What belt size for TVS+2.65+IW OD

rstlaurent

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2009
Messages
13
Location
Montreal
What belt size do you use when you have a TVS with upper pulley 2.65 and Innovators West 10% OD.

What model number?
Where did you buy it?


Thanks.

:shrug:
 

rstlaurent

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2009
Messages
13
Location
Montreal
Here you go...:

Car Quest, Micro V

Part# K100852, 36mm x 2180mm

Rob

Taken from the Installation Notes of Innovators West:

Gates Belt # K100852 is required for 10% Overdrive Dampners when used with the factory supercharger pulley. This belt is available at most local auto parts stores.

========================
Are you sure about using the K100852 in combination with a smaller upper pulley than stock?
 

Rob_03Mach

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,041
Location
Stafford, VA
I am positive that I'm using Part# K100852, 36mm x 2180mm with my current set-up i.e., TVS upper and lower. Even went out to see if that part# is on my car....I have had no issue at all with that belt for 2+ years....

Ensure that the length on the Gates belt states 36mm x 2180mm....

Let me know if you want a pic...

Good Luck, Rob

PS ... just went out and double checked...K100852 is on the car...:beer:
 

rstlaurent

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2009
Messages
13
Location
Montreal
I am positive that I'm using Part# K100852, 36mm x 2180mm with my current set-up i.e., TVS upper and lower. Even went out to see if that part# is on my car....I have had no issue at all with that belt for 2+ years....

Ensure that the length on the Gates belt states 36mm x 2180mm....

Let me know if you want a pic...

Good Luck, Rob

PS ... just went out and double checked...K100852 is on the car...:beer:

I just ordered it and will be ready to pick up at the end of the day.

Thank you for double checking!
 

2001Cobrabuddy

Member
Established Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2009
Messages
183
Location
Virginia
Received my k100852 and the dimensions are 35mm x 2182..... which is a slight measurment difference from the posting above. Comments?
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top