There are plenty of weak links. Enough that every car owner can potentially face an unplanned expensive surprise.
http://www.openroadbrands.com/media/k2/items/cache/deb45d333d0414ba3de42155789fdb4a_L.jpg
What are you disagreeing with me about?As I have said before, I have no complaints about timing belts whatsoever
Well you did make this statement -
“The customers that complained about the high costs of maintaining a car using a timing belt could have made a different choice.”
I wasn’t disagreeing with you per-say…but with the people who think a timing belt comes with a higher cost. For most people who only keep their vehicles 150-200 thousand miles…then yes…a chain would be cheaper for them. But for some people like me who keeps their vehicles 300k+ miles…the belt is usually the cheaper cost.
We can debate forever which has the highest long term cost, a belt or a chain, and we have done so on more than one occasion, however if you were to ask 50 people on the street if their car has a belt or a chain you might find one who knows what he heck you’re talking about. And even if you asked them what kind of car they had and told them whether it had a belt or a chain, maybe one of them would know what that means.
The statement blaming the customer for having made a bad choice is ridiculous. I pissed & moaned when my old car needed a new belt too, and my labor was free!! IMHO, designing a car to need a multi-hundred-dollar scheduled maintenance repair every 60K (or whatever) is shameful. But I blame the designers, not the customers. I also think that designing the water pump to be driven by the belt as well, such that a failure of the former destroys the latter, is unconscionable too. But the fact is that it’s all driven by manufacturing costs. Only customer dissatisfaction can override reduced manufacturing costs in the design decision process.
But Rod made a great point. There are lots and lots of opportunities to complain. There’s a lot more to buying a car than just whether it has a belt or a chain. That’s only one in a number of factors, and one that the average person wouldn’t even understand.
Just an FYI, The decision to design an engine with a belt or a chain is less about the cost difference between the two and more about noise. Chains will always be more noisey than timing belts, They also absorb crankshaft vibration so the cam timing is more stable. NASCAR engines haven’t used chains in a long time for vibration (they don’t car about noise!). To design in tensioners and dampers for the chain is difficult. Carmakers do consider the after-sale disgust their customers experience when a belt breaks on interference engines. Some still use belts, though…
mountainbike
I did not piss and moan when any of my cars needed timing belts, and my labor was free
On some of them, I kept the car long enough, that I did the job multiple times
But it didn’t bother me
And I certainly don’t “blame” myself for having bought those cars. I fully well knew they had t-belts when I bought them. They all served me faithfully for many years
Sorry, but it in my book it’s not shameful to design a car to need a t-belt every 60K or so
In my book it’s more shameful to design a v-engine with 3 chains, 3 tensioners, and one of the chains is on the back of the engine . . . what if you do keep it long enough to need a chain. Many US drivers rack up miles very quickly, because they have to drive an hour or more to work
In my book it’s more shameful to design a transmission that can’t be drained and refilled the old school way. I’m talking about the ones where you have to pump in the fluid from the bottom, using one of those machines and an adapter . . . the ones that don’t have any kind of dipstick . . . the ones that the newer Toyotas and Benzes use
FWIW . . . I agree with @Mustangman about the noise. My brother’s Toyota is chain driven, and it’s noiser than my t-belt driven Toyota. 2GR-FE versus 1MZ-FE, for those who are interested
By the way, I’m not mad at you, or any of the other guys on this forum
It’s just that we have different viewpoints, and we’re obviously sticking to our guns
I admit I’m pigheaded and stubborn, and have to be right, and that other guys have to be wrong
And none of us will see the “error” in our thinking . . . THAT INCLUDES ME
LOL
Mustangman, I respectfully disagree that anyone can hear a chain over a belt from the driver’s seat… any driver’s seat on any mass produced vehicle. I have serious doubts, frankly, that anyone could tell the difference in noise even from under the hood.
I’d bet a lobster dinner that if you were blindfolded and walked through a parking lot to listen to various engines you wouldn’t be able to tell which were belts and which were chains.
I think it’s unrealistic to compare NASCAR engines with stock street engines. NASCAR engines are running at extreme RPMs for long periods, and under those conditions the mass of a chain is a real detriment. The lower mass in a belt not only places lower lateral stresses on the shafts, but as you said, it does better absorb the rotational vibrations from the crankshaft, which in NASCAR engines is far more extreme than in stock engines. Stock engines do fine with harmonic dampers and balance shafts. In addition, the lower mass of a belt helps in acceleration on the racetrack.
Regular oil changes will increase timing chain life, you are probably wasting money changing a timing chain before you get indications of a problem.
mountainbike
With the hood up, my brother’s chain driven toyota v6 is noisier than my t-belt v6 with the hood up
Personally, I don’t have a problem with timing belts at all although I prefer chains on my cars.
As to my comment about some customers running for the door at the mention of a timing belt job being on their dime, I will just say that I’ve seen more than a few go ballistic over the fact that they have to pay for the oil changes on their new cars.
“Warranty is supposed to cover everything…” is usually the first sentence followed by grumbling, cursing, various veiled or non-veiled threats, or stalking out.
We had a customer once file a complaint with the BBB because her first oil change was not paid for under warranty. We never saw her again and Lord only knows what her reaction was if and when she discovered that the future timing belt job on her Subaru was coming out of her pocket also…
She probably got rid of the car when the timing belt was due
Unfortunately, that seems to be fairly common with a lot of drivers . . . if something expensive is due, sell the car, and keep quiet about any overdue maintenance or needed repairs
Me, being a cynic by nature, will assume that any and all used cars I buy have had zero maintenance