thanks for responding. I spoke with VAP. I need another belt, the 1461mm. It's on it's way. I'll let you know how it goes.

 

I’m using a Gates DK080578 (8DPK1444) belt that is specified as a 28mm x 1473mm OC (1-3/32” x 58”). Just barely long enough, but leaves the tensioner plenty of travel to take up any stretch.

 

Interesting. As I'm in a bind, I looked up that exact belt, but I had a tough time locating a place it would sell up here, in Canada.
As the stock OEM belt off the V6 is 1438mm, and the proper VAP belt is 1460mm, how does 1473 work? You said its too small, but wouldn't it be too large?
what was the OEM belt size that came off yours?

 

I thought you used the DK080568 (at least back in post #27 that is what you said) and the gates spec says its effective length is 1444mm. Link:

https://www.gates.com/us/en/power-tr...0/v/8550-01028

Also I don't think there is a DK080578 belt. I can't find one on the Gates site.

PS: My previous post said the belt was a DK80568 in error (since corrected). Sorry for the error.

 

Doh...yes it's a Gates DK080568 (8DPK1444). 1473mm Outside Circumference (1444mm cut length). Available from Eurotoys.

 

The tune and pulley are great, thanks for all your help everyone.
While installing the pulley, the mechanic mentioned that a different filter (than OEM) may provide the supercharger with more air, what do you folks think? I have an F-Pace which uses a panel filter, same as XF

 

The stock paper filters (there are two of them, one each side) already flow more than the SC can handle and there is nothing to be gained from after-market filters other than sometimes some increased SC whine.

 

AND most likely, less filtration.

 

I'm glad it's you two who answered, some of the most experienced Jaguar people I have ever heard of.
what would you two think of K&N filters here?

 

So VAP sent the 1460mm belt and it now works fine? Good news. Make sure you do a couple full throttle accelerations to make sure the belt doesn't slip. If it does you will know immediately.

 

actually, we put the belt on, but it's extremely tight.

The belt fit, but just fit and the tensioner arm is fully extended through its entire travel.
I'm very confident it's the wrong belt at 1461mm, and should be 1473mm. But I don't know, is there any issue with it being this tight if it works ok?

 

If I understand your post correctly the 1460mm belt fit but the tensioner has almost no travel left to take up slack (extended fully away from the crank pulley)? If that is the case then a longer belt will make it worse and more likely to slip. If the tensioner is fully compressed (all the way toward the crank pulley) then the belt is too short. If you could get the belt on the pulleys by compressing the tensioner then there is probable enough travel in either direction IMHO and you have nothing to worry about.

Post 1 of this tread shows how the tensioners travel.

Also make sure the new belt is properly seated on the upper SC pulley and middle guide pulleys. If it is not seated correctly it will make is seem short and eventually shred or pop off.

 

The only engine I ever destroyed was using a K&N filter system for only 111k miles. Very anecdotal, but the final oil analysis showed extremely high silicon level after only 3k miles. That experience convinced me to have oil analyses run at all my oil changes.

 

Hi Tim,

The first belt we sent to you (1438) was the wrong size for YOUR particular car. There's two different tensioner assemblies, a VIN break on each model (which we're now pretty close to having 100% dialled in) and in your case we had the wrong size for what shipped with your initial order.

The belt we sent to you is NOT an oem size. It's a custom made belt which Hutchinson makes for us (the OEM supplier) in a 1461mm length (Centrelin). I'm not aware of any 1473mm OEM belt - the 144mm4 OEM Land Rover belt has a 1473mm outside diameter, but the centreline is still 1444mm.

The second belt we sent to you is the one that we have used on circa 300 FPace, RR, RR Sport, LR4/Discovery. No issues.

 

Hi Lance,

Just to be clear, your 1444mm centreline belt would be a good length (so would OEM JLR 1438mm) for your car. HOWEVER - you also have an earlier production date vehicle, with a different tensioner assembly to the gentleman who is posting about his FPace. Your OEM belt length would be 1412mm. His OEM belt length would be 1444mm. If he bought the belt you're talking about it would be SHORTER than the one we shipped him.

Not having a go at you at all, I just wanted to clarify because people are now talking about cars that have different OEM tensioners and belt lengths, and we have people confusing Outside circumference with effective belt length which is measured through the centreline.

 

So VAP now has an HD version of the Gates DK080568 Double sided belt? Also what is the current estimated VIN/MY cutoff for each length?

 

No, we don't have a double sided version of the DK080568. The effective length of that belt would be 1442.75mm. The belt we have made is 1461mm.

Also worth noting, that the industry standard tolerance +/- is generally accepted at around 2mm - so regardless of who you're buying a belt from, say, a 1444mm OEM belt could be 1442mm or 1446mm.

 

I don’t take it as a go at all. There’s no way I can keep up with the “minor” production changes that can have a major impact on mods we do.

 

The other reason the Dk080568 (which is double sided) works for me is that I have the smaller SC pulley as well.

 

To back up Lance's comment about K&N air filters, I fitted them to every car I owned prior to the F-Type going back some 12 years, and never detected any increase in power or torque or throttle response. And that includes a 2010 XFR with the same dual filter set up as the AJ126.
I considered fitting them to the F-Type when I first got it (I had a near new pair from the old XFR) but I immediately discovered that the F-Type filters are a different shape so that kiboshed that idea. I then discovered that the F-Type filters are a right royal PITA to access and replace, 1,000 times more difficult that the XFR filters were. So I gave up on the idea.
There are many reports on the interwebz of K&N filters being not very good at filtering very fine dust particles, and here in hot and dry Adelaide fine dust is quite common.
The silicon in the oil that Lance refers to comes from this fine dust, it's effectively very fine sand and it is not good for your piston rings and cylinder bores!