Not this again...
Timing Belt ??
- Thread starter CrackyWainwright
- Start date
- Status
I prefer timing chains and therefore purchase cars that have them. I'm sure OP knew his car has a timing belt before purchase and no one forced him to buy it. Why rant about it now? Why purchase a car equipped with a timing belt while having an opinion that timing chains are superior?
Something doesn't compute here and it is not the manufacturer's choices for timing belts or chains.
Something doesn't compute here and it is not the manufacturer's choices for timing belts or chains.
$400 timing belt special here:
http://www.hondaoftomsriver.com/service-specials
Although V6s are more plus add the cost of any other parts you want replaced. Just google "Honda timing belt specials" to see if anything is located close by.
http://www.hondaoftomsriver.com/service-specials
Although V6s are more plus add the cost of any other parts you want replaced. Just google "Honda timing belt specials" to see if anything is located close by.
Originally Posted By: CrackyWainwright
What automotive engineer ever thought the timing belt was a superior idea and practice over the timing chain?
We on BITOG are all in the habit of careful maintenance so that our vehicles will last a long time, so any of us with timing belt vehicles can expect to have to change them two or three times over the life the car. My Honda Accord V6 timing belt job cost me $900 at the Honda dealer two years ago. If I keep the car another couple of years, I'll be at 200,000 and in need of another $900 timing belt replacement.
Some will say timing chains stretch or break, but those are rare occurrences. I've always believed a chain to be far superior to a belt that has be changed every few years.
Some of you fellows can fill me in on the historical specifics, but I would guess that some automotive engineers 30 or 40 years ago had the idea of a belt that could be accessed easily and changed for $100 at most shops. Very quickly, however, manufacturers began stacking all kinds of parts and components in the way of the timing belt cover and causing the cost of the replacement to go way up. Again, this is my idea of what happened.
What do you gentlemen know about this? Thanks.
I think it was to make the engine quieter. I sold my 1994 Camry with about 225K miles on it as it was due for a timing belt change and that would have cost 50% of what the car was worth.
But timing chains are not what they use to be. In my 1965 Mustang with 289 V8 the chain was a straight run to the cam, nothing else was driven off the timing chain. They never needed anything and no one ever talked about them as an issue.
Then at some point they went to timing belts driving a multitude of things. And the change needed at 90K and some engines were interference.
Now its back to timing chains but they do not have a straight run and drive all the things a timing belt did and now do break (but not very often).
What automotive engineer ever thought the timing belt was a superior idea and practice over the timing chain?
We on BITOG are all in the habit of careful maintenance so that our vehicles will last a long time, so any of us with timing belt vehicles can expect to have to change them two or three times over the life the car. My Honda Accord V6 timing belt job cost me $900 at the Honda dealer two years ago. If I keep the car another couple of years, I'll be at 200,000 and in need of another $900 timing belt replacement.
Some will say timing chains stretch or break, but those are rare occurrences. I've always believed a chain to be far superior to a belt that has be changed every few years.
Some of you fellows can fill me in on the historical specifics, but I would guess that some automotive engineers 30 or 40 years ago had the idea of a belt that could be accessed easily and changed for $100 at most shops. Very quickly, however, manufacturers began stacking all kinds of parts and components in the way of the timing belt cover and causing the cost of the replacement to go way up. Again, this is my idea of what happened.
What do you gentlemen know about this? Thanks.
I think it was to make the engine quieter. I sold my 1994 Camry with about 225K miles on it as it was due for a timing belt change and that would have cost 50% of what the car was worth.
But timing chains are not what they use to be. In my 1965 Mustang with 289 V8 the chain was a straight run to the cam, nothing else was driven off the timing chain. They never needed anything and no one ever talked about them as an issue.
Then at some point they went to timing belts driving a multitude of things. And the change needed at 90K and some engines were interference.
Now its back to timing chains but they do not have a straight run and drive all the things a timing belt did and now do break (but not very often).
Last edited:
AZjeff
$50 Site Donor 2023
It's a Constitutional Right to b1tch about car repair/maintenance costs.
Us car-centric guys fail to recognize that the vast majority of the driving public have no idea what a timing chain or belt is and the dealerships certainly don't bring it up. Same public doesn't sit down and look at the long-term service requirements of cars before they buy them either. What the heck, if sparkplugs are good for 100,000 miles why shouldn't some internal icky engine part be good for 500,000?
Us car-centric guys fail to recognize that the vast majority of the driving public have no idea what a timing chain or belt is and the dealerships certainly don't bring it up. Same public doesn't sit down and look at the long-term service requirements of cars before they buy them either. What the heck, if sparkplugs are good for 100,000 miles why shouldn't some internal icky engine part be good for 500,000?
Originally Posted By: AZjeff
It's a Constitutional Right to b1tch about car repair/maintenance costs.
Us car-centric guys fail to recognize that the vast majority of the driving public have no idea what a timing chain or belt is and the dealerships certainly don't bring it up. Same public doesn't sit down and look at the long-term service requirements of cars before they buy them either. What the heck, if sparkplugs are good for 100,000 miles why shouldn't some internal icky engine part be good for 500,000?
While that's somewhat true, they do remember the next time they have to buy a car. So all those people who either had a belt break or paid a lot to replace the belt remembered the next time. Probably why it fell out of favor. Just like making sure you get 2 keys when buying a used car because now a replacement key tends to be well over $100 in some cases.
It's a Constitutional Right to b1tch about car repair/maintenance costs.
Us car-centric guys fail to recognize that the vast majority of the driving public have no idea what a timing chain or belt is and the dealerships certainly don't bring it up. Same public doesn't sit down and look at the long-term service requirements of cars before they buy them either. What the heck, if sparkplugs are good for 100,000 miles why shouldn't some internal icky engine part be good for 500,000?
While that's somewhat true, they do remember the next time they have to buy a car. So all those people who either had a belt break or paid a lot to replace the belt remembered the next time. Probably why it fell out of favor. Just like making sure you get 2 keys when buying a used car because now a replacement key tends to be well over $100 in some cases.
Originally Posted By: CrackyWainwright
What automotive engineer ever thought the timing belt was a superior idea and practice over the timing chain?
We on BITOG are all in the habit of careful maintenance so that our vehicles will last a long time, so any of us with timing belt vehicles can expect to have to change them two or three times over the life the car. My Honda Accord V6 timing belt job cost me $900 at the Honda dealer two years ago. If I keep the car another couple of years, I'll be at 200,000 and in need of another $900 timing belt replacement.
Some will say timing chains stretch or break, but those are rare occurrences. I've always believed a chain to be far superior to a belt that has be changed every few years.
Some of you fellows can fill me in on the historical specifics, but I would guess that some automotive engineers 30 or 40 years ago had the idea of a belt that could be accessed easily and changed for $100 at most shops. Very quickly, however, manufacturers began stacking all kinds of parts and components in the way of the timing belt cover and causing the cost of the replacement to go way up. Again, this is my idea of what happened.
What do you gentlemen know about this? Thanks.
There are positives and negatives to the design using chain vs belt. Some engine designs would be difficult to integrate a chain vs belt. Your concern about the minor cost of maintenence (which for a 100k mile change interval cost is very minor in Grand scheme of things) is not one of the concerns of the engineer.
What automotive engineer ever thought the timing belt was a superior idea and practice over the timing chain?
We on BITOG are all in the habit of careful maintenance so that our vehicles will last a long time, so any of us with timing belt vehicles can expect to have to change them two or three times over the life the car. My Honda Accord V6 timing belt job cost me $900 at the Honda dealer two years ago. If I keep the car another couple of years, I'll be at 200,000 and in need of another $900 timing belt replacement.
Some will say timing chains stretch or break, but those are rare occurrences. I've always believed a chain to be far superior to a belt that has be changed every few years.
Some of you fellows can fill me in on the historical specifics, but I would guess that some automotive engineers 30 or 40 years ago had the idea of a belt that could be accessed easily and changed for $100 at most shops. Very quickly, however, manufacturers began stacking all kinds of parts and components in the way of the timing belt cover and causing the cost of the replacement to go way up. Again, this is my idea of what happened.
What do you gentlemen know about this? Thanks.
There are positives and negatives to the design using chain vs belt. Some engine designs would be difficult to integrate a chain vs belt. Your concern about the minor cost of maintenence (which for a 100k mile change interval cost is very minor in Grand scheme of things) is not one of the concerns of the engineer.
Noise I believe was the primary concern.
Timing belts were much quieter than chains. Economy cars didn't have as much sound deadening. Using a belt was probably a cheaper way to build the engine and make the car more quiet.
Probably also less mass, meaning less power lost to the cam belt compared to a timing chain.
Modern cars have more sound deadening and more powerful 4 cylinder engines. So the move back to chains has been the recent trend.
Originally Posted By: CrackyWainwright
What automotive engineer ever thought the timing belt was a superior idea and practice over the timing chain?
We on BITOG are all in the habit of careful maintenance so that our vehicles will last a long time, so any of us with timing belt vehicles can expect to have to change them two or three times over the life the car. My Honda Accord V6 timing belt job cost me $900 at the Honda dealer two years ago. If I keep the car another couple of years, I'll be at 200,000 and in need of another $900 timing belt replacement.
Some will say timing chains stretch or break, but those are rare occurrences. I've always believed a chain to be far superior to a belt that has be changed every few years.
Some of you fellows can fill me in on the historical specifics, but I would guess that some automotive engineers 30 or 40 years ago had the idea of a belt that could be accessed easily and changed for $100 at most shops. Very quickly, however, manufacturers began stacking all kinds of parts and components in the way of the timing belt cover and causing the cost of the replacement to go way up. Again, this is my idea of what happened.
What do you gentlemen know about this? Thanks.
Timing belts were much quieter than chains. Economy cars didn't have as much sound deadening. Using a belt was probably a cheaper way to build the engine and make the car more quiet.
Probably also less mass, meaning less power lost to the cam belt compared to a timing chain.
Modern cars have more sound deadening and more powerful 4 cylinder engines. So the move back to chains has been the recent trend.
Originally Posted By: CrackyWainwright
What automotive engineer ever thought the timing belt was a superior idea and practice over the timing chain?
We on BITOG are all in the habit of careful maintenance so that our vehicles will last a long time, so any of us with timing belt vehicles can expect to have to change them two or three times over the life the car. My Honda Accord V6 timing belt job cost me $900 at the Honda dealer two years ago. If I keep the car another couple of years, I'll be at 200,000 and in need of another $900 timing belt replacement.
Some will say timing chains stretch or break, but those are rare occurrences. I've always believed a chain to be far superior to a belt that has be changed every few years.
Some of you fellows can fill me in on the historical specifics, but I would guess that some automotive engineers 30 or 40 years ago had the idea of a belt that could be accessed easily and changed for $100 at most shops. Very quickly, however, manufacturers began stacking all kinds of parts and components in the way of the timing belt cover and causing the cost of the replacement to go way up. Again, this is my idea of what happened.
What do you gentlemen know about this? Thanks.
Oh and I've had two timing chain systems fail. Both on Buick 3.8L engines.
Never had a timing belt fail.
Not really convinced that belt driven systems are < chain driven systems.
Never had a timing belt fail.
Not really convinced that belt driven systems are < chain driven systems.
I think a belt has less friction too so may get better power/mileage. When Toyota switched the 22R from a double-row chain to a single-row chain the engine gained 9HP if I recall.
The only timing chain failure I had was because the fiber gear on the Buick V6 225 engine wore down to 1 and 1/2 teeth! The chain was actually fine, it was the not so smart addition of a fiber gear by GM that failed!
Of course that was a 1964 Buick Special, but still!
Of course that was a 1964 Buick Special, but still!
$900.00 at the stealer around $500.00 or so at a quality engine shop.
When you look at the complexity of oil-pressure tensioned chain guides and sealing the oil-lubricated chain cavity it's pretty clear why designers would move to belts, no doubt considered the 'high-tech' solution way back when.
However - despite chains being common in the last decade, belts are making a comeback in a maintenance-free variety. My '14 VW TSI has a polyester belt developed from when they had life issues on the TDIs. It runs looser than you might expect and has oval cam pulleys to level out the loading. The water pump is even driven with a small toothed belt off the rear end of one camshaft and I think it runs wet, like the cambelt in the Ford Ecoboost 1.0, also a maintenance-free design.
However - despite chains being common in the last decade, belts are making a comeback in a maintenance-free variety. My '14 VW TSI has a polyester belt developed from when they had life issues on the TDIs. It runs looser than you might expect and has oval cam pulleys to level out the loading. The water pump is even driven with a small toothed belt off the rear end of one camshaft and I think it runs wet, like the cambelt in the Ford Ecoboost 1.0, also a maintenance-free design.
If the belt is super easy to do like a VW inline 4 i much prefer it to a chain. The Honda V6 is a relatively easy one to do.
The nice thing with belts is they are usually only covered with plastic covers and require no gaskets or seals on the covers.
With many chains you need to pull the oil pan, valve covers and the timing cover just to gain access, the parts can be very expensive for a DOHC V engine.
Long thin chains with multiple tensioners and long slippers are not immune to failure and repair can cost 4x as much as a belt job and more.
The most trouble free are the single cam in block gear drives but there are very few these days.
The nice thing with belts is they are usually only covered with plastic covers and require no gaskets or seals on the covers.
With many chains you need to pull the oil pan, valve covers and the timing cover just to gain access, the parts can be very expensive for a DOHC V engine.
Long thin chains with multiple tensioners and long slippers are not immune to failure and repair can cost 4x as much as a belt job and more.
The most trouble free are the single cam in block gear drives but there are very few these days.
Cheap way to build an overhead cam engine.
That's all it comes down to.
Save $.20 on each vehicle and pass maintenance costs along to the consumer. It won't hurt sales since the original owners don't keep the cars long enough to have to pay for it.
That's all it comes down to.
Save $.20 on each vehicle and pass maintenance costs along to the consumer. It won't hurt sales since the original owners don't keep the cars long enough to have to pay for it.
My Focus has a chain. I recall in the mid/late 00's when Toyota introduced the chain to the Corolla, all the other manufacturers had to jump on board, or risk losing sales.
Gotta admit, despite the slight increase in engine noise, it's kinda nice knowing I dont' have to deal with a belt and recommended water pump change as it ages.
SIDE NOTE: I also like that so many cars these days all come with alum heads AND blocks. Will prevent so many head gaskets from failing
Gotta admit, despite the slight increase in engine noise, it's kinda nice knowing I dont' have to deal with a belt and recommended water pump change as it ages.
SIDE NOTE: I also like that so many cars these days all come with alum heads AND blocks. Will prevent so many head gaskets from failing
Originally Posted By: Trav
If the belt is super easy to do like a VW inline 4 i much prefer it to a chain. The Honda V6 is a relatively easy one to do.
The nice thing with belts is they are usually only covered with plastic covers and require no gaskets or seals on the covers.
With many chains you need to pull the oil pan, valve covers and the timing cover just to gain access, the parts can be very expensive for a DOHC V engine.
Long thin chains with multiple tensioners and long slippers are not immune to failure and repair can cost 4x as much as a belt job and more.
The most trouble free are the single cam in block gear drives but there are very few these days.
Does Rolls Royce used timing gears for a long time. The only downside of gears is cost.
American manufactures cheated and used nylon gears for a bit to save money on proper machining...
If the belt is super easy to do like a VW inline 4 i much prefer it to a chain. The Honda V6 is a relatively easy one to do.
The nice thing with belts is they are usually only covered with plastic covers and require no gaskets or seals on the covers.
With many chains you need to pull the oil pan, valve covers and the timing cover just to gain access, the parts can be very expensive for a DOHC V engine.
Long thin chains with multiple tensioners and long slippers are not immune to failure and repair can cost 4x as much as a belt job and more.
The most trouble free are the single cam in block gear drives but there are very few these days.
Does Rolls Royce used timing gears for a long time. The only downside of gears is cost.
American manufactures cheated and used nylon gears for a bit to save money on proper machining...
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Yeah on my Ford Duratec, it has the timing chain and the original water pump, crank cam seals, tensioner, starter and it's over 210k.
What year Ford Duratec ???
Do you know if the 2003 Focus Duratec (2.3L)....has a timeing chain?
Yeah on my Ford Duratec, it has the timing chain and the original water pump, crank cam seals, tensioner, starter and it's over 210k.
What year Ford Duratec ???
Do you know if the 2003 Focus Duratec (2.3L)....has a timeing chain?
- Status
