non-interference engine

why does it bother you?

Why would it matter if it is or it isn't?

I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing chain instead of a belt.

Don't count on it "not mattering" for that... my old GLC died a messy death when an improperly-adjusted timing chain slipped a tooth.

IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts. Maybe they have improved, but the last car I had with a chain (an 84 Dodge with a Mitsu engine) didn't make it 100K miles before the chain was worn enough to jump. The first step in replacement was: remove engine from car.

Mike

In all my years, I've spun more bearings (2) than I've ever broken a timing chain (0), or belt for that matter.

Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?

Steve

"Michael Pardee" wrote in news:A5-dnehaCoSgP0LZnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@sedona.net:

Depends on the engine design. Certain cars were notorious for eating timing chains. The Nissan Axxess had one such. On the the opposite side, the old Toyota timing chains were very well designed. They'd wear and get noisy, but never break or jump.

Even an engine maintained on schedule is susceptible to sudden death by valve crash. Usually that comes from water pump failure if the water pump is driven by the timing belt. In that respect chain driven engines are "safer."

Mike

Toyota 4-cylinders have been chain-driven since the late 90s (starting with the '98 Corolla I believe), and I am not aware of any chain-related failures in properly maintained cars. Nissan was using chains long before that, although I don't know how reliable they have been.

I think it is more a question of good engineering vs. bad engineering. Saturn owners have a lot more problems with the chains than Honda owners have with the belts. Ironic, as the Saturn dealers pitched the chain as being superior to Honda's belts.

We will see if these new Honda chain engines can routinely go 200K on the original chains. I am assuming that a chain replacement will end up costing twice as much as a belt.

Also, how hard is it to change the water pump in these cars? Do you have to remove the chain?

My #2 son had an '82 Toyota Corolla with a chain. We replaced it a few months before the engine threw a rod :-(

Researching the chain, we found that it was common for them to eat through the timing chain cover as a result of "stretching" (pivot wear) and that those covers were at a premium on the used market for that reason.

Mike

if you maintain the engine as it's supposed to be, this will *never* be an issue. you run more danger of wheel bolts fatiguing than you do having a belt/chain break on a properly maintained engine. and get some perspective on cost/benefit of failure vs. performance/economy of interference engines.

come to think of it, this thread smells of fud.

The salesman that sold me my 06 Si said that it was a timing belt, and the scheduled maintenance for it was 100K. Is that incorrect?

Well the opposite end of that scale would be the trusty old Dodge "Slant-6" engines... my dad had one in his '81 pickup, never had it replaced that I know of... when he retired the truck in '87 with over 450,000km, the chain was streched enough to be constantly rubbing in its guideway... but it just kept on running (the engine was also drinking a liter of oil with every tank of gas after my sister ran it dry of oil once). Thin was damn near indestructable.

It is incorrect. It uses a timing chain.

--------------------------------

The 06 Si comes with a FINE manual. Read The Fine Manual.

Read this too, regarding the 'art' of car salesmanship. It's LONG:

I wouldn't doubt it. When I was a kid, my father owned a '77 Dodge Aspen and our neighbour owned a '79 Plymouth Volare. Both had the slant-6, and both were major pieces of junk.