Timing belt vs chain

[gulledge]

My 2002 Honda CRV has a timing chain instead of a belt like my Civic. Honda recommends changing at 100K or so. Question is:
Can the chain be driven longer before a change over a belt due to strength versus a belt, or is Honda right in recommending the chain be changed as often as the belt?
Also if you think it can go further, what would be the upper limit of time/miles would you go?

 

[wander2039]

Honda recommends changing the timing chain? I've wondered about that on my Duratec but Ford doesn't mention replacement. All i've found is timing chains last the life of the vehicle or every 150-200k depending on manufactor.

 

[Cutehumor]

wow, I always thought that a timing chain lasted the life of the car. There isn't any recommendation to change it in my owner's manual that I can find. My 96 Pontiac sunfire has 139K miles on the OEM timing chain since new! I always thought as long as the oil stayed full to keep the chain lubed and the chain doesn't make strange noises. You'll be ok.

 

[Cutehumor]

Oh, my wife worked with a guy when his timing chain broke. but it was a 15 yr old chevy pickup and it looked like one too. It's the only failure I heard of.

 

[va3ux]

Failure of the main timing chain on the Chrysler (Dodge) 2.7 V6 is one the predominant failure modes in that engine. A Chrylser Master Tech told me that 150K miles is about the average life of the chain. "Life" is based on when they fail. So some of them fail well before 150K miles and some after that. Many of them have failed before 100K miles. Since this is an interference engine, a chain failure generally means that the engine is trashed.

There are 2 secondary chains in this engine (4 camshafts). Those chains rarely fail but their tensioners occasionally fail.

I'm gearing up to replace all 3 chains/tensioners plus the chain guides and the internal water pump on mine. I figure I'm running on borrowed time.

 

[JTK]

Quote:

---

My 2002 Honda CRV has a timing chain instead of a belt like my Civic. Honda recommends changing at 100K or so...

---

Are you positive it has a chain? I didn't know that existed on a 4cyl CRV.

An OEM 100Kmi timing chain replacement recommendation is unheard of IMO. Typically they are considered 'lifetime' units.

Joel

 

[gulledge]

It is a chain in the CRV. If I don't change it at the 100k mark, would there be any signs of when it is going bad?

 

[jkhawaii]

chain is better untill it brakes but usualy the car is ready to be replaced well before the chain. most manufactures seem to use 150,000 miles as a target service life

 

[The Critic]

I think you misread. If your CRV has a belt, then it requires a service @ 105k along with new plugs, valve clearance adjustment, and preferably, replacement of the water pump and drive belts.

If it has a chain, it's good for the life of the unit.

I've seen engines with chains last well over 200k miles. Keeping up with maintenance is very important, as some designs are dependent upon the engine oil for lubrication, same with the hydraulic tensioner.

 

[Gurkha]

Diesels are harder on their valvetrains and timing chains in Mercedes OM 616/617 engines last well over 200,000 miles if proper oil change is observed.

 

[Lonnie]

When a timing chain starts going bad it will talk to you in a voice you can not avoid. That, itself, is an advantage. Belts just go zing and take your valves for a ride to the junk yard.

 

[CBDFrontier06]

I have to say I'm very surprised Honda went with a chain, but I'm glad. The reason carmakers are moving to chains is for the lack of scheduled maintenance, which is attractive to buyers. It's ususual for one to break during the lifespan of the car, hence they can tout 'no maintenance', a huge selling point for me. I won't buy a car that utilizes a belt. I've been around that block with my Eclipse, and I can say in confidence NEVER AGAIN.
I'd re-visit the subject to make sure you understood correctly. If their timing chain needs to be replaced at 100K, there was no reason for them to use a chain at all.

 

[cowsareholy]

chain or not with an interference engine id atleast try to have it looked at around 100k. i had a early buick with a 3.8 with 105k and the chain let go. it was a well kept car in very good shape with regular oil changes. it was a non interference engine so it was more of an inconvenience than anything. if it had been an interference engine the car would of been scraped even know if was in great shape but not worth the rebuild

 

[CharBaby]

I agree with CBD. If only 100,000 is the limit with a Honda timing chain then there was no reason to change from a timing belt since their belt scheduled maintenance was around 100,000 miles(60,000 miles on older Hondas). I've driven some OHC 4 cyl engines with timing belts that had no scheduled maintenance for their belts due to the fact that, that particular engine was a "NON INTERFEARANCE" engine so, if the belt did snap there was no damage to the valves.

 

[Dave Sherman]

That's very interesting that a 2002 CR-V calls for timing chain replacment. I have a 2004 with the same engine (2.4), and it makes no mention of it. It actually says that in the owner's manual? Not doubting you, I just figured the chain never needed routine replacement.

 

[cowsareholy]

I went to my local shop get one of my cars inspected and they had a late model volvo suv with a v8 with a timing chain and an interference engine that snaped the chain and there were rebuilding it. I didnt ask how many miles were on it or anything, he was showing me 1 of the bent valves and telling me how bad the pistons were. he brought it up because the car i brought in for the inspection had 100k miles on it and he thought it had an interference engine but i told him its non interference and i just changed the belt the other day. ive also seen a valve that was stuck in a piston top at a different shop, it must of bent to the side and struck the piston again and slamed into it sideways, half of the valve was sticking into the piston. it was also had a timing chain snap

 

[CBDFrontier06]

My question has always been....some car makers produce a perfectly fine non-interference engine, so why can't they all be like that? How much space can you possibly be saving by putting things that close together, rather than making them so they don't self destruct when a $25 belt breaks. You can get the same compression ratio by changing the crank pitch and pistons. It's senseless.

 

[cowsareholy]

i dont know why they do it but i dont own a car with a interference engine and dont really plan to. thats one of the first things i check while im looking at cars

 

[johnd]

I've seen engines -primarily pick up trucks-break timing chains pulling heavy loads. I've never understood why exactly this happens, but it does.

 

[JTK]

I had no idea honda went to a chain on some of their engines! Old school cam-in-blockers are a different animal as the chains are short and simple. No tensioners, guides, etc.. These mile long DOHC chains scare the heck out of me. The atlas 4.2L I6 in my trailblazer has one. I will say though, we never had an issue with the timing chains on our nissan sentra 4 bangers. It's gotta be a marketing thing.

Joel