timing belt question

I have a 91 tracer with the 1.9 engine. The timing belt snapped. Is this engine freewheeling, or do you think I trashed the valves? Thanks

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
gjtms wrote:

Well you can take the timing cover off and try turning the cam gear very slowly, if you get one full revolution I'd say its a non-interference engine. You already have to set up the timing gear to #1TDC since the belt snapped so no loss moving the cam gear at this point.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

This reminds me of a question: Why the hell would anyone design an interference engine? A timing belt is consumable. It's guaranteed to break. What engineering advantage is there to making an engine that self-destructs when a particular consumable part fails?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

this
I think It allowed for a little higher compression, Jim?? what say you?? Tony

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think it is a freewheeling engine, I think I have a timing belt book at work, I will try to check for sure. Tony
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
gjtms wrote:

The original 1.6L in the Escort, waaay back in 82-84, was an interference engine. It was reworked in 1985 into the 1.9 and has been freewheeling since then. Part of the redesign was to eliminate valve damage in case of a timing belt failure. Always replace the water pump and tensioner pulleys when replacing the timing belt on this motor.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Always

belt on this

Good advice Tony
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Adkins wrote:

Ford did make some 1.6 freewheeling engines in the 80's. I think they started in 83'. I had an 85' Escort with one. The 1.6 engines from 81-82 were definately interference designs. When the public found out what could happen to early Escort/Lynx engines if the timing belt broke, Ford had a better idea.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fordfan wrote:

Really? I never knew that, surely never saw one. Maybe 1.6 Turbo? I thought all of the standard 1.6s would crash, although you could get lucky now and then. Didn't the 1.9 come out in 85? For a few years I had a fun side business rehabbing those old Escorts from 82-89. The used car lots would sell them for pennies with bent valves or cracked heads. I made a nice buck fixing and reselling those little beasties, always had a nice work car too. ;) I probably turned around 50 of them. With proper maintenance they were a tough little car, I sort of miss them. I even had a diesel for a while. Speaking of non interference motors; the 2.0 in the Contour\Mystaque is supposed to be freewheeling, right. I've seen a lot of them with bent valves when the idler pulley siezes and the cam timing retards. When the belt just snaps from old age, the valves are usually ok. Go figure.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Adkins wrote:

I remember researching this subject before I bought my 85' Escort. I wanted to be sure it didn't have an interference fit engine. I was familiar with this problem because my mother had an 81' Lynx. That was the first model year for the Escort/Lynx. There was talk at the time in the car industry and also in some publications for the general public about what could happen to the 1.6 engines if the timing belt broke. I encouraged my mother to trade her 81' Lynx for an 85' Escort like mine. A year or two later, strange as it seems, I was actually driving her 85' when the timing belt broke with only about 35K on the engine. The car was towed home and I changed the belt. There was no damage to the engine. I was driving at highway speed when it happened, so the engine must have had enough inertia to turn over a few times before it stopped. I also knew someone with an 82' Escort. That car and the 81' Lynx both had blue valve covers. I just did a some Googling and found a website (see below) that identifies the early 1.6 (81-82) with the blue valve cover as the interference type. The 85's had black covers. However, I also found some other sites which list *all* the 1.6 engines as interference designs. Some of those sites even list the 2.0 as an interference engine. Could they all be wrong? Many of those sites use the same graphics chart, so it could be a repetition of error. I don't recall what source I used for researching my 85' before purchasing it. That was long before the Internet but I'm quite sure I must have found out it was not an interference engine or I wouldn't have bought the car or told my mother to do the same. Having seen and worked on quite a few Escorts of that era, I do know that the head design was changed near the mid' 80's. They may also have changed to a thicker head gasket to eliminate the interference. I think the turbo 1.6 engine retained the interference design longer than the base 1.6 because Ford wanted the extra performance from the former. I'll look into this subject some more.
Here's the link to the 'blue valve cover' reference. It can be found under the picture with the text: "These cars that almost always bend valves when the belt breaks".
http://www.econofix.com/tbelt.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks for all the info--I'll replace pump and tensioner. I looked at the valves and it all looks good. I appreciate it!

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.