Bluestone Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 I've got only 51,000 miles on my 2000 GT Wagon; I've been outside the States a lot and haven't had occasion to rack up the mileage on it. Timing belt replacement is 105,000 miles or 105 months. I've owned my Sube for 90 months, now. Is replacing the belt really an issue at 105 months, even though the actual mileage on it would be far, far less than 105k miles? I would think that mileage on the belt would be the critical factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 Yes. tis is NOT a part you want to double guess subaru on. http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/TBeltEWWin05.pdf Rubber ages with time as well as mileage. Ozone from pollution, stresses from starting and sutting off the engine, Temperiture extreems, all affect rubber. nipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gloyale Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 I personally would replace the belt. I would never trust a timing belt to 105k miles, on anything. It is such relatively cheap insurance against bent valves, and being stuck on the side of the road, that it only makes sense. This is one that FHI baffles me with. The old NON-Interfernce motors had a recommended interval of 60k miles. Now that all the motors are interference, it's 105K?????? Can you say "planned obsolesense"? Or maybe Planned "you need a new motor, better to just buy as new subaru!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edrach Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 I personally would replace the belt. I would never trust a timing belt to 105k miles, on anything. It is such relatively cheap insurance against bent valves, and being stuck on the side of the road, that it only makes sense. This is one that FHI baffles me with. The old NON-Interfernce motors had a recommended interval of 60k miles. Now that all the motors are interference, it's 105K?????? Can you say "planned obsolesense"? Or maybe Planned "you need a new motor, better to just buy as new subaru!" The earlier EA82 motor had two belts, one of them considerably smaller than the other and both narrower than the single belt on the EJ engines. I've had EA belts fail on me twice without any damage to the engine and both with more than 60K on the belts. I can understand why the newer EJ belts last longer and I don't know of any premature belt failures on the EJ engines; either the 2.2 or 2.5 engine. I also think the automatic belt tensioner helps on the EJ engines to keep the belt from failing prematurely. Looking to find a Forester to buy recently I found a number of them with 125K or more miles with no evidence that the belt had ever been changed. That being said, I think it is wise to change the belt at 105 months for the reasons given by nipper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 I personally would replace the belt. I would never trust a timing belt to 105k miles, on anything. It is such relatively cheap insurance against bent valves, and being stuck on the side of the road, that it only makes sense. This is one that FHI baffles me with. The old NON-Interfernce motors had a recommended interval of 60k miles. Now that all the motors are interference, it's 105K?????? Can you say "planned obsolesense"? Or maybe Planned "you need a new motor, better to just buy as new subaru!" I dont get what your saying? All belts have a specific life to them. the 105, 000 miles is due to the initial emission regulations of 100,000 miles. The car had to hold timing for 100,000 miles in order to meet emmssion regulations. I dont see planned obsolesence here, just a design protocol. nipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluestone Posted January 19, 2008 Author Share Posted January 19, 2008 Well then, why did most car manufacturers move away from timing chains? As I recall, timing chains were generally more durable and lasted a lot longer than timing belts do. Years ago, I had a Citroën DS-21 and drove it for 220k miles with no timing chain replacement, and the engine was still going strong when I parted with it. Them were the GOOD days, sigh.....sure miss them(sniff, sniff). Cars, then, didn't call for chain replacement at certain intervals; ya just drove the car until the chain showed evidence of noticeable wear, if it ever did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edrach Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Belts are less expensive than either timing gears or chains to manufacture. Timing gears never seem to fail (look at your EA81 engine). Timing chains do stretch and wear out but would last longer than a timing belt. Simple economics, belts are the cheapest to manufacture and replace. Ask an early Toyota owner what it cost to replace a slapping timing chain in an L16 or L20 engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edrach Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Cars, then, didn't call for chain replacement at certain intervals; ya just drove the car until the chain showed evidence of noticeable wear, if it ever did.Our Toyota pickup with the timing chain exhibited chain slap at around 110K. There's an adjustment but the labor involved made me opt to pay the extra to just have the chain replaced and be done with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porcupine73 Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 I think the 105k timing belts use kevlar aramid or somethign that makes them so durable. I don't see many posts about the OEM belts breaking before their time? I think the 100,000 mile thing was originally due to Calif. emmisions saying the vehicle couldn't require certain kinds of maintenance/service before 100,000 miles. Some mid 90's-ish 2.2L soobs say 60k mile/60 months timing interval for the non-calif emmissions version, but 105k/105 months for the calif emmisions version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Timing chains have draw backs. they are noisey, they have many many moving parts, are expensive, and they are heavy. Subaru went to a chain on the H-6 becuase chains are stonger, and they are much smaller then belts. They did pay a price for BHP using one. BMW timing chain interval is around 200,000 miles. i sort of einvision a subaru being around 160,000 (gut feeling). It could be worse. VW timing chain the w6 i think is between the engine and tranny. http://www.reesphotos.com/VW/ nipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porcupine73 Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Yes I know I have seen where soob has said the H6 timing chain is 'good for the [useful] life of the engine' but didn't say the mileage. The limiting factor there I think is the water pump. Also I think soob went timing chain on the H6 to save a little space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 After seeing the VW adjuster costing 634.00 (and there are two of them), Subaru doesnt look all that bad anymore. nipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skip Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 No talking "relativity" here please. I am only at 70 kmi on my H6 I do not need to look forward to a 3k$ expense at 150 Porcupine says it best What about the H20 pump? When it reaches this mi. a 1000$ H20 pump may spell it's demise. Is this their plan for obsolesce? I would be a fool to change only the pump at this venture.... see above costs. So this leads me to understand that Fuji thinks, us folks that buy this top of the line car will trade up to their new junk when it needs a water pump? pitiful just pitiful I say. This bean counter mentality pulls a large vacuum. I am sure they (FHI) are not alone. I think BMW has a better plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 No talking "relativity" here please. I am only at 70 kmi on my H6 I do not need to look forward to a 3k$ expense at 150 Porcupine says it best What about the H20 pump? When it reaches this mi. a 1000$ H20 pump may spell it's demise. Is this their plan for obsolesce? I would be a fool to change only the pump at this venture.... see above costs. So this leads me to understand that Fuji thinks, us folks that buy this top of the line car will trade up to their new junk when it needs a water pump? pitiful just pitiful I say. This bean counter mentality pulls a large vacuum. I am sure they (FHI) are not alone. I think BMW has a better plan. I dont really agree, but to each thier own. nipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gloyale Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 I think the 100,000 mile thing was originally due to Calif. emmisions saying the vehicle couldn't require certain kinds of maintenance/service before 100,000 miles. Some mid 90's-ish 2.2L soobs say 60k mile/60 months timing interval for the non-calif emmissions version, but 105k/105 months for the calif emmisions version. This is excactly what I'm talking about. The original EJs, had a belt interval of 60k. The new engines use excactly the same type of belt(different lengths for each engine). I didn't realize it was an emmisions clause that changed the recommended interval, but it was, a I expected, an arbitrary change. Meaning that they just decided to print new specs. Not redesign anything. They just let you live with a bigger risk, doesn't cost them anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subsince77 Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 I have what I think is a related question. I am coming up on my second timing belt interval on my 97 OBW 2.5. I'm at 197K right now, the last one was actually done at 113,000. The right side timing cover is showing a small amount of oil that I assume is coming from the cam seals on that side. Will this oil leak affect the timing belt's life span? Should I do the job earlier? This is exactly what happened last time. The seals started to leak before the belt interval. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durania Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 My idea is that car manufactures do a timing belt change at 105K because it is outside of the car's engine warranty. Your timing belt breaks at 70K and ruins every valve in your motor and they *should* front you a new motor. But if its passed the warranty, they just say tough crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hondasucks Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 I personally would replace the belt. I would never trust a timing belt to 105k miles, on anything. It is such relatively cheap insurance against bent valves, and being stuck on the side of the road, that it only makes sense. This is one that FHI baffles me with. The old NON-Interfernce motors had a recommended interval of 60k miles. Now that all the motors are interference, it's 105K?????? Can you say "planned obsolesense"? Or maybe Planned "you need a new motor, better to just buy as new subaru!" 105k is the California spec belt, the 49 state belt interval is 90k, and they ARE interchangeable, just the CA belt is supposed to last longer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porcupine73 Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 I found some more pics of the H6 timing chain stuff in an endwrench article: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durania Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 59 bolts secure the timing chain cover! :eek: Says in the endwrech article that the timing chain is suppose to last the life of the engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hohieu Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 If that's the case, it would seem more prudent to desigin an accessory belt driven water pump. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.