|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|04-18-2015 09:22 AM|
LOL, most idiots don't change the belt when or before they are suppose to, and hence the destruction!
How many times on every car you've owned, did you follow the maintenance schedule, and change the trans fluid and filter, the rear diff gear oil, grease the wheel bearings, change the plugs and wires, rotate the tires, flush the cooling system, change the air filter, change the fuel pump and regulator, etc., etc., before they break....................................never, as NO ONE DOES as we would all spend our lives under the hood in a never ending maintenance battle each weekend and the car makers know this. And anyone that says they do, is either perverted with their car, has no life, or has more money than cents and still has no life. I know people with Lambo's and Bentleys that don't follow the schedule, but they just buy another car. So where does all this leave us? It's all in what YOU make of it. Either way, it all cost the same. Do the maintenance as recommended costs X dollars over 10 years. Don't do maintenance, and cost's X dollars to repair at destruction. As my friend just found out while repairing his SRT 10 truck when the crank went thru the pan taking a road trip. $8900 for replacement and rebuild. Sold it 2 months later for $8500. It all boiled down to a weak full pump causing the engine to run lean and self destruct after a period of years running like that. No warning light for that one as I've seen it many times now.
|04-18-2015 08:26 AM|
The part I don't understand is, some accessories on a diesel engine are gear driven along with the cam. Power steering, water pump, etc. But I also know they don't spin much over 2500 rpm's and last 300k miles.
Next is the timing belt issue, every car manufacture I have seen in the last 20 years says to change the timing belt every 10,000 miles, I have also seen them say 30,000 miles too. But if you are just another "turn the key and drive it till it breaks" type person, well then you bring it on yourself and the added costs and headaches. Now I say this as our 07 Charger 3.5 HO has 157k on the timing belt and I know its just a matter of time, but, I'm fixing to do the common business trick of "stick it to someone else" and trade it in on another one. I have put rocker arms, crank and rod bearings, and host of other items on this car and now the suspension is gone (another $1000 to fix) so I'm not going to put anymore in it. Great car, but time to go.
|04-17-2015 11:01 AM|
|04-17-2015 10:40 AM|
There was a few year period that A5 owners wished there was a belt, or anything else than what the factory had engineered and installed! LOL
Thankfully, the "fix" seems to be working well, as no reported failures with the new shoe and tensioner.
|04-17-2015 10:12 AM|
Friend had the belt in her 85 Charger. As the miles neared 80,000, I started thinking about changing it. Dammit too late, it let go a month later at almost exactly 80,000 miles. Luckily no damage or bent valves.
Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
|04-17-2015 10:08 AM|
A lot of the Japanese cars are interference motors.
Also you never know when a belt will snap.
I had a 1984 FORD EXP 2 seater (remember those?) and my belt snapped at about 50,000 miles while judt cruising down the road,and the manual said to change it at 60,000......good thing it wasn't an interference motor.
|04-17-2015 09:33 AM|
|randycat99||I'd almost say I'd take the noise over the alternative. No need for it to have to be a straight-cut gear set either, right? I'd think in this day and age it would be possible to come up with quiet(er) gear drive, when the survival of an interference design engine is on the line...|
|04-17-2015 09:23 AM|
|04-17-2015 09:20 AM|
The first generation (93-97) of the 3.5 was a non-interference design- belt breaks, you coast to the side of the road. Replace the belt, no harm done other than aggravation. It also was not prone to break, I knew a lot of people back then who went way beyond the recommended 90k mile belt change interval with no problem. The 2nd-gen 3.5 was an interference design so it can bend valves if the belt breaks, although I've only heard of a very few examples of it actually breaking. Yeah, I think its dumb, but most timing belt engines after the mid 90s were made that way.
Interference design engines can have higher compression, more favorable valve angles, and more efficient valve timing, so that's why the manufacturers did it. That's also why I like chains, even though they're not perfect.
|04-17-2015 09:05 AM|
|randycat99||Given the context that made this discussion topic possible, chain designs can be just as vulnerable, it seems. The real issue is the "interference design" which is not uncommon in engines over many decades, and that typically comes about with high-output engines and high compression ratio designs. In an ohc design, you pretty much have to go with a belt or chain due to the proximity between crankshaft and camshafts. On an ohv design, I wonder why they don't go back to a gear to gear drive, if it's going to be an interference design...|
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|