In 1959, roller timing chains were all but unheard of. Every 292 was fitted with a new link-type timing set, and they served their purpose well past the warranty period.
Over many miles, your engine wears, and starts hesitating. It no longer gives that instant response that it did when it was new; something every car owner makes gas pedal adjustments for at every green light. Many of today's 292's are still running on original parts, but a 'major' overhaul is inevitable.
Today, link-type chain sets are still readily available everywhere. In the racing world, roller chains reign supreme. Roller sets are preferred over gear sets, too. Link chains are still available at a third the price of a roller set, but are seldom used because roller sets last so much longer.
Here is discussion from the "Accelerator Pump Problem" link:
Ted (4/3/2009)
simplyconnected (4/1/2009)
Roller timing chains don't stretch nearly as bad as original chains, which makes them last three times longer. You can tell a roller chain; it looks like two rows of bicycle chain side-by-side. Original chains look like 'fingers' that grow and shrink as they flex around their sprockets.Dave. My experience has been that the link chains actually stretch at a slower rate than the roller type of chains. I examined this in detail back in the Seventies and found that the stretch occurs specifically through the links themselves but this only applies to those applications where the link chains are actually wider than the alternative roller chain setups for the same application such as on the Y-Block or FE Fords. A link chain in most applications simply has more connecting links between each pin thereby making the link belt type of chain more robust and less prone to stretching as compared to a roller type of chain that uses fewer connecting links between pins. On those engine applications where the link chains and roller chains have the same number of connecting links, then the wear factor at the gears themselves becomes critical thus making a link chain the less desirable setup. Friction or drag related to the two types of chains is a completely different topic however as the roller type of chains wins this contest easily. And the different types of roller types of chains haven't even been touched upon here although chain elasticity has been brought up to a small degree.
Ted, I agree that link chains stretch at a slower rate, but they also stretch MUCH farther than a roller set. I have a well-worn set from my 292. Here's a picture of the original cam sprocket:
The chain was VERY sloppy, but what does the sprocket 'witness marks' tell?
* First, the finger-grooves are on the leading AND lagging sides of each tooth. If cam drag (valve train, oil pup and distributor gear train), were in one direction only, the wear pattern would be heavy on one side and light on the other. These are about equal.
* Crud at the bottom shows, the chain fingers stopped about half way down.
Here's a crank sprocket:
Again, same story. This is the DRIVING GEAR, but it has wear on both sides, but only half way down each tooth. I can tell the direction of rotation. I can also see the wear from when the cam was actually driving the crank (when the driver got off the gas from high revs).
Double roller chain sets don't wear like this. They don't have fingers that fold up. Instead, they use hardened steel pins with bearing-sleeves that reduce friction by turning freely. A roller chain incorporates much more precision but costs three times more than a link chain. In this case, you get what you pay for.
Our 292's aren't a hot item any more, so fewer manufacturers make aftermarket parts for the Y. The double roller chain is out there, but much harder to find than link chains.
This one is going in my Y-Block next week.
Dave
Royal Oak, Michigan (Four miles north of Detroit, and 12 miles NORTH of Windsor, Canada). That's right, we're north of Canada.Ford 292 Y-Block major overhaul by simplyconnected