I am about to replace the engine accessory belts of my family vehicles>. All have 4 year old belts showing signs of aging . I have noticed>that the Kelly Springfield belts ( division of Goodyear ) are less>price than the of other brands Dayco, Gatorback . Are they a good>value ?

At work we use Goodyear (not KS) belts on our machinery> (newspaper insert machines, etc.) For our applications,> the Goodyear holds up longer than the others. Automotive> may be a different story though.

C. Massey wrote:>

Are there any differences in quality between the Goodyear and> Kelly-Springfield brands of belts? All I know is that the Goodyear> brand is warranted for life and costs 2-3 times as much.

I bought some belts for the 85 toyota truck at the local pep boys and in> less than a year they were crazed to the backing.

Au contraire. Whenever possible I bought their lifetime parts.

I doubt if they're any cruddier than anybody else's.

Why do people assume that something is better just because it costs> more?

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, The Real Bev wrote:>

Ignorance is bliss, isn't it, Bev?

Good question. It costs no more, in general and overall, to buy good> parts.

Why do people assume that something is better just because it costs> more?

But the very best long-term solution to a rebuilt part> like an alternator or starter is to take it to a local> reubuilder and let them overhaul your original- that way> it won't get subjected to the usual chain-store rebuild> factory process(*).

(*) The process: tear 'em all apart, throw the re-usable> parts in bins whether it came from a 1972 starter or a 1982> starter, sandblast the housings so that nothing quite fits> square anymore, press in the cheapest bearings you can find,> intsall cheap brushes and springs, pull random re-usable> parts out of the bins, even though they may be subtly> different (often results in mis-matched rotors and stators> in alternators giving dim lights at idle, for example) and> then reassemble a Franken-part.