I have a Volvo V70 (non turbo) that is over 9 years old with 55,000 miles. It has been driven very conservatively, with the RPMs rarely over 2500, and only in emergencies over 3000. The dealer says the belt should be changed at 10 years. This car has an interference engine. Do timing belts just wear out with age? Or can I just go to the 70,000 mile replacement schedule?
Yes they need to be changed by miles or years which ever comes first. How many times is this question going to be asked when all you have to do is look in the damn manual.
Age, fluid leaks and vapors, and environmental conditions also affect belt life. Just my 2 cents but I’d never allow a belt to languish 9 years on an interference fit engine and the dealer claim of 10 years was likely made by a service writer who has no substantial mechanical aptitude.
Timing belts can dry rot just like serpentine accessory belts, tires, wiper blade inserts, etc and a timing belt can appear visually to be in excellent condition right up to the nano-second that it snaps; leaving you on the side of the road instead of crashed if lucky and not so lucky from a financial perspective.
I agree with the dealer and the other posters. Change it now. Rocketman
I know that it often pays to be skeptical of a dealership’s maintenance recommendations, but when something like this is clearly spelled-out (in terms of both odometer mileage and elapsed time) in the Owner’s Manual, I am puzzled that so many people seem to be so confused about timing belt replacement intervals.
In addition to having the timing belt replaced very soon, the OP should check the Volvo maintenance schedule in order to see what other types of maintenance he/she may have skipped over the past 9 years. Among the critical issues that have likely have been overlooked are…flushing/changing the brake fluid, and changing the transmission fluid & filter.
The bottom line is that timely maintenance is invariably cheaper than the repairs that result from lax maintenance.
Gates, a belt supplier, says the timing belt should be replaced at 105,000 miles. That implies a time interval of about 7 years. I am willing to believe that you might not have the owner’s manual, especially if you are not the first owner. The water pump is driven by the timing belt and should be replaced at the same time. If the pump breaks over the next 7 years, you would have to remove the timing belt to get to it and then it has to be replaced again. Replacing the pump means draining the coolant, and it should be replaced too. The mechanic should inspect oil seals and pulleys associated with the timing belt and replace them I’d required. Summing up, replace the timing belt, water pump, and coolant. Replace pulleys and oil seals if needed.
Common sense says change it!
If you are keeping car why not change it sooner than later? Providing you can afford it now. It may cost more in a couple more years.
10 bucks says the timing belt tensioner which is not changed due to cheap owner will fail in 1 yr and mechanic will say it should have been changed
How you drive the car and when is irrelevant. The belt is due for replacement.
The repair manual also states clearly that the tensioner be replaced during belt replacement.
Since OP says the car is 9 years old, here’s the 2006 maintenance schedule
Note the . . . overly optimistic . . . timing belt interval for PZEV vehicles. That would be the top chart
Is it possible the swedes are snorting too much cocaine . . . ?
15 years/150K . . . uh-huh
For a 15 years/150k miles belt replacement recommendation I’d have to say that whoever made that one has a very rosy outlook on life.
I wonder how many engines bit the dust because of that one.
A few years ago, someone I know had a 1998 Volvo S60 (I think). She neglected to replace the timing belt on any kind of schedule, despite my suggestions she do so. One day driving to work, the engine completely died, and she was able to coast into a parking lot. The timing belt had broken just like that, and there was severe engine damage. She foolishly sunk $3000 into repairing the car… only to eventually sell it off for a Camry about a year later. The Volvo was a money pit.
But I digress. Yes, get the timing belt changed tomorrow. Good luck.
In certain states, California and others that adopt Calif. rules , manufactures have to warranty some parts for 150000 miles. I would want to confirm that the timing belt was covered with the manufacturer ( not the dealer ) before I proceeded not to change it. And make sure I bought the car in one of those states.
It’s possible the belt could last longer, but in my opinion, delaying the change-out, it’s not a good bet to make. The downside if you are wrong is a pretty big hit to your pocketbook, and could result in a dangerous driving situation.
I couldn’t possibly imagine that a timing belt is one of those items covered for 150K
The reason I doubt it, is that a timing belt is not an emissions component
I could be wrong, but over the years I’ve seen lists of things with “extended coverage” and I don’t ever recall seeing a timing belt on there. I’ve seen a PCM on the list, though. I’m assuming that is because the PCM controls the emissions components, the electrical ones, at least
Volvo V70. What you wrote makes no sense whatsoever. The proper phrasing is, damned manual, not, damn manual, as you wrote.
Grammar Nazi alert: