Ford Fiesta 08 1.6 petrol Ghia

Remove the engine?

Surely not. I've only known one car (and derivatives) which needed this (aside from exotica) - and that was when Fiat wedged a 5-cylinder lump transversely into a small hatchback.

At nearly 100k miles, I'd be very nervous of even starting the car - nevermind running it for a few extra thousand miles.

the engine stays in, the job takes 2.5 hours. Worst way 250 quid labour plus parts (max 250) The car is worth very little without the belt being replaced

Most Fords with cam belts have had a change interval of 100k or more for at least a decade; some of them are listed as 120k, and they rarely fail early.

Chris

Does the car still suit your needs? If so, and it is otherwise in good order, why consider changing it just for the cost of a cam-belt change? You would lose more than that as soon as you drove the new(er) one off the forecourt.

Chris

Let's say it's a £2k car now, and the work is £500.

Why would _any_ sane buyer pay more than £1500 for it with a cambelt imminent?

Most people would't know the belt was due until a garage tells them it's due, or the belt snaps.

Why is there not some automatic software mechanism which senses when the belt is worn and needs changing? E.g. the ECM could sense when timing is sligly off?

Because the timing doesn't change as the belt ages. Or as a plastic tensioner pulley starts to crack and break up.

Surely, there must be a way of sensing an approaching timing belt failure. Just that someone hasn't done it yet.

Or you could just replace it on a precautionary basis, on time/mileage.

Even if there was, no manufacturer will ever implement it.

If the belt failed for some other reason, and the warning system hadn't worked, the owner would expect to be compensated. For example, the system couldn't detect a water pump seizure, or something thrown up from the road, either of which can break a belt.

I see little wrong with cam-belts if decently designed. The vast majority of cars are scrapped before 120k miles, and the belts can be made to reach that sort of mileage easily.

Chris

Use chains or gears. Much less risky.

They all fail, but gears or chains are much more difficult to replace.

SE Essex, I paid £230 all in for cam belt and axillary belt replacement on a Focus 1.6 petrol (not main dealer). Why do assume that the engine needs to be removed?

Properly designed, chains and gears can easily outlast the life of a car

- it's not unheard of for Alfa twin-cams to be on a few hundred thousand miles on the original chain - and Honda's gear driven V4 bike engines similarly last for silly mileages with no timing gear maintenance.

The answer would be to require it to be easy to replace the cam belt. No nonsense like having to remove the engine. It is an external drive, so perfectly possible.

Or require all makers to have a maximum figure for replacement. Say 50 quid. That would concentrate their minds.

We've done this to death here.

Chains break, or wear enough to rattle. Replacement is more expensive than a belt change.

Some chain drives use plastic sprockets, which are known to break.

Chain tensioners break.

Gear drive is much more expensive to engineer, and can be noisy. (Volvo tried this approach many years ago, and used a Tufnol idler to reduce noise. Failure rates were so high, many non-Volvo garages kept them in stock.)

If belts will run to 120k plus, what's the problem?

Chris

What authority would be able to make those demands?

The last cam-belt I had done on my Focus increased the running costs over 10 years by 39 pence a week - hardly a significant amount!

Chris

Many people do not consider car maintenance costs in any way when budgeting. Every expense comes as a massive shock.