Cruze 1.8L uses timing belt

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
I'm surprised, the people who buy those kind of cars usually don't like to spend a whole lot on maintenance, and a T belt job is probably $400-$600.

GM should go to chains like all the Japanese cars are doing.

Or they can could use gears like Rolls Royce used to...each
set for each engine were hand lapped for 80 hours...


Seriously? The only other engine that GM has ever had that used a timing belt (that I can think of) was the 2.0 Pontiac engine of the 80s.

 

[urchin]

Only ONE other person understands why timing belts are better than chains here!!!! Wow.

Like this poster says, as long as you are good about changing it out at the interval scheduled (a long time + high mileage) you will have no problem. If you do decide to keep the car for a long time it will be cheaper to do the T belt than the Chains !

Most timing belt changes are pretty straight forward and not outrageously expensive either.

I prefer timing belts too!

 

[Virtuoso]

Originally Posted By: urchin
Only ONE other person understands why timing belts are better than chains here!!!! Wow.


All a matter of opinion. Personally, I prefer chains. But I've yet to need to replace a chain or related components. Belts on the other hand...

 

[Kiwi_ME]

Originally Posted By: urchin
Only ONE other person understands why timing belts are better than chains here!!!! Wow.
And neither of you actually stated the reason! Quality cars use chains.

 

[daves87rs]

Eh, the belts are not going to scare me...I'm still considering the 1.8 anyways.

I'm pretty anal on keeping up on things, so it shouldn't be an issue...

 

[silverrat]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
I'm surprised, the people who buy those kind of cars usually don't like to spend a whole lot on maintenance, and a T belt job is probably $400-$600.

GM should go to chains like all the Japanese cars are doing.

Or they can could use gears like Rolls Royce used to...each
set for each engine were hand lapped for 80 hours...


Seriously? The only other engine that GM has ever had that used a timing belt (that I can think of) was the 2.0 Pontiac engine of the 80s.


90s LQ1 3.4L DOHC has a timing belt

 

[mjoekingz28]

1st place = timing belt with no interference
2nd chain
3rd belt with interference


I prefer a small 4 cylinder SOHC with a non interference timing belt.

The chain on my car now is starting to make some racket in the morning.


btw, I'm looking forward to the Sonic. Basically a Cruze with a hatchback minus 400 pounds.


So, is the Cruze Eco no improvement whatsoever from the Cobalt Eco?

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: dishdude

Seriously? The only other engine that GM has ever had that used a timing belt (that I can think of) was the 2.0 Pontiac engine of the 80s.

Pontiac OHC 6
Vega 2.3
Chevette 1.6
Lumina Z34
Cadillac Catera
Saturn L300
Chevrolet Aveo (Daewoo - and a variant of the engine that's in the Cruze 1.8)
Nova 1.6 (okay, that's a Toyota Corolla...I won't count that)
Sprint 1.0 (Suzuki...ditto)
Spectrum 1.5 (Isuzu I-Mark...ditto)
Pontiac LeMons (Daewoo...ditto and I refuse to call that little egg-ship a LeMans)

 

[CBR.worm]

You could argue that belts are quieter, keep better timing, less shock load, and appear to be much easier on oil and are cheap to replace. I still prefer chains due to maintenance intervals and the miles I drive.

I have had engines with cam drive gears, they whine and clack. Not annoying if you are into that sort of thing, but for a 4 cam V engine in a normal production car - not too great. I suspect that the gears probably don't keep timing as accurate for as long as belts where they can take up all the slack on the 'slack' side and have very little overall drift throughout the life of the belt. chains a little more drift, a lot more life.

Is it more expesive to do one timing chain, tensioner and guide replacement at 200K than 2 100K timing belts? If you could stretch it out to 300K it may balance, but I won't keep anything to 300K - except that one time - and it req'd 60K belt changes.

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: mjoekingz28
1st place = timing belt with no interference
2nd chain
3rd belt with interference


I have a slight preference for a chain myself, but a strong preference for an accessory belt-driven water pump.

1 - no timing-driven water pump
2 - no interference
3 - chain
4 - belt

 

[ms21043]

I actually don't like timing chains on OHC engines. I think that came from working on those old Japanese engines. Remember the Datsun L series or the Toyota 18RC, even the 20R. Those things would end up sounding like diesels when the tensioners wore and the chains stretched. The Nissan and Toyotas used to pop head gaskets easily, and then you had to wedge a block of wood into the chain to keep it and the tensioner from falling while you pulled the head. IMO changing a belt is a piece of cake compared to having to do a chain.

 

[eljefino]

Don't forget a chain on an OHC engine has a long path and cover that needs to have oil sealed inside. A belt gets a cheezy plastic cover and two little seals.

With appropriate programming they can probably come up with a "belt life monitor" much like an oil life one. Then they can sell the car without a set interval. They already have cam and crank sensors, could sense some cam timing inaccuracies. Then add how many cold starts, total revs, high revs, whatever else they figure detracts life.

With serperntine drive belts, it's less hassle to dig down to the timing cover than the old days, excepting the elephant in the room, more-cramped engine bays.

 

[CBR.worm]

That's an interesting idea. I wonder how long before all wear items are monitored or at least have a predicted life based on operating conditions (CBM). My BMW can tell me how many miles are left in the brake pads, oil, etc. Why not sparkplugs, belts, air filter, etc. And in the case of the turbo DI engines, HPFP life left.

 

[artificialist]

Originally Posted By: CBR.worm
That's an interesting idea. I wonder how long before all wear items are monitored or at least have a predicted life based on operating conditions (CBM). My BMW can tell me how many miles are left in the brake pads, oil, etc. Why not sparkplugs, belts, air filter, etc. And in the case of the turbo DI engines, HPFP life left.

Heavy duty vehicles have an air restriction gauge between the air filter and engine intake that tells people when to replace an air filter.

Anyway, a T-belt life monitor sounds nice, but it doesn't change the price of replacing the belt.

Mitsubishi engines now have a device that measures timing chain life. Attached to the chain tensioner is a sensor that detects how far the tensioner gets extended. If it is pushed out past a certain point, the check engine light will be lit to tell the owner to replace the chain and guide hardware.

The timing chain is one reason I chose the Mitsubishi instead of a Subaru.

 

[ms21043]

Originally Posted By: artificialist
Mitsubishi engines now have a device that measures timing chain life. Attached to the chain tensioner is a sensor that detects how far the tensioner gets extended. If it is pushed out past a certain point, the check engine light will be lit to tell the owner to replace the chain and guide hardware.


When that CEL lights up and they have a fault for timing chain, the owners gonna wish it was belt come time to pay the replacement bill.
Why the need for a monitor, isn't the chain supposed to last the life of the engine?

 

[Hokiefyd]

A properly-designed timing chain system should last the life of the engine. Japanese automakers haven't always got timing chain systems right from the get-go. Nissan has had trouble in the past with this for example. And I'm surprised that Mitsubishi has installed sensors to indicate a timing chain replacement requirement.

American automakers seem to have better luck here. For example, the Cadillac Northstar has a rather elaborate 3-chain system driving its 4 camshafts, but I haven't heard of a single failure or slackening of a chain from that system. I think Ford's Modular engines have a pretty good timing chain reputation also, don't they? And I'm not sure Chrysler's had any problems with their OHC chain systems, such as in the 3.7L V-6 and the 4.7L V-8 engines.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
A properly-designed timing chain system should last the life of the engine. Japanese automakers haven't always got timing chain systems right from the get-go. Nissan has had trouble in the past with this for example. And I'm surprised that Mitsubishi has installed sensors to indicate a timing chain replacement requirement.

American automakers seem to have better luck here. For example, the Cadillac Northstar has a rather elaborate 3-chain system driving its 4 camshafts, but I haven't heard of a single failure or slackening of a chain from that system. I think Ford's Modular engines have a pretty good timing chain reputation also, don't they? And I'm not sure Chrysler's had any problems with their OHC chain systems, such as in the 3.7L V-6 and the 4.7L V-8 engines.


Ford had a problem but it was with the 3.4 V8 in the SHO so not many were actually affected. (compared to the large amount of other Ford engines)

The Germans are hit and miss. Some are very good and last a very long time. Others like the Mercedes Benz 230s in the '60s and 380s in the '80s and Volkswagen VR6 have had problematic timing chains. Mercedes tried using a single row timing chain both times and quickly switched back to a double row chain. As far as I know, the VR6 just ends up with a timing chain change around 120,000 miles.

 

[Johnny248]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
I think I am done with timing belts.

I remember [complaining] about doing it on my 2.3 Mustang. And that hooptie had about 18 inches between the radiator and the front of the engine.

They only got worse.

My Scoupe? bad.
Ex-Mother-In-Law's Sunbird? I hate this engine. I will burn the [darned] thing to the ground before I do another one.
The Convertible's 6G73? real bad.
Integra GS-R? not as bad but no picnic.
Wife's Eclipse GT 6G72? repeat of my convertible.
Wife's PT-Cruiser GT? Worst thing ever.

I've decided that I'm just not going to do them anymore unless they are on a 2.3 Fox body where I can practically stand in the engine compartment and change it.

[imghttp://3.bp.blogspot.com/_B0GILfaLHME/TOdrSfJVwaI/AAAAAAAAAfo/70ti4qX2EFA/s1600/do+not+want.jpg[/img]


I think the Mitsu timing belts are quite easy actually...

 

[artificialist]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
A properly-designed timing chain system should last the life of the engine. Japanese automakers haven't always got timing chain systems right from the get-go. Nissan has had trouble in the past with this for example. And I'm surprised that Mitsubishi has installed sensors to indicate a timing chain replacement requirement.

American automakers seem to have better luck here. For example, the Cadillac Northstar has a rather elaborate 3-chain system driving its 4 camshafts, but I haven't heard of a single failure or slackening of a chain from that system. I think Ford's Modular engines have a pretty good timing chain reputation also, don't they? And I'm not sure Chrysler's had any problems with their OHC chain systems, such as in the 3.7L V-6 and the 4.7L V-8 engines.

I have dealt with a few Northstar timing chains and Ford Modular chains.

One problem with the Northstar is that if it has a head gasket failure, all those chains have to come out.

American cars have been hit or miss, too. The 2.3L and 2.4L "Quad4" engines had chain stretch and guide wear as well.

What makes some cars worse than others is when the timing chain drives the water pump. When the pump has to be replaced, it costs 3 to 4 times as much due to extra steps in removal and installation.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: Johnny248
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
I think I am done with timing belts.

I remember [complaining] about doing it on my 2.3 Mustang. And that hooptie had about 18 inches between the radiator and the front of the engine.

They only got worse.

My Scoupe? bad.
Ex-Mother-In-Law's Sunbird? I hate this engine. I will burn the [darned] thing to the ground before I do another one.
The Convertible's 6G73? real bad.
Integra GS-R? not as bad but no picnic.
Wife's Eclipse GT 6G72? repeat of my convertible.
Wife's PT-Cruiser GT? Worst thing ever.

I've decided that I'm just not going to do them anymore unless they are on a 2.3 Fox body where I can practically stand in the engine compartment and change it.

[imghttp://3.bp.blogspot.com/_B0GILfaLHME/TOdrSfJVwaI/AAAAAAAAAfo/70ti4qX2EFA/s1600/do+not+want.jpg[/img]


I think the Mitsu timing belts are quite easy actually...


The Scoupe's Mitsu 4G15 wasn't an absolute nightmare, but I still didn't like it.
The 6G7X motors were not fun. And they were both single cams. I imagine the DOHC 6G72 in the Diamante and 3000GT would be that much more annoying