Just my 2 cents but I had a 1990 Corolla that went 180K+ when it
> broke. My 1999 Camry had 170K when it broke. I had a 1990Corolla that
> had over 180K with the original belt. It's not good because the car
> stops right where it is. No other damage. I don't own the 2 Corollas
> but the Camry has a new belt and is running fine.
Mine broke at 105000, but if it broke in a bad area id be dead.
As far as I know, the 97 and 98 engines are identical. So it's probably just a marketing move to better match competitors like Honda's 105K mile intervals that they had for ages.
The older cars still are on the 60K schedule. But if owners drive only
12K miles a year instead of 15K, then IMO they should change at 60K miles. Even those who drive 15K miles will benefit at 60K with the 4- cyl, because without an automatic tensioner the belt stretches and becomes loose. But it probably won't make a difference to most owners.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required