Belt or Chain (timing, that is)

mad_machine wrote: honestly, if you replace the belt when you are supposed to, belts are just as reliable as pushrods or chains. Especially modern belts.

Agreed, I just don't like the idea of that requirement to avoid catastrophic engine failure. Oil change? Sure. That takes 10 minutes. At least a timing chain usually has multiple, obvious signs before it fails. A timing belt often takes multiple tools, removal of accessories, sometimes removing a wheel, inner fenders, engine mounts, multiple times up and down with a jack under the engine.... no thanks.

My LT1 had a leaking oil pan gasket. I used it as an opportunity to replace the water pump, front cover gasket, and for $18 I slapped a new chain in it. The whole job took about the same amount of time as an entire VW timing belt job. There was nothing wrong with my chain at 110k, just thought I might as well do it. I had an old 83 Caprice with a loose chain. The chain was rubbing the timing cover it was so loose. Under deceleration it would pop out the exhaust. I drove it like that for about 10k until I found a nice day to fix it. You can't do that with a belt. Chances are you push it 10k with no symptoms and you'll end up with a very expensive boat anchor.

Since I have a 924s (aka a 944) I am a gluten for punishment when it comes to timing belts.

I much prefer to change most timing belts over timing chains usually a cleaner job. But ever 2 years or 30-40K is the recommended change on the P car. I have standard air filters that have lasted longer than timing belts in my P car. With cars being engineered you wuld think that they would re think this and come up with a better solution.

I am surprised that they have not perfected a hydraulic/pneumatic controlled valve train for street cars controlled by a computer that eliminates a cam all together.

My '95 Maxima has almost 209k on it and still has the original chain. Only the newer Nissans have issues with the chains eating through the guides and causing the whirring noise, and that's a TSB so there's a fix. My buddy's '92 325is has 325k on it with the original chain. Give me a chain any day, I'll take my chances that I never have to touch it. Even easy timing belts are a pain in my butt..

Chains are great, till they aren't, like an old guide fails and proceeds to make the chain skip and eat the valve train. The belt forces you to do upkeep on such things, often give an excuse to pull the valve cover and check the valve lash, etc. Unless you have a Mitsubishi V6 or a PT Cruiser, you likely have nothing to complain about.

read the first half a page, scrolled down to comment box:

i'm a pushrod V8 guy at heart... but i've done a few OHC timing chains and belts.. i prefer belts.. the first OHC engine i ever owned was the 2.2 in an 86 Dodge Charger i got for $200... the belt broke on me and i had to figure out how to fix it with no internet (i didn't know it was a thing in 1995 when i had that car) and a crappy set of mostly SAE tools... i think it took me an hour and a half from the time i got the belt to figuring out how to take it apart, how to line up dots or whatever, and put it back together..

the 3.5 in my 94 Chrysler LHS was a little more involved, but not too bad- even without the "proper" tools or even a chiltons or Haynes manual to guide me. it helped that they put the engine in those in the car so that the front of the engine is pointing at the front of the car..

the timing chain in my brother's Ecotec powered '04 Cavalier was a different story- that thing just flat out sucked, even with the internet to fall back on for help. and then it developed a rod knock about 10 minutes after getting it back together and we wound up putting a junkyard engine in it, anyways...

so, yeah, gimme a cam in block pushrod engine as my preference, but if it absolutely MUST be of the OHC variety, i'll take a belt over a chain..

How about oil bath belts?

They are coming.

In reply to curtis73:

Curtis, the belt vs chain debate generally refers to OHC engines. V8 engines with in-block cams sin't what the original discussion is about. Sure, you can easily drive a V8 with a marginal chain making noise for 10K miles, but there's no way in hell I'd attempt that in an OHC engine.

curtis73 wrote: My LT1 had a leaking oil pan gasket. I used it as an opportunity to replace the water pump, front cover gasket, and for $18 I slapped a new chain in it. The whole job took about the same amount of time as an entire VW timing belt job.

Where did you find a timing chain for an LT1 for $18, and how did you get all that done in three hours?

Hyundai's belts are super easy, so I never minded the relatively short life (60k miles). I'm on my first OHC chain engine (world motor/Theta) in the SeX. It is quite a bit louder than the old Beta in the Elantra, but it's also a better engine in every respect.

So, I don't care. If it works and it doesn't cost me assloads of money, I'm good.

Bobzilla wrote: Hyundai's belts are super easy, so I never minded the relatively short life (60k miles). I'm on my first OHC chain engine (world motor/Theta) in the SeX. It is quite a bit louder than the old Beta in the Elantra, but it's also a better engine in every respect. So, I don't care. If it works and it doesn't cost me assloads of money, I'm good.

im a little over 100k on the 2.0 and dont have any unusual noises like nissans do to broadcast guide failure, so I think we're gonna be looking at looooooooooooooooong maintenance intervals thank god. lol

In reply to corytate:

I've seen some of the early NF Sonata's with 200+k on the Theta in them on the original chains so I'm guessing we are not going to suffer the same fate as Honda's chain driven K-motors.

Bobzilla wrote: In reply to corytate: I've seen some of the early NF Sonata's with 200+k on the Theta in them on the original chains so I'm guessing we are not going to suffer the same fate as Honda's chain driven K-motors.

that is great to know.
Everything on this car has been amazingly durable, I'm verry happy with the purchase still.
Hopefully that doesn't change now that my commute is all city miles on the horrible charlotte roads

hmmmmm.... I'll just leave this here.....

In reply to Ian F:

What could go wrong?

In reply to oldeskewltoy:

This board is one of the few places where that picture looks pornographic...maybe its the blurred "censoring."

Ojala wrote: In reply to oldeskewltoy: This board is one of the few places where that picture looks pornographic...maybe its the blurred "censoring."

its blurred/censored because there are a grand total of 2 engines of this type running this belt configuration.... it is still a bit new to reveal some of the tricks.....

My Crosley had gear drive.

bgkast wrote: In reply to Ian F: What could go wrong?

I own one of those engines! Drove it to work today!

Realistically, though, why is it that the timing chain on the Audi 4.2 is considered evil, while the one on the S62 isn't?

bgkast wrote: In reply to Ian F: What could go wrong?

Depends. Are you going to change the oil every 5,000 miles or every 15,000 miles?

For the uninitiated: Look carefully at the crank. We're looking at the transmission end of a newer Audi 4.2 V8.

codrus wrote: Realistically, though, why is it that the timing chain on the Audi 4.2 is considered evil, while the one on the S62 isn't?

Does the S62 engine also have a reputation for eating the chains before it hits 60k, causing a $20k repair bill?

Knurled wrote:

bgkast wrote: In reply to Ian F: What could go wrong?

Depends. Are you going to change the oil every 5,000 miles or every 15,000 miles? For the uninitiated: Look carefully at the crank. We're looking at the transmission end of a newer Audi 4.2 V8.

WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT?!

Brilliant bit of engineering, actually. Makes the front of the engine lower (important when you're shoving a V8 in front of the front axle centerline) and it makes the engine shorter since chain noise gets lost in the bellhousing instead of requiring a bulky aluminum case. Every new engine design that VWAG did starting with the VR6 has been this way.

The VW 5-cylinder uses the same bore centers as the old belt-driven five, but because the timing chain is shoved back into otherwise dead space, the engine is only a centimeter or so longer than the old four-cylinder engine. You best believe that people have figured out how to replace the old fives with the new one, too. There's room in front of the engine for a radiator or intercooler when you do that!

(if you've never seen an old 5-cyl Audi, they have the radiator off to the side, tucked behind the alternator and other accessories. Crank pulley winds up being a fingers-width from the front bumper.)

Knurled wrote:

ShadowSix wrote: This: for all the timing belt hand-wringing I've seen a lot more chain-related issues on Nissans and Toyotas than belt-related issues on Hondas and Subarus.

I understand that the new Subaru engines have chains. (As do basically every Honda designed in the past 15 years or so) I wonder how they're dealing with the boxer harmonics. On DOHC Subaru fours with manual transmissions, there are guides around some of the pulleys to keep the belt from bouncing off. I'm assuming that automatics don't need them because they have the mother of all Fluidamprs on the back of the crank to damp out any strange harmonics, and the SOHC don't need them because they have more even loadings on the cam pulley.

which Honda's ? I know the CR-V has a chain .. but my '01 Integra has a belt .. it's my understanding that the Fit has a chain (as did the RSX-S)

have the V6's gone to a chain yet ?

Knurled wrote:

ShadowSix wrote: This: for all the timing belt hand-wringing I've seen a lot more chain-related issues on Nissans and Toyotas than belt-related issues on Hondas and Subarus.

I understand that the new Subaru engines have chains. (As do basically every Honda designed in the past 15 years or so) I wonder how they're dealing with the boxer harmonics. On DOHC Subaru fours with manual transmissions, there are guides around some of the pulleys to keep the belt from bouncing off. I'm assuming that automatics don't need them because they have the mother of all Fluidamprs on the back of the crank to damp out any strange harmonics, and the SOHC don't need them because they have more even loadings on the cam pulley.

Honda 4 cyl, yes. The V6's still use belts.

Timing chain stretch at 90-100k miles on the hondars is funny to me. It basically wipes away any benefit of the chain (longer service intervals) and triples the cost compared to the belt engines.

All this in 3 pages and no mention of the E36 M3ty 4.0 SOHC from Ford and 2.4 Chryslers.....

But I agree, Ecotec's suck.