Cambelt or chain ?
Discussion
Rollcage said:
Si_steve said:
2000-2007 Mondeo TDCI 2.0 Duratorq engines are chain driven IIRC.
But you can replace the cost of a broken belt with that of knackered injectors with that particular engine.....I had an Alfa 2.4JTD 156 & when that had a problem with its Bosch system even Bosch couldn't diagnose it! Off the road 3 weeks in the end before they found it was the HP pump which was £750. More modern cars are 2-4 times that for the HP pump. The cambelt on the Alfa was £400 which is small beer compared..
Seems strange to me to buy a car purely on the basis it has a chain and not a cambelt? 
Surely overall engine reliability is far more important factor and will influence the repairs costs more than a cambelt change which can cost as little as £250 for some cars / from some places?
Or do the below:
Surely overall engine reliability is far more important factor and will influence the repairs costs more than a cambelt change which can cost as little as £250 for some cars / from some places?Or do the below:
MX7 said:
Would it be worth considering which engines are non-interference?
Or just get the belt done.
Or just get the belt done.
Riknos said:
Seems strange to me to buy a car purely on the basis it has a chain and not a cambelt? Surely overall engine reliability is far more important factor and will influence the repairs costs more than a cambelt change which can cost as little as £250 for some cars / from some places?
Or do the below:
Thanks chaps, should have qualified it by saying I need a few months stop gap car, that hopefully I can do a basic home service on, without the expense of another garage bill. I'm not averse to doing an 'easy' cambelt. But purely by coincedence all of my daily cars have had chains ... Her current peugeot has been serviced at vast expense on schedule for the last 3 years and 120k miles, and 3 cambelts (!) but has thanked us with a blowing headgasket .. circa £700 on a Hdi Diesel engine ! Not really worth fixing on a 2001 Pug 306 ! Surely overall engine reliability is far more important factor and will influence the repairs costs more than a cambelt change which can cost as little as £250 for some cars / from some places?Or do the below:
MX7 said:
Would it be worth considering which engines are non-interference?
Or just get the belt done.
Or just get the belt done.
So I was looking for a cheap low maintenance runabout for a few weeks, as we probably have a good deal on her Dads ex company car in September.
Chains are susceptible to problems just as cam belts are! On the VR6 engine (and apparently most derritives like the R32) the timing chain tensioners wear and need replacing sometimes as often as every 80,000 miles (but usually last longer) - and when they fail, it's equally catasrophic and very expensive to fix.
Plenty of cam belts have long replacement intervals (60k+) - so just buy one, get the cam belt done and forget about it?
Plenty of cam belts have long replacement intervals (60k+) - so just buy one, get the cam belt done and forget about it?
Perd Hapley said:
I appreciate the extra complexity of driving an OHC with a chain, but it always seemed crazy to me to hold an interference engine together with a rubber band.
You're not the only one. I don't think that chains are much more complicated per se, I'd have thought that lubrication was the only additional requirement.I get the impression that belts have given way to chains again in modern cars, anyone know if that generally the case, or do many new cars still use belts?
MX7 said:
Would it be worth considering which engines are non-interference?
Or just get the belt done.
+1Or just get the belt done.
Just get the damn thing done and you won't have to worry at all. Belts cost a tuppence compared to a new head.
If you've got some form of neurosis then buy a non-interference engine.
Ancedotally, I currently have a 2.2 vectra with a FSH that has managed to felch itself because of a slipped chain so don't be so certain chains are the answer. They can be bloody expensive to change as well as you need access and to do things like balancer chains and clean oil feeds etc.
Just to add to the above my old man has just bought a 2.5 v6 Mondeo, very nice for the money. Awful on fuel though.
Perd Hapley said:
I appreciate the extra complexity of driving an OHC with a chain, but it always seemed crazy to me to hold an interference engine together with a rubber band.
You could just as easily say it seems like a bad idea to hold an interference engine together with a device consisting of thousands of tiny moving, wearing components of which only one or two needs to have a manufacturing defect or wear out to cause the whole thing to fail.Belts are only a problem if you're too tight to get them changed on time. I'd go as far as to say chains present more of a problem as they instill a false sense of security. Although less prone than belts, they can and do still fail.
cheesesliceking said:
less weight, less noise and cheaper.
The weight difference is marginal on a 150 kilo engine, mine has a chain and doesnt seem any noisier and on a diesel its hardly a consideration, which brings us to the third reason, cheaper which I think was the main one, I have heard of loads of people having cam belt issues but very rarely chains, the very fact they get noisy when worn is a good warning where belts tend to just snap.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff