Originally Posted by
Sneakin Deacon
well, just free thinking here, did they possibly do a 2nd tensioner because the one that was originally designed had a high failure rating, and they figured in the long run, rather than recalls and doing warranty engine replacements, they'd add a back up tensioner?
93-96 Preludes had only a standard tensioner, and it never gave any issues with reliability. Essentially the same motor just different emissions
as for balance shafts, its a 2.2 with a long stroke that revs to almost 8k from the factory, im sure for guys such as me and you, the idle loping wouldnt be an issue, but it's one of the creature comforts that will appeal better to the masses.
having built these a few times, they have no issues when you remove them. However, I do tend to recommend you keep them. None the less they make timing belt changes a complete and total nightmare. On B series motors, T belt jobs are a few hour operation, not so with the 97+ Ludes
cable shift trans...thats a toss up. i think everything for the 92 model year was cable shifted except the EG's. that may just be a manufacturers call.
the B and D series motors, the ones that most people modify the most, use solid linkage vs cables. The K series uses cables as well, but the shift quality is SO much better in the B, D, and K series its not even close.
its all speculatory though. it isnt a horrible car. its a car probably built right to its limits from the factory, but it was honda's hi-po car of the day, aside from the nsx.
It isn't a horrible car. If left alone and driven daily, it's a nice enough car. I'm just speaking from my experience, which is that of someone who's busted a lot of knuckles on these cars and could never charge enough to work on them. John at LHT feels the same way as I do
