>>Notwithstanding the possibility of a better job at an independent there's not much difference between

£500 and £480.

Unless I read your post wrong I make that £860 at your main dealer for

the two jobs compared to £480 saving £380.

I had my Golf V cambelt replaced at 27K miles 2 years ago. I'm not going to keep the car for 2 more years and pay for another one. As far as servicing costs go, I think VW are taking the p*** - my old Volvo needs a cambelt change at 70K intervals. I dont know of any other allegedly quality car that needs belt changes at 4 year -or 40K mile- intervals. I had understood that the first change of my Golf cambelt was due to a bad set ofd belts, but it seems they just fitted another bad one. Lesson- don't buy a Golf unless you don't care about economical motoring!

How much fuel would £410 buy if the engines were chain cam?

Not much. Chains aren't foolproof either. They cost more to manufacture (which is passed onto the consumer), and require noise suppression techniques (which belts don't need). To me, the problem lies with the universal adoption of DOHC. Yes, I know 4 vaves gives better breathing at high RPMS, but how often do you wind the engine up to 6+ grand anyway?

Chevrolet's Generation III V8 seems to be producing plenty of hp using OHV. One short timing chain driving a single cam, operating all inlet and exhaust valves for 8 cylinders. Compact, cheap, great low end torque, reasonable specific power. Everything DOHC isn't. As much as 'experts' like clarkson et al ridicule pushrod engines, they are really far better suited to daily driving then high winding engines. Another victory for the marketing men...?

PS the universal adoption of 4VPC is not just for top-end power, it enables you to run much softer cam timing and with less lift (for a given port area) giving the whole valvetrain an easy time promoting longevity, low noise and better emissions figures thanks to the lower valve lift increasing swirl.