Does anyone know? I know you don't have to change the chain like you do for timing belt.

12/17/2005 11:11:39 PM

well I would imagine that some engines aren't set up for chains?

12/17/2005 11:23:17 PM

should still inspect chain ans sprockets per recommended intervals.

Ford F-150's have to have something, don't remember what, replaced or your engine gets fuxord. I think it's the timing chain tensioner which someone told me is made of plastic.

12/18/2005 12:03:10 AM

chain rattles

12/18/2005 12:15:25 AM

The timing belt is like your neck. It connects the cam(s) or Brain of the engine to the crank or body of the engine; the part that does the work. Now think about it for a second would you want a metal neck or rubber neck?

12/18/2005 12:48:08 AM

Seems like timing chains are a lot less trouble in the long run on a lot of cars.

12/18/2005 12:49:16 AM

not really

12/18/2005 2:04:51 AM

yes really.

12/18/2005 2:58:16 AM

Depends on what you drive, and how sturdy the setup is. You can ask an assload of Yota 22R owners that have had the guides worn through, eventually into the timing cover, filling up the crankcase with coolant.

Quite a few engines use a rubber "foot" as the cam chain tensioner or have guides that are lined with hard rubber or plastic, and every now and then they do wear out.

12/18/2005 3:14:53 AM

The timing chain on my previous SAAB ('99 9-5) had snapped/had the entire engine replaced before I bought it - so though rare, it does happen.

Chains are overall lower maintenance and longer lived than belts from what I've seen.

12/18/2005 8:25:53 AM

On some cars (mine included) the chain rubs against the guides and they will eventually fragment and you get metal pieces everywhere. Overall though, chains are better.

12/18/2005 11:37:36 AM

i dont care as long as i dont have to do another one on a quad 4

12/18/2005 11:43:38 AM

^That's a "Praise Jesus" on that one. The Quad is a nice fucked up engine.

12/18/2005 11:47:12 AM

one for the reasons i wanted my car was b/c it had a timing chain instead of a belt. the only issue i've had was to replace the hydraulic timing chain tensioner w/ a new design b/c the original one was faulty.

12/18/2005 12:07:47 PM

Chain snapped on my old Malibu. Of course, this was at 174,000 miles and 22 years old.

12/18/2005 12:34:30 PM

belt, chain, sprockets, dosent matter to me.

12/18/2005 12:35:02 PM

chains can have different tensions at different sections, but thats due to normal wear and they last longer.

12/18/2005 1:08:13 PM

belts have different tensions at different sections too, whats your point?

12/18/2005 1:34:07 PM

^ I was thinking the same thing

12/18/2005 2:03:37 PM

chains tend to sap more HP out of an engine than a belt. Rotating mass and the fact that a belt doesnt need lubrication.

12/19/2005 3:36:44 AM

^ what about the fact that under high loads a belt will stretch unlike a chain? and if you were a real man, you would just use gears, on a pushrod motor, (makes it sound like its supercharged)

12/19/2005 7:30:00 AM

chains can stretch too... thats why some ppl run gears.

but the only major problem ive heard (for chains) in most applications is the guide rail or tensioner breaking apart.

12/19/2005 9:42:52 AM