my polo 1.4 is 6 years old and only done 21000 miles.Do i need a new cam belt yet?
|
Do you like playing Russian roulette?
|
As railroad says.
The choices are as follows :
1. Get it done. Done properly (all tensioners, rollers, waterpump, etc) it'll cost £300 or so.
2. Don't bother. It the old belt or one of the ancillaries fails, the engine is toast. Cost to fix ££thousands
|
|
|
Probably not. My Royal Mail rubber bands last longer than this. Cambelts are very strong and long-lived, only breaking if the things they drive get stiff or seize. Such a young VW cambelt should be at least as good quality as our 15yr old 110,000m original Ford Focus cambelt which, last time I looked, was as good as new.
So, look at and listen to it, and make up your own mind. As long as the engine doesn't have an issue with seizing tension pulleys or other things the belt might drive, the odds of it breaking before or indeed considerably after the recommended change intervals are considerably more remote than Russian roulette.
|
Probably not. My Royal Mail rubber bands last longer than this. Cambelts are very strong and long-lived, only breaking if the things they drive get stiff or seize. Such a young VW cambelt should be at least as good quality as our 15yr old 110,000m original Ford Focus cambelt which, last time I looked, was as good as new.
So, look at and listen to it, and make up your own mind. As long as the engine doesn't have an issue with seizing tension pulleys or other things the belt might drive, the odds of it breaking before or indeed considerably after the recommended change intervals are considerably more remote than Russian roulette.
I had a cambelt break on a (non-interference) Honda engine at 4 yyears and 40K miles. All driven parts, water pump etc ok.
(The odds for Russian roulette vary considerably with exactly how the cylinder is spun andorientation of the piece before pulling the trigger.)
|
I had a cambelt break on a (non-interference) Honda engine at 4 yyears and 40K miles. All driven parts, water pump etc ok.
(The odds for Russian roulette vary considerably with exactly how the cylinder is spun andorientation of the piece before pulling the trigger.)
You must have been v unlucky, Honda have big mileage and long change intervals. Any idea why it broke so prematurely? Which engine? Could it have been clocked? Had it been interfered with from new?
(odds reduced if more than one bullet in chamber.....)
|
I had a cambelt break on a (non-interference) Honda engine at 4 yyears and 40K miles. All driven parts, water pump etc ok.
(The odds for Russian roulette vary considerably with exactly how the cylinder is spun andorientation of the piece before pulling the trigger.)
You must have been v unlucky, Honda have big mileage and long change intervals. Any idea why it broke so prematurely? Which engine? Could it have been clocked? Had it been interfered with from new?
(odds reduced if more than one bullet in chamber.....)
It was a 1.6 petrol 115 bhp, ran perfectly before (and after, after my trusted indy took the head off to check valves etc and replaced gasket, new cambelt etc)
(Odds increased in roulette played by those of low intelligence who try it with a self loading pistol such as a Luger or Colt .45)
|
It was a 1.6 petrol 115 bhp, ran perfectly before (and after, after my trusted indy took the head off to check valves etc and replaced gasket, new cambelt etc)
I thought those vtec D16W7 engines (if that is what it was) were incredibly reliable so you have been incredibly unlucky. But your post is a puzzle as virtually all Honda engines are interference engines and you would have needed more than a valve 'check'!
What exactly was the car in this story and when and why did it fail so early?
(safety catch on - so far)
|
It was a 1.6 petrol 115 bhp, ran perfectly before (and after, after my trusted indy took the head off to check valves etc and replaced gasket, new cambelt etc)
I thought those vtec D16W7 engines (if that is what it was) were incredibly reliable so you have been incredibly unlucky. But your post is a puzzle as virtually all Honda engines are interference engines and you would have needed more than a valve 'check
What exactly was the car in this story and when and why did it fail so early?
(safety catch on - so far)
This was in a Rover 216 (same body as the 1.5 Honda Concerto), on my commute to work at 35 mph downhill on a trailing throttle in 4th the engine just died - coasted to a stop and called Britannia, who took it to my indy's garage. No bent valves, no seized pulleys, no other faults, 40K miles, I think.
Should add that I trained as a Metallurgist and spent 40 years in Engineering companies, some which manufactured rubber components in house.
|
What exactly was the car in this story........
This was in a Rover 216 (same body as the 1.5 Honda Concerto), on my commute to work at 35 mph downhill on a trailing throttle in 4th the engine just died - coasted to a stop and called Britannia, who took it to my indy's garage. No bent valves, no seized pulleys, no other faults, 40K miles, I think.
At last, we might be getting closer to the truth. We appear to be discussing a car of 30yrs ago. According to Wiki, the 216 used the BL S series 1.6, which did indeed have a cambelt, possibly of much the same substance as a Royal Mail rubber band. It may well have been a non-interference engine (perhaps a BL greybeard might enlighten us) explaining the lack of damage. The 213 had the Honda engine.
|
At last, we might be getting closer to the truth. We appear to be discussing a car of 30yrs ago. According to Wiki, the 216 used the BL S series 1.6, which did indeed have a cambelt, possibly of much the same substance as a Royal Mail rubber band. It may well have been a non-interference engine (perhaps a BL greybeard might enlighten us) explaining the lack of damage. The 213 had the Honda engine.
With respect, the 1.6 was the Honda D 16A8 2OHC engine; these cars were built alongside the Honda Concerto at Longbridge. The other, BL engine, offered in these was 1.4 litres.
|
With respect, the 1.6 was the Honda D 16A8 2OHC engine; these cars were built alongside the Honda Concerto at Longbridge. The other, BL engine, offered in these was 1.4 litres.
Thanks - that's about 10yrs later. So you really were unlucky (and Wiki needs update and clarification - can you edit it?)
|
With respect, the 1.6 was the Honda D 16A8 2OHC engine; these cars were built alongside the Honda Concerto at Longbridge. The other, BL engine, offered in these was 1.4 litres.
Thanks - that's about 10yrs later. So you really were unlucky (and Wiki needs update and clarification - can you edit it?)
Actally I got this detail from Wiki for the 1992 model, so it is correct anyway.
|
|
The polo 1.4 16v (not tsi) has a cambelt that should really be changed at 4 years or 40,000 miles (whichever sooner) . This interval was revised for all VAG cars with this engine after many failures. It's not the belt that usualy fails first, but the plastic pulley wheels. Water pump shoulld be replaced at the same time.
I have the same engine in a 2001 Skoda Octavia where the pulley wheels started failing at 50k+ miles. Fortunately I was still under warranty at the time and somehow the belt wasn't thrown off so no engine damage done. I now always change at 4 years/ 40k - which reminds me it is due next year!
|
..... It's not the belt that usualy fails first, but the plastic pulley wheels. Water pump shoulld be replaced at the same time.
Quite so. Reminds me of our old '94 Passat 2.0Gl. Tension pulley started whining (I think it was metal, not plastic) at around 130,000. Easy enough for amateur mechanic (me) to replace but belt and water pump went on to 240,000+ with no problem. They usually last the life of the car these days if you don't muck about with the cooling fluid. There is a salutary story on another site of premature Audi pump failure because someone had foolishly used an acidic flushing agent instead of leaving well alone.
IIWDMI
|
|
|