Posted by user on August 12, 2009, 6:16 pm
Timing Chain mate, not timing belt. Both are a result or wear & tear,
battery and timing chain.
But they do, and often before maintenance schedules, mine was fried on
my Saturn 30,000k before suggested replacement. Had my power steering
pump not gone south I never would have noticed.
So let's look at expected
You've never had a timing chain/belt break have you? When they go they
often take a chunk of the engine with them.
If they are anything like a prius battery , just about zilch.
Posted by Bruce Richmond on August 12, 2009, 6:29 pm
You present a good argument below except he wrote "chain" not "belt".
It is known that people neglect routine maintainece, so engines with
timing belts are almost always designed to be non-interference
engines. That means reguardless of the position of the camshaft when
the belt breaks there is no way the piston can hit the valves.
Replace the belt (about $0 and 5 hrs labor) and you're back on the
road. I timing chain OTOH is never expected to break. The car in my
driveway has 220,000 miles on the original timing chain and I have no
doubts that it will last as long as I own the car. Because of this
such engines are often designed as interference engines. So should
the timing chain break (it could happen, but I have never seen one) it
would bend valves, possibly damage the head, piston and maybe even the
cylinder wall. IOW you might need a new engine.
So likelyhood of anyone having to spend $000 to fix the timing chain
damage is a whole lot less likely than needing to replace a battery.
And since we are talking about an older car here, if a timing chain
did break any normal person would get a replacement engine from a
salvage yard and do the job much cheaper.
Posted by vaughn on August 12, 2009, 6:39 pm
OOPS! Good catch. As you pointed out though, comparing the *certain*
degradation of a battery to the *unlikely* breakage of a timing chain is
still not valid.
Posted by user on August 12, 2009, 7:17 pm
Bruce Richmond wrote:
This is not the case, and should never be assumed that because it has a
belt it is not an interference setup.
That means reguardless of the position of the camshaft when
Posted by Bruce Richmond on August 12, 2009, 10:44 pm
On Aug 12, 3:17pm, u...@domain.invalid wrote:
I stand corrected. Guess I have just been lucky :) One of the
engines I lost a belt on is listed as an interference engine but it
still ran fine after replacing the belt.