So it's been getting quite 'heated' whilst I've been away - had a little gastroenteritis so I couldn't make much time for keyboard tapping over the last couple of days!
Quote:
|
1) VFCs with PN 119 200 00 22 do NOT lock up until 100C at the bms
|
How about this for the melting pot, Jim in your opinion how much upwards movement of the bms does the clutch require to achieve lock?
Are you assuming that you need to physically see the movement with the naked eye to achieve lock? Did you take a picture of the bms at 100C - or when you think it looks bent enough?
What was the difference in movement across your tests?
Assuming the information on your web site is correct stating that only 0.07" (1.79mm) is required for lock do we believe this can actually be seen underwater considering the refractive index?
I still cannot understand the difference in these two tests. No matter what the 'laws of physics' are (which you often repeat), one unit operates correctly, the other doesn't and this cannot be disputed.
However at least we have moved away from saying that ALL MB designed vfcs fail to lock correctly, just because one Sachs part fails we cannot assume that all vfcs fail. As this statement is by far to sweeping.
Have we got the data sheet on the bms itself? Maybe a clue to be found here?
Phil
What's the part number of your bms?
Maybe I ask far too many questions and so this is a good point to thank Jim and Phil for actively taking part - thanks chaps. Right, I'm off to find a mirror and torch to decipher my bms number (I removed the silly black plastic housing on my fist silicone refill). If it's the same as yours Jim, how do we explain this?
Lea