Some people prefer to drive their cars until there is a failure. They see no reason to fix what ain’t broke. Over the years there have been several cars that fit that personality. In fact, all full size domestics of the 60s could be economically run till they dropped and then patched just enough to get them going. We have a sizable and growing segment of the population who are economically forced to “get by” from pay check to pay check and they have little to no discretionary income. It seems that the late 80s base model rear wheel drive cars and base model trucks from all the domestic manufacturers are currently the most reliable vehicles to operate in the “drive till they drop” mode. The economy is getting tough. Very tough for some.
Good to see we’re on the same page. @ Whitey
Yes, many people are living from paycheck to paycheck, and many without a paycheck. However, I disagree that the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” method of car maintenance is the most economical method under any circumstances. When it comes to cars, I believe in the following axioms:
– An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
– If you can’t afford to maintain a car, you can’t afford to own a car.
IMHO the arguments in this thread all make the erroneous assumption that the element of an engine being interference is relatively isolated from all the other aspects of the engine design, and that that factor alone creates some advantage over a noninterference design. I contend that none of this is true. As an obvious example, Toyota’s Corolla engine is extremely comparable in all performance and operating characteristics to the Civic engine, yet one is interference and the other not.
In truth, the interference design is a result of a lot of geometry including valve angles and sizes, head design, piston stroke, cylinder size, and a whole plethora of other characteristis all designed together to obtain specific operating characteristics. Interference design is a result of everything taken together, not a design criterion in and of itself.
Nice catch by the way, Goldwing, on the nomenclatures. I missed that one myself.
I forget whether it was Shakespeare or Chaucer who said “mounted, a poor man rides his horse to death.” But does that mean that people are poor BECAUSE they lack foresight, or does that mean that BECAUSE they are poor they can’t afford foresight. You seem quite sure of the former, Whitey. I will reserve my judgement for now and continue to observe.
Whether it was Chaucer or Shakespeare, I disagree wholeheartedly with the sentiment expressed in that quote.
I reject the idea that foresight and poverty are mutually exclusive. My father’s family grew up dirt poor, and partially because of because of that, they take care of the things they have. Your quote ignores the poor man who has so much appreciation for his horse that he takes great care of it, mainly because he remembers what life was like without a horse.
Me thinks you take things too personally…
Too personally? I don’t think so. I don’t see this as a personal issue.
If you accused me of taking things too seriously, you wouldn’t be the first.
woohoo, this thread is really heating up.
I know it might not look nice, but a plaque on the dash that tells the uneducated ignoramus who owns the car, when to have the timing belt, the coolant the oil, the brake fluid, etc. changed would likely save a whole lot of grief for dudes and damsles with no mechanical knowledge or erperience. ( the tppical car owner)
come to think of it, since the odometer lists mileage, a dash panel operated by the odometer, that lights up and tells the owner to take it in for service NOW, would be a simple and easy and cheap feature to include on almost any car or truck. But then I suppose cars would last longer, and sales would go down. Its the old shoe horizon event all over again isn’t it?
This is all just hypothetical rambling. Don’t sweat it.
It’s not so much a question of interference engines as the use of timing belts and the potential they carry for a catastrophic breakdown. I owned a VW that would strip the teeth of the belt, randomly, about once a year. I could replace the belt in about an hour so that was a minor inconvenience, the problem was being stranded miles from home, sometimes at night. Most other breakdowns give some kind of warning or will prevent the car from starting. Few problems are as devastating to the driver as a timing belt failure anytime, anywhere.
I will never again purchase a vehicle with a timing belt.
call me a cynic, but I think some dispute between block design engineers and head design engineers led to the an engine that would not run, so the timing design enieers worked out a compromise that pleased the sales dept. guys. But that is just the result of having spent 22 years in the manufacturing environment, dealing with design enineers. many of them are deaf, call it a case of engine ears.
In addition to the reasons mentioned, a timing belt runs quieter than a chain.
Timing chains can jump too when they get worn. True it usually takes twice the mileage that it would with a belt, but it depends on how often the owner changed the oil.
I see your point.
Or perhaps interference engines are just engines designed by committees. The committee members designing the valve geometry want to displace X space with the valves and the committee members designing the short block want to displace X space with the pistons. Since if everything is timed properly they’ll never meet, the production manager says “go for it! We have a schedule to meet!”.
Timing belts have been around since the '60’s. I don’t understand what the big deal is.Pick your vehicle. I drive a '92 Mustang as a commuter car. The timing belt broke .Its a non-interference motor. Within the hour I had changed the belt and was on the road again.
If you don’t like the idea of an engine with a timing belt interference motor, don’t buy one. I don’t think the price of changing the timing belt every 90,ooo miles is a big deal.
You have to realize that auto execs and engineers regard a car with 90,000 miles the same way we would a 20 year old pizza.It should have been discarded long ago.I highly doubt any one in the stratosphere of auto execs drive a vehicle with over 5000 miles. Any one that drives a car over two years old are ‘pond scum…little people.’
If you can’t afford a shop price, ask around. You will find a mechanic who will do the job on a weekend for $1oo. You buy the parts.
Many cars have this feature. My 2000 Ford Explorer has a digital info display and many other creature comforts. I used to have a 1982 Honda with three mechanical indicators in the speedo. They tripped from green to yellow to red based on various mileages and would signal you when maintenance was due based on the schedule in the owner’s manual. The first box was for oil changes, and went to yellow in 5,000 miles and red at 7,500 miles. The last box went to red every 60,000, signaling need to change the timing belt and other 60,000 miles services. I forgot the interval for the middle one.
The trend thankfully is returning to chains on mass selling cars (4cylinder Honda’s), Hyundai, and even Subaru has joined the crowd for 2011 in their standard issue 4 cylinder flat 4.
However for the folks who can least afford it they get a nasty surprise.
A serpentine belt failure will not ruin your engine. A failed timing belt will ruin an “interference engine”.
As to why are there “interference engines”? Pollution controls made manufacturers look for more efficiecy in their motors. Cleaner burning motors need less add on pollution controls and are easier to tune for “driveability” and power. Moving the valves closer to the pistons is one way to achieve a cleaner burning motor.
Why drive the valves with a timing belt, instead of a timing chain or pushrods? Timing belts have advantages in less noise, no need for lubrication, and they take up less space meaning a smaller engine. Timing chains have advantages and disadvantages, as do the old fashioned pushrod motors. Manufacturing costs is a part of the equation too.
If you want a car with a timing chain and want to avoid timing belts you can find cars of all sizes with timing chains. It is up to the customer to do the research and find the car they want.
Me, I’m not that concerned with whether a motor has a timing chain or belt. Changing the belt is just a part of maintaining a motor that has a belt. $800 every 100K miles isn’t that big an expense in my opinion.
Those exist. People pay as much attention to them as they do to the infamous Check Engine light - “oh, yeah, that’s been lit for a year or so. Maybe I should have someone look into it sometime, but not right now - it still runs, so there can’t be anything too wrong, right?”
Sadly, those of us who realise it really is cheaper to service it on schedule so it doesn’t break in the first place are in the minority. A service reminder light that limited performance, now that would actually get people’s attention… and nobody would buy a car with it.
For the record, I get scheduled maintenance done by the odometer, before the reminder light comes on.