I recently bought a second Subaru. My 90 Legacy's manual says to

replace the timing belt at 60K miles. My 2000 OBS calls for 105K

before replacing the belt. They are both 2.2 engines, I assume

the same engine. Were there changes made by Subaru, improvments

in belt technonlgy...or whats the reason for the major increase in

mileage before changing belts. What I'm getting to is they are both

the same engine so do I really neeed to do the 90 Legacy at 60K.

I know what the owners manual says,I just wonder what changed.

 

Richard

I'd do the 2000 OBS sooner than 105k. They're assuming that the tech changed to make the belts last longer.

 

The 90 won't care if you don't change the belt. It'll just break and that's that. If the 2000's breaks, you could potentially have some major issues that would require engine replacement.

Starting in 97, all belts went to 105K. Different belt, different materials, unless you have the STI, that belt stays at 60K due to it's materials and tighter timing specs.

 

Before 97, many Calif spec belts, once again a different p/n, were 90K or 105K. Calif made that manditory so all mfgr's had to step up to that spec.

 

No reason you can't put the Calif spec belt on an older Subaru ( 90-96 ).

It's the belt. I have a '96 legacy and '00obw and examining the timing belts side by side they are definitely different material or technology or whatever. Maybe the newer belts include kevlar or something to make them sturdier. On the ~'96 and earlier 2.2's the only risk of breaking a belt is being stranded, but after that and on the 2.5's you're going to most likely have to replace bent valves and maybe event dented pistons if that belt breaks.