I need to change (at least) the secondary tensioners on my XJR8 and
rather than buy or rent the tools for camshaft alignment etc, I
would rather make my own. Does anyone have dimensioned drawings of
the tools they would be willing to share with me? I have a full
engineering workshop at my disposal and would willingly return the
favour with a set of the tools produced. They would need to be
fully dimensioned drawings and/or solid edge or similar model.
Thanks
Paul–
Turblo, 2000XJR8 , 1994XJ40 , 1987XJS.
abingdon, oxfordshire, United Kingdom
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
In reply to a message from turblo sent Tue 27 Sep 2011:
Paul,
Rather than going to the trouble of making the tools, the job can
be done with zip/cable ties. There’s a lot in the archives about
this method.–
The original message included these comments:
I need to change (at least) the secondary tensioners on my XJR8 and
rather than buy or rent the tools for camshaft alignment etc, I
would rather make my own. Does anyone have dimensioned drawings of
the tools they would be willing to share with me? I have a full
engineering workshop at my disposal and would willingly return the
favour with a set of the tools produced. They would need to be
fully dimensioned drawings and/or solid edge or similar model.
Thanks
Paul
In reply to a message from gary breyer sent Tue 27 Sep 2011:
Yes its not worth the time to make the tools, as the top tensioners
can be changed in less time.–
UK. XJR 2001 Pacific Blue
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
In reply to a message from Mick G sent Wed 28 Sep 2011:
I used the zip tie method on the last tensioners I changed,
although I own the tools. It was certainly faster. However, there
is a dimension change in Gen I vs. Gen III tensioners for the tight
side slipper plate of 5 + mm or so. Therefore, there is an angle
position error introduced in the cam to crank relationship,
although I have not calculated what the actual angle error is.
Again, I wa snot so conerned that I went back with the ‘‘approved’’
method, but I don’t have a dyno to know if it matters.–
Ross - 89 XJS, 98 XJR, 99 XJR, 02 XJ8
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
In reply to a message from sparkenzap sent Wed 28 Sep 2011:
Gentlemen, (and any Ladies out there), I recently changed out the
secondary chain tensioners with out any of the ‘approved’ gear, and
my 98 VP runs wonderfully. I removed the valve covers, and stood
and looked at the problem for at least an hour. After turning the
engine over by hand, and lining up the flat portion of the cams
(what ever they call that part of the cam!), I realized that as
long as I got all four cams back to that top dead center position,
all would be in harmony with the Jag universe. I unbolted the cam
retainers on the exhaust cam, lifted the cam carefully, removed the
old tensioner and installed the new one, returned the cam, being
carefull to line up the flat edge ( using a metal ruler) and
rebolted the retainers (in sequence and proper tightness), and
replaced all the parts and pieces. Big Kitty started right up, and
650 miles later, still is running fine. Ther are many ways to skin
a cat. Don–
donclutter
Malott/WA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
In reply to a message from donclutter sent Wed 28 Sep 2011:
Hi,
Thanks for all the replys, and i’m aware of the ‘cable tie’ method.
My concern is, that I believe the chain/s may have already slipped
a tooth and wanted to ensure all was correctly timed.
I have no idea if this will help but I did this on my Expedition by counting
the chain links between the timing marks; luckily the counts were
symmetrical fore and aft of the timing marks. I’m not sure that the Jag is
however so you’d then need to have the link count information for it to be
of any use.
Cheers,
Jack - '99 XJ8L PA USA
< snip >
Hi,
Thanks for all the replys, and i’m aware of the ‘cable tie’ method.
My concern is, that I believe the chain/s may have already slipped
a tooth and wanted to ensure all was correctly timed.
In reply to a message from Jack Hollibaugh sent Wed 28 Sep 2011:
Not to dispute anything already mentioned (folks have gotten
sensitive around here lately) but some observations.
The cam flats do not align at top dead center of the piston. It
is in fact, a location that not piston is in position to contact a
valve.
counting links and teeth will work in lieu of the zip tie, but
there are no marks.
Whether an engine ‘‘runs fine’’ is NOT a really good method of
knowing whether you have it timed to the optimum location. I doubt
any of us could sense a few degrees of being off just driving the
car, but most of us would ratherbelieve we were timed spot on.
I would happily sketch the cam tool (be damned if I will model it
for free!), but the timing ring plug is another matter. It needs
to be a fairly precision fit and it has a rhomboid or other such
named shape to deal with.–
Ross - 89 XJS, 98 XJR, 99 XJR, 02 XJ8
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
In reply to a message from sparkenzap sent Wed 28 Sep 2011:
As to the position of the ‘flats’ on the cams, all four, when
clamped down with the proper tool are as close to the same position
as two pieces of steel with bolts into the heads can get. If I had
the exhaust cam off by a tooth, there would have been a noticeable
difference in relative position of the flat cam sections of the
exhaust and intake cams. And the engine would have run like crap. I
realize that I took a chance and could have screwed the job up
royaly, but I did not. Cams are not micro-engineering tech. With
chain streach/slop, there is some leeway with any engine. This car
was not assembeled by Rhodes Scholars who attended Oxford. Your
humble american cousin, Don.–
The original message included these comments:
In reply to a message from Jack Hollibaugh sent Wed 28 Sep 2011:
Not to dispute anything already mentioned (folks have gotten
is in fact, a location that not piston is in position to contact a
3) Whether an engine ‘‘runs fine’’ is NOT a really good method of
I would happily sketch the cam tool (be damned if I will model it
In reply to a message from donclutter sent Wed 28 Sep 2011:
Don:
I agree with what you say, BUT, there is a continuim between ‘‘runs
perfectly’’ and ‘‘runs like crap’’, My point is that the zip tie
method does not NECESSARILY get the timing to optimum. So the same
folks who need Akibono brake pads, Brembo rotors, Jag brand oil
filters, Jaguar battery and so on (none of which apply to me) might
consider if the fast method is the same.–
Ross - 89 XJS, 98 XJR, 99 XJR, 02 XJ8
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
In reply to a message from sparkenzap sent Wed 28 Sep 2011:
Ross,
If you were able to supply a sketch, I would happily model it
myself. Reproducing any shape (rhomboid or other)is not a problem,
just need an accurate drawing or sketch !
Thanks
Paul–
The original message included these comments:
I would happily sketch the cam tool (be damned if I will model it
for free!), but the timing ring plug is another matter. It needs
to be a fairly precision fit and it has a rhomboid or other such
named shape to deal with.
In reply to a message from turblo sent Wed 28 Sep 2011:
turbo-
The sketch of the plug ain;t easy either! I will send you a
picture of the plug next to a ruler and a sketch of the cam
positioner next week when I get back from vacaation, if someone
does not get it to you before then–
Ross - 89 XJS, 98 XJR, 99 XJR, 02 XJ8
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
In reply to a message from sparkenzap sent Wed 28 Sep 2011:
Ross,
That would be fantastic, thankyou. If anyone else could add to
the ‘sketch’ pot it would be much appreciated.
Thanks
Paul–
The original message included these comments:
The sketch of the plug ain;t easy either! I will send you a
picture of the plug next to a ruler and a sketch of the cam
positioner next week when I get back from vacaation, if someone
does not get it to you before then
In reply to a message from sparkenzap sent Wed 28 Sep 2011:
I replaced my secondary tensioners a couple of years ago. I’m not
clear in my feeble mind how my cam timing could have changed by
replacing the tensioners. The cam sprocket was never loosened from
the cam (exhaust). The chain did not move on the sprocket. It
would either move in tooth increments or not at all - unless I am
missing something. It is as if the tensioner fairy came in the
night and, poof, new ones appeared where the old ones were. I did
this as preventative maintenance. Car runs great, same as before.
The whole exercise was little more trouble than changing the cam
cover gaskets. Or is it just a case of ‘‘ignorance is bliss ?’’.–
The original message included these comments:
Not to dispute anything already mentioned (folks have gotten
sensitive around here lately) but some observations.
The cam flats do not align at top dead center of the piston. It
is in fact, a location that not piston is in position to contact a
valve.
counting links and teeth will work in lieu of the zip tie, but
there are no marks.
Whether an engine ‘‘runs fine’’ is NOT a really good method of
knowing whether you have it timed to the optimum location. I doubt
any of us could sense a few degrees of being off just driving the
car, but most of us would ratherbelieve we were timed spot on.
In reply to a message from James Legge sent Thu 29 Sep 2011:
As I said in the previous post, I was suprised to find that the
location of the tight side slipper shoe for the Gen III tensoioner
was at a different evevation from the Gen I. Therefore, the chain
path is shorter for the Gen III.
If the pathe is shorter, the relative position of the sprockets are
different.
The angle that it is different is likely to be small, and it is a
simple geometery problem but I have not bothered to do the
calculation. The Gen III slipper face is about 5mm lower than the
Gen I. That seems like a good design, since the cahin will put
less force on the face because the chain is now almost straight
from sprocket to sprocket.
I think the Gen II slipper MIGHT very well be the same dimensions
as the Gen III, since they look the same, but none of my cars had
the Gen II design.–
Ross - 89 XJS, 98 XJR, 99 XJR, 02 XJ8
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
In reply to a message from sparkenzap sent Thu 29 Sep 2011:
Just one more suggeation, which won’t help this OP but to
assure proper timing I have used a couple pieces of card
stock with a slot cut into it for the cam shaft. I lay
these cards accross the head behind a couple cams each and
trace the position of the cam and make a mark for
repositioning the card on the head later.–
Jack XJ8L 1999 70K miles
York, PA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –