Manual Cam Chain Tensioners ?

[TxGSrider]

I was reading a thread earlier where it was suggested to change the stock timing chain tensioner to a manual one for performance use.
So I have some questions:

1) how often do the stock ones fail in either stock or performance applications?

2) did Suzuki upgrade them later for the oil cooled GSXR1100 / 750 that made some pretty good hp and turned some higher rpms?

3) How often do the manual tensioners have to be re-adjusted?

Thanks!

[Steve]

Let's start with you giving your definition of "performance".

For most street bikes, the stock tensioner will do just fine. Even with a modest big bore kit and cams, it will probably do OK.
I am not sure at what point there is a recommendation to switch to a manual tensioner, but I have only run stock engines
and have only had one issue with a tensioner. A 'new' bike that I got was a bit noisy, but I was going through all the usual stuff, anyway. When I pulled the tensioner, this is what I saw:


The dimple was deep enough to keep the plunger from moving smoothly.

How did this happen? The tensioner had been installed improperly. The set screw was tightened all the way on the plunger, not allowing it to move. The little bit of slack that was in the chain would then hammer on the tensioner, resulting in the dimple.

A few licks with a file, it looked much better. I smoothed it out a bit more after this, but did not get a picture.


Twelve years and about 25,000 miles later, that bike is still running well and tensioning its chain properly.

.

[TxGSrider]

Thanks Steve,
I kinda figured on pages of stories about how the stock tensioners failed and killed forum members' motors or something, but since you're the only one that had an issue, it looks like the manual tensioners may be a waste of money.

[Grimly]

I wouldn't sweat it. I've never had a moment's doubt about the tensioners. Well, not strictly true - I did have the odd doubt, but it was totally unfounded.
Humungous mileage from them without any more worries

[Brendan W]

Not all auto tensioners are created equal. Kawasaki instructed dealers to lock their auto tensioners on the first service of new 650 bikes about 1980.
Any bike I had with a manual tensioner the tension would have been checked/reset at every 3000 mile service. Can't say that I ever noticed any significant uptake of slack.

[John Park]

A fixed tensioner assumes one of two things; the distance between the cams and the crank will remain constant, or the chain will be adjusted with enough slack to allow for expansion. Or that it will be adjusted with the motor hot.

With all that aluminum between the shafts and a steel chain, you'll need a strategy. Mine is to nurture and love the original design; unless you're turning 5 figures a lot and know how to set up a fixed one properly, you're better off stock.

[gs11ezrydr]

If you properly maintain a manual tensioner I think there is several advantages, Especially when performance is involved. Just go to the dragstrip and count the manual tensioners. Should tell you something there. You can set the chain to have the proper amount of slack and pressure causing prolonged chain wear. The chain guides seem to last longer also. You don't ever have to worry about them backing off during deceleration. Mainly it is just a set screw against a shaft on the stockers. You still have to adj.the stock ones also. Mostly in race applications have I heard of and seen the backing off problems.. As how often to adj. them I adj. the chain every time I adj. the valves which depends on the amount of hours. At least every 40 hrs. sometimes sooner on how hard I run it. That's just me .I'm sure everyone is different. And yes the newer bikes have a spring loaded automatic ratchet style tensioner and some also have oil pressure added to the tensioner to add hydraulic pressure also. I think the automatic ones cause excessive wear by having constant pressure all the time on the chain and guides. But no failures. So depending on the application determines the tensioner. Just my thoughts and opinions.