Ford Fiesta 08 1.6 petrol Ghia

Perhaps if people didn't insist on having physically large engines in physically small engine bays, stuffed full with auxiliary belts and various other toot...

Indeed. 500 quid after 100k miles is insignificant, and belts are quiet

Well, the US demanded that all car diagnostics (as regards emissions) had to be able to be read using the same equipment. Something I'll bet the makers hated.

Oh indeed. But as has been said, some are better than others.

Yes, but that's quite a leap to determining a maximum charge for a service item.

BTW, I bet VW now wish that the US authorities had demanded sight of all ECU code in order to check for irregularities...

Chris

I did my 1.4 recently, and you had to remove one of the engine mounts, which means you need a jack underneath to support the engine and lift it back into place. It's a pain because the camshafts aren't keyed, and you have to be careful to get the timing correct when you put it all back. Also requires massive torque on the crankshaft bolt.

I don't know how similar the 1.6 is to that lot, but if you're thinking of doing it yourself, it might turn into one of those jobs you wish you'd never started.

[...]

Yep, that's why Autodata lists it as a 2.5 hour job.

In spite of me telling a neighbour all of the above, and giving him a full print-out of the correct (Autodata) method of doing it, he managed to destroy the engine if his wife's 1.25 Fiesta. He is a bit of a know-it-all, so I wasn't too upset for him!

The irony is that he did it two years and about 20k before it was due. He scrapped the car as a result.

Chris

Indeed.

Especially if the figure in mind is so low that you can't even buy the parts for a common and simple engine for it, let alone pay for one hour's labour at an out-of-London independent garage.

The car already have many alarm sensors about critical engine conditions; lack of oil, lack of coolant. Do you also expect to be compensated if any of those gave wrong signal? Manufacturers could make a disclaimer that the alarm warnings are just secondary.

Replacing a belt. e.g. on a secondhand car when you know nothing, is really a waste of money if the belt already has been recently replaced.

A little reserch on internet (I know...) shows that belts doesn't snap. The failure mode is really wear of belt which causes it to slip. This wear could be monitored by optical sensors; e.g. size of tooths.

That's when they come to sell the car. Why sell a perfectly good car :)

[...]

That's not the same at all; those things require regular checks from the owner, and are easy to check. You can't look at a cam-belt install and predict the remaining life.

I'm not sure anyone was suggesting you should.

A bit more research would reveal that the belt snapping or it shedding teeth

*without* any other factor is the *least* likely reason for failure.

Most failures occur due to the tensioner spring breaking or its bearing failing, an idler pulley bearing failing, or a subsidiary component that the belt drives seizing. Failures also occur due to interference from something disassociated with the cam drive. Most usually, this is the auxiliary drive belt failing, and the flailing ends getting entangled with the cam-belt.

If you are thinking that you could have a sensor measuring the gap between teeth whilst the engine is running, I don't think you realise how difficult that would be, and how pointless.

BTW, you do know the belts are toothed, and therefore can't 'slip'? They could in theory jump a tooth, but by then it would usually be game over for at least some of the valves.

Chris

A 'perfectly good' car is *not* one that hasn't been properly maintained!

Chris

Such failures aren't timing belt related, and has little to do with life of timing belt, right.

No, I didn't say that.

The belt can slip if tooths are worn down. That was my point.

They hated it so much that they had to define TWO SAE standards for OBDII in 1996. One for FORD SAE J1850 PWM and a different one for GM SAE J1850 VPW.

Europe had 2 more standards. ISO 9142-2 ISO 14230

It wasn't until 2008 that they mandated CAN bus protocol ISO 15765-4 making a 5th standard, still on the same old 16 pin socket.

Ford have 2 separate CAN bus interfaces on the ODBII 16 pin plug, these run at different speeds. Because of this many (Chinese rip off) ODBII scan tools can't read the fault codes from FORD/MAZDA.

So that's 6 standards, still on the same 16 pin plug.

Vauxhall dealer was charging over £500 for V6 cam belts 15 years ago. They had the prices on an A4 note by the side door to the showroom. Vauxhall reduced the belt change interval to 40K miles. For 10K miles/pa that is £2.40 per week.

Alfa V6 £795 if you do the lot and many don't make it to the 75K mile change.

If driven by the cam belt a sized water pump is a prime cause for physical belt failure. As others have said many other cam belts suffer failure of things like tensioner / idler pulley.

The next big cost in later life is clutch. On FWD cars this can cost so much that it's not worth it. Clutch life has seen improvements over the years. Early 80's 80K miles was about the limit. Late 80's 100-120K. Some cars are now getting to 140-150K on the original clutch. A £500 charge on a sub £1000 car is really not worth it as the shocks will be next, then lots of chassis bushes.

I could get it done a lot cheaper than that - and most V6s do make it to the change. It's the 4-pots which had issues - so we always changed ours at 3 years / 36k miles.

I have only ever come across one engine where the belt had slipped several teeth due to severe old age, looseness and some teeth ripping off. Bizarrely enough, with a new belt it ran fine, I was amazed. Especially since it was a diesel, a Peugeot 205 iirc.

[...]

Wrong! The tensioner has *everything* to do with the timing belt, as does the timing belt idler.

In the context of what you were suggesting as a means of giving a warning of impending failure, they all have a lot to do with the life of the belt.

It can't slip, in the way a 'V' or other non-toothed belt can. If the tooths (sic) are worn to the point that the belt slips, an interference engine will be destroyed in one revolution.

Chris

[...]

Yebbut we were only considering properly designed systems. ;-)

The big difference here is that a clutch is not a service item; it's life is almost entirely dependent on how it is used.

I've changed lots of clutches over the years, but never one on any of my own vehicles. I have a very old-fashioned driving style; I don't 'ride' the clutch, and always select neutral at halts. It's served me well on everything I've owned since 1962, and lots of them have been bangers and high-milers.

Chris

The belt broke on our old Capri a few decades ago. It just made a sort of raspberry noise, ripped all the teeth off, and I was able to replace it fairly easily after we'd got towed home. Nothing like as complicated as it is now. Those were (probably) the days. I expect belts are longer lasting nowadays.

They are, I used to change the belt as a yearly or two yearly service item on high per year mileage vehicles in the late 70's/early 80's (mainly transits) But it was so easy and quick.