Timing belts

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 16 Nov 2008, 09:06 am   #1 (permalink)
norm46
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Timing belts

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.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16 Nov 2008, 09:51 am   #2 (permalink)
01dyna
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Timing belts

On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 07:06:53 -0800 (PST), norm46
<nrowe46@roadrunner.com> you wrote:

>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.



...and this is news because......?

The whole idea behind maintenance schedules are to prevent just what
you experienced.. And, if that's the first time the belts were ever
changed, you want WAY beyond any maintenance interval for changing
belts.

You would think that after the second belt failure, some light, even a
small wattage one, would of come on over your head.

  Reply With Quote
Old 16 Nov 2008, 03:18 pm   #3 (permalink)
ransley
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Timing belts

On Nov 16, 9:06*am, norm46 <nrow...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> 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.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16 Nov 2008, 05:38 pm   #4 (permalink)
Sharx35
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Timing belts



"ransley" <Mark_Ransley@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4f16533c-702a-4df4-8acc-e6359f0862b5@e38g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 16, 9:06 am, norm46 <nrow...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
>> 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 in just outside YOUR house?

  Reply With Quote
Old 24 Jan 2009, 04:32 pm   #5 (permalink)
WMB
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Timing belts

I changed my 96 4 cyl at 60K and again at 120K. At 120K it was cracked
pretty bad and the idlers were both making noise.
If it breaks while you are on the highway, a piston could come up and hit a
valve....then you got major problems.


  Reply With Quote
Old 25 Jan 2009, 01:35 am   #6 (permalink)
Mark A
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Timing belts

"WMB" <noway@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:8HMel.13704$ci.4205@newsfe02.iad...
>I changed my 96 4 cyl at 60K and again at 120K. At 120K it was cracked
>pretty bad and the idlers were both making noise.
> If it breaks while you are on the highway, a piston could come up and hit
> a valve....then you got major problems.


It depends on whether the engine is interference (a piston could come up and
hit a valve) or non-interference (the valves cannot come in contact with the
pistons even if the timing belt breaks). Most Toyota engines of that era
were non-interference. Interference engines typically have timing chains
(but not always).


  Reply With Quote
Old 25 Jan 2009, 04:33 am   #7 (permalink)
Leftie
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Timing belts

Mark A wrote:
> "WMB" <noway@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:8HMel.13704$ci.4205@newsfe02.iad...
>> I changed my 96 4 cyl at 60K and again at 120K. At 120K it was cracked
>> pretty bad and the idlers were both making noise.
>> If it breaks while you are on the highway, a piston could come up and hit
>> a valve....then you got major problems.

>
> It depends on whether the engine is interference (a piston could come up and
> hit a valve) or non-interference (the valves cannot come in contact with the
> pistons even if the timing belt breaks). Most Toyota engines of that era
> were non-interference. Interference engines typically have timing chains
> (but not always).
>
>


The '96 Camry four is non-interference, and the change interval for
normal use is 90,000 miles. If the belt was badly cracked after 60k
miles, it was either cheap aftermarket or the engine was run very hot,
often.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26 Jan 2009, 08:14 am   #8 (permalink)
Pszemol
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Timing belts

"Leftie" <No@Thanks.net> wrote in message
news:6mWel.5000$B01.2860@newsfe13.iad...
> The '96 Camry four is non-interference, and the change
> interval for normal use is 90,000 miles.


Has it changed since 1995? It was 60000 for that model year.
And it was the same for both schedules A and B:
http://www.camrystuff.com/manuals/Gen3/ma.pdf

> If the belt was badly cracked after 60k miles, it was either
> cheap aftermarket or the engine was run very hot, often.


Or the person doing the service at 60k did not do their job
and the belt trully was 120k miles old...

  Reply With Quote
Old 26 Jan 2009, 01:58 pm   #9 (permalink)
mrdarrett@gmail.com
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Timing belts

On Jan 24, 11:35*pm, "Mark A" <some...@someone.com> wrote:
> "WMB" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>
> news:8HMel.13704$ci.4205@newsfe02.iad...
>
> >I changed my 96 4 cyl at 60K and again at 120K. At 120K it was cracked
> >pretty bad and the idlers were both making noise.
> > If it breaks while you are on the highway, a piston could come up and hit
> > a valve....then you got major problems.

>
> It depends on whether the engine is interference (a piston could come up and
> hit a valve) or non-interference (the valves cannot come in contact with the
> pistons even if the timing belt breaks). Most Toyota engines of that era
> were non-interference. Interference engines typically have timing chains
> (but not always).



Does anyone know - did the Celica 94-99 have interference engines?

Michael
  Reply With Quote
Old 26 Jan 2009, 08:46 pm   #10 (permalink)
johngdole@hotmail.com
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Timing belts

According to the Gates timing guide (www.gates.com), Celica GT, ST,
GTS 1.6-2.2L are all non-interference type, with a 60K severe service
replacement interval.


On Jan 26, 11:58*am, mrdarr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Does anyone know - did the Celica 94-99 have interference engines?
>
> Michael


  Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:36 am.

Attribution:
Autoblog
Powered by Yahoo Answers



ToyotaLexusForum.com is an unofficial community for car enthusiasts. ToyotaLexusForum.com is not affiliated with Toyota Motor Corporation in any way.
Toyota Motor Corporation does not sponsor, support, or endorse ToyotaLexusForum.com in any way.
Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are not intended or implied.