should provide some actual, factual, and at least believable evidence* rather than getting all worked up on a forum.





munkittrick said:


> It's not a claim when it's factual.


No need, he's claimed it's factual, therefore it is! :laugh: SNAKE OIL, GET YOUR SNAKE OIL HERE! ic:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Okay, I was right. 



20v master said:


> You're either *a really bad troll*, a bad engineer, or just a shady salesman.


This is just an elaborate troll attempt, backed up by a previously created thread to allow his "current" design to reference back to a "problem" he had in the past. He's been hard at work since June of 2014 coming up with a solution, and now he has it! Tried and true, tested and confirmed to solve a problem that he's the only 1.8T owner to ever have! Check it out, he tried to warn us all of the dangers of oil pump chain slack right HERE when he realized he needed to shorten his chain. 


:laugh:


----------



## Bunruh (Mar 21, 2013)

Just a thought. I am no engineer or anything and I didn't want to take the time to count the sprocket teeth and chain, but you could test this theory by marking the chain and sprocket and doing some high RPM runs and then come back and see if they still line up ( that is if they always come back to the same spot, which I imagine they would). This would be a pretty easy test.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> Okay, I was right.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 It's actually kind of funny, but that is the impetus for the design and it turned out that they gave me the incorrect chain at the dealership. Had you been able to read the solution, or bothered to understand that it is a systemic problem for most cars with aftermarket upgrades...you'd be a lot more respectful and a whole lot less of a big-shot auto-tech nerd. That said, you're lack of understanding does not impact the validity, nor does it hurt my feelings. I actually make solid claims throughout the entire conversation with points to back them up and you wanted to argue about something that was over your head. I understand how that must feel, but I'm not going to berate you for your shortcomings. You really don't need to take shots at something just because you don't get it. Thanks, just the same.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Bunruh said:


> Just a thought. I am no engineer or anything and I didn't want to take the time to count the sprocket teeth and chain, but you could test this theory by marking the chain and sprocket and doing some high RPM runs and then come back and see if they still line up ( that is if they always come back to the same spot, which I imagine they would). This would be a pretty easy test.


With the oil pump, the timing of the device isn't as crucial as the valve timing, so it's pretty common to have an odd number rotation. I believe that it's 1 and 1/8th full rotations of the oil pump sprocket to 1 full rotation of the crankshaft gear. There are places that sell smaller and larger sprockets (which doesn't really make sense) and most people have seen an oil pump failure at the bolt that holds the pump sprocket in place, but I don't think that it would prove or disprove anything given that the chain itself slips over a tooth now and then...unless that's your litmus test to find out if the chain actually does skip. There is almost no one who has worked on these cars that would tell you that the chains don't skip...otherwise, VW wouldn't have bothered to put a tensioner in the system to begin with, but I appreciate the intelligent input.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> It's actually kind of funny, but that is the impetus for the design and it turned out that they gave me the incorrect chain at the dealership. Had you been able to read the solution, or bothered to understand that it is a systemic problem for most cars with aftermarket upgrades...you'd be a lot more respectful and a whole lot less of a big-shot auto-tech nerd. That said, you're lack of understanding does not impact the validity, nor does it hurt my feelings. I actually make solid claims throughout the entire conversation with points to back them up and you wanted to argue about something that was over your head. I understand how that must feel, but I'm not going to berate you for your shortcomings. You really don't need to take shots at something just because you don't get it. Thanks, just the same.


I read the whole thread, you never admitted you had the wrong chain. I have plenty of aftermarket upgrades, and KNOW that it is not a systemic problem. What's funny is you question my understanding, but can't get "your" and "you're" usage correct. BTW, I have a mechanical engineering degree just like you claim to, so this isn't over my head. I work for an OEM manufacturer, who do you work for?  You do make "claims" but you're not backing them up with anything but conjecture. Still waiting on the proof of a slipping chain. :crickets:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> I read the whole thread, you never admitted you had the wrong chain. I have plenty of aftermarket upgrades, and KNOW that it is not a systemic problem. What's funny is you question my understanding, but can't get "your" and "you're" usage correct. BTW, I have a mechanical engineering degree just like you claim to, so this isn't over my head. I work for an OEM manufacturer, who do you work for?  You do make "claims" but you're not backing them up with anything but conjecture. Still waiting on the proof of a slipping chain. :crickets:


A.) I didn't need to "admit" that I was sold the wrong part. I just stated it and was speaking about the other thread where that all started.

B.) You're a bit ignorant of what the word "problem" means, but for the sake of argument, let's just say that I consider a "problem" something that negatively impacts a situation.

C.) Your and you're mean very little when arguing a subject that is simply a waste of time for you, considering that you're magic and have never had a problem that most others do. Congrats on that by the way. Maybe you have some snake oil to sell as well?

D.) The fact that you claim to have any degree in engineering, and you're proving with every additional reply that you do not, is an absolute insult to the body from which you bought your paperwork...because you really don't get the simplest concepts of fluid dynamics and engine cooling principles. I bet that you were the star student of your class at UTI. Wyotech star student? Whatever you say chief....

E.) What more do you need to know other than the fact that chains slip? It's not a conundrum. It's not even a complex thought. Your chain, my chain...your mom's chain (if she too drives a motor vehicle with a tensioner)...they all slip to some degree. The fact that you don't recognize that doesn't make it untrue. It just makes you sound like a tool.

F.) Unless you have some manner of evidentiary argument that proves a chain with a tensioner could not possibly slip a tooth, you're simply walking around and making noise. It's not incumbent upon me to prove that a chain slips when the rest of the entirety of mechanical engineers would agree that a tensioner's entire purpose is to keep a chain that could slip teeth from doing so and therefore must agree that slippage is a potential hazard...but I'll let you troll me for more of your nonsensical quackery.

Finally, there are obviously things that you will not be able to benefit from, and apparently THIS idea is something that YOU will not benefit from, so instead of being an idiot and insulting something that made a positive difference in my own engine, and any one of the 31 units that has been sold...why not come up with your own concept? Why not invent your own idea and create your own solution to your own problem? You're not gaining traction here and you continually hit the head of a nail that is already doing what it's supposed to in the hope that something will change. If you were a real mechanical engineer, you'd understand that machines, however complex do not solve their own problems...and people like you hold innovation and advancement back from people like me who think ahead of the curve. I don't really get your argument in the first. A better product to replace a poorly engineered OEM tensioner, made with better materials with the potential for far more reliable oil pump operation at almost the exact same cost as the OEM POS part! What part of that isn't a step in the right direction? Does your engine operate without a tensioner? I'd imagine that even your magic engine uses one. My only real claim is that this tensioner does a better job and prevents a widely known problem. Why is that threatening to you?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> A.) I didn't need to "admit" that I was sold the wrong part. I just stated it and was speaking about the other thread where that all started.
> 
> *So you had the wrong part, but wanted to modify it to "correct" the problem. Admitting you had the wrong part would have led you to fitting the correct part and no need to come up with your BS tensioner you are now trying to justify as a "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist.*
> 
> ...


You haven't proven the "positive difference on your own engine." Machines don't have to solve a problem that doesn't exist. The part that isn't in the right direction is you want people to buy an unproven design that doesn't accomplish anything. Better is subjective, and you haven't proven that it is better in any way. End result: you aren't convincing anyone that this is needed much less an upgrade over anything, AS CHAINS DON'T SLIP.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> Maybe you have some snake oil to sell as well?


And in all that, I missed this gem. Rest assured, if I did have some BS idea to sell, you'd be the first one I'd pitch it to, because it's obvious you'll believe anything. :laugh:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> You haven't proven the "positive difference on your own engine." Machines don't have to solve a problem that doesn't exist. The part that isn't in the right direction is you want people to buy an unproven design that doesn't accomplish anything. Better is subjective, and you haven't proven that it is better in any way. End result: you aren't convincing anyone that this is needed much less an upgrade over anything, AS CHAINS DON'T SLIP.


 You are literally too dumb to insult. So better pistons don't result in better performance? Better intercoolers don't provide better performance? I'm not sure that you're even thinking about the potential of a better built part to do a better job at all. I think you're just here to try and make sense of an argument that ONLY you can make. I'll tell you what....you tell me why Volkswagen engineers decided to add a tensioner to the oil pump chain if not to take the slack out and attempt to prevent slipping and "chatter" of the chain and I'll argue FOR your point of view if your answer makes any ****ing sense at all. Deal? Ok, go!


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> And in all that, I missed this gem. Rest assured, if I did have some BS idea to sell, you'd be the first one I'd pitch it to, because it's obvious you'll believe anything. :laugh:


Pardon me, but you're already trying to sell your BS idea...and it's not going very well for you.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> Pardon me, but you're already trying to sell your BS idea...and it's not going very well for you.


Deflect, deny, change the subject! :laugh: Sorry, we all see through your :bs:. Enlighten us all, and tell us what idea I'm selling? That your idea is FOS 100% BS? Becuase it is. We are all still waiting on proof of this chain slipping.........I'll leave you alone until you actually provide any, I've embarrassed your attempt at marketing this "solution" enough.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> Deflect, deny, change the subject! :laugh: Sorry, we all see through your :bs:. Enlighten us all, and tell us what idea I'm selling? That your idea is FOS 100% BS? Becuase it is. We are all still waiting on proof of this chain slipping.........I'll leave you alone until you actually provide any, I've embarrassed your attempt at marketing this "solution" enough.


Nice try...but you're now in your own puddle of snake oil junior. So, once more dip****...why is there a tensioner in the stock engine? Why bother with a cam tensioner? Why do timing belt tensioners exist? BECAUSE WITHOUT THEM...things slip out of alignment, out of time or out of tune. Stunning, right? Do you thin that there's a chain tensioner because VW thought that it was pretty...or because their engineers felt that it offset a weight problem with the cup holders? Or...maybe you're just not able to make a sensible argument without proving that you're an idiot and I've created something that makes a beneficial change to a poorly made part? Whatever the reason, it's cute that you keep swimming around saying that facts aren't facts. Tick, tock... Tensioners? Why do they exist?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

A quick Google search found Exo Performance on Facebook converting FSI engines to 1.8T oil pumps, chain, and *tensioners*. I also found a company JNL Racing that modifies BMW engines to use the 1.8T oil pump tensioner. So much for that horrible OEM part that fails all the time. :facepalm:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> Nice try...but you're now in your own puddle of snake oil junior. So, once more dip****...why is there a tensioner in the stock engine? Why bother with a cam tensioner? Why do timing belt tensioners exist? BECAUSE WITHOUT THEM...things slip out of alignment, out of time or out of tune. Stunning, right? Do you thin that there's a chain tensioner because VW thought that it was pretty...or because their engineers felt that it offset a weight problem with the cup holders? Or...maybe you're just not able to make a sensible argument without proving that you're an idiot and I've created something that makes a *beneficial change* to a poorly made part? Whatever the reason, it's cute that you keep swimming around saying that facts aren't facts. Tick, tock... Tensioners? Why do they exist?


Tensioners apply tension. You claim they don't apply enough. That is a CLAIM because no one has this tensioner fail, except you when installing the wrong parts. Facts? Still waiting on these proven problems, benefits, etc. :crickets: I'm not the only one who's asked, yet you want to argue with me about why tensioners exist. You're not doing a good job of promoting this product. It is enjoyable watching you spin spin spin your wheels though.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> Tensioners apply tension. You claim they don't apply enough. That is a CLAIM because no one has this tensioner fail, except you when installing the wrong parts. Facts? Still waiting on these proven problems, benefits, etc. :crickets: I'm not the only one who's asked, yet you want to argue with me about why tensioners exist. You're not doing a good job of promoting this product. It is enjoyable watching you spin spin spin your wheels though.




So you DO understand...you're just an idiot? Okay. Got it. Thanks.

Broken tensioner leads to failed oil pump.

Oil pump chain slack caused vibration and led to sprocket bolt failure.

Oil pump chain tensioner failed. Low oil pressure light.

I searched for all of 30 seconds and found a few failed tensioners...but...not yours, because YOURS is magical!


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Another failed tensioner leads to failed oil pump.

It's like magic, huh? You should try and sell your version of tensioner....because it's practically unbreakable (in your mind...). Chains. They slip. Really...


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> So you DO understand...you're just an idiot? Okay. Got it. Thanks.
> 
> Broken tensioner leads to failed oil pump.
> 
> ...




First one caused by overheating, melted the windage tray, clogged the oil pump pickup. Not a tensioner issue. 

Last one is a link to a 33 page build with no mention of oil pump tensioner on the first page, sorry, I'm not doing your homework for you. 

Second one is actually a broken tensioner arm. Congrats, you found a failed component that merits your unproven redesigned solution. There, I've admitted there is an issue, albeit a single occurance, over the course of millions of 1.8T's being bashed on the internet for tons of issues, ranging from coil packs, MAF's, clutches, timing belts, water pumps, valve stem seals, and thermostats. But alas, you've found the holy grail and a single incident of a failed component. Now that you've established that a single problem exists, you've made a solution that no one else needs, isn't proven, could lead to more damage to the oil pump sprocket and chain since your solution isn't "mated" to anything, and all while violating VMG advertising policies. Congrats! Moving on, where's all that proof of loss of oil flow/pressure, and all the damaged engines? That one isolated case had a low oil pressure warning light, a dead give away. Something tells me that that others who don't get this light don't have your made up problem!


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> Another failed tensioner leads to failed oil pump.
> 
> It's like magic, huh? You should try and sell your version of tensioner....because it's practically unbreakable (in your mind...). Chains. They slip. Really...


Do you even read? That bearing is from the turbo. NOT the oil pump tensioner. You're trying way too hard....


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

I love how you've ignored repeated requests for data, evidence, proof of this phenomenon occurring, yet don't have any. Your "evidence" is finding old threads that hypothesize that the oil pump tensioner failed, with most of them not even related. You're 1 for 4, keep it up!


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> First one caused by overheating, melted the windage tray, clogged the oil pump pickup. Not a tensioner issue.
> 
> Last one is a link to a 33 page build with no mention of oil pump tensioner on the first page, sorry, I'm not doing your homework for you.
> 
> Second one is actually a broken tensioner arm. Congrats, you found a failed component that merits your unproven redesigned solution. There, I've admitted there is an issue, albeit a single occurance, over the course of millions of 1.8T's being bashed on the internet for tons of issues, ranging from coil packs, MAF's, clutches, timing belts, water pumps, valve stem seals, and thermostats. But alas, you've found the holy grail and a single incident of a failed component. Now that you've established that a single problem exists, you've made a solution that no one else needs, isn't proven, could lead to more damage to the oil pump sprocket and chain since your solution isn't "mated" to anything, and all while violating VMG advertising policies. Congrats! Moving on, where's all that proof of loss of oil flow/pressure, and all the damaged engines? That one isolated case had a low oil pressure warning light, a dead give away. Something tells me that that others who don't get this light don't have your made up problem!


 You need to learn how to internet better. When you don't ask, you only get a portion of the information. Those were links posted on the Vortex, but thanks for your admission of ignorance. Apology accepted.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> I love how you've ignored repeated requests for data, evidence, proof of this phenomenon occurring, yet don't have any. Your "evidence" is finding old threads that hypothesize that the oil pump tensioner failed, with most of them not even related. You're 1 for 4, keep it up!


A hypothesis is a theory. Those are pretty obvious broken parts....but...you're entitled to your....um....opinion....you crazy engineer. PS fucco...if it breaks on one car, it could potentially break on any car. Just because a lot of people don't do their own work and post photos doesn't mean that it's not real. Call your dealer and ask about broken oil pump tensioners. Or, you could call mine if you like...either way, educate yourself to the potential of failing parts. The part I'm speaking about is better made, stronger, more effective and gives you a bit of peace of mind...because unlike the stock tensioner....this one doesn't fail...so...yeah....


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> You need to learn how to internet better. When you don't ask, you only get a portion of the information. Those were links posted on the Vortex, but thanks for your admission of ignorance. Apology accepted.


No, one of the four was posted on Vortex, and it wasn't even related to the oil pump tensioner. The other three were posted elsewhere and two of the three weren't relevant nor did they prove your false point. I didn't admit to ignorance, nor any other fault, you interpreted it as that to aid in your fight to support your BS product, but you also unknowingly admitted you don't have any proof by not posting your data. Thanks for playing. opcorn:




munkittrick said:


> A hypothesis is a theory. Those are pretty obvious broken parts....but...you're entitled to your....um....opinion....you crazy engineer. PS fucco...if it breaks on one car, it could potentially break on any car. Just because a lot of people don't do their own work and post photos doesn't mean that it's not real. Call your dealer and ask about broken oil pump tensioners. Or, you could call mine if you like...either way, educate yourself to the potential of failing parts. The part I'm speaking about is better made, stronger, more effective and gives you a bit of peace of mind...because unlike the stock tensioner....this one doesn't fail...so...yeah....


Correct, and your theory is junk. No, there was ONE broken tensioner, and it hadn't even broken, was just cracked. I've educated myself on failing parts, that's why I'm paid by an OEM to do torture testing, extreme environmental testing, and benchmarking, you know...of other manufacturer's engines. I've had over 800K engines produced under my evaluation as a process engineer that all had single tensioners on one side of timing chains and oil pump chains. I've seen it on motorcylces and automobile engines for years in this setup. Not one of them has ever had a chain skip teeth like you are claiming. *It's not possible. There is no arguing this. * You are using one old thread that has one failed plastic tensioner arm, that could have been damaged during rebuild, as your proof that the OEM design is bad and horrible and failure prone, and oh yeah, just so happens you'll get 30% more oil pump flow (WHICH IS COMPLETE BS) if you install your super dooper new fangled design that hasn't been proven at all. Apparently you skipped statistical analysis class and don't know that a sample size of 1 isn't a sample, it's an outlier. This same person who had the arm break went on to say...



> I did not know mine was broken till I pulled the engine apart.


What does that tell you? It hadn't failed. The pump nor the sprocket had failed. He was still driving the car and had enough oil pressure to do so. What's the point of this? That your crap design and rainbow intentions are as fake as your "evidence" of "most people" having this issue that you keep claiming. CLAIM \= EVIDENCE. You aren't an engineer, you aren't an advertiser, you aren't an inventor, nor are you a fabricator. You are a blow hard who wants to sell crap to people who won't get the benefits you claim. I shouldn't even reply to you but you keep coming back with random events that somehow support and justify your CLAIM that everyone needs this oil pump chain tensioner upgrade. I feel bad for all the idiots that will buy this and think they've upgraded, when all they've done is line a thieving liar's pockets. /thread


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> No, one of the four was posted on Vortex, and it wasn't even related to the oil pump tensioner. The other three were posted elsewhere and two of the three weren't relevant nor did they prove your false point. I didn't admit to ignorance, nor any other fault, you interpreted it as that to aid in your fight to support your BS product, but you also unknowingly admitted you don't have any proof by not posting your data. Thanks for playing. opcorn:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I cannot imagine how you function at all with that limited intellect, but I do appreciate your input...what minuscule amount that there has been. Let's just agree that you're not willing to admit a problem and I'm not willing to lie about the problems that I've seen. That way, you don't have to keep pressing a point that lacks poignancy and value, and I don't need to keep telling you that you're really out of your element.

1.) I've explained every single point along the way that the OEM chain tensioner is ****...and that's not really up for debate. You disagree...but you're kind of frigging thick...so that's a perspective.

2.) I've pointed out that the new design is made of 16 gauge steel and ceramic bearings and offers a longer life than injection molded plastic. While there is nothing that refutes the obvious difference in materials, you cried that it wasn't a good part. Boo-hoo... So we'll disagree on that front as well.

3.) I've told you that the OEM chain slips teeth...and while you do not agree, that doesn't lessen the fact that Volkswagen put a oil pump chain tensioner in their engine for a reason...although you don't seem to be able to rationalize why that might be other than "for tension"...which is exactly what I've said all along....derp.

4.) You claim to have some manner of engineering degree, but then speak directly to the opposite of that possibility by saying things that are ludicrous to anyone in ANY manner of engineering. You have said that an "OEM" to do testing on parts, but haven't said anything beyond that...so unless you're adjusting toilet paper rolls as a "janitorial engineer", I think it's fair to call BS on that.

5.) If you're interesting buying one, you can feel free to THEN debunk the working model at your own expense, but doing so at mine is really rather petty, and given that you've said the same...inane...idiotic and utterly incorrect statement about the purpose and necessity of a chain tensioner, and what it does in the application that I'm speaking about...you're hardly the best person to argue the intent and/or potential for performance on something that you've never even owned. It's a mechanically sound, purposefully designed and well made piece of hardware that increases performance when compared to the stock part in any logical test that can be devised. Just because you don't have a solid grasp of the concept doesn't mean you're entirely incorrect in YOUR application, but it's the answer to a problem and I felt that it might be of use to people who have, or have had this same issue in the past.

So, truly, unless you're bringing something new to your argument, you're really just peddling your one-legged bike up the wrong hill. My argument is sound. My idea is factually based. My design works as expected and I'm perfectly fine without having you as a spokesperson...not that your positive review....with your "degree" wouldn't look sweet on the box...but you're of zero use to your own argument...and you're just getting in deeper and deeper by spitting out random non-facts about my questions regarding the purpose of a oil pump chain tensioner. If no chain, anywhere has never slipped, what would be the benefit of such a part? It doesn't add security if the chain breaks...so it must be there to keep the chain from sloppy rotation so that the teeth don't lose depth and the chain slips over teeth...which, unbeknownst to you...IS a real problem...no matter what your Hasbro Super-Duper "I'm A Real Engineer" playset says. So, how about you find a new argument, another sound functioning device that you can hack into and get out of the way of progressive ideas. People like you hold back good ideas due to lack of understanding...and that's really just a bitter man's game. Don't be that guy. Have a great one!


----------



## AmIdYfReAk (Nov 8, 2006)

This is really the scary part, while your argument may seem valid to you, its idiotic to everyone else... You claim that's because everyone has less of an IQ and Engineering prowess than you.. That's fine, keep on thinking that... 

The only way to prove anything is to post your data.... 

If the data is there to support it, there is no arguing it as you've stated prior.


----------



## suffocatemymind (Dec 10, 2007)

AmIdYfReAk said:


> This is really the scary part, while your argument may seem valid to you, its idiotic to everyone else... You claim that's because everyone has less of an IQ and Engineering prowess than you.. That's fine, keep on thinking that...
> 
> The only way to prove anything is to post your data....
> 
> If the data is there to support it, there is no arguing it as you've stated prior.


:thumbup:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> 4.) You claim to have some manner of engineering degree, but then speak directly to the opposite of that possibility by saying things that are ludicrous to anyone in ANY manner of engineering. You have said that an "OEM" to do testing on parts, but haven't said anything beyond that...so unless you're adjusting toilet paper rolls as a "janitorial engineer", I think it's fair to call BS on that.
> 
> 
> blah blah blah
> ...


There's no proof of this claimed increased performance. End of story. We've all been waiting to see it.....but since I've already beat down every point you've futilely brought up, you now want to attack my professional abilities. I'll just say this: You may think it's fair to call BS, but in reality I work for Honda as a Quality Analysis Engineer for New Model Devlopement in the Engine Division. You, Michael, are, according to your LinkedIn profile, an "Audio, Graphics, Director, and Producer," (which is obviously a made up title and sounds.....like a struggling artist) and the proud owner of Evolve Media Solutions in Gainesville, Florida. I work in a big office full of engineers. Several of them literally laughed outloud at your "design," mostly at your claims of increased oil flow rate. Maybe you should stick to your day job instead of horribly attempting to reinvent mechanical parts. :laugh:

PS: This is the part where you come back and say that there is obviously a problem and I just won't admit it. Then, continue to not post any data or proof. It's getting kinda old.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

AmIdYfReAk said:


> This is really the scary part, while your argument may seem valid to you, its idiotic to everyone else... You claim that's because everyone has less of an IQ and Engineering prowess than you.. That's fine, keep on thinking that...
> 
> The only way to prove anything is to post your data....
> 
> If the data is there to support it, there is no arguing it as you've stated prior.


 Fair enough, but to say that a part that is widely known to fail...does not is substantially more idiotic than any argument he's made thus far. It's not at all scary to upgrade engine internals if you understand the function of the part...but it is scary to disregard the potential benefits of a better product. And it has nothing to do with my IQ, and I don't claim to be a mechanical engineer...just a machinist who knows how facts work. He claims to be a mechanical engineer...but he's got his fingers stuck in his ears and yelping out "I know you are, but what am I". That's not how progress is made. It has everything to do with the fact that a tensioner maintains tension on a chain that is turned by a crankshaft gear and then turns a sprocket to feed oil into a 1.8t engine. To overtly disagree with that fact is kind of frigging dense at best. If a person can't understand that, then every point beyond that is moot.

Once again, my leading argument is that this is a better built product that works better than OEM. If anyone truly believes that stainless steel has less tensile strength than an injection molded piece of plastic is absolutely nuckin futz! My claims were laid out and I even went through the detailed explanation on the initial testing. It's not academic, but it's all factually accurate. Save for the claimed increase in flow rate, everything else is absolutely undeniable...unless you don't understand mechanical engineering and its application in our engines. THAT'S what I'm defending and why the lot of you are barking. Fact.

Here's the thing...if you're not interested in the idea of advancing the oil feed into our engines....then this is probably never going to be your thing. But it's selling, people seem to like it and thus far, I've only sold them to people who had a failed OEM part. I'm perfectly capable of conversational discussion, but disregarding physics because an "engineer" said that HIS part didn't fail yet is just being an idiot.

I've got time to go over every part of the thing and have done so NUMEROUS times. The very first post makes, and defines the claims. I explained the testing and without a facking scientific study and product analysis, there is no more that I can offer in the way of "data". It works. More oil flows. Almost perfect function and a sound piece of hardware. How does that not resonate with a man who claims to be an engineer? It's a perpetually staggering bit of lunacy.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> It has everything to do with the fact that a tensioner maintains tension on a chain that is turned by a crankshaft gear and then turns a sprocket to feed oil into a 1.8t engine. To overtly disagree with that fact is kind of frigging dense at best.


No one is arguing that......but don't let that stop you from continuing to beat the snake oil drum. opcorn:


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

dude.. i'm _not_ a mechanical engineer (or a machinist, lol), and even i can figure out that a static chain on sprockets isn't going to increase or decrease the rotational speed of either sprocket no matter how much/little tension is applied to the chain.

is your unit more resilient than the injection-molded piece, of course it is. it's made out of steel ffs. however your proclamation that "these units fail all the time" flies in the face of established knowledge here. 

just take your lumps at being called out about it on vortex, and continue selling it to gullible morons. win/win.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> No one is arguing that......but don't let that stop you from continuing to beat the snake oil drum. opcorn:


Whatever you say champ...but if you're not arguing against this point...you have no point to argue. Thanks for playing.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> dude.. i'm _not_ a mechanical engineer (or a machinist, lol), and even i can figure out that a static chain on sprockets isn't going to increase or decrease the rotational speed of either sprocket no matter how much/little tension is applied to the chain.
> 
> is your unit more resilient than the injection-molded piece, of course it is. it's made out of steel ffs. however your proclamation that "these units fail all the time" flies in the face of established knowledge here.
> 
> just take your lumps at being called out about it on vortex, and continue selling it to gullible morons. win/win.


 No ****, but what happens when the chain spins around the sprocket with a failed tensioner? That chain can effectively slip over the teeth on the upper gear, and in fact, is known to do so. In fact, when people claim that their "chain failed", it's almost always more likely that the chain slipped and/or tensioner spring failed and the center of one or more links has pressure applied which causes fatigue and gear wear. Why the **** is that so hard to understand? Beyond the pettiness of Captain Know Nothing screaming that a tensioner isn't responsible for preventing that slack, there is no argument that holds water...and that's an idiot argument too. Piss and march in circles all night long about what is "established knowledge", but when a failed part is in need of replacement on numerous cars in a relatively short period of time and could very easily be part of a failing engine oil system...saying anything to the contrary doesn't make it "established knowledge" by default. I'll take no lumps, and certainly not from people like this assclown who LITERALLY has the same breadth of knowledge about mechanical tension and tolerances that I could get in a comic book. Listen, it doesn't matter how loudly you say it...the oil pump chain tensioner, lower sprocket bolt, upper gear and the chain itself have ALL failed at numerous times in a rather large number of 1.8t equipped engines. Why, if it's within reason to reduce or eliminate that potential failure should I be relegated to some people's nonsensical argument instead of sharing the knowledge. If "taking my lumps" means educating people...lump away. That said, you're gonna' need to go way up the food chain to find an argument that defies the logic in this part and what it does. I appreciate your time just the same.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

munkittrick said:


> No ****, but what happens when the chain spins around the sprocket with a failed tensioner?...


So can the chain actually spin around the sprocket in the event of a failure? I agree that this would be bad news if it happened...


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

munkittrick said:


> No ****, but what happens when the chain spins around the sprocket with a failed tensioner? That chain can effectively slip over the teeth on the upper gear, and in fact, is known to do so.


According to you, it is. The rest of us, who routinely beat the piss out of this motor (i'm on my 3rd) have never personally experienced nor heard of others encountering it.



> In fact, when people claim that their "chain failed", it's almost always more likely that the chain slipped and/or tensioner spring failed and the center of one or more links has pressure applied which causes fatigue and gear wear. Why the **** is that so hard to understand?


It is not hard to understand. It is _extremely unlikely_ that the event you described occurs, so much so that when asked for examples you stammer and post links to things that do nothing to validate your point. Is _that_ hard to understand?



> Beyond the pettiness of Captain Know Nothing screaming that a tensioner isn't responsible for preventing that slack, there is no argument that holds water...and that's an idiot argument too.


Something about glass houses.. honestly, i have my 4th 1.8t on a stand right now in the garage, and i read this thread because it seemed like a fascinating topic. however, even if you _were_ able to back up the claims you make about your product, I wouldn't purchase one simply because of your tit-for-tat attitude and immaturity. 



> Piss and march in circles all night long about what is "established knowledge", but when a failed part is in need of replacement on numerous cars in a relatively short period of time and could very easily be part of a failing engine oil system...saying anything to the contrary doesn't make it "established knowledge" by default.


Nothing becomes "established knowledge" by default, it becomes "established knowledge" by being corroborated and expanded upon by many minds. Just because you think you're smarter than everyone here doesn't make it so.



> I'll take no lumps, and certainly not from people like this assclown who LITERALLY has the same breadth of knowledge about mechanical tension and tolerances that I could get in a comic book.


This isn't a pissing contest though. We asked for details about how you tested this and came to your conclusions, you responded by berating and questioning people's intellect. We're still waiting on examples of any of the claims you have made other than material, yes metal is stronger than plastic. 



> Listen, it doesn't matter how loudly you say it...the oil pump chain tensioner, lower sprocket bolt, upper gear and the chain itself have ALL failed at numerous times in a rather large number of 1.8t equipped engines.


This is the crux of the matter, considering none of us have heard of these oh-so-common failures you are describing. It is also what is pegging the BS meters of everyone that has posted in this thread.



> Why, if it's within reason to reduce or eliminate that potential failure should I be relegated to some people's nonsensical argument instead of sharing the knowledge. If "taking my lumps" means educating people...lump away. That said, you're gonna' need to go way up the food chain to find an argument that defies the logic in this part and what it does. I appreciate your time just the same.


So far, there has been no education in this thread other than reducing your claims to "replacing potential failure part" from "30% increase in [email protected]", as well as learning that you're a pretentious twatwaffle with limited intellect. I appreciate your appreciation.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> So can the chain actually spin around the sprocket in the event of a failure? I agree that this would be bad news if it happened...


 If you want the no BS answer without any coloring of the facts or insulting your intelligence, yes...the chain CAN and does slip teeth.

Except, apparently if your car has ever been owned by the guy who has been harassing me all day in the previous posts...you should be fine...because every car he touches is magic.

But, if your car is just a standard VW or Audi with a 1.8t engine, then yes, the OEM tensioner can fail, has failed and is a known point of failure. It was designed to take up a small amount of slack in the chain at the time of manufacture. The slack was intended to allow for flexibility, much like the poly in your engine mounts were designed to allow for a bit of engine movement under acceleration, such is the oil pump chain tensioner. Volkswagen calls it "chain flutter". I call it a hazard...and so I thought that I'd try to do something to take that potential failure out of the loop. The problem that I was hoping to solve was one that I'd never experienced before, but heard about a lot at the dealership. One day, out of the blue the trademark tapping from my AWP engine sounded louder. I looked over everything and surmised that it must be the variable valve tensioner on the cams...but it seemed fine. Basically, when I dropped my oil pan to really get a good look, the plastic tensioner had score marks on what was left of the thing after it shattered. I replaced it, the oil pump, the crankshaft gear and had the bolt that hold the sprocket on the oil pump welded so it wouldn't fail in the future, but the newly replaced tensioner and spring wasn't really doing it's job well and only applied tension to one side of the oil pump chain. The piece that I built fits perfectly where the stock piece mounted, but offers a lot more peace of mind, better (or at least more consistent) oil flow, not to mention that it hasn't had any issues in over almost 5 months of continuous use. I posted photos of the lack of wear compared to the stock unit along with the pertinent info on the materials that I used to make it as well as instructions on how to buy one. Contrary to the overwhelming negativity thrown at me over the last couple of days by the Magic Man, I've tried to point out the benefits of using it and what it was DESIGNED to prevent and/or repair. It wasn't cheap to have it blueprinted and to find the parts...like the ceramic bearings...all made in the USA was a real bit of work...but I did it and I'm proud of the thing. Hate it, or love it...it's a piece that can circumvent a known failure in our engine. I'm working on one for the screwed up tensioner on the MKV engines now. Those are made of cast aluminum and break in damned near every performance built turbo charged VAG engine...but at the moment, what I have is what I have.

Thanks for being interested and I hope that I explained it well. This place has very few forward-thinking minds, but if you're a "slam it and put on some BBS RS wheels" kind of guy, you'll find plenty of negativity and short-order conjecture...but no legitimate argument that counters what this device was intended to do.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> Something about glass houses.. honestly, i have my 4th 1.8t on a stand right now in the garage, and i read this thread because it seemed like a fascinating topic. however, even if you _were_ able to back up the claims you make about your product, I wouldn't purchase one simply because of your tit-for-tat attitude and immaturity.
> 
> Nothing becomes "established knowledge" by default, it becomes "established knowledge" by being corroborated and expanded upon by many minds. Just because you think you're smarter than everyone here doesn't make it so.
> 
> ...


 Whatever floats your boat. You're not likely to be a customer, and frankly...I don't need customers who aren't aware of such a common failure...even though one clown claims to be a mechanical engineer. Maybe he's trolling. Maybe he's clueless...but my time defending him against his own ignorance is over. You can't help those who are confident that the Titanic won't sink.

I'm definitely not smarter than anyone else...EXCEPT people who put their fingers in their ears and stamp around in circles crying. I just feel like I'm just thinking ahead of the curve on this. I like to fix things BEFORE they get expensive. It's my tragic flaw. I love my cars and hate when engines seize. If all you're waiting on is the flow rate numbers, I've already said that my method wasn't scientific. I did use industry standard tools and the container that I utilized filled with oil 30% more quickly than with the stock set-up. If that's the thing keeping you from understanding why it's better than stock, I'll never be able to argue you into buying one, and you'll never convince me that you're on par with what "established knowledge" is. It's not a pissing contest. Jack ass spoke on a subject and I was cordial until he insulted my idea. Then, I took him apart with the facts. His best defense is "that chain never slips"...which is an absolutely simpleton reply.

I appreciate that you're capable of appreciation...but let's be honest...you don't know what the **** I'm talking about...and NOTHING is going to change your mind, because YOU also seem to believe that a ****ty plastic tensioner is incapable of failure and that a loosely fitting chain propelled at upwards of 5,000RPM every time it accelerates is entirely incapable of slipping teeth. If the thing slips A SINGLE tooth...it's one too many for my comfort....but then, I'm a precision kind of guy...which is why I won't settle for a crap part and won't back down from what only a limited few people claim has NEVER happened...when it's noted as a common failure point in an otherwise very well built engine. Thanks for dropping in, but please DO come back with some real questions and an open mind if you really give a damn about the potential of this piece of hardware. If not, thank you, but you're wasting your time and mine.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

munkittrick said:


> I'm definitely not smarter than anyone else...EXCEPT





> let's be honest...you don't know what the **** I'm talking about


 if it makes you feel better to think you're smarter than everyone around you, more power to you. you're still not getting away with claiming that your tensioner produces 30% more flow or whatever silly claim it is you're making.



> it's noted as a common failure point


perhaps you would deign to share with us where this is noted? your earlier links were not accurate except in one case, and i for one would like to see some official VW documentation on this part being failure-prone.



> Thanks for dropping in, but please DO come back with some real questions and an open mind if you really give a damn about the potential of this piece of hardware. If not, thank you, but you're wasting your time and mine.


Really, we are all here to learn. If you can't take being questioned then perhaps the Honda forums would be a better stomping ground for you?


----------



## zrau17 (Apr 21, 2010)

The only way to prove yourself right is with visual evidence. Until you do so, no one here is going to believe that all these years of building these motors (which some of these people do for a living, and you don't seem to think they're smart enough to understand why a chain under tension "slips") they've been ignoring a crucial part of a motors performance. I'm honestly not sure I've ever read a topic about some altered or replaced form of the stock oil pump assembly. In fact, as mentioned, this form of oil pump assembly is being adopted by other cars as an upgrade.

Answer this question, and if you don't, I'm going to rant on about how stupid you are and claim you don't know anything…same as you would do.

If a chain with a tensioner slips with RPM changes, why is it that the VR6 motors don't blow their valves to pieces on a regular basis? Their entire timing is based on a chain with a tensioner. If your theory is true, everyone with that motor should drive like a fairy bitch so they don't make their chain slip.

No one has said you have a bad idea on your hands, if you think it's better than do it…but you can't come in here making claims that a SPROCKETED CHAIN will slip. It just doesn't make sense.

Here's an idea, because research is the first part of development. Take an oil pump assembly, put the chain on something to drive it, vary it's RPM with quick drops and spikes and you show me a video of exactly when that chain "slips." When you can do this, people might listen. Until then, telling everyone else they're an idiot is not the way to go about making them listen to you.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> if it makes you feel better to think you're smarter than everyone around you, more power to you. you're still not getting away with claiming that your tensioner produces 30% more flow or whatever silly claim it is you're making.
> 
> 
> perhaps you would deign to share with us where this is noted? your earlier links were not accurate except in one case, and i for one would like to see some official VW documentation on this part being failure-prone.
> ...


 I'm not sure why you keep saying that I think I'm smarter than everyone else. I'm not, but I am able to grasp a concept that a few people here are not...and I do appear to be a little out of those few people's spectrum. That said, if YOU grasp the concept, then I clearly am no smarter that you on this subject....but it does not appear that you do. My central claim is that this part is better than the OEM part, which has a high failure rate. Maybe you're a lucky guy...but you're one of a limited few who haven't heard of this problem...and to be honest, that kind of bothers me considering that you're taking shots at a design that solves a problem that you do not even recognize. I don't know what a "deign" is. If you're interested in buying the part, I'm building a media package and website and speaking to this and at least two other potential places where I may, or may not advertise. Being that I'm having the hardest time explaining this, it might be best if I leave the complicated parts for something a little less abrasive...but until you recognize that a plastic tensioner held on by a stretch bolt with a piece of coiled coat hangar wire to keep inconsistent tension on one side of a chain that turns the oil pump which, then feeds oil to your engine...there is nothing that I can say that will help you...and therefore, you cannot really be here to make a discovery, but instead pick a fight. Fighting wastes my time.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

zrau17 said:


> Answer this question, and if you don't, I'm going to rant on about how stupid you are and claim you don't know anything…same as you would do.
> 
> If a chain with a tensioner slips with RPM changes, why is it that the VR6 motors don't blow their valves to pieces on a regular basis? Their entire timing is based on a chain with a tensioner. If your theory is true, everyone with that motor should drive like a fairy bitch so they don't make their chain slip.


Easy answer. First, you're talking about a timing chain. I'm talking about the oil pump chain on a 1.8t which has ZERO necessity of keeping time with the engine. That might be why VW half-assed the tensioner. Next, A VR6 utilizes a tensioner that provides even tension on more than a single point in the chain system, and it does so in exactly the manner that my design does, by pushing the chain together on both sides of the chain to maximize the "contact patch" of the chain on the drive gears. The better, more reliable the contact, the less likely it will be to slip. As a follow up, I'll also point out that when people claim to be "changing the chains" on a VR6, they are doing so because the TENSIONERS lose their ability to keep the chain tight after a certain amount of miles. Furthermore, it also has guides and a dual-link chain for a lot more strength, not to mention that the oil pump must run in-time with the engine or at least have a common multiplier in order to keep the oil flowing within a given flow rate range without throwing the valves out of time.

Okay, that's the answer to your question. Did that make sense or did I word it oddly?


----------



## zrau17 (Apr 21, 2010)

munkittrick said:


> Easy answer. First, you're talking about a timing chain. I'm talking about the oil pump chain on a 1.8t which has ZERO necessity of keeping time with the engine. That might be why VW half-assed the tensioner. Next, A VR6 utilizes a tensioner that provides even tension on more than a single point in the chain system, and it does so in exactly the manner that my design does, by pushing the chain together on both sides of the chain to maximize the "contact patch" of the chain on the drive gears. The better, more reliable the contact, the less likely it will be to slip. As a follow up, I'll also point out that when people claim to be "changing the chains" on a VR6, they are doing so because the TENSIONERS lose their ability to keep the chain tight after a certain amount of miles. Furthermore, it also has guides and a dual-link chain for a lot more strength, not to mention that the oil pump must run in-time with the engine or at least have a common multiplier in order to keep the oil flowing within a given flow rate range without throwing the valves out of time.
> 
> Okay, that's the answer to your question. Did that make sense or did I word it oddly?


Yes there is more "contact" but one side is simply a guide, there's only a tensioner on one side still.

Here's what I'm getting out of this, if you're stating that the chain slips…the only way for that to happen is if the back side where there is no tensioner becomes completely slack and loose enough for the crank to spin freely under the chain and skip teeth. That chain is not large enough to do that. The only way that is possible is if at some point the crank went backwards or the pump gear kept spinning faster than the crank on a downshift (RPM drop) causing slack, in which case the chain would have to lift itself off the crank gear and spin itself freely under the chain. You claim at high RPM the chain is slipping which leads to less oil pressure, you seriously think that chain is coming loose with that much tension on it and skipping teeth? It will not happen.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

zrau17 said:


> Yes there is more "contact" but one side is simply a guide, there's only a tensioner on one side still.
> 
> Here's what I'm getting out of this, if you're stating that the chain slips…the only way for that to happen is if the back side where there is no tensioner becomes completely slack and loose enough for the crank to spin freely under the chain and skip teeth.


 With a brand new crankshaft gear, a brand new oil pump, a brand new chain and with the tensioner not installed, you can roll the chain over the teeth with a bit of effort. Put a 13mm socket on the oil pump sprocket without the tensioner and you can turn that sprocket without really even trying that hard. Yes, it will grab much of the time during initial failure due to gravity, but I'm talking very specifically about those instances where the tensioner fails and the chain is left to spin without proper tension. I understand that thus far, most of the guys here haven't heard of that happening...but their lack of experience with the problem doesn't make it nonexistent. It just makes it something that they are not familiar enough with to comment on with any certainty. It's not as simple as grabbing the chain with your hand and pulling it until your heart's content over and over the gear, but under power, that tiny bit of slippage creates more slack in a very short time frame. I've seen guys pull apart engines where good maintenance practices were kept, but the tensioner failed and the gear began to lose it's teeth and the oil pump sprocket center bolt had begun to back out due to lack of tension after as little as 2,000 miles. The worst part is that the 1.8t doesn't make a "dinner bell" sound when the tensioner fails...and since the chain never really slips off of the teeth, only over them...there aren't a lot of alerts that would lead you to check the tensioner. All too often, that little bit of slack becomes a very costly problem. Why bother with that BS if the negating of the potential is as simple as getting a BETTER part?


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

munkittrick said:


> If you want the no BS answer without any coloring of the facts or insulting your intelligence, yes...the chain CAN and does slip teeth...


No BS answers are usually best - I ask because I have a hard time seeing how this would happen and in post #12 of *this* thread you mention that,_ "The OEM unit allows the chain to rise up almost to the very top of the crankshaft cog..." _

The simplest/best way to clear this up would be to start with a picture of the pump chain being pulled as high up as it can go over the gear - this would show a worst case scenario...



munkittrick said:


> ...Basically, when I dropped my oil pan to really get a good look, the plastic tensioner had score marks on what was left of the thing after it shattered...


Although others in this thread haven't experienced this, I think any one of us would be alarmed to find a shattered tensioner in our engine so it's understandable why you searched for a better solution.



munkittrick said:


> ...The piece that I built fits perfectly where the stock piece mounted, but offers a lot more peace of mind...


This on its own has solid merit.



munkittrick said:


> ...It wasn't cheap to have it blueprinted and to find the parts...like the ceramic bearings...all made in the USA was a real bit of work...but I did it and I'm proud of the thing...


Commendable that you went the quality route even though it's more expensive - wish more companies did that.



munkittrick said:


> ... "slam it and put on some BBS RS wheels" ...


My car is a little lower than it should be from a suspension geometry standpoint but it's fine all year round up here in Winterland... I'm running BBS CH's but wouldn't mind a set of LM's - nothing against RS's of course...


----------



## zrau17 (Apr 21, 2010)

All_Euro said:


> The simplest/best way to clear this up would be to start with a picture of the pump chain being pulled as high up as it can go over the gear - this would show a worst case scenario...


The point is that he has yet to do any of this while making his claims.



munkittrick said:


> The worst part is that the 1.8t doesn't make a "dinner bell" sound when the tensioner fails...and since the chain never really slips off of the teeth, only over them...there aren't a lot of alerts that would lead you to check the tensioner.


I'm pretty sure a metal chain driven by a metal gear over another metal gear is going to make some kind of noise if it's skipping over teeth at 5000+ RPM lol

I'll add one more point here, if anyone can tell me the last time they changed an oil pump and put the chain back on without taking the gear off let me know …because if I'm not mistaken IT'S LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE or else they wouldn't send you a new friggin' bolt to replace it with when you take the old one off.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> No BS answers are usually best - I ask because I have a hard time seeing how this would happen and in post #12 of *this* thread you mention that,_ "The OEM unit allows the chain to rise up almost to the very top of the crankshaft cog..." _
> 
> The simplest/best way to clear this up would be to start with a picture of the pump chain being pulled as high up as it can go over the gear - this would show a worst case scenario...
> 
> ...



That thread is a discussion that took place before I realized that I was given the incorrect chain. I no longer remember which I was given in lieu of the correct one, but when I replaced my seals, I also did the gear, pump, chain and tensioner. That replacement tensioner snapped after a few days of driving a bit more enthusiastically than I typically would. I replaced the tensioner again and had a replacement pump shipped under warranty just in case the cog inside the pump was contacting the interior walls of the pump...but that second tensioner failed too. Volkswagen verified proper installation and couldn't explain the failure but were quick to suggest that I change my crank and potentially my entire engine. They claimed "warpage"...but there is none. That WAS a worst case scenario, but because it actually happened and others have commented on similar tensioner issues, granted nothing as extreme as mine but failure is failure...I can't even begin to think that it isn't a potential for failure in any 1.8t. Much the same type of disgust from the guys that drive the balance shaft oil pumps. Parts that aren't supposed to fail under heavy use failed pretty easily under normal use. **** happens. I am just tired of it happening to me...and I wanted to build something that would eliminate my need to strip the side of my engine down every few thousand miles due to failure that has since been pointed out by the dealership as "common". I'm not looking to change the world...and I've got no reason to try and convince people who don't like unconventional progress...but I hope that all of this helps at least a few people out there take steps to stop a problem before it comes one.


----------



## AmIdYfReAk (Nov 8, 2006)

munkittrick said:


> Fair enough, but to say that a part that is widely known to fail...does not is substantially more idiotic than any argument he's made thus far. It's not at all scary to upgrade engine internals if you understand the function of the part...but it is scary to disregard the potential benefits of a better product. And it has nothing to do with my IQ, and I don't claim to be a mechanical engineer...just a machinist who knows how facts work. He claims to be a mechanical engineer...but he's got his fingers stuck in his ears and yelping out "I know you are, but what am I". That's not how progress is made. It has everything to do with the fact that a tensioner maintains tension on a chain that is turned by a crankshaft gear and then turns a sprocket to feed oil into a 1.8t engine. To overtly disagree with that fact is kind of frigging dense at best. If a person can't understand that, then every point beyond that is moot.
> 
> Once again, my leading argument is that this is a better built product that works better than OEM. If anyone truly believes that stainless steel has less tensile strength than an injection molded piece of plastic is absolutely nuckin futz! My claims were laid out and I even went through the detailed explanation on the initial testing. It's not academic, but it's all factually accurate. Save for the claimed increase in flow rate, everything else is absolutely undeniable...unless you don't understand mechanical engineering and its application in our engines. THAT'S what I'm defending and why the lot of you are barking. Fact.
> 
> ...


He said, He said, He said.... We get it, 
Take "him" out of it and stop with the childish replies, Not once was it said that your product is less superior to the OE piece... Hell, A metal arm with a tougher spring would be an upgrade to say the least!

What we're Painfully trying to pull out of you, If you want to claim that it will give 30% more flow... Lets see the DATA to back said claim! Tests, Videos, raw measurement data!!!! something! 

I've owned ~4 06A based engines, and had another 6-8 in my family at different times with no issues with oiling other than the build up issue on some passats because of the aforementioned running regular oil with longer intervals, Once the motors and oil pickups where cleaned they where spot on!

And truthfully, Recently I've converted my fathers B5.5 TDI to the 1.8T oil pump system from its balance shaft assembly! it was 100% gear driven and has a STUPID high failure rate. 

If i had even a SECOND thought about the setup, I would have easily addressed it.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

zrau17 said:


> The point is that he has yet to do any of this while making his claims.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So, because my engine was the incubator of the first part, I should tear it down to show you your engine's tolerances with the OEM part? That's absolutely illogical.

Yes, it DOES make noise, but inside the cabin, you'll never hear it and at idle, the noise id negligible. It does the most damage at higher speed where the rotational forces are less easy to control. A sloppy chain leads to problems, regardless of how small...they will be costly.

I actually removed the oil pump to get my chain on the first time instead of the sprocket bolt, but at some point after that tensioner failed...the chain began wearing and the upper gear on the crankshaft showed signs of moderate wear after a few thousand miles with low chain tension. Sadly, I never head a thing until the chain began moving laterally due to the lower pump sprocket wobble pushed the fastening bolt back out a bit. THAT is a sound that you know is not good....but that took weeks.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

AmIdYfReAk said:


> What we're Painfully trying to pull out of you, If you want to claim that it will give 30% more flow... Lets see the DATA to back said claim! Tests, Videos, raw measurement data!!!! something!


As I've said over and over, that's the ONLY claim that I can't scientifically prove...but that's not even the most significant point. I will have properly, academically tested flow results and rotational torque numbers as well as the range of adjustability, but that argument has been conceded as "unsubstantiated" for the moment. That aside, every other point is absolutely undeniable. Every other point is logically and technically accurate. The 30% was measured properly with professional tools, but again, that aside...I see no other argument for why this part is not a better product.


----------



## AmIdYfReAk (Nov 8, 2006)

munkittrick said:


> As I've said over and over, that's the ONLY claim that I can't scientifically prove...but that's not even the most significant point. I will have properly, academically tested flow results and rotational torque numbers as well as the range of adjustability, but that argument has been conceded as "unsubstantiated" for the moment. That aside, every other point is absolutely undeniable. Every other point is logically and technically accurate. The 30% was measured properly with professional tools, but again, that aside...I see no other argument for why this part is not a better product.


And I've said it, Your part *IS* better than the OE piece, From my reading and watching this thread unfold Not a single person said it wasn't. 

What was said, the General condenses is that its not needed. 

Can you post said tests? the output of the tools? give something to help your cause here... I'm trying to toss you a bone here bud.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

AmIdYfReAk said:


> And I've said it, Your part *IS* better than the OE piece, From my reading and watching this thread unfold Not a single person said it wasn't.
> 
> What was said, the General condenses is that its not needed.
> 
> Can you post said tests? the output of the tools? give something to help your cause here... I'm trying to toss you a bone here bud.


Read page one. I used some pretty standard tools and my gauges were all designed for fluid dynamics and flow rate specifically...but I concede that I'd only used them for about a week before I got my final measurements...and 30% improvement was my peak benefit...so bear that in mind as well. "Not needed" is not a sufficient argument to do what these clowns have done. They shredded the theory of the part without considering the real-world benefits. If the ONLY tangible benefit is better quality at a similar price with a well thought out design that functions as good or better than stock, is that alone not worth the consideration?


----------



## AmIdYfReAk (Nov 8, 2006)

I have read, and re-read this thread.... You do state your tests, and what tools you use in a vague manor... But the issue is exactly that.... its vague. 

The issue here is much simpler than you're thinking, Anyone can see that doubling up on the tensioners on a chain drive, or hell even a belt drive would give more of a secured and accurate tension on the belt/chain. 
That fact, within its self if worth something, But the question is how much exactly?

If you can post a solid set of data, measurements, Video displaying the difference even on a test bench! then it would be irrefutable and you'll have a hell of a marketable piece, But right now you're sticking with your "I've said it over and over" bit and continue to cause this rather comedic thread. 

Until you post the data, All you've got is a metal alternative to the OE setup with no real benefits other than its construction material. 

Honestly, Good luck man....


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

AmIdYfReAk said:


> I have read, and re-read this thread.... You do state your tests, and what tools you use in a vague manor... But the issue is exactly that.... its vague.
> 
> The issue here is much simpler than you're thinking, Anyone can see that doubling up on the tensioners on a chain drive, or hell even a belt drive would give more of a secured and accurate tension on the belt/chain.
> That fact, within its self if worth something, But the question is how much exactly?
> ...


 I respect your point entirely, and if I could give you undeniable scientific figures, I'd do it...but I'd prefer not to upset the natives with what my resulting flow measurement equated to until I can get it properly verified. While I'm no slouch when it comes to wrench time (but I didn't go to MIT or anything), I've based much of this on the problem that I had. I'd never heard about it before, but I've heard from a lot of people since...and many of the people who have bought this piece have done so one ease of install and quality over OEM alone.


----------



## Chris164935 (Jan 10, 2004)

zrau17 said:


> I'll add one more point here, if anyone can tell me the last time they changed an oil pump and put the chain back on without taking the gear off let me know …because if I'm not mistaken IT'S LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE or else they wouldn't send you a new friggin' bolt to replace it with when you take the old one off.


I started reading this thread prior to going in to work and all I could think about all day was how I wanted to post this exact thing. There was no way in hell that that chain was going onto the teeth of the oil pump gear with the gear bolted to the pump. So, I'm having a hard time seeing the chain coming off of the oil pump gear and the crank gear to jump teeth unless it is expanding so much from normal warm up that it could potentially come off (with little or no tension on the chain, mind you).

I also want to point out that claims of the oil pump chain tensioner being a common failure item at this point in the game seems a bit moot. Even the newest car that had a 1.8t motor is at least 10 years old! I'd say that if it is taking these tensioners 10 years to fail, **** it. Save how ever much the difference is of this guy's tensioner and a new OEM tensioner and spend it on the wife, or a 12 pack or something while installing a new OEM tensioner. Lol.

But, to add more to the technical side of this conversation, how much tension do you know to put on the chain? How much is too much or not enough? How do we/you know that your new setup does not put too much tension on the chain and cause problems? A similar concept is people putting too much tension on the 1.8t's timing belt by tightening the manual tensioner too much which, in turn, caused the belt to turn to shreads. Do you have OEM recommended tension specs for the 1.8t's oil pump chain? I know that the OEM tensioner is spring loaded, does yours account for possible heat expansion of the chain? How do you know it's not moving around in there causing excessive wear on your new tensioner set?


----------



## superkarl (Dec 18, 2012)

Ffs prove your claims you moron


----------



## dspl1236 (May 30, 2007)

munkittrick said:


> I respect your point entirely, and if I could give you undeniable scientific figures, I'd do it...*but I'd prefer not to upset the natives with what my resulting flow measurement equated to until I can get it properly verified.* While I'm no slouch when it comes to wrench time (but I didn't go to MIT or anything),* I've based much of this on the problem that I had. I'd never heard about it before, but I've heard from a lot of people since...and many of the people who have bought this piece have done so one ease of install and quality over OEM alone.*


If you provided proof...the"natives" would be happy. :screwy:


The problem you had was the wrong size chain. Now you say its a problem you have never heard before. But somehow its a know problem every 1.8t has. You STILL have to take the front main flange off to install your product! How is this an easy install and quality over OEM? 

Do you have a photo of your product installed on an engine?


If your motor spins backwards I would see there being some issues.....because there is a guy whom converts aeb 1.8t and runs the backwards. I know the 2nd photo is to demonstrate how your product sits on the chain....but it is photoshopped.



munkittrick said:


> This is the OEM system and the problem is extremely easy to see.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> But, if your car is just a standard VW or Audi with a 1.8t engine, then yes, the OEM tensioner can fail, has failed and is a known point of failure.
> 
> ...blah blah blah.....
> 
> ...


No, it's not a common or known failure point in 1.8T's. YOU had it fail because of incorrect parts, and that led you down this rabbit hole. Your known failure does not make it a known failure for the entire span of engines produced. No one is arguing that it doesn't increase tension. The point is it's not an upgrade because it won't increase flow rate, it's certainly not been properly tested (5 months on your own car isn't sufficient), and it's snake oil because of those two facts. There is no legitimate argument that counters those statements. Don't you love it when your own logic gets turned around on you? 



munkittrick said:


> You're not likely to be a customer, and frankly...I don't need customers who aren't aware of such a common failure..
> 
> I'm definitely not smarter than anyone else...
> 
> ...


Customers "aren't aware of such a common failure" because it's not common. We know you're not smarter than anyone else, but thanks for confirming. If your OEM tensioner is in place, not cracked, and you're not using the wrong parts, like you did, then the chain does not ever slip. Again, no one is arguing this. If your whole foundation for this design is the chain slips when the OEM tensioner is broken, congrats, you're officially a moron. It doesn't take a simpleton to know that installing a new tensioner fixes this, but some people like to do things the hard way. Hint: that's you! Your precipice on this whole subject is that it's a common failure. Those of us who've been here longer than you know it's not. THAT'S MY WHOLE POINT. You can't refute this. Your experience started with components that rarely fail when you got sold the wrong parts. Your experience is unlikely to be duplicated, and certainly doesn't necessitate reinventing the wheel, but you're special like that. 



munkittrick said:


> ...but until you recognize that a plastic tensioner held on by a stretch bolt with a piece of coiled coat hangar wire to keep inconsistent tension on one side of a chain that turns the oil pump which, then feeds oil to your engine...there is nothing that I can say that will help you...


You've made no statement here, I think we all realize how the stock system works. The problem is you are convinced that the tension is inconsistent. That only happens with a broken tensioner. Again, no one is arguing that. The difference is you think we all drive around with broken tensioners and no one knows it. That's not even close to true. 



munkittrick said:


> My central claim is that this part is better than the OEM part, *which has a high failure rate*. Maybe you're a lucky guy...but *you're one of a limited few who haven't heard of this problem*...and to be honest, that kind of bothers me considering that you're taking shots at a design that solves a problem that you do not even recognize.


The high failure rate is exaggerated by your own limited experience with incorrectly applied parts. There is no limited number that haven't heard of this problem, there is an *unlimited* number who've never heard of it, because it is not anywhere close to as common as you're claiming. I'd say you're the limited example. 



munkittrick said:


> With a brand new crankshaft gear, a brand new oil pump, a brand new chain and *with the tensioner not installed*, you can roll the chain over the teeth with a bit of effort. Put a 13mm socket on the oil pump sprocket *without the tensioner* and you can turn that sprocket without really even trying that hard. Yes, it will grab much of the time during initial failure due to gravity, but I'm talking very specifically about those instances *where the tensioner fails and the chain is left to spin without proper tension.*


So all of this need for this new part is based on the chain can skip teeth with no tensioner installed. Brilliant deduction, however, the OEM tensioner doesn't break nearly as often as you'd like to believe. This is the whole scare tactic in your marketing. You've ignored it every time it's been brought up, and want to resort back to "this is better, so why not?" even though your design has no where near the required testing to put into motors and not be worried about liability issues. But you're forward thinking, and you'll have a media package together soon, so it'll all be okay, right? 



munkittrick said:


> So, because my engine was the incubator of the first part, I should tear it down to show you your engine's tolerances with the OEM part? That's absolutely illogical.


For someone who is so convinced that this is a widespread problem and wants us so badly to see the light and error of our ways by accepting this superior design that we really need and don't realize it, it's absolutely logical. The burden is on you. As a salesman, you're failing. 



munkittrick said:


> Listen, it doesn't matter how loudly you say it...the oil pump chain tensioner, lower sprocket bolt, upper gear and the chain itself have *ALL failed at numerous times in a rather large number of 1.8t equipped engines.*


No, no they haven't, and that's why it doesn't matter how many stupid statements you claim as logical that you bring to the table. This is why people, obviously besides myself, think your whole idea isn't needed. You keep ignoring this fact, even though others have pointed it out, but carry on. opcorn:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Well this is just about the most entertaining thing which happened in this forum last 12 months. All it took was one quack trying to push snake-oil.

opcorn:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Gulfstream said:


> Well this is just about the most entertaining thing which happened in this forum last 12 months. All it took was one quack trying to push snake-oil.
> 
> opcorn:


You just don't understand the concept, therefore you are accepting a problem you don't even know you have! Aren't you scared? Doesn't that in itself make you want to upgrade these components that fail in every 1.8T all the time? It's just a matter of time until yours fail too! :laugh:


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

Gulfstream said:


> Well this is just about the most entertaining thing which happened in this forum last 12 months. All it took was one quack trying to push snake-oil.
> 
> opcorn:


Seriously. I've been quietly enjoying it for a few days now. :laugh:



Chris164935 said:


> But, to add more to the technical side of this conversation, how much tension do you know to put on the chain? How much is too much or not enough? How do we/you know that your new setup does not put too much tension on the chain and cause problems? A similar concept is people putting too much tension on the 1.8t's timing belt by tightening the manual tensioner too much which, in turn, caused the belt to turn to shreads. Do you have OEM recommended tension specs for the 1.8t's oil pump chain? I know that the OEM tensioner is spring loaded, does yours account for possible heat expansion of the chain? How do you know it's not moving around in there causing excessive wear on your new tensioner set?


This is a really good point. Your design seems to have a fixed tension, as opposed to the OEM piece self-adjusting for wear; how do you know that it's the "right" amount of tension. It seems to me (not an engineer, but a fairly experienced wrencher) that too much tension would lead to accelerated bearing wear in the oil pump and maybe even the crank. 

Until that point, it seemed to me like a decent idea to solve a rare problem, but now I'm wondering if it could actually be detrimental to the engine.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Chris164935 said:


> But, to add more to the technical side of this conversation, how much tension do you know to put on the chain? How much is too much or not enough? How do we/you know that your new setup does not put too much tension on the chain and cause problems? A similar concept is people putting too much tension on the 1.8t's timing belt by tightening the manual tensioner too much which, in turn, caused the belt to turn to shreads. Do you have OEM recommended tension specs for the 1.8t's oil pump chain? I know that the OEM tensioner is spring loaded, does yours account for possible heat expansion of the chain? How do you know it's not moving around in there causing excessive wear on your new tensioner set?


 This is the FIRST intelligent argument made in this entire commentary! Thank you! I'll give YOU the answers in my thought process and await your reply.

First, with respect to how much tension to put on the chain, there is a provided torque setting for the bolt that holds the OEM tensioner in place, but no OEM spec for tension. That said, in a test of 6 different OEM tensioners, none provided the exact tension at any pressure level. The lead VAG certified tech at the regional dealership explained that it's not the measure of tension that is important, but the consistency of the tension...which, if that's true actually negates, are at the very least sets up a powerful argument against the effectiveness of the OEM tensioner immediately.

Second, technical specs with regard to heat expansion of the OEM oil pump chain tensioner is measured in the thousandths of an inch (with due translation from metric) so it's negated as a potential failure unless you run your engine continuously for the entire life of the engine under maximum load. A more significant consideration in this area is that heat fatigue of the OEM tensioner spring allows for nonuniform decay in the spring rate and tension in a rather short time frame leading common wisdom to ask the question; at what point does the OEM tensioner stop working at optimum efficiency and what detriment does it cause after a certain point of fatigue. We know that the spring will actually lose tension at a high enough temperature, but taking into account annealing calculations and the ductility of cold rolled steel, the spring should actually lose tension exponentially over its life...but being that the spring decline rate is not constant, how do we know that the OEM tensioner is doing its job at the optimum level. especially given that there is no specification for the OEM spring over time and after degradation? In my mind, a device that maintained consistent tension and did not suffer fatigue at anywhere near the rate of the OEM piece would better meet the needs of the engine over a longer time period, not to mention that this device is easily adjustable to compensate for any degradation over time to counteract any short cycle annealing due to quick temperature changes.

Finally, the chain and the device work in the place of the OEM tensioner by pulling the chain together at the chain's natural fulcrum point or that of gravity under lower load. Essentially, this means that the chain tensioner is capable of an extremely small amount of pitch and all but eliminates any yaw rotation or irregularities through centrifugal rotational force. Yaw, or side-to-side "flutter" as VW refers to it, is a natural act of the chain due to the rotation of the engine and the harmonic balance of the internal parts of the engine, and those harmonics change at different rates in the RPM range. The crux is that, this flutter causes the chain to yaw at a different rate for plastic and metal parts. This causes the chain, which is in inconsistent rotational speed to move against the face of the OEM tensioner. This, taking into account all scientific principles would be a bad thing for this engine. The higher the velocity, the worse the inconsistency of tension and control of the chain. My device allows for that micro-sized flutter to be reduced and even absorbed entirely to a degree which allows for more linear rotation and predictable tension. The "wear" to the new tensioner is all but entirely negated as the dual ceramic rotational buffers (wheels) have a far higher strength and a far lower degradation rate than the stock part and do so at a predictable rate. Because those wheels rotate WITH the chain, the friction is almost entirely eliminated and the rotational speed allows the pitch of this tensioner to advance and decline at a natural rate that is in perfect synchronicity with the engine's own internal processes.

I'd love to hear your insights on these ideas and will gladly listen to your suggestions. I really, REALLY appreciate that you made an intelligent and respectful argument. It gets old trying to explain cold fusion to cavemen.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

zrau17 said:


> I'll add one more point here, if anyone can tell me the last time they changed an oil pump and put the chain back on without taking the gear off let me know …because if I'm not mistaken IT'S LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE or else they wouldn't send you a new friggin' bolt to replace it with when you take the old one off.


i have never taken the gear off, i unbolt the pump from the block and rotate it out of the chain. but you are still correct, there is nowhere near enough slack to do what this guy is claiming.


----------



## stevemannn (Apr 17, 2008)

im still confused as to how a chain actually slips lol.
this guy is just a big troll.


----------



## superkarl (Dec 18, 2012)

Still no mention of increase of flow or pressure.....

Just clutching at straws as to the durability benefits. And made up 'yaw' of the chain. 

It's like this guy read a mechanical engineering book and tried to apply every principle to this god damn chain


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

_explaining cold fusion to cavemen_

:laugh: what a prat

trollin trollin trollin


----------



## stevemannn (Apr 17, 2008)

how many systems do we know of that only apply tension to one side of a chain? a **** load
do those chains slip? no
if they did, how long would that chain,and cog last if it slips at 7k+ RPM, not very long if you ask me.
this guy is a huge troll,and as stated before, he ran too long of a chain, cause him to come up with this quick fix,that he is trying to bull**** his way through.

what about our cam chain tensioner? only applys tension to one side, it must slip too. i cant count the amount of valves i gone through cause of this! 
screw this guy lol


----------



## .Ant (Jun 7, 2011)

May we please see the test data between oem tensioner and yours?


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

As a side note, the chain tensioner system on the bmw v8 engines is pretty cool



















Essentially, it is a single sided chain tensioner (like our cam to cam chain, timing belt, a bicycle, oil pump, etc etc) but for the tensioner it uses a spring+oil pressure tensioning device. The spring keeps it initially loaded, but once oil pressure builds the oil pressure takes over. Sort of like our VVT tensioner.

............

Another interesting note is the Toyota 22R engines. One of their apparent weak links is the plastic timing chain guides. At some point someone came up with a metal backed timing chain guide that is now a common upgrade for these engines to help make them 'bulletproof'.


----------



## woodywoods86 (Jul 29, 2008)

This is not the Demdebate, stop the rhetoric :banghead:

Give me some data, force models, hell I would even settle for a static model, 3D models, failure analysis, blah blah more engineering stuff.

These are the kinds of things VAG did to design at very successful engine.

You could start with showing the data from pressure and flow testing. You could start with, as some pointed out earlier, what a chain w/o tension looks like. 

Having a BS in Mechanical Eng I am very intrigued by your concept but SUPPORT that ****.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

groggory said:


> As a side note, the chain tensioner system on the bmw v8 engines is pretty cool
> 
> Essentially, it is a single sided chain tensioner (like our cam to cam chain, timing belt, a bicycle, oil pump, etc etc) but for the tensioner it uses a spring+oil pressure tensioning device. The spring keeps it initially loaded, but once oil pressure builds the oil pressure takes over. Sort of like our VVT tensioner.


No different than a Hyundai timing chain tensioner and many other similar systems. The spring keeps slack out during rest and startup but the oil pressure increases the tension. Now if you get some RTV in the oil feed hole that supplies the tensioner......:laugh:


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

groggory said:


> As a side note, the chain tensioner system on the bmw v8 engines is pretty cool
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Haha...I replace those chains all the time at my shop. The plastic breaks off the metal backed chain guides resulting in slap, lack of tension and fault codes. Its a 25hr job to repair:laugh:. There is also a tensioner between the cams on both banks. Even when all the plastic has came off the rails and that long ass chain is flopping around I am yet to see one jump a tooth.


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

Twopnt016v said:


> Haha...I replace chains all the time at my shop. The plastic breaks off the metal backed chain guides resulting in slap, lack of tension and fault codes. Its a 25hr job to repair:laugh:. There is also a tensioner between the cams on both banks. Even when all the plastic has came off the rails and that long ass chain is flopping around I am yet to see one jump a tooth.


Good to know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

stevemannn said:


> im still confused as to how a chain actually slips lol.
> this guy is just a big troll.


If you're still trying to work that out, then you really have no business commenting.:facepalm:


----------



## superkarl (Dec 18, 2012)

Actually our cam tensioner does tension both sides


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

superkarl said:


> Actually our cam tensioner does tension both sides


You are correct.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> If you're still trying to work that out, then you really have no business commenting.:facepalm:


Nice try, but no one believes the chain will skip if the tensioner isn't broken. That's why for the 100th time, this is a horrible scam, as the tensioner is not a common failure, no matter your insistence that it is.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

groggory said:


> You are correct.


That's not the oil pump tensioner....but the failure of the lower tensioner that I'm speaking of has been attributed to the VVT cam tensioner (in your photo) to fail over time due to oil starvation as well.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> Nice try, but no one believes the chain will skip if the tensioner isn't broken. That's why for the 100th time, this is a horrible scam, as the tensioner is not a common failure, no matter your insistence that it is.


I would ****ing pay you to see your mechanical engineering degree. Until you present that, you're just blowing me for the attention. How you can call me a fraud is ****ing unfathomable.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

stevemannn said:


> how many systems do we know of that only apply tension to one side of a chain? a **** load
> do those chains slip? no
> if they did, how long would that chain,and cog last if it slips at 7k+ RPM, not very long if you ask me.
> this guy is a huge troll,and as stated before, he ran too long of a chain, cause him to come up with this quick fix,that he is trying to bull**** his way through.
> ...


Seriously? The cam chain tensioner applies tension to only one side? Get the **** outta' here! Even the other empty toolboxes in the comedy of errors knows that.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

superkarl said:


> Still no mention of increase of flow or pressure.....
> 
> Just clutching at straws as to the durability benefits. And made up 'yaw' of the chain.
> 
> It's like this guy read a mechanical engineering book and tried to apply every principle to this god damn chain


 Actually, I just asked for an argument for any point beyond pressure and flow because that needs to be measured with more accuracy and by another entity other than myself. Do you have any other argument, or no? For the record, I only stated relative terms used in the mechanical physics that applied to this device's function and design...most of those terms require some level of experience with them to explain their purpose. I'm not building rockets or anything, but I understand all of the terminology and its applied execution in a process. Do you? So, you think that I made up "yaw"? Yeah, because that has never been used to explain motion one of three axes. You're literally a worthless tool.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> I would ****ing pay you to see your mechanical engineering degree. Until you present that, you're just blowing me for the attention. How you can call me a fraud is ****ing unfathomable.


How you can insist a single failure caused by using the wrong parts is common is beyond logic and the basis for your whole marketing of this craptacular tensioner. How much would a struggling graphic design artist pay, Michael?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Ball is in your court, chief. I'm calling your bluff. We are all waiting on your proof of a chain slipping WITHOUT A BROKEN TENSIONER.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> How you can insist a single failure caused by using the wrong parts is common is beyond logic and the basis for your whole marketing of this craptacular tensioner. How much would a struggling graphic design artist pay, Michael?


It's from Auburn! That's like ****ting in a Cheerios box and selling it as if it were shredded wheat! Now I feel like giving money would be charity! I've been wasting my time with you!:facepalm:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> Ball is in your court, chief. I'm calling your bluff. We are all waiting on your proof of a chain slipping WITHOUT A BROKEN TENSIONER.


No **** Sherlock! The ball never left my court.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

groggory said:


> As a side note, the chain tensioner system on the bmw v8 engines is pretty cool
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, that is badass. I imagine that engine would be a frigging nightmare to do the chains.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> It's from Auburn! That's like ****ting in a Cheerios box and selling it as if it were shredded wheat! Now I feel like giving money would be charity! I've been wasting my time with you!:facepalm:



Yeah, top 50 in the US, horrible. 

http://best-engineering-colleges.com/auburn-university

Deflect, deny, change the subject, but don't admit you're wrong, whatever you do. You are a graphic design artist, and a poor fabricator/ designer /whatever you're pretending to do.



munkittrick said:


> No **** Sherlock! The ball never left my court.


Then why are you dribbling the ball under your own goal with your thumb up your rear?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> Yeah, top 50 in the US, horrible.
> 
> http://best-engineering-colleges.com/auburn-university
> 
> ...


 Whatever you say, tiger. All I can be sure of is that the University of Florida and the US Navy MUST be offering an entirely higher level of education...because you're not very good at that whole thinking thing. And yes, I'm a damned good graphic designer, tv producer, editor and I do work in visual effects from time to time. The point of that is that, even as a designer and disregarding ALL of my other education, I still apparently understand simple **** that you can't. Auburn...pfft...


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> Whatever you say, tiger. All I can be sure of is that the University of Florida and the US Navy MUST be offering an entirely higher level of education...because you're not very good at that whole thinking thing. And yes, I'm a damned good graphic designer, tv producer, editor and I do work in visual effects from time to time. The point of that is that, even as a designer and disregarding ALL of my other education, I still apparently understand simple **** that you can't. Auburn...pfft...



Translation "I have no proof of chains slipping, I hope people don't believe this engineer because he can tell my product is garbage. Hopefully suckers out there won't see this thread and keep buying them."

PS All the cartoon animals on your Facebook page are cute. You should stick to designing those.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> Translation "I have no proof of chains slipping, I hope people don't believe this engineer because he can tell my product is garbage. Hopefully suckers out there won't see this thread and keep buying them."
> 
> PS All the cartoon animals on your Facebook page are cute. You should stick to designing those.


That would be a chuckle is it weren't so inaccurately "translated". Did you get your translating degree at Auburn too?

And thanks for the complement! Those characters just gained three more syndicated outlets in the last 60 days. If it keeps growing at the present rate, I'll be able to buy you an education at an actual college soon.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> That would be a chuckle is it weren't so inaccurately "translated". Did you get your translating degree at Auburn too?
> 
> And thanks for the complement! Those characters just gained three more syndicated outlets in the last 60 days. If it keeps growing at the present rate, I'll be able to buy you an education at an actual college soon.


Translation "I have no engineering degree, couldn't get into UF, so I draw cartoons and pretend to design car parts. Also, I have no proof of my claims that justify this part I made. It's $19.99, but if you act now, I'll double your order if you pay shipping and handling!"

You're really, really, trying too hard. Everyone sees through your BS. I'm done for tonight, I'm sure you'll be here justifying your garbage tomorrow. :wave:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> Translation "I have no engineering degree, couldn't get into UF, so I draw cartoons and pretend to design car parts. Also, I have no proof of my claims that justify this part I made. It's $19.99, but if you act now, I'll double your order if you pay shipping and handling!"
> 
> You're really, really, trying too hard. Everyone sees through your BS. I'm done for tonight, I'm sure you'll be here justifying your garbage tomorrow. :wave:


Translation: "I have zero clue about actual engineering and this guy made sense, but I'm just going to jam my fingers in my ears and yell "nope" until this stops being correct about oil pump chains, tensioners and generally everything inside of a 1.8t VAG engine...but I'll keep on pushing this little wagon of bull**** uphill until I get tired of getting called out and abused blah, blah, blah..."

Make sure that someone there helps you with the "engineering" of laying down....maybe the "engineering" of talking to yourself...but make sure that they're not from Auburn okay. I get tired of leaning my degree on yours to keep yours from sliding of the internet. I sold two more today, at least one of them read this thread! Thanks for helping me to reach my 40th sold! Have a great night and sweet dreams, sweet cheeks!


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

20v master said:


> _pic of degree with post-it telling it like it is_


ohhhhhhh snap lol


----------



## stevemannn (Apr 17, 2008)

superkarl said:


> Actually our cam tensioner does tension both sides


i stand corrected, but either way i still dont see how that oil pump chain will skip without the tensioner it self failing


----------



## .Ant (Jun 7, 2011)

I'm still waiting for actual data showing that this is an issue.

I would like to know what Mike P is running for a tensioner.


----------



## zrau17 (Apr 21, 2010)

I'm sure y'all have heard the say you can't argue with stupid right? This is getting out of hand. OP, go in your garage, take the OEM tensioner off your car, and pull it out far enough "worst case scenario" to let it "slip." Then come back, and explain why it didn't work and that none of our engine will rotate backwards to create slack nor will the oil pump gear magically spin faster than the crank under load to create slack either.

You really need to relax, you're claiming someone Bachelors degree in mechanical engineering is bull****? Those are some tall words. No one has said you're idea is stupid, like I said before if you think it's better than do it…but you still will be 100% unable to convince anyone here that that chain will actually slip. Go read through people's build threads pushing 7-8-900hp on these motors and see if they even touch the OEM assembly. Chances are they don't, and if you'd like to go ahead (as you probably will) and claim that they too are stupid then you have your head so far up your own ass it's insane.

Post proof like everyone has asked for and we will believe you. As a matter of fact, I have an extra block, oil pump, gear, and chain in my garage. I may feel compelled to put it together and show YOU that it's impossible for the chain to slip.


----------



## OldWrencher (Sep 15, 2015)

I'm going to be a bit of devil's advocate here...

I'm sure that the chain will never slip with any tensioner in place, without a tensioner, there may be a possibility (it's a car, anything is possible lol), or as said before, if the wrong part(s) were used.

Advocate part here... The design of this tensioner is actually decent. Do I believe the claims that the OP makes, no, not at all, but I do know that floating tension designs are very good at keeping even tension. I did some machine work at a company that made these things (for commercial applications) and they are pretty cool in how they work. Mind you, these were to replace single sided tensioners on a 10ft and upwards chain, so the physics are greatly different.

I would contemplate using a floating design if the OEM piece ever did fail, but it would be made of SS all around. No point in replacing that ever failing plastic OEM tension piece with more plastic... Guess that wasn't put into the engineering of the part? :wave:


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

zrau17 said:


> ...I have an extra block, oil pump, gear, and chain in my garage. I may feel compelled to put it together and show YOU that it's impossible for the chain to slip.


If you can find the time - please do. Would be nice to have some pictures and documentation on the clearances :beer:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

This whole thread is :laugh:

It's like saying:

-Hey you guys! I changed out the vband clamps on my turbo and now my turbo flow 30% MORE: NO ****TTT!!!


I hope this thread continues throughout the weekend. Great entertainment opcorn:


----------



## Mic17a (Feb 4, 2013)

I like the idea of the floating tensioner - However I feel like it has no useful application on the 1.8t platform and the whole thing is created to solve a problem that doesn't really exist. Kind of like infomercials at 3 o'clock in the morning.

6 pages of posts in 6 days. I wish all the other threads on this forum would take flight like that!


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

War Damn Eagle, 20v! 

I wish the 1.8T Tech forum was always this entertaining.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

GasInMyVeins said:


> War Damn Eagle, 20v!
> 
> I wish the 1.8T Tech forum was always this entertaining.


War Eagle! :beer:


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Very good entertainment indeed! 

Facts are: 

1) This part is a solution for a nonexistent problem with the 1.8t

2) The floating design is sound and will work 

3) Without any long term testing from the designer, only fools will buy and use an untested products from an unknown source 

4) Some of the claims on what this will prevent is just ludicrous


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Very good entertainment indeed!
> 
> Facts are:
> 
> ...




This claim is my favourite:

E.) The floating design boosted the QPM oil pump flow rate by over 30% (HOLY ****!!!)


By magic the oil pump start spinning faster even if it's linked directly to the crank and will do same rpm. :thumbup:opcorn::bs:


----------



## stevemannn (Apr 17, 2008)

was bored today, here is some entertainment from our favorite engineer lol

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6975195-WTF-is-up-with-this-oil-pressure-!-!-!



munkittrick said:


> First, let me say that I'm no certified mechanic, nor do I claim to be a technical wizard when it comes to the mechanics of a complicated machine. That having been said, I'm not an idiot by any stretch of the imagination either. I've rebuilt my own engines for years...so when I hear a load of horse sh!t...I'm usually informed enough to know it.
> .


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

stevemannn said:


> was bored today, here is some entertainment from our favorite engineer lol


It gets better! Check THIS out! He used to drive for VWMS for 2 years, and he's been inside 50 1.8T's that they raced! I wonder what they used as a tensioner for the oil pump chain on those motors. :laugh:



> Now, I drove for VW Motorsports for almost 2 full years and have seen the inside of more than 50 1.8t engines and we never used anything but OEM pumps.


----------



## stevemannn (Apr 17, 2008)

lol, i love issam's reply at the bottom also.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Where's the nut? I'm waiting for more crazy... 

opcorn:


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

Delusions of grandeur along with a hearty serving of narcissism


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

stevemannn said:


> was bored today, here is some entertainment from our favorite engineer lol
> 
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6975195-WTF-is-up-with-this-oil-pressure-!-!-!





20v master said:


> It gets better! Check THIS out! He used to drive for VWMS for 2 years, and he's been inside 50 1.8T's that they raced! I wonder what they used as a tensioner for the oil pump chain on those motors. :laugh:


Could you guys cut it out already... gonna chase away the forum's new star entertainer, and turn this place back into its boring state again! :laugh:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Could you guys cut it out already... gonna chase away the forum's new star entertainer, and turn this place back into its boring state again! :laugh:


Looks like it's too late. He probably climbed back up in his tree.... umpkin:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

OldWrencher said:


> Advocate part here... The design of this tensioner is actually decent. Do I believe the claims that the OP makes, no, not at all, but I do know that floating tension designs are very good at keeping even tension. I did some machine work at a company that made these things (for commercial applications) and they are pretty cool in how they work. Mind you, these were to replace single sided tensioners on a 10ft and upwards chain, so the physics are greatly different.
> 
> I would contemplate using a floating design if the OEM piece ever did fail, but it would be made of SS all around. No point in replacing that ever failing plastic OEM tension piece with more plastic... Guess that wasn't put into the engineering of the part? :wave:


 I appreciate the input. The floating tensioner is the strongest, safest and simplest to design because it's predictably consistent. It's also the oldest and most respected in higher power systems. I used to work on Caterpillar extremely heavy-duty paving vehicles and they all have floating tensioners BECAUSE of reliability and strength. Mine is all stainless steel wrapped inside of a very high grade poly-coated steel sleeve with ceramic bearings. No part of it is as poor quality as the plastic OEM part. This poly is the highest resilience and has been proven to have especially high resistance to petroleum derivatives. If you'd be interested in owning one, give me a shout when you are in a position to upgrade and I'll give you one at cost.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

zrau17 said:


> I'm sure y'all have heard the say you can't argue with stupid right? This is getting out of hand. OP, go in your garage, take the OEM tensioner off your car, and pull it out far enough "worst case scenario" to let it "slip." Then come back, and explain why it didn't work and that none of our engine will rotate backwards to create slack nor will the oil pump gear magically spin faster than the crank under load to create slack either.
> 
> You really need to relax, you're claiming someone Bachelors degree in mechanical engineering is bull****? Those are some tall words. No one has said you're idea is stupid, like I said before if you think it's better than do it…but you still will be 100% unable to convince anyone here that that chain will actually slip. Go read through people's build threads pushing 7-8-900hp on these motors and see if they even touch the OEM assembly. Chances are they don't, and if you'd like to go ahead (as you probably will) and claim that they too are stupid then you have your head so far up your own ass it's insane.
> 
> Post proof like everyone has asked for and we will believe you. As a matter of fact, I have an extra block, oil pump, gear, and chain in my garage. I may feel compelled to put it together and show YOU that it's impossible for the chain to slip.


 Dear God! I wish that I couldn't argue with stupid...but he keeps rattling off the same illogical argument. I conceded the fact that the pump measurement wasn't scientific, but I plan on getting another tech to get some finite specs. When that happens, right or wrong...I'll be back to eat a plate full of crow, or hand out plates full of ****.

I really don't like arguing with anyone. I've always tried to help people when I was in a position to do so. The problem here is that some people cannot wrap their heads around the fact that ALL parts will fail at some point...and that's a fact. Does everyone have the same problems with their cars? No. Does everyone have the identical upgrades? No. Does everyone want to do the kind of work and use non-OEM parts to advance their car's performance? At this point, I'm not really sure...but there's absolutely no doubt that better parts make for better results.

I'd honestly LOVE to see a video of a chain that doesn't flutter with no tensioner, but I'd be ecstatic to see what you come up with on slipping the chain over the upper gear. This piece of OEM plastic cannot outperform a piece of steel in this environment. It's just not going to happen. I understand that a majority of you guys think that the stock oil system has zero slippage, nonexistent chain stretch and no unpredictability when the tensioner spring begins to fail...and I could say over and over that my experience, while not the same as yours, is entirely factual...and I've actually seen quite a few cars that have had the chains snap, and more often than not it's been related to sloppy chains.

Does no one see the merits of this device? I can't believe that no one would consider this an upgrade...or at worst, a better built option. To each his own I guess.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Very good entertainment indeed!
> 
> Facts are:
> 
> ...



1.) Depending upon what you deem a problem I suppose, but it was designed to stop chain "chatter" and "flutter" when the OEM tensioner begins to lose it's rigidity. That may not be a prevalent problem here, but it is absolutely existent

2.) Yes, and with higher reliability, even if you don't think the chains could slip...you cannot devalue quality because "it's always been that way".

3.) I've used one for many months and have had no issues whatsoever. Scientific? Nope...but no reason for someone to lose **** and start foaming at the mouth. The only difference that I can even point out is that the floating tensioner pulls the chain more evenly and has helped to quiet my engine, keeps my oil near flawlessly clean with no caking and clogs that I was experiencing some time ago.

4.) Okay. You got me...it will definitely NOT make your dick bigger...but it's still a better product and it's something that will most likely never need to be replaced, unlike the OEM part.


Hey, listen...I never came here to pick a fight, but this bull**** pettiness isn't helping anyone. Right or wrong, it's ****ed up to trash someone's hard earned time and money invested in a project. My true intent is based on wanting to help fellow Vortex users simply because I thought this place might still be ahead of the game.

I'm worn down an tired of this sausage fest and have gotten ZERO support from most of you guys (Thank you for the private messages guys). I can't even advertise on the VW Vortex now because you're all so intent on killing my progress. Thanks, but no thanks.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Mic17a said:


> I like the idea of the floating tensioner - However I feel like it has no useful application on the 1.8t platform and the whole thing is created to solve a problem that doesn't really exist. Kind of like infomercials at 3 o'clock in the morning.
> 
> 6 pages of posts in 6 days. I wish all the other threads on this forum would take flight like that!


 Thank you. I felt that I needed to reach ahead and try something new, but for me, it's all about building a better mousetrap. I did my homework and built a prototype...and it worked perfectly as it was. And, the problem does exist. I'm not doubting that some people will never see it, but it's one of the most replaced parts on these engines according to the dealer's parts department. It may not be as prevalent in some areas of the country, but it does happen.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> Delusions of grandeur along with a hearty serving of narcissism


"Narcissism"? Not at all. I hate that I don't know everything that I'd like to know, but if four guys fall overboard with one life preserver, I'm going to cling to that bitch and defend myself because the other three guys are ****ed. If you want to look and sound smart, hang out with idiots.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Good night all. Have a great weekend!


----------



## .Ant (Jun 7, 2011)

No one is arguing that your part it's better quality than the oem tensioner. HREs are nice wheels but I don't have to spend that much if my OEM wheels operate appropriately. 

The argument is mostly about your claims that it boosts oiling performance and that the chain slips with the oem tensioner. You have proven neither to us. Nearly two decades of this motor goes to disprove your claims. 

I understand that you haven't "scientifically" collected data, but from my understanding you have performed some type of tests. I would still like to see the results. Some data would be more telling than none.

If it was such an issue I would imagine that bigger performance companies would have made their own solution a long time ago. In lieu, 1.8t oil pump conversion kits are offered for other motors.

You seem to be dancing around certain questions, comments and concerns by name calling and deflecting. Not trying to get into the name calling bullsht. Please stop with that childish nonsense. We should all stick to the technical concerns of this part and not each other's lives. It does nothing for either side of the argument.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

munkittrick said:


> "Narcissism"? Not at all. I hate that I don't know everything that I'd like to know, but if four guys fall overboard with one life preserver, I'm going to cling to that bitch and defend myself because the other three guys are ****ed. If you want to look and sound smart, hang out with idiots.


Thank you. Your last few posts have been quite rational, consistent, and helpful. This is the type of conversation that's been desired. However, as pointed out above, you still haven't answered questions regarding the claims you make.

It is one of my greatest pet peeves when someone will not admit their own ignorance. I am glad to see you not attacking, but instead explaining, 'idiots' dig notwithstanding.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

.Ant said:


> No one is arguing that your part it's better quality than the oem tensioner. HREs are nice wheels but I don't have to spend that much if my OEM wheels operate appropriately.
> 
> The argument is mostly about your claims that it boosts oiling performance and that the chain slips with the oem tensioner. You have proven neither to us. Nearly two decades of this motor goes to disprove your claims.
> 
> ...



That's been the point all along. How does one "prove" that a stock OEM tensioner slips without an OEM system set-up on the work bench? The next time I get time to break down one of my own engines, I'll gladly get video and photos of how the system works. I've backed entirely away from any claims of a performance boost for the exact reason that you stated; just because it's better doesn't men that you need it. That not withstanding, better quality is still better quality, and while it might be logical to say that your stock wheels are still round, I've still seen them bend, chip and require repair. That could be true of ANY part at any given point in a vehicle's life...but what is argument/proof should I use to explain that I've seen a lot of the these engines with sloppy chain tensioners, poorly designed OEM parts and obvious signs of failure at different stages that have almost all contributed to a larger problem? It's kind of like explaining to a group of women how their makeup makes them look like crap. 1 in 25 women might be in a position to actually say, "brand "A" make up is **** and you could look better", and they all have mirrors and see things they could change for the better, but when someone externally point out the flaws on their makeup, even the most rational of women seems to swirl into a frenzy to argue how their makeup is fine...they'll just settle because it still gets them laid. Sure, the OEM tensioner is fine, and if you've never had a problem, then clearly this is not for you...but I've just sold 45 of these things in a week without any claims of performance boost, and I'm hearing quite frequently that "my tensioner failed a few years ago and facked up my entire engine. I don't want to risk that again". My own car split an OEM tensioner into shards about a year ago, and while numerous posts on this forum show that I was working with a poorly stacked deck....be it that the dealer gave me the incorrect part or another failing part leading to a relatable problem that required some input, MOST of what I have seen and have been posting has been factually accurate in that the stock part is NOT fail-proof and I've heard from a rather sizable group that claims to have lost their tensioner in relatively short order. Two dealerships, entirely independent of each other have said that they see the problem quite often and that when the tensioner fails, many people never know it...but that it causes the gears to wear exponentially faster than in a system with a fully operational tensioner. They have pointed out to me that running for any length of time with a failed tensioner can be bad for the engine's longevity and more than 90% of the people who bring their cars in for servicing NEVER even know that the tensioner has failed at all....they just drive it as it is. Now, with their input and my own experiences, everything that I've just said s 100% true. Are a lot of people going to even know that they have a wear tensioner or failed internal part? Maybe, but the noise cause by a slipping chain is not one that most people can pick out under the hood, and they certainly aren't going to hear it over Justin Beiber playing at 75% of full-volume while speeding down the freeway. The entire reason that I spent my time, money and effort was to find a cure to MY problem and to address MY concerns...and I did, but since my first mention of this idea almost a year ago, I've been asked enough times about the subject that offering the part as part of a solution to someone else's problems seemed logical and worthy of the investment. I come here, the poor man's Mecca of VW tech and get blasted left and right about the claims that my blender is better than the blender that they own....ALL claims aside. It is an impossible argument for me to sell you something that you have already made up your minds that you don't need. That's fine, but people are still asking me if this will help to make their engine less likely to break _another_ tensioner and I can honestly tell them "yes"...because it's a better product with one of the longest testing cycles in modern history. The floating chain tensioner is the proverbial "wheel" that wasn't reinvented to make better, but to make more cheaply and to sell more volume by VW. It's been in use almost as long at the gas powered engine has existed. Mercedes-Benz used them, Bugatti used them, Jaguar used them, large equipment manufacturers STILL use them for their beneficial strength and reliability, not to mention all the claims that I made regarding the equal distribution of chain tension. If you buy something and want to eliminate as many weak points that you can, wouldn't you look to other people who have solved the issue that have had to resolve that weak link? What more does someone need to do in order to explain that there is no logical argument for wanting a less reliable product over an equally priced, higher quality product? If you're going to say that the problem doesn't exist, then I won't be selling you a tensioner, and I'm perfectly okay with that...but your engine is not the norm compared to the people that have spoken to me. Your engines are in a rare minority to many of the people that have spoken to me, and in as much as I'd like to be the perfect person, if someone needs "something" and I've made "something", I'm not going to refute their claims that they have had tensioners fail which led to sloppy chain control, which led to premature gear wear and failed oil pump sprocket bolts, which led to low oil flow/pressure, which led to an under-lubricated can chain tensioner, which led to larger engine failures. I'm not going to argue with the logic that tells any rational person that there is a compounded problem that begins with a simple, stupid, poorly made piece of plastic. I'm simply going to take that portion of my argument and leave the rest for you guys to discuss and negate at your own expense.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

I beat the living crap out of my engine at the track and have probably done like 70-80 trackdays with the same block and oilpump/tensioner. Everytime we opened the engine for whatever parts failed, crankshaft, rods, bearings and so on one thing my mechanic always pointed out was how new the chain and tensioner to the oilpump looked. Even after all that abuse with triple power of what it's designed to handle. It's clearly not a weak link in the engine.

Your problems seemed to be incorrect mix of parts. You used the wrong chain and ****ed **** up as a result. Blaming other parts for your neglect is a swing and a miss.

Now you "invent" a floating tensioner to fix the problem only you had caused by usage of incorrect parts and make all kind of BS claims on the forum. Ppl here are not idiots like you repeatedly state and they call you bluff. Why do you think they bite your head off? 

If you had a bit different approach to the whole situation where you didn't make all this BS claims, namecallings and treat users in here like braindead sheeps you'd probably have a better time but I doubt anyone would replace the oem tensioner because there is just no reason for it. Oem tensioner is a great part.


For future projects I suggest you change your approach and don't expect everyone but you is an idiot. Also, facts to back up your **** don't hurt either. BS didn't work so well for you here did it?

:wave:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> I beat the living crap out of my engine at the track and have probably done like 70-80 trackdays with the same block and oilpump/tensioner. Everytime we opened the engine for whatever parts failed, crankshaft, rods, bearings and so on one thing my mechanic always pointed out was how new the chain and tensioner to the oilpump looked. Even after all that abuse with triple power of what it's designed to handle. It's clearly not a weak link in the engine.
> 
> Your problems seemed to be incorrect mix of parts. You used the wrong chain and ****ed **** up as a result. Blaming other parts for your neglect is a swing and a miss.
> 
> ...


 It's funny how you don't seem to get that I don't give a f~ck about what YOU think. You're snide, sh!tty, offer nothing to the conversation and only climb on the backs of people with some idea of what THEY are talking about because your bullsh!t doesn't float on it's own. 70-80 track days a year, and you're best argument is, "well, it's never happened to me"? I'm done with you. You are literally useless. You keep chattering and bobbing up to the top...and nothing, NOTHING that you've said has made any reason for me to communicate with you beyond to turn your own insults right back at you. You're shallow, uninformed and you do not seem to posses the ability to communicate without being a completely insulting troll. When you speak to me respectfully, I'll do the same to you, but since your first message to or about me was an insult to my entire idea, you can fist fu(K yourself senseless. You are not working toward any solution other the destruction-by-fire of a complete idea, and as such...I've no interest in watching light the match. Since you missed it...I'll re-post this just for you.:wave:

That's been the point all along. How does one "prove" that a stock OEM tensioner slips without an OEM system set-up on the work bench? The next time I get time to break down one of my own engines, I'll gladly get video and photos of how the system works. I've backed entirely away from any claims of a performance boost for the exact reason that you stated; just because it's better doesn't men that you need it. That not withstanding, better quality is still better quality, and while it might be logical to say that your stock wheels are still round, I've still seen them bend, chip and require repair. That could be true of ANY part at any given point in a vehicle's life...but what is argument/proof should I use to explain that I've seen a lot of the these engines with sloppy chain tensioners, poorly designed OEM parts and obvious signs of failure at different stages that have almost all contributed to a larger problem? It's kind of like explaining to a group of women how their makeup makes them look like crap. 1 in 25 women might be in a position to actually say, "brand "A" make up is **** and you could look better", and they all have mirrors and see things they could change for the better, but when someone externally point out the flaws on their makeup, even the most rational of women seems to swirl into a frenzy to argue how their makeup is fine...they'll just settle because it still gets them laid. Sure, the OEM tensioner is fine, and if you've never had a problem, then clearly this is not for you...but I've just sold 45 of these things in a week without any claims of performance boost, and I'm hearing quite frequently that "my tensioner failed a few years ago and facked up my entire engine. I don't want to risk that again". My own car split an OEM tensioner into shards about a year ago, and while numerous posts on this forum show that I was working with a poorly stacked deck....be it that the dealer gave me the incorrect part or another failing part leading to a relatable problem that required some input, MOST of what I have seen and have been posting has been factually accurate in that the stock part is NOT fail-proof and I've heard from a rather sizable group that claims to have lost their tensioner in relatively short order. Two dealerships, entirely independent of each other have said that they see the problem quite often and that when the tensioner fails, many people never know it...but that it causes the gears to wear exponentially faster than in a system with a fully operational tensioner. They have pointed out to me that running for any length of time with a failed tensioner can be bad for the engine's longevity and more than 90% of the people who bring their cars in for servicing NEVER even know that the tensioner has failed at all....they just drive it as it is. Now, with their input and my own experiences, everything that I've just said s 100% true. Are a lot of people going to even know that they have a wear tensioner or failed internal part? Maybe, but the noise cause by a slipping chain is not one that most people can pick out under the hood, and they certainly aren't going to hear it over Justin Beiber playing at 75% of full-volume while speeding down the freeway. The entire reason that I spent my time, money and effort was to find a cure to MY problem and to address MY concerns...and I did, but since my first mention of this idea almost a year ago, I've been asked enough times about the subject that offering the part as part of a solution to someone else's problems seemed logical and worthy of the investment. I come here, the poor man's Mecca of VW tech and get blasted left and right about the claims that my blender is better than the blender that they own....ALL claims aside. It is an impossible argument for me to sell you something that you have already made up your minds that you don't need. That's fine, but people are still asking me if this will help to make their engine less likely to break another tensioner and I can honestly tell them "yes"...because it's a better product with one of the longest testing cycles in modern history. The floating chain tensioner is the proverbial "wheel" that wasn't reinvented to make better, but to make more cheaply and to sell more volume by VW. It's been in use almost as long at the gas powered engine has existed. Mercedes-Benz used them, Bugatti used them, Jaguar used them, large equipment manufacturers STILL use them for their beneficial strength and reliability, not to mention all the claims that I made regarding the equal distribution of chain tension. If you buy something and want to eliminate as many weak points that you can, wouldn't you look to other people who have solved the issue that have had to resolve that weak link? What more does someone need to do in order to explain that there is no logical argument for wanting a less reliable product over an equally priced, higher quality product? If you're going to say that the problem doesn't exist, then I won't be selling you a tensioner, and I'm perfectly okay with that...but your engine is not the norm compared to the people that have spoken to me. Your engines are in a rare minority to many of the people that have spoken to me, and in as much as I'd like to be the perfect person, if someone needs "something" and I've made "something", I'm not going to refute their claims that they have had tensioners fail which led to sloppy chain control, which led to premature gear wear and failed oil pump sprocket bolts, which led to low oil flow/pressure, which led to an under-lubricated can chain tensioner, which led to larger engine failures. I'm not going to argue with the logic that tells any rational person that there is a compounded problem that begins with a simple, stupid, poorly made piece of plastic. I'm simply going to take that portion of my argument and leave the rest for you guys to discuss and negate at your own expense.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Yeah, after your first posts where you outed yourself as somewhat of a quack I stopped reading the content of your posts. I just see crazy-crazy-crazy. I must say, it seems like you are one mentally unstable cookie....


Why won't you remind us how you feel we are all against you again opcorn::laugh:


Seek help amigo :wave:


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> Yeah, after your first posts where you outed yourself as somewhat of a quack I stopped reading the content of your posts. I just see crazy-crazy-crazy. I must say, it seems like you are one mentally unstable cookie....
> 
> 
> Why won't you remind us how you feel we are all against you again opcorn::laugh:
> ...


 Yeah, you stopped reading, but kept on typing. Kudos to your integrity. I've decided to stop treating the small group of inane babblers as part of the VW community because, I seem to recall when people were courteous and wanted to do something to give back to the VW community. These days it's all about "frame notch lowering", BBS-RS wheels, cold air intakes, shifty body kits and mob rule. I didn't sign on for that, and if you did...you might want to step back and take inventory of anything positive that you've said in this thread. All I see theses days is "you fail", "you suck" and "you're wrong because it never happened to me". Nothing helpful at all.

Sure, your intent is to try and chop me down and make fun of my idea in the hopes that it will divert people away from owning something that might be of benefit. As a sad irony to the entire situation, I'm one of a few people who has used common facts to point out the many things that people who use this design could achieve. I'm not trying to fleece people. I'm here to try and help. If you feel that it will not help you, I understand....but don't **** block other people by trash talk and gang rape on one person. In the grand scheme of things, you're no closer to disproving my assertions than I am and sidelining yours. I understand how burden of proof works...but that could have been covered a long time ago if people weren't so quick to insult and berate. It's kind of tiresome and degrading to everyone. Brilliant closing line, by the way. You call me crazy for creating something, but you somehow think that you're not crazy for diligently attacking it. Personally, I think that anyone who owns a VW needs some manner of mental health services, but the fact is that I'm no more or less crazy than you. I'm just on the other side of the fulcrum.

I'll close up my responses to you with this; I actually DO appreciate that you read the post at all, and I don't mind some criticism...but you've got to understand that progress has no place in your argument against this design. Maybe I'll catch you on my next invention. Maybe I won't, but I'm always going to try to do something that I can be proud of and when this thing has gone through the ringer and come out the other side...people are buying these things with almost TOTAL disregard of my performance claims, and quite a few of them are are saying that their issue was a oil system problem that led them to the purchase. It's the way free-market enterprise works. If you want it, buy it. If you don't trust that the design is better than OEM, don't buy it. Either way, my intent is now, and has always been to help people and think ahead. Keep your eyes peeled for a modified intercooler design, but next time, start with something less spiteful and we can actually talk a bit before you lose your ****. Good luck in the future.


----------



## Chris164935 (Jan 10, 2004)

How is it that the oil pump chain tensioners failing is a common issue known to you and 2 dealerships (one of which sold you the wrong part), yet it is not known anywhere else? There's a common issue with the coolant flange on the back of these heads leaking, cracking, etc. and you can see it frequently posted in these forums. There's a common issue with the coil packs on these motors, so much so that VW/Audi did a recall on them; but you can see the issue with them frequently coming up in these forums (and others as well). Sorry, but if you had come with this idea and these claims 10 years ago, we'd probably be more inclined to believe you since the age of the motors and the mileage of these motors would have been way less. But, to claim this part is a common failure item on a 10+ year old motor (the last of the 1.8t engines came out in 2005ish), I'm not buying it. Sorry. I've had my 1.8t engines since 2001 and have rebuilt a couple of my project motors and have never seen any issues with crumbling or exploding oil pump chain tensioners. At best, you could claim there is wear issues, but that's to be expected (these same wear patterns can be seen on all the plastic tensioners that tension chains). And I just don't see people spending the money it would cost to install these by a shop (if a shop would even do it, since I don't see any dealerships doing it because it's an aftermarket part) or to get the extra parts and spend the extra time to install it. Especially for a daily beater.

Also, as to the general design. No one is claiming it is bad. Are they claiming it is unnecessary? Sure, because from everything found online and in a lot of people's experiences (mine included), it appears to be that way. Secondly, YOUR design/setup is not fully tested. How many miles have you put on yours? 12K? I'd say come back in 60k miles with pictures of the setup that was used to show wear/tear... Then, we'll see.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Chris164935 said:


> How is it that the oil pump chain tensioners failing is a common issue known to you and 2 dealerships (one of which sold you the wrong part), yet it is not known anywhere else? There's a common issue with the coolant flange on the back of these heads leaking, cracking, etc. and you can see it frequently posted in these forums. There's a common issue with the coil packs on these motors, so much so that VW/Audi did a recall on them; but you can see the issue with them frequently coming up in these forums (and others as well). Sorry, but if you had come with this idea and these claims 10 years ago, we'd probably be more inclined to believe you since the age of the motors and the mileage of these motors would have been way less. But, to claim this part is a common failure item on a 10+ year old motor (the last of the 1.8t engines came out in 2005ish), I'm not buying it. Sorry. I've had my 1.8t engines since 2001 and have rebuilt a couple of my project motors and have never seen any issues with crumbling or exploding oil pump chain tensioners. At best, you could claim there is wear issues, but that's to be expected (these same wear patterns can be seen on all the plastic tensioners that tension chains). And I just don't see people spending the money it would cost to install these by a shop (if a shop would even do it, since I don't see any dealerships doing it because it's an aftermarket part) or to get the extra parts and spend the extra time to install it. Especially for a daily beater.
> 
> Also, as to the general design. No one is claiming it is bad. Are they claiming it is unnecessary? Sure, because from everything found online and in a lot of people's experiences (mine included), it appears to be that way. Secondly, YOUR design/setup is not fully tested. How many miles have you put on yours? 12K? I'd say come back in 60k miles with pictures of the setup that was used to show wear/tear... Then, we'll see.


 Yes, one time I got the wrong part...and it was clearly the incorrect part...but I got the correct part and installed it as per specifications. That horse has died, stop fingering it. It would seem as thought this is only NOT a problem here, but I can't speak for those few people here have a different experience, nor will I debate your engine against mine. It's not a pissing competition. The coil pack issue was, and still is on many cars a damned tragedy, but it's a part that you KNOW if wrong because the car stops. People drive around for months and months with tensioners losing strength and allowing chain flutter. You can't tell anyone about a potential issue that you don't know that you have, but with Volkswagen being one of the cars that people most neglect to do good maintenance practices with (only behind to Honda, Kia and Audi in Car & Driver's report from early 2014. Don't recall the exact publication date), it's not a completely uninformed assumption that the number of tensioners sold online, at dealerships and through places like ECS is so high because of replacement or failure. If you want to get hard numbers on those, you can contact almost any dealership and quantify the exact number.

These were never meant to be installed by a shop. These are for people who do their own work and simply want the added security these provide, your experience with OEM parts not withstanding.

Finally, I wish I had been in a position to do a 60k test and report back...but I didn't and what I have is what I have. I'm not asking for people who are happy with their OEM part to take a chance. I'm telling people who might had this problem that it doesn't need to happen again. Again, that doesn't appear to be something that would help you specifically, but it does seem to be a lot easier to sell than I'd surmised, so there has got to be a reason for that. Like you said, no one who has no problem is going to rush right down and take out the tensioner at a shop for a few hundred dollars. I wouldn't think that those people would care either way...which is why I'm shocked that there's this much bitterness about the product. If you don't like Red Lobster you don't run inside one yelling "there's cat in your surf & turf" unless you work in THAT kitchen. I'm just tired of trying to validate other people's experiences against other people who have said to me that the problem is why they were looking for something better. All of this started because of a poor experience I've now had on a few of my own cars. I needed a solution, couldn't find one and made my own based on some very commonly accepted mechanical principles. That's it. That's where I started from. I'm just not interested in the dramatic banter that this forum has been trowing at me from the beginning. It's not getting anywhere...and as I've said, I prefer to make progress and go forward whenever possible. Thanks for the input and good luck in the future.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

Where is the break-point between being entertained on a forum and letting someone troll the **** out of the place?

edit: and for the record, my 01 mexican jetta is straight sleeper that will destroy anything donny dipshiat is offering here


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> Where is the break-point between being entertained on a forum and letting someone troll the **** out of the place?
> 
> edit: and for the record, my 01 mexican jetta is straight sleeper that will destroy anything donny dipshiat is offering here


Am I supposed to excuse you from the conversation? I was not aware that you needed permission to leave. By all means Captain Post Count, go with my blessing.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

munkittrick said:


> Am I supposed to excuse you from the conversation? I was not aware that you needed permission to leave. By all means Captain Post Count, go with my blessing.


*snert* sure thing homie, keep it up.. out of curiosity, where are you posting on how you're trolling the shiat out of a vw forum?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> *snert* sure thing homie, keep it up.. out of curiosity, where are you posting on how you're trolling the shiat out of a vw forum?


I can't troll my own post:facepalm:. Actually, you're trolling my post...not that you'd know how that works. You keep asking why I claim that you're stupid...and then you answer yourself for me. Technically, none of your posts in this thread have been requisite reading and much of your commentary has just been dimwitted jockeying to post anything at all. Clearly, you're working on your post count. If you're going to ask why I call you stupid, at least wait for me to respond. I've been a member here for almost 10 years, and with the exception of a post a few years back where people ****ed with some kid about cutting his springs, this is the worst thread in the history of this forum. I thought that you were tired of this thread and wanted to exit? I gave you permission to leave. Take advantage of the gift.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

munkittrick said:


> I can't troll my own post:facepalm:. Actually, you're trolling my post...not that you'd know how that works. You keep asking why I claim that you're stupid...and then you answer yourself for me. Technically, none of your posts in this thread have been requisite reading and much of your commentary has just been dimwitted jockeying to post anything at all. Clearly, you're working on your post count. If you're going to ask why I call you stupid, at least wait for me to respond. I've been a member here for almost 10 years, and with the exception of a post a few years back where people ****ed with some kid about cutting his springs, this is the worst thread in the history of this forum. I thought that you were tired of this thread and wanted to exit? I gave you permission to leave. Take advantage of the gift.


hah. i'll reply for entertainment's sake. if you want to deflect to my post count, no one can stop you. it still won't validate your claims made earlier in the thread, especially the 30% flow rate. you're a half-rated hack; a machinist that is angry at the world because he couldn't finish technical college, destined to claim that his mental superiors are in fact inferior and unable to grasp your commanding mastery of physics. 

you want to talk about post count? why don't we go back to where you added to your post count by claiming that the pump chain was wrong because you were too dense to get the correct part in the first place?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> hah. i'll reply for entertainment's sake. if you want to deflect to my post count, no one can stop you. it still won't validate your claims made earlier in the thread, especially the 30% flow rate. you're a half-rated hack; a machinist that is angry at the world because he couldn't finish technical college, destined to claim that his mental superiors are in fact inferior and unable to grasp your commanding mastery of physics.
> 
> you want to talk about post count? why don't we go back to where you added to your post count by claiming that the pump chain was wrong because you were too dense to get the correct part in the first place?


 Yes, please...stay and entertain me. Pertinent information is always appreciated. If I find that something changes the factored outcome of a post that I made, I change it to help people...you know, just to be a swell guy. You, on the other hand seem to find joy in bobbling your way through poorly crafted insults and not realizing that you can't be handed your intellect like you've been handed your ass. You were saying...?


----------



## Chris164935 (Jan 10, 2004)

munkittrick said:


> Yes, one time I got the wrong part...and it was clearly the incorrect part...but I got the correct part and installed it as per specifications. That horse has died, stop fingering it. It would seem as thought this is only NOT a problem here, but I can't speak for those few people here have a different experience, nor will I debate your engine against mine. It's not a pissing competition. The coil pack issue was, and still is on many cars a damned tragedy, but it's a part that you KNOW if wrong because the car stops. People drive around for months and months with tensioners losing strength and allowing chain flutter. You can't tell anyone about a potential issue that you don't know that you have, but with Volkswagen being one of the cars that people most neglect to do good maintenance practices with (only behind to Honda, Kia and Audi in Car & Driver's report from early 2014. Don't recall the exact publication date), it's not a completely uninformed assumption that the number of tensioners sold online, at dealerships and through places like ECS is so high because of replacement or failure. If you want to get hard numbers on those, you can contact almost any dealership and quantify the exact number.
> 
> These were never meant to be installed by a shop. These are for people who do their own work and *simply want the added security these provide*, your experience with OEM parts not withstanding.
> 
> Finally, I wish I had been in a position to do a 60k test and report back...but I didn't and what I have is what I have. I'm not asking for people who are happy with their OEM part to take a chance. I'm telling people who might had this problem that it doesn't need to happen again. Again, that doesn't appear to be something that would help you specifically, but it does seem to be a lot easier to sell than I'd surmised, so there has got to be a reason for that. Like you said, no one who has no problem is going to rush right down and take out the tensioner at a shop for a few hundred dollars. I wouldn't think that those people would care either way...which is why I'm shocked that there's this much bitterness about the product. If you don't like Red Lobster you don't run inside one yelling "there's cat in your surf & turf" unless you work in THAT kitchen. I'm just tired of trying to validate other people's experiences against other people who have said to me that the problem is why they were looking for something better. All of this started because of a poor experience I've now had on a few of my own cars. I needed a solution, couldn't find one and made my own based on some very commonly accepted mechanical principles. That's it. That's where I started from. I'm just not interested in the dramatic banter that this forum has been trowing at me from the beginning. It's not getting anywhere...and as I've said, I prefer to make progress and go forward whenever possible. Thanks for the input and good luck in the future.


Here is the problem. You still have no proof that these (these meaning YOUR specific design/setup) will provide added security. A lot of people have thousands invested in their project motors, and to put stock in something that is NOT fully tested would be crazy. You're asking people to go out on a whim because of an issue you had and a fix you put into place (still untested).
As for your Red Lobster reference, something like that would never happen. Why? Because there are inspections and government regulations in place that would prevent "cat" from being in my "surf n turf". Same as inspections and regulations (as well as rigorous testing) have been put into the current OEM designs of the 1.8t motor. Unfortunately, your setup is unregulated, non professionally inspected, and untested... If I don't like Red Lobster, then I just don't eat there. But, you do not see Red Lobster posting on chef discussion boards about how its "surf and turf" is superior to 3 star Michelin-rated restaurants with no way to validate that or with proof of such claims...


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Chris164935 said:


> Here is the problem. You still have no proof that these (these meaning YOUR specific design/setup) will provide added security. A lot of people have thousands invested in their project motors, and to put stock in something that is NOT fully tested would be crazy. You're asking people to go out on a whim because of an issue you had and a fix you put into place (still untested).
> As for your Red Lobster reference, something like that would never happen. Why? Because there are inspections and government regulations in place that would prevent "cat" from being in my "surf n turf". Same as inspections and regulations (as well as rigorous testing) have been put into the current OEM designs of the 1.8t motor. Unfortunately, your setup is unregulated, non professionally inspected, and untested... If I don't like Red Lobster, then I just don't eat there. But, you do not see Red Lobster posting on chef discussion boards about how its "surf and turf" is superior to 3 star Michelin-rated restaurants with no way to validate that or with proof of such claims...


 How would I go about explaining the tensile strength of stainless steel as compared to injection molded plastic? I would assume that it would be a very easy argument given that I've yet to see an injection molded plastic engine block, but I'll let you tell me. Can I prove anything in the application of this device? Well, if you take 12k miles and almost no wear whatsoever and a far more silent running engine....then I can get you proof. But if you're asking me to come back in 10 years and reiterate the superiority of the floating tensioner over the plastic tensioner, I doubt that my response would be much different, in that a steel part with hardware stronger than the ARP head studs that I use to hold my engine together would still be steel and still in the shape that I left it. I see your point. I would never ask anyone who wasn't already in some manner of specific need to replace a working part for a questionable part...but I'm not exactly putting an empty cup in their hands and tell them to fill it with wishes. The floating tensioner has been around for over 100 years...and Top Fuel dragsters use them to keep the centrifugal force from throwing the supercharger belt into the stands. In the entire history of automotive advancement, I have never heard of a floating tensioner failing. That was the proof that I'd requested from the other guy...but he had nothing.

As for the reference, my apologies. I was aiming for the most far-flung possibility that my mind could conjure up. My point was that you'd never do something that irrational if you had no interest in the food...even if it was something that YOU knew. But, in fairness.....Red Lobster does get chop-blocked in a lot of online places...and crazies that don't even eat seafood there come calling just to dogpile the person who said the food was much better down the road at Sammy's Seafood. This was a blatant attack that everyone just keeps throwing around. The sleepy1.8t guy....he's been here for a very brief time and some of his questions are "Why don't my cams look right? Do my cams look right to you guys?" and subjects he needs help with start with subject lines like "stock maf died hnnnnnggghhhh". WTF business does that guy have piling on? Seriously? It doesn't look good for any professional forum for that to happen, nor does just kicking out the same tag line in the hopes that sooner or later my ability to do something that I've already said that I can't. The end all and be all of this is that I'm a guy who likes to create. I like to help people. I love VWs. I have a LOT of experience with these cars. The clown patrol joked about it above, but I did actually work for and drive for VW Motorsports. Not that it changes anything, but I'm still in the register at the Homestead track in South Florida for posting the fifth fastest lap time in a 4 cylinder in a 1983 VW GTI with a modified Oettinger supercharger. I've been around these cars all of my life. That is not to say that I know everything about them, not by a long shot...but I'm not out to screw up anyone's car. If I didn't truly believe that this was a better idea, I'd have never said anything. I, personally think that keeping quiet until I had used the thing for a few thousand miles was a testament to my dedication to the cause of building a better car. So, I'll probably not be able to do enough testing to make anything that would change anyone's mind anyway, but everything that I have done and will do in the future...so long as I'm in a VW, will be for the VW community.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

munkittrick said:


> How would I go about explaining the tensile strength of stainless steel as compared to injection molded plastic? I would assume that it would be a very easy argument given that I've yet to see an injection molded plastic engine block, but I'll let you tell me. Can I prove anything in the application of this device? Well, if you take 12k miles and almost no wear whatsoever and a far more silent running engine....then I can get you proof. But if you're asking me to come back in 10 years and reiterate the superiority of the floating tensioner over the plastic tensioner, I doubt that my response would be much different, in that a steel part with hardware stronger than the ARP head studs that I use to hold my engine together would still be steel and still in the shape that I left it. I see your point. I would never ask anyone who wasn't already in some manner of specific need to replace a working part for a questionable part...but I'm not exactly putting an empty cup in their hands and tell them to fill it with wishes. The floating tensioner has been around for over 100 years...and Top Fuel dragsters use them to keep the centrifugal force from throwing the supercharger belt into the stands. In the entire history of automotive advancement, I have never heard of a floating tensioner failing. That was the proof that I'd requested from the other guy...but he had nothing.
> 
> As for the reference, my apologies. I was aiming for the most far-flung possibility that my mind could conjure up. My point was that you'd never do something that irrational if you had no interest in the food...even if it was something that YOU knew. But, in fairness.....Red Lobster does get chop-blocked in a lot of online places...and crazies that don't even eat seafood there come calling just to dogpile the person who said the food was much better down the road at Sammy's Seafood. This was a blatant attack that everyone just keeps throwing around. The sleepy1.8t guy....he's been here for a very brief time and some of his questions are "Why don't my cams look right? Do my cams look right to you guys?" and subjects he needs help with start with subject lines like "stock maf died hnnnnnggghhhh". WTF business does that guy have piling on? Seriously? It doesn't look good for any professional forum for that to happen, nor does just kicking out the same tag line in the hopes that sooner or later my ability to do something that I've already said that I can't. The end all and be all of this is that I'm a guy who likes to create. I like to help people. I love VWs. I have a LOT of experience with these cars. The clown patrol joked about it above, but I did actually work for and drive for VW Motorsports. Not that it changes anything, but I'm still in the register at the Homestead track in South Florida for posting the fifth fastest lap time in a 4 cylinder in a 1983 VW GTI with a modified Oettinger supercharger. I've been around these cars all of my life. That is not to say that I know everything about them, not by a long shot...but I'm not out to screw up anyone's car. If I didn't truly believe that this was a better idea, I'd have never said anything. I, personally think that keeping quiet until I had used the thing for a few thousand miles was a testament to my dedication to the cause of building a better car. So, I'll probably not be able to do enough testing to make anything that would change anyone's mind anyway, but everything that I have done and will do in the future...so long as I'm in a VW, will be for the VW community.



The crazy is strong in this one opcorn:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Gulfstream said:


> The crazy is strong in this one opcorn:


:laugh:

Yeah, he likes to resurface his clutches with soda! That's some magic machining right there. 

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5630100-If-I-hadn-t-seen-it-with-my-own-eyes-I-d-never-have-believed-it-soda-clutch-WOW!


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

20v master said:


> :laugh:
> 
> Yeah, he likes to resurface his clutches with soda! That's some magic machining right there.
> 
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5630100-If-I-hadn-t-seen-it-with-my-own-eyes-I-d-never-have-believed-it-soda-clutch-WOW!


:what:

How did that thread not turn into 20 pages of "Wha..."


----------



## dspl1236 (May 30, 2007)

i just want the technical facts.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

munkittrick said:


> Yes, please...stay and entertain me. Pertinent information is always appreciated. If I find that something changes the factored outcome of a post that I made, I change it to help people...you know, just to be a swell guy. You, on the other hand seem to find joy in bobbling your way through poorly crafted insults and not realizing that you can't be handed your intellect like you've been handed your ass. You were saying...?


lol... NO U


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

dspl1236 said:


> i just want the technical facts.


we all do. problem is, there are none to be had.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

sleepy1.8t said:


> we all do. problem is, there are none to be had.


You're just here for the post count, right? :laugh:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

20v master said:


> Yeah, he likes to resurface his clutches with soda! That's some magic machining right there.
> 
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5630100-If-I-hadn-t-seen-it-with-my-own-eyes-I-d-never-have-believed-it-soda-clutch-WOW!


Soda makes his clutch flow 30% more. WOW! 

I begin to wonder if he is just a full time troll writing insane threads in slow forums just to get some circulation back again.. I hope so for his sake. If not, I'm afraid some neurological connections are missing upstairs, if ya know what I mean.. 

Sent fra min SM-T900 via Tapatalk


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

dspl1236 said:


> i just want the technical facts.


 If you want to contact me on, or after December 9th I'd be glad to share the technical data with you. I've got a unit being sent out to Schlumberger for flow and stress testing, and another going to PetroWest for similar tests. Neither will be in the actual working environment of the vehicle, but both provide testing that will provide actual data on the key components of each unit and some manner of flow rate testing so that I can get an accurate read on the theoretical difference based on resistance differences between the oil pump chain rolling on a ceramic bearing wheel pulley and dragging it over a piece of plastic that is presently installed in many of these engines. We'll be using the resistance data to calculate the difference in hydrodynamics of both systems and will tally up the difference in resistance as potential flow rates. My own initial testing proved to offer some really nice results, but because the results did not seem to hold true hydrodynamic advantages accurately, I've decided to have them done externally by people who test almost every TUV approved piece in motor vehicles. We have now purchased a website, applied for our US Patent and have a large number of people with interest in the technical merits of the device, so I'm reasonably certain that it will be available for sale in at least one auto parts outlet within the US by late December. Until then, you can communicate with me with any orders or particular questions.

As would be the adult thing to do, I've opted to no longer respond to people who post illegitimate requests and make uninformed, albeit typical Vortex responses. I'd like to think of those people as fuel that I have set alight...and I will now do nothing more than watch them burn out and delude others on their own value. I have withdrawn my marketing budget for the VW Vortex and have ended all communications with their management as they are not responsive to potential advertiser's needs or interests.

Having said that, so long as your responses remain helpful to the advancement of the device, rational and can't be reduced to a comical means of attempted slander of a good idea, I'll make time to respond in the best manner possible. This has been, and will continue to be a costly personal investment for me. I have a large amount of time and effort invested as well. I expect to create no less than 20 US based jobs, and I'm using only US made materials in effect, making this the only 100% US made part for our particular engines in a long time. I'm doing my best to make an advancement in the quality and longevity of our engines and I expect that anyone else who is would treat myself and this idea with the respect they are worthy of.


I appreciate your interest.


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

> We'll be using the resistance data to calculate the difference in hydrodynamics of both systems and will tally up the difference in resistance as potential flow rates.


How does that work exactly?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

groggory said:


> How does that work exactly?


 My understanding is that they will utilize the resistance of one system in a given situation against the resistance of another to calculate how much potential flow advantage there would be. As I said earlier, my own testing was done in-car but with an uncalibrated and non-traditional tool. It was explained to me that the resistance will calculate theoretical flow rates derived from resistance over time in different mechanical situations. I don't understand the method...but then again, my testing was not industry standard and this method apparently is.


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

munkittrick said:


> If you want to contact me on, or after December 9th I'd be glad to share the technical data with you. I've got a unit being sent out to Schlumberger for flow and stress testing, and another going to PetroWest for similar tests.


Both of those companies seem focused on oil drilling and such; a couple minutes of Google searching turned up no substantial involvement in the auto industry. I'm curious why they're doing testing on auto oil pumps.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

GasInMyVeins said:


> Both of those companies seem focused on oil drilling and such; a couple minutes of Google searching turned up no substantial involvement in the auto industry. I'm curious why they're doing testing on auto oil pumps.


 They aren't doing any testing on oil pumps. I'm not rebuilding the oil pump. Schlumberger does industrial-grade resistance testing for high viscosity fluids and can simulate wear to mechanical designs submerged in, or exposed to high levels of petroleum very accurately. PetroWest builds, flow tests and refines nothing but devices used in the petroleum industry, but is quite involved in the automotive industry with respect to testing the lifespan and deterioration properties of all kinds of rubberized, metal and poly materials. They both do a standardized resistance test that will pit one design against the other. The one with the least resistance offers the potential for more real-world flow rate. Once that test is complete, we'll consider going to a custom mechanical model to do testing on an actual engine...which shouldn't really matter considering the fact that the aftermarket tensioner will be proven to not be the weaker link, but then it becomes a test of actual performance through optimization and modification.

In what is a twisted irony, the industry standard for testing oil flow in a given mechanism involved the calculation of resistance of the device in question. Since I'm not modifying anything except for the tensioner, the rest of the oil system isn't going to show any difference. I can only surmise that the resulting friction and wear testing will show the *potential* for increased flow...unless my design proves to be weaker than the plastic design in terms of lower resistance and higher wear...but I'm confident that this tensioner will provide much better results. The potential is what I'm after. If that turns out positive, those "tuned" and "ported" oil pumps that I've seen on different performance sites might have some real value. If my design doesn't outlast and offer better potential for hgher flow rates, I've spent a bunch of money for nothing...but being that I'm selling them at a rate of two to three a day without any real promotion seems to tell me that there are other minds out there that think a bit differently.


----------



## superkarl (Dec 18, 2012)

Resistance does not equate to flow 
:banghead:
What planet are you on


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

superkarl said:


> Resistance does not equate to flow
> :banghead:
> What planet are you on


Lower resistance equals *potential* for higher flow. I can't create flow where there is none. The problem then falls upon someone else to design a higher flowing pump to meet my device's potential. Is that someone you? Probably not, so you can :banghead: all you want. I'll be right here...on Earth...waiting for you.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Changing a tensioner won't make the pump rotate faster and it won't make more flow. More flow which the 1.8t engine don't need as the oem pump is a superior product out of the box. In fact the pump is designed to flow much more than required and flow/pressure is regulated by a release valve. 

How hard can this be? 

I think this has been repeated 20 times in this thread alone.... 



Sent fra min SM-T900 via Tapatalk


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> Changing a tensioner won't make the pump rotate faster and it won't make more flow. More flow which the 1.8t engine don't need as the oem pump is a superior product out of the box. In fact the pump is designed to flow much more than required and flow/pressure is regulated by a release valve.
> 
> How hard can this be?
> 
> ...


 Why would you imagine that it would make the pump turn faster? If that's your hypothesis or where you derived you ideas about this design, then your assumption was poor. You can't make the pump rotate any faster without changing the gear or sprocket. How and why would you think that? I think that you're getting the application of the pump confused with the mechanical potential, but maybe if you explain the part where I'm making the pump turn faster I can help sort this out for you. Yes, it's been posted at least 20 times, but I think that I'm now beginning to see the error in your process.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

munkittrick said:


> Why would you imagine that it would make the pump turn faster? If that's your hypothesis or where you derived you ideas about this design, then your assumption was poor. You can't make the pump rotate any faster without changing the gear or sprocket. How and why would you think that? I think that you're getting the application of the pump confused with the mechanical potential, but maybe if you explain the part where I'm making the pump turn faster I can help sort this out for you. Yes, it's been posted at least 20 times, but I think that I'm now beginning to see the error in your process.





munkittrick said:


> E.) The floating design boosted the QPM oil pump flow rate by over 30% (HOLY ****!!!) which means more oil when the engine needs it most.



:heart::heart:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

You claim better flow simply by changing the tensioner. 

The only way to increase flow of the pump is by rotating it faster. 

What you claim is physically impossible. 

If you think your engine need better flow per pressure use the correct weight and use a larger oil filter. 

Explain how a floating tensioner create more flow. Just try and explain it. 





Sent fra min SM-T900 via Tapatalk


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> You claim better flow simply by changing the tensioner.
> 
> The only way to increase flow of the pump is by rotating it faster.
> 
> ...


 I claim higher reliability, a better part capable of approximately 30% less rotational resistance and therefore the potential for vastly improved oil flow, nearly 30% by my experience. I'm not selling an oil pump, and unless you have, you're STILL missing the point. I've made a tensioner. Two wholly different pieces of the engine. If you want to create additional flow, you'd need to modify your pump, the gear diameter or internal volume of the oil pump itself. ALL of my tests were conducted on a bench, with the exception of one, where installed a device in-line to see if the difference created less slack and more reliability. A "bench test" of a part is not a test of the part in the application. PLEASE tell me that you understand that.

Imagine that you use an old ball bearing turbo with a defined rotational resistance rate. Now take that EXACT turbo and install a ceramic bearing system. You don't get any additional power from that swap alone, but it's far more reliable and creates less resistance. People buy better parts to get better performance. If that's not the case in your mind, I don't see how any of this creates a substantial argument for your perspective. I really don't want to have to argue about something that I believe just became clear to you.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

So your claim is now that the floating tensioner create 30% less friction than the oem tensioner. Less friction on a chain driven directly from the crank driving a mechanical oil pump which makes 100psi in certain circumstances. Really.... 

You validate this by comparing a chain driven oil pump rotating up to 8000rpm, or 9500rpm if your name is Aaron, to an exhaust gas driven turbine which rotates upwards of 130 000rpm. Really... 

Is this logic to you? 

Sent fra min SM-T900 via Tapatalk


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

I'd argue a floating tensioner with two rotating bearings create more paracite drag than the oem tensioner which use an oil film between the chain and tensioner. 

Not less drag, but MORE. 

Also, the resistance from the oil pump itself is so great that whatever tensioner you use won't affect its performance whatsoever. It's like sayin; if you run really fast westbound you make the earth spin faster. 30% faster according to my gut feelings.


That's all for tonight folks. Please come back tomorrow for more crazy - crazy - CRAZY! 





Sent fra min SM-T900 via Tapatalk


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> So your claim is now that the floating tensioner create 30% less friction than the oem tensioner. Less friction on a chain driven directly from the crank driving a mechanical oil pump which makes 100psi in certain circumstances. Really....
> 
> You validate this by comparing a chain driven oil pump rotating up to 8000rpm, or 9500rpm if your name is Aaron, to an exhaust gas driven turbine which rotates upwards of 130 000rpm. Really...
> 
> ...


 My claim has always been less tension, less friction, less failure and more potential. According to VW, the universal pump used in the AWP and AWW 1.8t engines is a minimum of 40PSI and a theoretical maximum of 100PSI. Actually, the physics involved with your turbo spindle shaft and the chain drive are nearly identical with the exception of the device causing resistance to the chain. Sure, it's exponentially slower, but the it's still a spinning body and the forces are very similar.

I have got to ask you, do you actually think that a piece of metal drug over a piece of plastic will have less resistance than a low-mass ceramic bearing system? Is THAT logical?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> Also, the resistance from the oil pump itself is so great that whatever tensioner you use won't affect its performance whatsoever. It's like sayin; if you run really fast westbound you make the earth spin faster.
> Sent fra min SM-T900 via Tapatalk



No, it's not like that at all. It's actually like saying, if you walk reasonably fast eastbound on a treadmill, you will be less fatigued when the Sun comes up compared to the guy who decided to run. The Sun will still rise on time, but you won't be ****ing tired when it comes up.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

I'll just throw something out here before I make some zzzzz. 

Have you heard of hydroplaning? How much friction does the tires have during this condition and what happen when the tires grip and start to rotate again? 

Zero vs good friction. 


Someone else have to explain you the difference between a tensioner to a metal chain and ballbearings inside a turbo. No more time tonight. 

Cowboy stretch time! 



Sent fra min SM-T900 via Tapatalk


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

Here's a neat read on Stanyl.

http://www.dsm.com/products/stanyl/en_US/product-info/properties.html

This is the modern version of PA66, which is what I believe our tensioner shoes are made of.

Discussion on chain tensioners
https://www.dsm.com/content/dam/dsm/stanyl/en_US/documents/DSM_leaflet_automotive_ChainTensioner.pdf

http://www.newmaterials.com/News_De...porsche_cayenne_engine__227.asp#axzz3p41rx38D


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> I'll just throw something out here before I make some zzzzz.
> 
> Have you heard of hydroplaning? How much friction does the tires have during this condition and what happen when the tires grip and start to rotate again?
> 
> ...


 Your argument is not relative. In fact, you've just strengthened MY point. In a hydroplane, your car doesn't slide due to water on your axle shaft. It slips because of loss of grip on your tires. That's a bad thing. The OEM tensioner is more like the road, the chain assembly is the engine and the ground is the tensioner. The OEM tensioner creates instances where the chain slops around after a quick elevation in RPMs because resistance on the tensioner which would cause instances of elevated friction when compared to an object that rotates freely. In other words, if your car could levitate above the road, you eliminate the friction and therefore improve efficiency. In a perfect world, you could go from 0-to-100MPH and glide 100 miles without additional power....which would be more relative to this. With proper control but also with less friction, your MPG would increase dramatically. In this instance, the less friction against the tensioner, the more freely the chain can rotate between the two drive gears. In this instance, the rotational force is provided externally of the device by the crankshaft and directed to the oil pump via a chain. Anything impeding the chain or creating an unpredictable motion from the chain (like the flutter observed in cars with failed or failing OEM tensioners) negatively decreases throughput.

Have a nap. Drop by tomorrow when you're done _stretching your cowboy_ and I'll walk you through a course on chain driven engines and bearings in a turbo.


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

munkittrick said:


> I'll walk you through a course on chain driven engines


Not one to create any drama and I really do commend you for thinking outside the box, but there are 1.8T's and 1.9 TDI's out there with 600,000 (read six hundred thousand) miles on them running the OEM oil pumps and chain tensioners.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

groggory said:


> Here's a neat read on Stanyl.
> 
> http://www.dsm.com/products/stanyl/en_US/product-info/properties.html
> 
> This is the modern version of PA66, which is what I believe our tensioner shoes are made of.


 According to Volkswagen, they are injected molded HDPE. The newer plastic intake manifolds are a classified as PP, or polypropylene, but PP doesn't work well when directly contacted by petroleum, so I doubt highly that was used in a tensioner. They claim that it's "resin fortified", but provide no mention of what resin fortifier they used. Another dead giveaway that the material is not Stanyl is that you can melt an OEM plastic tensioner with a low-temperature flame (under 250 degrees). Stanyl has a high tensile strength, a low friction coefficient and was a material that I looked at initially, but it didn't provide a lifespan expectation in the environment I asked about....although, the rep did say that some newer exterior body panels were formed from Stanyl...like your gas cap and the dashboard cage in some American made cars and trucks.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

INA said:


> Not one to create any drama and I really do commend you for thinking outside the box, but there are 1.8T's and 1.9 TDI's out there with 600,000 (read six hundred thousand) miles on them running the OEM oil pumps and chain tensioners.


I appreciate that.

VW says that the stock tensioner should be replaced at 75-85K mile intervals (reduced from what used to be a 105k interval), the same as the timing belt and water pump. This one would be a lifetime purchase part that is both adjustable and over-engineered to last the life of the car at a cost of $35 versus a $28 part at the dealer that will need to be replaced. Thus far, the wear on the part that I installed in my own car is almost nonexistent, but the OEM tensioner shows groove wear at any point after 25k. I'm not at 25k with my tensioner yet, so I can't really do a direct comparison.


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

munkittrick said:


> the OEM tensioner shows groove wear at any point after 25k. I'm not at 25k with my tensioner yet, so I can't really do a direct comparison.


Which would make sense against this wear graph taken from the Stanyl site. Look at the PA66 as that is probably more characteristic of what the OEM tensioner is made of. Note, this is wear based on the Taber Abrasion Test (ASTM D1044), which is a dry abrasion test. Actual wear characteristics are likely far less.










If you still have the part handy, how deep were the grooves at 25k miles?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

groggory said:


> Which would make sense against this wear graph taken from the Stanyl site. Look at the PA66 as that is probably more characteristic of what the OEM tensioner is made of. Note, this is wear based on the Taber Abrasion Test (ASTM D1044), which is a dry abrasion test. Actual wear characteristics are likely far less.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 I think that the old part was discarded, but I'll be swapping one out some time in the next week or two and I'll save it. I don't have my notes handy, but I believe that PA66 absorbed a certain level of moisture over its life and that it only had low-term high-heat resistance. I think that there was a video on YouTube that put PA66 against polyethylene (I think PPE) and the PPE had almost zero moisture absorption (even in a pressurized test) and better overall wear properties, but had poor heat resistance. Either way, the wear properties of it drug over a chain would be worse than a rotating body like the outer part of the wheels on this design, don't you? I'm not being a wise ass. That's a legitimate question.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

I made a mistake thinking you understand basic physics... 

Let me just say this. I'll stop pointing out the obvious flaws with your little project here and instead cheer you on. Go all out with this. Then, when it fails and you sit for yourself broke wondering what went wrong you can go back to this thread and read all the comments from actual engineers who warned you. 

Tally Ho. 

Sent fra min SM-T900 via Tapatalk


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 18, 2009)

Not read the thread in full

It's like trying to reinvent the wheel, these parts do 100,000+miles on the standard gear without any problem so just leave it as it is.. When I did my engine I just fitted new parts knowing that they will last another 100,000 miles but doubt I will have the car to do that mileage.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> I made a mistake thinking you understand basic physics...
> 
> Let me just say this. I'll stop pointing out the obvious flaws with your little project here and instead cheer you on. Go all out with this. Then, when it fails and you sit for yourself broke wondering what went wrong you can go back to this thread and read all the comments from actual engineers who warned you.
> 
> ...



Technically, you've made quite a few mistakes, but mistaking my level of knowledge is far from the top of that list. I'd say that your biggest misunderstanding would be that you forgot the rule, "when you have nothing nice to say, say nothing". Now, I'm not making a political issue out of this, but you've said a hell of a lot that was not complimentary and none of it was really all that intelligent. 1.) You know very little about the internal workings of an engine. 2.) You opened your mouth about something that you had no business doing so. 3.) See number two. I really appreciate that you're going to be a cheerleader, but there's zero chance that I'm going to go broke with this project. For all intents and purposes, I've already paid for the first order, my legal fees and my US Patent application...so "failure" is really not a term that will apply here....but thanks, just the same. Herp derp...


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> Not read the thread in full
> 
> It's like trying to reinvent the wheel, these parts do 100,000+miles on the standard gear without any problem so just leave it as it is.. When I did my engine I just fitted new parts knowing that they will last another 100,000 miles but doubt I will have the car to do that mileage.


 That's actually the crux of the entire situation. I had a bad experience with my engine crumbling two tensioners after only a few thousand miles. After replacing the first one, I let the dealership do the next one....even though I know what I'm doing under the hood. That tensioner failed too, so they replaced it under warranty...and that one failed too. After a few weeks of disappointment, I started asking around...beginning at the dealership. I asked them about the failure rate of these tensioners. The dealership closest to me claimed to have replaced over 50 every year since about 1999 with a spike in 2005 of 63...IN ONE YEAR. In my mind, that's a epidemic failure rate that might be avoided by a better part or a new design. Thus far, that seems to be the consensus that I'm reinventing the wheel, but they are selling well and as of today, the positive commentary has started on the new Facebook page for the part...so regardless if I recognized a problem that was due to a failing part, or just the idea that a better part is worth the investment, it's selling...so there are at least a few people out there who are like-minded. Thanks for the input and I really appreciate you being courteous!


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

Let me see if I can explain what Gulfstream was saying in a different way.

Your claim: 

Your tensioner creates less friction/drag on the chain (up to 30%, right?), which reduces drag on the pump, allowing it to flow more oil.
If that's not an accurate summation of your claim, then stop reading and say so.

Counter-point:

The pump flows oil by rotating through seven chambers with six gear teeth, alternately compressing oil through the pump into the engine.
The pump rotates at a fixed speed relative to the crankshaft, based on the ratio of teeth on each gear. I think I remember someone saying it was something like 70% of engine speed.
Pump flow is increased only by increasing engine speed.
Since the pump and crank are mechanically linked, nothing can be done to speed up the pump, relative to the crank. Thus, no other external forces have a significant effect on pump speed.
Since the pump's flow rate is 100% related to engine speed, and no other external influences can change that, the tensioner's friction has zero effect on flow rate.


Put yet another way: If the crank is rotating at 5000 RPM and the pump is geared to 70% of that, then it rotates at 3500 RPM. The type of tensioner used doesn't add or subtract teeth, so it cannot speed up or slow down the pump. Since it cannot speed up or slow down the pump, it has zero effect on pump flow.


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

munkittrick said:


> The dealership closest to me claimed to have replaced over 50 every year since about 1999 with a spike in 2005 of 63...IN ONE YEAR. In my mind, that's a epidemic failure rate that might be avoided by a better part or a new design.


It's odd that your dealership sees such a high failure rate when no one in this thread (a few dozen engine builds among all of them) has ever seen that failure. I have a friend who has been a VW mechanic for a long time and still works for a VW dealer near me; I'll ask him if he sees many.


----------



## woodywoods86 (Jul 29, 2008)

I really hope you did not advertise this product with unsupported claims. I applaud you for taking part in the amazing Free Market system. However, if you did not CYA, you could be held liable for engine damage should it occur. 

Most notable claim is viabram five fingers; and more recently DieselGate Muhahahaha.










I once again commend your self professed ingenuity.

Show me some data, anything scientifically based, anything engineering based. There could be $35 in it for ya!  

Design 101:
1) Determine a problem
2) Determine severity of said problem
3) Determine cost of problem 
4) Determine multiple solutions to problem
5) Test and Determine best solution
6) Determine cost of solution
7) Implement solution

IIRC there are only 5 steps and tons of bullets in-between, but you get it. Sometimes the solution is just keep things, as is.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

GasInMyVeins said:


> Let me see if I can explain what Gulfstream was saying in a different way.
> 
> Your claim:
> 
> ...




Wrong, my claim is that the mechanical potential for higher flow exists with this device over the stock oil chain tensioner. Actual flow would only be boosted by modifying the pump, the drive mechanism or gravity...none of which I claim to do. I equated a vastly lowered resistance to a calculation that allowed for higher flow. It's my mistake for not clarifying that, but with everyone screaming "I'm an engineer"...I kind of felt that the logic of machines was clearly understood, also a poor assumption on my part.


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

munkittrick said:


> Wrong, my claim is that the mechanical potential for higher flow exists with this device over the stock oil chain tensioner. Actual flow would only be boosted by modifying the pump, the drive mechanism or gravity...none of which I claim to do. I equated a vastly lowered resistance to a calculation that allowed for higher flow. It's my mistake for not clarifying that, but with everyone screaming "I'm an engineer"...I kind of felt that the logic of machines was clearly understood, also a poor assumption on my part.


So you're _not_ saying that this gadget will increase oil flow?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

woodywoods86 said:


> I really hope you did not advertise this product with unsupported claims. I applaud you for taking part in the amazing Free Market system. However, if you did not CYA, you could be held liable for engine damage should it occur.
> 
> Most notable claim is viabram five fingers; and more recently DieselGate Muhahahaha.
> 
> ...



Might I say that you are far and away the most forward thinking individual in this thread, even beyond myself. I have actually spent a week explaining something to people who misread my claim as an ACTUAL, TANGIBLE gain in the flow and pressure of oil into the engine. Yesterday, I think that I had a breakthrough when they finally stopped bitching and made a complete statement with respect to its operation on a motor vehicle. The claims that I have made are accurate if you take into account that logic doesn't change physics or mechanical devices. In other words, my individual part has made the increase of oil flow a possibility when measured as resistance. Resistance on its own will not create or reduce oil flow independent of the driving force, in this case the engine crankshaft. I'm working to clarify that point now at great cost of my time, but something tells me that you'll grasp the concept straight away. With respect to the legality and responsibility of the part, it's installation and use have all been rated as "for off-road use only" and must carry a legal disclaimer as per DOT standards. While I don't consider it a shady action, given that modifying your ECU is technically not legal as per the DOT, I do understand that there will be one guy out there who tried to tie it to his crankshaft with chicken wire and make his turbo bigger....ungh!


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

GasInMyVeins said:


> So you're _not_ saying that this gadget will increase oil flow?


 Not on its own!?!? I've just spent a week arguing that point with these other derps! Please tell me that you didn't think that ANYTHING attached to the oil pump could change the internal workings of the oil pump. For ****s sake! I'm not offering a black hole. It's a couple of pieces of stainless steel with extremely low rotational resistance and a better means of controlling the chain inside of the oil feed system. THAT'S IT! It has the potential of adding about 30% of flow...IF you swap out the parts that it interacts with. There is a race pump made by Baxter Industries and it's fully capable of WAY more flow than the stock pump....but it's $500. Did you think that you were going to do what a $500 part does by buying a $35 part? COME ON MAN!

As an aside, your forum name/handle is sweet. Met a guy from Maryland with that tattoo on his calf.


----------



## superkarl (Dec 18, 2012)

munkittrick said:


> Wrong, my claim is that the mechanical potential for higher flow exists with this device over the stock oil chain tensioner. Actual flow would only be boosted by modifying the pump, the drive mechanism or gravity...none of which I claim to do. I equated a vastly lowered resistance to a calculation that allowed for higher flow. It's my mistake for not clarifying that, but with everyone screaming "I'm an engineer"...I kind of felt that the logic of machines was clearly understood, also a poor assumption on my part.


You contradict yourself yet again. 

There is NO potential for higher flow. You will not get increased flow. How many times do people have to repeat themselves. 

You need to edit and retract all statements regarding flow, it's horse ****, and the reason you are the laughing stock of this thread.
Stick to durability claims, this you might have an argument. Regardless of the fact there is no durability issues


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

munkittrick said:


> Not on its own!?!? I've just spent a week arguing that point with these other derps! Please tell me that you didn't think that ANYTHING attached to the oil pump could change the internal workings of the oil pump. For ****s sake! I'm not offering a black hole. It's a couple of pieces of stainless steel with extremely low rotational resistance and a better means of controlling the chain inside of the oil feed system. THAT'S IT! It has the potential of adding about 30% of flow...IF you swap out the parts that it interacts with. There is a race pump made by Baxter Industries and it's fully capable of WAY more flow than the stock pump....but it's $500. Did you think that you were going to do what a $500 part does by buying a $35 part? COME ON MAN!


No, I didn't think that, but it sure seemed like you were claiming it. This is from your first post:


> E.) The floating design boosted the QPM oil pump flow rate by over 30% (HOLY ****!!!) which means more oil when the engine needs it most.


That quite explicitly states that the floating tensioner increased pump flow rate, so you can see why I (and everyone else) thought that you were claiming to increase the pump's flow rate.
(Also, Google is coming up with nothing on a "Baxter Industries" oil pump.)

[HR][/HR]

By the way, answer from my VW friend (he's the master mechanic at a local dealer and has an ITB'd 16v Mk2, as well as apparently a BT 2.1 of some sort).









[HR][/HR]



munkittrick said:


> As an aside, your forum name/handle is sweet. Met a guy from Maryland with that tattoo on his calf.


Thanks, I suppose. I've been using it in a variety of forums since about 2003.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

You also keep saying specific people don't understand the workings of internal engines. We're all past kindergarten, and some of us actually have built higher horsepower, longer lasting engines than your bolt on stage 2 Wolfsburgs or whatever else it is you are driving these days. If you'd stop asserting your own superior intellect, you'd have a much better discussion, but you've been tooting your own horn since page 2. Remember, by your own admission....



munkittrick said:


> First, let me say that I'm no certified mechanic, nor do I claim to be a technical wizard when it comes to the mechanics of a complicated machine.


...taken from HERE, it was just over 4 years ago, AFTER I got my BSME by the way , that you didn't even comprehend that increasing WG preload and shortening WG stroke would lead to increased boost and more power. So stop with the condescending BS like:



munkittrick said:


> Technically, you've made quite a few mistakes, *but mistaking my level of knowledge* is far from the top of that list. I'd say that your biggest misunderstanding would be that you forgot the rule, "when you have nothing nice to say, say nothing". Now, I'm not making a political issue out of this, but you've said a hell of a lot that was not complimentary and none of it was really all that intelligent. 1.) *You know very little about the internal workings of an engine.*







munkittrick said:


> Wrong, my claim is that the *mechanical potential* for higher flow exists with this device over the stock oil chain tensioner. Actual flow would only be boosted by modifying the pump, the drive mechanism or gravity...none of which I claim to do. I equated a vastly lowered resistance to a calculation that allowed for higher flow. It's my mistake for not clarifying that, but with everyone screaming "I'm an engineer"...I kind of felt that the logic of machines was clearly understood, also a poor assumption on my part.


So since you like to repeat how we are all not as smart as you think you, even though that's obviously not true, why don't you spell out what the benefit of this increased mechanical potential is. I know what you're trying to say (and I use the term "trying" loosely), but you won't actually come out and say it. Here's your chance...batter up:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Also, I posted on an active UK forum that is predominantly 1.8T centric, asking if this was a known issue. The moderator responded that he had never seen a failed oil pump tensioner in the 14 year history their forum, and the Beits are pretty OCD about maintenance an oil sludge issues. While not absolute, it does reinforce that this isn't a common failure. While this floating tensioner may have more potential (we will see if he can accurately describe what that is), I'll stick with OEM to replace my never having failed OEM tensioners.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

GasInMyVeins said:


> No, I didn't think that, but it sure seemed like you were claiming it. This is from your first post:
> 
> That quite explicitly states that the floating tensioner increased pump flow rate, so you can see why I (and everyone else) thought that you were claiming to increase the pump's flow rate.
> (Also, Google is coming up with nothing on a "Baxter Industries" oil pump.)
> ...


 Sorry, I believe Baxter is also known as Bar-Tek. They basically sell a recast OEM oil pump with a different internal gearing system that creates a HUGE boost in actual flow, so much in fact that they recommend a secondary pressure release valve...but that's really only needed for cars that run on a drag strip or have inadequate stock oil cooling. Interestingly enough, they might very well adapt their oil pump "upgrade kit" to include this tensioner...and if they do...all of this will have been a worthwhile conversation.

Interestingly enough, my car runs the 2.1 stroker using the TFSI 2.0 crankshaft. It's all still OEM spec except for the stroke (obviously) and the internals, but it's a terrific engine to boost with. I can run upwards of 20PSI without too much worry of killing this thing...and the oil flows fine.

My apologies for the confusion. I think that the assclown brigade started in on me pretty quickly and I got tired of trying to explain what I perceived was kind of obvious. I guess I didn't really think about people misunderstanding...but in fairness, they asked for proof of flow and I was pretty emphatic in saying that I hadn't been able to do any academic testing in-the-car. I suppose I thought that because I said bench testing that they'd have known it was out of the car. Then again, when they fired across the bow, I don't recall reflecting on the posts...but that's why the Vortex isn't the resource it used to be. Too many people not actually reading the entirety of a conversation and asking questions before talking out of their rears.

Thanks and, as I've stated, I do plan on having some test results in December to share, but (spoiler ahead) they will not involve anything that has to do with the inside of the oil pump.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> Interestingly enough, my car runs the 2.1 stroker using the TFSI 2.0 crankshaft. It's all still OEM spec except for the stroke (obviously) and the internals, but it's a terrific engine to boost with. *I can run upwards of 20PSI without too much worry of killing this thing...and the oil flows fine.*
> 
> My apologies for the confusion. I think that the assclown brigade started in on me pretty quickly and I got tired of trying to explain *what I perceived was kind of obvious.* I guess I didn't really think about people misunderstanding...but in fairness, they asked for proof of flow and I was pretty emphatic in saying that I hadn't been able to do any academic testing in-the-car. I suppose I thought that because I said bench testing that they'd have known it was out of the car. Then again, when they fired across the bow, I don't recall reflecting on the posts...but that's why the Vortex isn't the resource it used to be. Too many people not actually reading the entirety of a conversation and asking questions before talking out of their rears.


Two points. You shouldn't make blanket statements like the first bold, as you haven't mentioned what turbocharger. If you had a mechanical engineering degree, or a better understanding of turbos, you'd know that 20 psi \= 20 psi in all cases. People run 20 psi on the stock crankshaft, we all know. If you do know this, you shouldn't make vague statements that could be perceived as holes in your understanding of forced induction engines. I've run 35 psi on my stroker crankshaft, but without knowing the turbo, you don't know how much flow or power that actually is. And I don't have to point out how your limited understanding of these types of simple concepts make it much less likely to believe your "claims" about this oil pump tensioner. 

The second is that the "assclown brigade" fired on you because you insist this is a known, common, and motor killing failure, when I think it's safe to say we've all disagreed with you on that. Regardless of how many your local dealership have changed, these cars are way past warranty, and the majority of the ones still on the road likely aren't modified and driven by a gear head enthusiasts. The OEM part of course can fail, but it isn't the problem you've made it out to be. Modifying the engine, as you claimed early on, doesn't impact tensioner in any way. Throw in your claims of increased flow, and it should be easy to see why no one here is buying what you're selling. The pawns on Facebook may be scared to death of your "findings," but the rest of us with real world experience know the truth is somewhere inbetween the false common failure point and the benefits you are touting as advantages. Is it worth $7 to upgrade to your part with no real world durability, temperature extreme, or NVH correlation testing done? Not for me, since the original hasn't failed. 

I have a GTI with 181K miles on it, all original except for the clutch, MAF, and coilpacks, intake and exhaust. Tensioner hasn't failed, no chain rattling, no oil flow issues. OEM seems to be working fine for me.


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

munkittrick said:


> Sorry, I believe Baxter is also known as Bar-Tek. They basically sell a recast OEM oil pump with a different internal gearing system that creates a HUGE boost in actual flow, so much in fact that they recommend a secondary pressure release valve...but that's really only needed for cars that run on a drag strip or have inadequate stock oil cooling. Interestingly enough, they might very well adapt their oil pump "upgrade kit" to include this tensioner...and if they do...all of this will have been a worthwhile conversation.


Ok, I know Bar-Tek. (This is the pump in question, if anyone is wondering.)



munkittrick said:


> Interestingly enough, my car runs the 2.1 stroker using the TFSI 2.0 crankshaft. It's all still OEM spec except for the stroke (obviously) and the internals, but it's a terrific engine to boost with. I can run upwards of 20PSI without too much worry of killing this thing...and the oil flows fine.


Doesn't the 2.1 use a TDI crank?



munkittrick said:


> Thanks and, as I've stated, I do plan on having some test results in December to share, but (spoiler ahead) they will not involve anything that has to do with the inside of the oil pump.


Without the engineer jargon you gave us straight from your tester, what results are you expecting/hoping for?


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> I have a GTI with 181K miles on it, all original except for the clutch, MAF, and coilpacks, intake and exhaust. Tensioner hasn't failed, no chain rattling, no oil flow issues. OEM seems to be working fine for me.


Good for you.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> I appreciate that.
> 
> VW says that the stock tensioner should be replaced at 75-85K mile intervals (reduced from what used to be a 105k interval), the same as the timing belt and water pump. This one would be a lifetime purchase part that is both adjustable and over-engineered to last the life of the car at a cost of $35 versus a $28 part at the dealer that will need to be replaced. Thus far, the wear on the part that I installed in my own car is almost nonexistent, but the OEM tensioner shows groove wear at any point after 25k. I'm not at 25k with my tensioner yet, so I can't really do a direct comparison.


Here's the OEM part for less than $14, not $35. 

https://www.ecstuning.com/Search/SiteSearch/Oil_Pump_Tensioner/ES279271/

So your new part is 2.5x more expensive than OEM.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> Good for you.


It is good for me in two ways. It let's me know that I don't need your tensioner. It also let's me know your are full of it with your claims. But don't address anything else I've said. Deflect, deny!


----------



## Chris164935 (Jan 10, 2004)

20v master said:


> So since you like to repeat how we are all not as smart as you think you, even though that's obviously not true, why don't you spell out what the benefit of this increased mechanical potential is. I know what you're trying to say (and I use the term "trying" loosely), but you won't actually come out and say it. Here's your chance...batter up:


Is it more horsepower? :laugh::laugh:


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

20v master said:


> I have a GTI with 181K miles on it, all original except for the clutch, MAF, and coilpacks, intake and exhaust. Tensioner hasn't failed, no chain rattling, no oil flow issues. OEM seems to be working fine for me.


Mine has 201k and has been modified and driven hard nearly its whole life. Only oil issues I have are the valve guides wearing out (the head is off to address that now).


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

GasInMyVeins said:


> Ok, I know Bar-Tek. (This is the pump in question, if anyone is wondering.)
> 
> Doesn't the 2.1 use a TDI crank?
> 
> Without the engineer jargon you gave us straight from your tester, what results are you expecting/hoping for?


Yep, that's the pump I'm speaking of.

My stroker was built with the TFSI 2.0 crankshaft and I had to use IE rods with the Mahle pistons to get anything to function. I was told that there was a "kit" to do the swap, but I haven't seen it. IE was SUPPOSED to have one, but didn't follow up with anything new...and I needed to get my car on the road. I wasn't aware of the TDI crank even fitting to be honest. I just took the TFSI crank because it allowed me to maintain a stock head with the exception of a head spacer gasket.

The result I expected, ultimately was to keep the goddamned tensioner from snapping off just below the mounting bolt. The additional effects were derived after the design proved to offer some additional rigidity and more reliable, evenly dispersed tension on the chain. The reduction in rotational resistance was an afterthought, but makes a very plausible argument for a high-performance upgrade part because of the potential it provides.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> Here's the OEM part for less than $14, not $35.
> 
> https://www.ecstuning.com/Search/SiteSearch/Oil_Pump_Tensioner/ES279271/
> 
> So your new part is 2.5x more expensive than OEM.


Yep. Better parts, better construction and better options costs more. Fact of life.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> It is good for me in two ways. It let's me know that I don't need your tensioner. It also let's me know your are full of it with your claims. But don't address anything else I've said. Deflect, deny!


Thanks for your input.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Chris164935 said:


> Is it more horsepower? :laugh::laugh:


Nope, but if you ask Captain Assclown, he'll say that I claimed that it would make your dick bigger...but he's wrong. Nothing will make your dick bigger.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

munkittrick said:


> Yep. Better parts, better construction and better options costs more. Fact of life.


Better is subjective. Just because you deem it better, considering you aren't an engineer, doesn't make it so.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

20v master said:


> Better is subjective. Just because you deem it better, considering you aren't an engineer, doesn't make it so.


Your opinion is subjective too...an considering that you went to Auburn, the 89th engineering college in a list of schools, my opinion might actually bear more weight than yours. I'd use the term "engineer" very, very carefully.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

munkittrick said:


> Your opinion is subjective too...an considering that you went to Auburn, the 89th engineering college in a list of schools, my opinion might actually bear more weight than yours. I'd use the term "engineer" very, very carefully.


20vmaster even proved to you he has a degree in engineering while you on the other hand can't even put the correct parts in your engine causing failures. You talked about kindergarten earlier. Remember to put squares in square holes and triangles in triangle holes? Well, you can't even do that... You fail at kindergarten level.

You make claims about this tensioner which are obviously bogus to anyone who passed kindergarten school :laugh: and when asked to provide facts you pretty much tell everybody to shut up. I look fwd to seeing you fail :wave:


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

munkittrick said:


> Your opinion is subjective too...an considering that you went to Auburn, the 89th engineering college in a list of schools, my opinion might actually bear more weight than yours. I'd use the term "engineer" very, very carefully.


There are 1,074 accredited schools in the US that offer engineering programs. Auburn is a solid school and trying to downplay someone's degree from an accredited university is downright ridiculous.

With that said, carry on...


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

groggory said:


> There are 1,074 accredited schools in the US that offer engineering programs. Auburn is a solid school and trying to downplay someone's degree from an accredited university is downright ridiculous.


That's not the only ridiculous thing in this thread. Making claims that can't be backed up, than backtracking and attacking everyone that challenges them is ridiculous. 

OP, you seriously need to calm down. You are really coming out as a nut case when you have problems with pretty much everyone that posted in this thread. I am the kind that likes to think outside of the box and try things that nobody does. What I can tell you from an outside view is that you are going the wrong way about introducing a product to a community. Attacking everyone that questioned things you posted does not help your image or the product. Can it be a better approach at having chain tension for the pump? Definitely! Will that change the fact that it's a relatively rare failure point on the the OEM motor? No

The knowledge base is deep here and the sampling pool is too big for you to ignore the experience of an entire community. So far I haven't see one person come forward in the most active thread in the tech section to say that the OEM chain tensioner is known to fail. Retract your earlier claims that there was a flow improvement, and stop the childish attacks on everyone that posted, and you will likely have a better chance at discussing the many valid advantages that there is to a tested floating chain tensioning design.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> 20vmaster even proved to you he has a degree in engineering while you on the other hand can't even put the correct parts in your engine causing failures. You talked about kindergarten earlier. Remember to put squares in square holes and triangles in triangle holes? Well, you can't even do that... You fail at kindergarten level.
> 
> You make claims about this tensioner which are obviously bogus to anyone who passed kindergarten school :laugh: and when asked to provide facts you pretty much tell everybody to shut up. I look fwd to seeing you fail :wave:


And the noise just keeps coming.


----------



## munkittrick (Aug 27, 2006)

groggory said:


> There are 1,074 accredited schools in the US that offer engineering programs. Auburn is a solid school and trying to downplay someone's degree from an accredited university is downright ridiculous.
> 
> With that said, carry on...


 Oh, you misunderstand. I'm not knocking the degree...just that ignorant people gets degrees all the time. Auburn has an engineering department, but if Assclown went there and they are ranked in the top 100 for post graduate studies with respect to engineering, it doesn't speak very highly of his level of retention.

While I'm here, are you not a moderator? I only ask because you have failed to answer any of my requests. I withdrew my conversation about advertising and have little to no need to be educated on the value, or lack thereof a college education. My education is firmly intact...and I'm fine with that reality. If you need something specific from me, I'm available via PM. I appreciate your work here, but I'm perfectly aware of what my statements are.


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

munkittrick said:


> Oh, you misunderstand. I'm not knocking the degree...just that ignorant people gets degrees all the time. Auburn has an engineering department, but if Assclown went there and they are ranked in the top 100 for post graduate studies with respect to engineering, it doesn't speak very highly of his level of retention.
> 
> While I'm here, are you not a moderator? I only ask because you have failed to answer any of my requests. I withdrew my conversation about advertising and have little to no need to be educated on the value, or lack thereof a college education. My education is firmly intact...and I'm fine with that reality. If you need something specific from me, I'm available via PM. I appreciate your work here, but I'm perfectly aware of what my statements are.


I must have misread that PM, I just re-read my recent PM's.

As requested, here's a lock on this thread.


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

The op is going to open a new thread and try this again. This thread took a bad turn and never recovered from it.

To everyone who cares to be part of the conversation, try to start with a good foot forward on the new thread and let's try this again...


----------

