Consider buying American!

OMG, sounds like a cost saving move the bean counters absolutely loved.

 

They don't stretch but just break or jump a tooth instead. Result -
wrecked engine. BTW, 'timing drift' due to chain stretch is insignificant.
If it were, two sided tensioning would be easy to implement.

Really? Then how come they first appeared on cheap cars?

There are *very* few belts that have a service life anywhere near this.
And fewer that would risk leaving it that long even where the maker
claimed it did.

The bean counters are more likely to cream themselves over the lovely
maintenance costs associated with belts.

True they have some advantages but not for road going engines.

 

Most car diesel engines are interference types.

 

Since you appear to be a Honda type does this apply to every Honda?
Somehow I doubt it...

 

You have a car with a distributor?

 

No it's not. You can make manual switches that handle many times that
load. In any case I've never known a Lucas main lighting switch to fail on
the dozens of old cars I've owned before relay operation became the norm.

Well we would be going back many years if you're talking about when Lucas
didn't use relays for this job. Probably pre '80 or so - although earlier
designs which didn't have them continued to be made.

 

You're still not actually naming those problems.
Despite owning dozens of old cars with Lucas electrics I never saw any
pattern to failures. Apart from of course poor grounding - but that is
down to assembly - not design.

 

With relays you need less heavy duty wire. The switch gear can obviously
be lower rated. Complex wiring to the controls takes up less room. I'd not
be too sure omitting a relay or two saves any money.

 

(1) Have you ever tried to recover a skidding FWD in icy conditions?
The physics are all wrong.

(2) I think you mean to say that "neither statement IS wrong."
"Neither" is singular,

 

They don't stretch but just break or jump a tooth instead. Result -
wrecked engine.[/QUOTE]

Only if it's an interference engine. If it's not, you coast to the side
of the road, call for a tow, and have it fixed.

 

Losing your timing belt means a non-interference engine is totalled?

You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you.

 

Only if it's an interference engine. If it's not, you coast to the side
of the road, call for a tow, and have it fixed.[/QUOTE]

If there isn't a big truck behind you, in which case you become a pancake.

jeff

 

yes i have. no it isn't.

there are two instances, hence the plural - "neither of these two
statements are wrong". something like "neither do i" is singular.

 

not true any more. most cars don't specify belt change as a service
item, but they do as part of the 100k mile "tuneup".

but you're right in that a lot of aftermarket belts are 60k.

like people that change their oil every 3k miles?

paradoxically, no. that motor will be maintained and kept running
almost indefinitely because it's "just a service item". chains otoh are
"engine rebuild" and most consumers throw in the towel at that point and
buy a new vehicle - just what a bean counter wants.

 

There's at least one Vauxhall (GM) available in the UK where the engine
has to come out to change the belt. If this is the case it would be little
more overall cost to change a chain. And in practice less since it would
have a greatly longer life.

 

Most all turbo-motors are non-interference. Not sure about the rather
unusual (at 10.2:1) new BMW 3.0L...

 

how much longer is "greatly longer"? put numbers to it. and define the
degree of wear considered "acceptable".

 

On average over 4 times longer than a belt. Some may never need changing
throughout the service life of the engine.

If it's quiet with the engine hot?