Timing Belt ??
- Thread starter CrackyWainwright
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
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.
There's no mystery, and I'm not seriously ranting. We're just discussing here . . . and talking over a relatively minor point is what BITOG folks love to do more than anything.
I have owned and enjoyed several timing belt equipped cars, but I think it's an unfortunate arrangement for those of us who like to keep a car a long time.
I wouldn't mind spending hours and hours doing a belt job myself, but I just don't have the mechanical skill to do it right.
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.
There's no mystery, and I'm not seriously ranting. We're just discussing here . . . and talking over a relatively minor point is what BITOG folks love to do more than anything.
I have owned and enjoyed several timing belt equipped cars, but I think it's an unfortunate arrangement for those of us who like to keep a car a long time.
I wouldn't mind spending hours and hours doing a belt job myself, but I just don't have the mechanical skill to do it right.
Originally Posted By: Kuato
$900!?!?!. That is stout.
Yes sir! Jerry Damson Honda in Florence, Alabama. They said that was their standard, non-negotiable rate for the job.
$900!?!?!. That is stout.
Yes sir! Jerry Damson Honda in Florence, Alabama. They said that was their standard, non-negotiable rate for the job.
Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
$900.00 at the stealer around $500.00 or so at a quality engine shop.
This is a very good point, and I wish it worked here. But in rural Alabama we have very few independent auto shops any longer. There's not one good independent shop in my town, and I have to drive 70 miles to get to a dealer. Sometimes around here you can find a guy who will work on a car out back of his house in the evenings when he gets home from his regular job, but it takes a week or ten days to get a repair done that way. It's half the price of a dealership, but it takes MANY days longer to get your car back.
$900.00 at the stealer around $500.00 or so at a quality engine shop.
This is a very good point, and I wish it worked here. But in rural Alabama we have very few independent auto shops any longer. There's not one good independent shop in my town, and I have to drive 70 miles to get to a dealer. Sometimes around here you can find a guy who will work on a car out back of his house in the evenings when he gets home from his regular job, but it takes a week or ten days to get a repair done that way. It's half the price of a dealership, but it takes MANY days longer to get your car back.
Originally Posted By: Oregoonian
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?
The Ford Duratec engines use timing chains. The Zetec and SPI engines use belts.
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?
The Ford Duratec engines use timing chains. The Zetec and SPI engines use belts.
VW has had a hard time making timing chains reliable, hence why they stuck to belts.
A timing chain that is well done is better than a belt that is well done. I have seen timing chain failures, but most of it was because the design was not well executed or the cars suffered neglect or were ultra high mileage units. Many of us remember when GM especially used the nylon timing chain gears in the 80s. Those would fail. I would certainly want a belt over nylon gears. Ford too way back in the day had fiber gears.
A timing chain that is well done is better than a belt that is well done. I have seen timing chain failures, but most of it was because the design was not well executed or the cars suffered neglect or were ultra high mileage units. Many of us remember when GM especially used the nylon timing chain gears in the 80s. Those would fail. I would certainly want a belt over nylon gears. Ford too way back in the day had fiber gears.
The Timing belt was first used back in 1945 on a race car.
The first production car with a belt was Vauxhall (British division of GM) on a slant 4 engine.
The benefits of a belt are, it doesn't need lubrication, it's lighter, quieter and cheaper than a chain.
It 'can' also be easier to change.
But that aspect seems to have been forgotten!
The first production car with a belt was Vauxhall (British division of GM) on a slant 4 engine.
The benefits of a belt are, it doesn't need lubrication, it's lighter, quieter and cheaper than a chain.
It 'can' also be easier to change.
But that aspect seems to have been forgotten!
CrackyWainwright 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 said:
Originally Posted By: CrackyWainwright
What automotive engineer ever thought the timing belt was a superior idea and practice over the timing chain?
GLAS in Germany. GLAS was later absorbed by BMW.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glas
German Wiki has more content, the 1964 Glas 1700 was the first car with Timing belt ("Zahnriemen)":
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Glas_GmbH
What automotive engineer ever thought the timing belt was a superior idea and practice over the timing chain?
GLAS in Germany. GLAS was later absorbed by BMW.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glas
German Wiki has more content, the 1964 Glas 1700 was the first car with Timing belt ("Zahnriemen)":
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Glas_GmbH
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: sasilverbullet
According to Porsche back in the 80's, the belts could rev higher. That was the technology of the day, but even Porsche has switched to all chains.
No. Look at motorcycle engines, they revs up to 16.000 RPM and all have chains. Only Ducati has timing belts, but they stay in the 10.000 RPM limit range. And they dont rev much higher because they ar two cylinders, not necessery because of the belt, i belive.
According to Porsche back in the 80's, the belts could rev higher. That was the technology of the day, but even Porsche has switched to all chains.
No. Look at motorcycle engines, they revs up to 16.000 RPM and all have chains. Only Ducati has timing belts, but they stay in the 10.000 RPM limit range. And they dont rev much higher because they ar two cylinders, not necessery because of the belt, i belive.
Originally Posted By: CrackyWainwright
What do you gentlemen know about this? Thanks.
Both timing chains and timing belts offer individual benefits. The fact that both are used today is evidence of this. Having grown up on timing chains, I always had a preference for them. But, after changing the timing belt on our 2005 MDX and finding the job to be a breeze, I've sort of changed my tune.
A timing chain is usually designed as a non-serviceable system. Sure, you CAN fix it if it breaks. And some manufacturers have had to go into warranted engines to replace a chain on a poorly-designed system. But they're generally regarded as "for the life of the engine" systems. If it really lasts that long, then that's great. They sometimes don't, and my batting average is about 50/50 here. I've had excellent modern timing chain systems (Cadillac Northstar) and I've had some poor ones, too (Nissan KA24E). Various manufacturers have had some trouble with timing chains over the past few years, so they're certainly not a sure thing. They're not always done right. Unfortunately, nobody seems to know this until years down the road. They are becoming more popular as engine bays are becoming tighter -- a chain is usually a more compact design. Both from the spatial standpoint (it's physically thinner than a belt) and from the access standpoint (you don't have to provide clearance). This often means that a chain failure is not a DIY job, and sometimes requires pulling the engine to repair. They're also gaining popularity because of their low ownership cost. Chains have pros and cons.
So do belts. The are a designated "wear" or "service" item, which means that they should not be a determining factor in the life of the engine or vehicle. Like tires or brakes. You can buy OEM timing belt parts for a few hundred bucks, replace them on a sunny Saturday morning of your choosing, and you're good to go for another 100,000 miles. I like that they don't require any support from the lubrication system, and that they don't degrade the oil like chains can. I like that they're a DIY item, even if some choose to not go that route. I can only speak for why I like them, and that's an aspect that I like -- I can service it myself. A timing belt's only real downfall, in my opinion, is that it needs to be changed. For a DIYer, that becomes a non-issue, at least for a Honda V-6, which is pretty easy to do. For someone who can't or won't do it themselves, then, yes, that's a cost that needs to be recognized.
Here's a thread of mine about doing the belt on our 2005 MDX. I look forward to doing the belt on my '09 Ridgeline this spring.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2985744
I sometimes draw an analogy to valvetrain systems. Timing chains are like hydraulic valve lifters. Both are designed to be maintenance-free for the life of the engine, requiring no attention from the owner. Timing belts are like solid lifters with manual lash adjusters. Both are maintenance items that need to be addressed.
Chains, like hydraulic lifters, are great if they don't fail. If they fail or get noisy, they often require a tremendous amount of effort to replace because they're not designed to be serviced. Belts, like manual lash adjusters, require that periodic attention. But, because they do require that periodic attention, access for servicing is generally much easier. Keeping an engine running by servicing it and tuning it is a favorite past-time of mine. Newer systems that take me out of the picture, as a DIYer, generally have less appeal to me.
What do you gentlemen know about this? Thanks.
Both timing chains and timing belts offer individual benefits. The fact that both are used today is evidence of this. Having grown up on timing chains, I always had a preference for them. But, after changing the timing belt on our 2005 MDX and finding the job to be a breeze, I've sort of changed my tune.
A timing chain is usually designed as a non-serviceable system. Sure, you CAN fix it if it breaks. And some manufacturers have had to go into warranted engines to replace a chain on a poorly-designed system. But they're generally regarded as "for the life of the engine" systems. If it really lasts that long, then that's great. They sometimes don't, and my batting average is about 50/50 here. I've had excellent modern timing chain systems (Cadillac Northstar) and I've had some poor ones, too (Nissan KA24E). Various manufacturers have had some trouble with timing chains over the past few years, so they're certainly not a sure thing. They're not always done right. Unfortunately, nobody seems to know this until years down the road. They are becoming more popular as engine bays are becoming tighter -- a chain is usually a more compact design. Both from the spatial standpoint (it's physically thinner than a belt) and from the access standpoint (you don't have to provide clearance). This often means that a chain failure is not a DIY job, and sometimes requires pulling the engine to repair. They're also gaining popularity because of their low ownership cost. Chains have pros and cons.
So do belts. The are a designated "wear" or "service" item, which means that they should not be a determining factor in the life of the engine or vehicle. Like tires or brakes. You can buy OEM timing belt parts for a few hundred bucks, replace them on a sunny Saturday morning of your choosing, and you're good to go for another 100,000 miles. I like that they don't require any support from the lubrication system, and that they don't degrade the oil like chains can. I like that they're a DIY item, even if some choose to not go that route. I can only speak for why I like them, and that's an aspect that I like -- I can service it myself. A timing belt's only real downfall, in my opinion, is that it needs to be changed. For a DIYer, that becomes a non-issue, at least for a Honda V-6, which is pretty easy to do. For someone who can't or won't do it themselves, then, yes, that's a cost that needs to be recognized.
Here's a thread of mine about doing the belt on our 2005 MDX. I look forward to doing the belt on my '09 Ridgeline this spring.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2985744
I sometimes draw an analogy to valvetrain systems. Timing chains are like hydraulic valve lifters. Both are designed to be maintenance-free for the life of the engine, requiring no attention from the owner. Timing belts are like solid lifters with manual lash adjusters. Both are maintenance items that need to be addressed.
Chains, like hydraulic lifters, are great if they don't fail. If they fail or get noisy, they often require a tremendous amount of effort to replace because they're not designed to be serviced. Belts, like manual lash adjusters, require that periodic attention. But, because they do require that periodic attention, access for servicing is generally much easier. Keeping an engine running by servicing it and tuning it is a favorite past-time of mine. Newer systems that take me out of the picture, as a DIYer, generally have less appeal to me.
BTT:
I dont have problems to change the timing belt in my 98 Honda and my 95 VW in my garage by myself. Its a littl bit annoying job for me as a hobby mechanic because i lack the practice and routine of doing this work. I have to work slowly and extra-carefull every time, but i can do it.
If the timing chain in my Suzuk Motorcycle would need a replacement, i have to pull the engine out and open the engine completly. Also, i could do this by myself, but this is a awfull lot of work.
I dont have problems to change the timing belt in my 98 Honda and my 95 VW in my garage by myself. Its a littl bit annoying job for me as a hobby mechanic because i lack the practice and routine of doing this work. I have to work slowly and extra-carefull every time, but i can do it.
If the timing chain in my Suzuk Motorcycle would need a replacement, i have to pull the engine out and open the engine completly. Also, i could do this by myself, but this is a awfull lot of work.
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: CrackyWainwright
What do you gentlemen know about this? Thanks.
Both timing chains and timing belts offer individual benefits. The fact that both are used today is evidence of this. Having grown up on timing chains, I always had a preference for them. But, after changing the timing belt on our 2005 MDX and finding the job to be a breeze, I've sort of changed my tune.
A timing chain is usually designed as a non-serviceable system. Sure, you CAN fix it if it breaks. And some manufacturers have had to go into warranted engines to replace a chain on a poorly-designed system. But they're generally regarded as "for the life of the engine" systems. If it really lasts that long, then that's great. They sometimes don't, and my batting average is about 50/50 here. I've had excellent modern timing chain systems (Cadillac Northstar) and I've had some poor ones, too (Nissan KA24E). Various manufacturers have had some trouble with timing chains over the past few years, so they're certainly not a sure thing. They're not always done right. Unfortunately, nobody seems to know this until years down the road. They are becoming more popular as engine bays are becoming tighter -- a chain is usually a more compact design. Both from the spatial standpoint (it's physically thinner than a belt) and from the access standpoint (you don't have to provide clearance). This often means that a chain failure is not a DIY job, and sometimes requires pulling the engine to repair. They're also gaining popularity because of their low ownership cost. Chains have pros and cons.
So do belts. The are a designated "wear" or "service" item, which means that they should not be a determining factor in the life of the engine or vehicle. Like tires or brakes. You can buy OEM timing belt parts for a few hundred bucks, replace them on a sunny Saturday morning of your choosing, and you're good to go for another 100,000 miles. I like that they don't require any support from the lubrication system, and that they don't degrade the oil like chains can. I like that they're a DIY item, even if some choose to not go that route. I can only speak for why I like them, and that's an aspect that I like -- I can service it myself. A timing belt's only real downfall, in my opinion, is that it needs to be changed. For a DIYer, that becomes a non-issue, at least for a Honda V-6, which is pretty easy to do. For someone who can't or won't do it themselves, then, yes, that's a cost that needs to be recognized.
Here's a thread of mine about doing the belt on our 2005 MDX. I look forward to doing the belt on my '09 Ridgeline this spring.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2985744
I sometimes draw an analogy to valvetrain systems. Timing chains are like hydraulic valve lifters. Both are designed to be maintenance-free for the life of the engine, requiring no attention from the owner. Timing belts are like solid lifters with manual lash adjusters. Both are maintenance items that need to be addressed.
Chains, like hydraulic lifters, are great if they don't fail. If they fail or get noisy, they often require a tremendous amount of effort to replace because they're not designed to be serviced. Belts, like manual lash adjusters, require that periodic attention. But, because they do require that periodic attention, access for servicing is generally much easier. Keeping an engine running by servicing it and tuning it is a favorite past-time of mine. Newer systems that take me out of the picture, as a DIYer, generally have less appeal to me.
That's a great response. Thanks for the details. I wish I had the tools, knowledge, and patience to do work beyond oil changes here at home; I could have saved $10,000 over the last 10 years if I could do mechanic work myself. Having so few independent shops in rural Alabama, I have had to resort to dealership service departments WAY too often.
Originally Posted By: CrackyWainwright
What do you gentlemen know about this? Thanks.
Both timing chains and timing belts offer individual benefits. The fact that both are used today is evidence of this. Having grown up on timing chains, I always had a preference for them. But, after changing the timing belt on our 2005 MDX and finding the job to be a breeze, I've sort of changed my tune.
A timing chain is usually designed as a non-serviceable system. Sure, you CAN fix it if it breaks. And some manufacturers have had to go into warranted engines to replace a chain on a poorly-designed system. But they're generally regarded as "for the life of the engine" systems. If it really lasts that long, then that's great. They sometimes don't, and my batting average is about 50/50 here. I've had excellent modern timing chain systems (Cadillac Northstar) and I've had some poor ones, too (Nissan KA24E). Various manufacturers have had some trouble with timing chains over the past few years, so they're certainly not a sure thing. They're not always done right. Unfortunately, nobody seems to know this until years down the road. They are becoming more popular as engine bays are becoming tighter -- a chain is usually a more compact design. Both from the spatial standpoint (it's physically thinner than a belt) and from the access standpoint (you don't have to provide clearance). This often means that a chain failure is not a DIY job, and sometimes requires pulling the engine to repair. They're also gaining popularity because of their low ownership cost. Chains have pros and cons.
So do belts. The are a designated "wear" or "service" item, which means that they should not be a determining factor in the life of the engine or vehicle. Like tires or brakes. You can buy OEM timing belt parts for a few hundred bucks, replace them on a sunny Saturday morning of your choosing, and you're good to go for another 100,000 miles. I like that they don't require any support from the lubrication system, and that they don't degrade the oil like chains can. I like that they're a DIY item, even if some choose to not go that route. I can only speak for why I like them, and that's an aspect that I like -- I can service it myself. A timing belt's only real downfall, in my opinion, is that it needs to be changed. For a DIYer, that becomes a non-issue, at least for a Honda V-6, which is pretty easy to do. For someone who can't or won't do it themselves, then, yes, that's a cost that needs to be recognized.
Here's a thread of mine about doing the belt on our 2005 MDX. I look forward to doing the belt on my '09 Ridgeline this spring.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2985744
I sometimes draw an analogy to valvetrain systems. Timing chains are like hydraulic valve lifters. Both are designed to be maintenance-free for the life of the engine, requiring no attention from the owner. Timing belts are like solid lifters with manual lash adjusters. Both are maintenance items that need to be addressed.
Chains, like hydraulic lifters, are great if they don't fail. If they fail or get noisy, they often require a tremendous amount of effort to replace because they're not designed to be serviced. Belts, like manual lash adjusters, require that periodic attention. But, because they do require that periodic attention, access for servicing is generally much easier. Keeping an engine running by servicing it and tuning it is a favorite past-time of mine. Newer systems that take me out of the picture, as a DIYer, generally have less appeal to me.
That's a great response. Thanks for the details. I wish I had the tools, knowledge, and patience to do work beyond oil changes here at home; I could have saved $10,000 over the last 10 years if I could do mechanic work myself. Having so few independent shops in rural Alabama, I have had to resort to dealership service departments WAY too often.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: Oregoonian
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?
The Ford Duratec engines use timing chains. The Zetec and SPI engines use belts.
Miller 88.....thanks for the info regarding Duratec engines, and that my Duratec (2.3) has a timing chain. It provided me with the information I've been seeking for awhile.
Originally Posted By: Oregoonian
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?
The Ford Duratec engines use timing chains. The Zetec and SPI engines use belts.
Miller 88.....thanks for the info regarding Duratec engines, and that my Duratec (2.3) has a timing chain. It provided me with the information I've been seeking for awhile.
Originally Posted By: CrackyWainwright
Having so few independent shops in rural Alabama, I have had to resort to dealership service departments WAY too often.
That's certainly a consideration.
After pondering it more, I think I can summarize my post better with this: I see chains as a higher risk item than belts, though neither is a show-stopper for me. With a belt, you pretty much know what you're getting. They're pretty hard to get wrong from an engineering standpoint, and you have a high assurance that they'll work. The downside to that is you have to change them. A chain is a much more complex system, and manufacturers have demonstrated that it's not always easy to get them right. The upside to this higher degree of complexity is the potential of a system that doesn't need attention.
I don't believe that one is better than the other; they just present different types of risk and reward. But I will say what my tolerance to risk is, and I generally prefer the known quantity to the unknown. Having said that, I think chains are *generally* robust enough that I don't really use this as a consideration in vehicle shopping. If it has a chain, that's fine; I'll hope it lasts. If it has a belt, that's fine, too; I enjoy that type of maintenance work.
That is to say, all things considered, I don't really have a preference at this point in my life. I think the pros and cons of each cancel each other out such that neither stands above the other for me. If I was not a DIYer, then my preference would probably move significantly over to the timing chain side.
Having so few independent shops in rural Alabama, I have had to resort to dealership service departments WAY too often.
That's certainly a consideration.
After pondering it more, I think I can summarize my post better with this: I see chains as a higher risk item than belts, though neither is a show-stopper for me. With a belt, you pretty much know what you're getting. They're pretty hard to get wrong from an engineering standpoint, and you have a high assurance that they'll work. The downside to that is you have to change them. A chain is a much more complex system, and manufacturers have demonstrated that it's not always easy to get them right. The upside to this higher degree of complexity is the potential of a system that doesn't need attention.
I don't believe that one is better than the other; they just present different types of risk and reward. But I will say what my tolerance to risk is, and I generally prefer the known quantity to the unknown. Having said that, I think chains are *generally* robust enough that I don't really use this as a consideration in vehicle shopping. If it has a chain, that's fine; I'll hope it lasts. If it has a belt, that's fine, too; I enjoy that type of maintenance work.
That is to say, all things considered, I don't really have a preference at this point in my life. I think the pros and cons of each cancel each other out such that neither stands above the other for me. If I was not a DIYer, then my preference would probably move significantly over to the timing chain side.
Originally Posted By: Oregoonian
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?
A 2001. I threw that in there just so people get some perspective that Honda isn't the greatest thing since sliced bread and there are American engines out there that are more reliable and don't cost a fortune to maintain.
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?
A 2001. I threw that in there just so people get some perspective that Honda isn't the greatest thing since sliced bread and there are American engines out there that are more reliable and don't cost a fortune to maintain.
The first timing belt I ever had to have changed was on my 1989 Mustang 2.3L 4-cyl. I had it changed at 75,000 miles in 1994 for about $125 at an independent shop in Birmingham, Alabama. That was very reasonable I thought . . . even though I was a poor college student then. The belt must have been easy to get to in that car. Honda had taken this procedure to a whole new level of $$$.
Originally Posted By: CrackyWainwright
The first timing belt I ever had to have changed was on my 1989 Mustang 2.3L 4-cyl. I had it changed at 75,000 miles in 1994 for about $125 at an independent shop in Birmingham, Alabama. That was very reasonable I thought . . . even though I was a poor college student then. The belt must have been easy to get to in that car. Honda had taken this procedure to a whole new level of $$$.
Easy to get at and the water pump was not driven by the timing belt
The first timing belt I ever had to have changed was on my 1989 Mustang 2.3L 4-cyl. I had it changed at 75,000 miles in 1994 for about $125 at an independent shop in Birmingham, Alabama. That was very reasonable I thought . . . even though I was a poor college student then. The belt must have been easy to get to in that car. Honda had taken this procedure to a whole new level of $$$.
Easy to get at and the water pump was not driven by the timing belt
Originally Posted By: Silk
the early Ford (Pinto for the US, Cortina for us)was a 20 minute job just cruising - 3 bolts and the cover was of, slip the alt belt of, then fit a new cambelt.
the early Ford (Pinto for the US, Cortina for us)was a 20 minute job just cruising - 3 bolts and the cover was of, slip the alt belt of, then fit a new cambelt.
- Status
