Ford 3 cylinder worth expense?

The CVT transmission uses a metal flex belt. Ford uses a "rubber belt."

I've replaced a belt in a Geo Meter 3 cylinder, before. It was simple and easy.

I don't think the internal timing belt will be that easy to replace. In the past 10 years or more, most all manufacturers have switched back to timing chains, after years of using timing belts.

 

That Geo Metro or Suzuki Swift as we call them was the only small car I remember seeing in New England at the time.

I'm personally not a fan of 3 cyl na cars, they sound like they are under severe pressure on a motorway, fine tipping about in a city, not for motorway imo

 

Every once in a while I still see them on the interstates. It's the hills that may be a challange.

 

But they're getting fuel efficiency similar to the Prius for a fraction of the cost. Such cars are popular here and are ideal city commuters.

I'm sure owners of such vehicles are having the last laugh when they fill them up and when they find that last, tight, parking place in a crowded city street.

It's horses for courses.

 

You are right, not a metal flex belt. It appears to improved synthetic rubber and glass fiber. It is a life of the engine design, like a chain. No changes may seem hard to believe, but it has been used in the diesel Lynx since 2008. So I think reports of it not being so would have cropped up when it appeared in the Fusion and C-max hybrids.

http://www.ngfeurope.com/~/media/NGF%20Europe/Site%20Content/News/Automotive%20Design%20Europe%20Feature.ashx

The 1.8 base engine in the Sonic uses a belt. Another reason I choose the 1.4 turbo.
At least some, Honda and Toyota engines still use regular belts. The efficiency advantage and lower manufacture cost is deemed worth while to them.
VW infamously uses them in their diesel. Same with the Cruze diesel. This puzzles me the most. Does the efficiency increase and noise reduction really make that much difference to a diesel.

I prefer timing chains, but if improvements in design and materials have belts as good as in longevity while still being better in efficiency and noise, I'll reconsider. Advancement does tend to march on.

 

I known some were laughing when they sold theirs for near $8000 during the 2008 gas price spike.

 

Over the last 50 years, I've been screwed more than once a an early adopter of new and so called technology.

I'll stay with tried and true technology.

I waited 12 years, before I purchased my first Prius.

 

No they are rubbish and fail often and often with no warning. The manufacturers recommend changing them every 60,000 miles, but you'd be wise to change them long before this time!

 

Yes, timing belts need to be changed. It varies by manufacturer and engine. The Toyota, Honda, and GM engine I know are in the 90k to 100k mile range. Like a timing chain, Ford's oil bathed timing belt in the 2L hybrid engine and 1L Ecoboost do not have a recommended change interval.

The rubber and glass fibers are stronger and more wear resistant than the ones in traditional belts. I'm not sure why an oil bath is needed. Perhaps it provides cooling, or keeps the rubber conditioned.

I haven't looked into the Lynx diesel. If the non need for belt change is true for it, I'd like to know what the difference for it is.

 

All I know is that motor oil contains solvents and any rubber compound, either natural or synthetic, is a petroleum product.

That belt will eventually dissolve or weaken. Time takes it toll on ALL petroleum products.

 

Timing chains stretch and the gear teeth wear(faster if they're plastic). Time wears down all things, but plastics have a habit of lingering on. Ford is claiming that these belts are good for the life of the engine. The question how long is the life of an engine. Seeing how most standard timing belts have a change interval near 100k miles, I think it's safe to say this belt will go past that.

Modern cars are getting to 200k miles on average now, and that is a safe bet what Ford targeted for this belt. I wouldn't bet on it lasting longer than a chain though. A French lab slapped on of these oil belts onto a chain engine and reports efficiency improvements in the 0.5% to 1.1% range. Should be higher with an engine designed with it. So by the time comes to replace this belt, the gas savings will more than likely cover the cost.

The system has been used in the diesel Lynx(I'm not really sure if that is the name of the car or engine) for 5 years now. If it doesn't last much longer than the older belt, reports should be out now.

 

The first synthetic runner was developed by IG Farben in the 1930 and made famous at the Buna Monowitz Plant at Auschwitz in Poland. The rubber is a combination of Butadiene and Sodium (or Natrium). Most all synthetic runners have those roots. They are still petroleum products, which means that they are soluble in petroleum oils.

Most all early timing gears had teeth molded to an aluminum core in Nylon 6. I saw a lot of them in the 1970's removed from small block Chevrolet engines. They often lasted more than 200K miles and beyond.

Later and current gears have teeth made of POM or polyoxymethalene, commonly known under the DuPont trade name Delrin. When cast over an aluminum core, the material makes one durable timing chain gear. POM is self lubricating, much less deformed under stress than Nylon and wears for many many miles. It is impervious to petroleum oils. POM is used in gears with no metal cores and have lasted for decades.

A lot of timing belt gears are NOT aluminum but a fiberglass filled phenolic (phenol formaldehyde) commonly known as Bakelite invented by Leo Hendrik Baekeland. Bakelite is the first artificial plastic. It is highly heat and wear resistant and stable.

Each has its benefits. The most durable is the metal roller timing chain with the POM aluminum core gears. Since the longest NEW car warranty is 10 years or 100k miles, manufacturers often install that which is the most cost effective for them in terms of their profit.

 

Are you assuming that the engineers and material scientists at Ford don't know what they are doing? Do you have evidence that their new timing belt is using a petroleum based rubber that will fail long before the life of the engine? Standard timing belts have been moving to nitrile rubber, which has used in the fuel system for years because of its resistance to petroleum.

Yes, they do. Because part failure incidence tends to be on a bell curve, (a few fail early, some last longer, most die in somewhere in between) designers target a lifespan beyond the warranty period in order to reduce warranty costs from early failures.

Ford started using this oil bathed belts in 2008. Is there any evidence that they are failing earlier than Ford claims? These aren't standard timing belts. Until proof comes to light that they don't last as advertized, comparing them with standard timing belts is like changing the oil in a modern car at 3000 miles or that the Prius will need a new battery in 5 years.

 

Yes, Ford knows exactly what they are doing.

They knew what they were doing, when they designed the Ford Pinto in 1971, without rear end crash protection for the gas tank under the trunk. I owned and drove one of them. It had a thin chromed bumper, just like the original 1960 Falcon upon which the 1964 Mustang was based.

Internal documents were discovered where Ford analysis weighed the cost of paying the expense of "wrongful death" litigation against the total cost of equipping the rear of the car with stronger rear gas tank protection.

In the end, Ford paid for both. My 1971 Pinto was recalled and updated with stronger rear end protection.

I.G. Farben knew what it was doing at the Monowitz Buna plant.

It's all about the GOLDEN Rule and GREED.

Those who have the gold make the rules, and rules over those who have less GOLD.

 

So your stance has nothing to do with the actual part.

This was recently pulled from the Wikipedia article on the Pinto:
"Schwartz paper
In a 1991 paper, "The Myth of the Ford Pinto Case", for the Rutgers Law Review, Gary T. Schwartz[4] said the case against the Pinto was not clear-cut.[22][23]
According to his study, the number who died in Pinto rear-impact fires was well below the hundreds cited in contemporary news reports and closer to the 27 recorded by a limited National Highway Traffic Safety Administration database. Given the Pinto's production figures (over 3 million built), this was not substantially worse than typical for the time. Schwartz said that the car was no more fire-prone than other cars of the time, that its fatality rates were lower than comparably sized imported automobiles, and that the supposed "smoking gun" document that plaintiffs said demonstrated Ford's callousness in designing the Pinto was actually a document based on National Highway Traffic Safety Administration regulations about the value of a human life — rather than a document containing an assessment of Ford's potential tort liability.
Schwartz's study said:

• The Pinto Memo wasn't used or consulted internally by Ford, but rather was attached to a letter written to NHTSA about proposed regulation. When plaintiffs tried to use the memo in support of punitive damages, the trial judge ruled it inadmissible for that purpose (p. 1021, Schwartz study).
• The Pinto's fuel tank location behind the axle, ostensibly its design defect, was "commonplace at the time in American cars" (p. 1027).
• The precedent of the California Supreme Court at the time not only tolerated manufacturers trading off safety for cost, but apparently encouraged manufacturers to consider such trade-offs (p. 1037)."

Here is a link to the paper: http://www.pointoflaw.com/articles/The_Myth_of_the_Ford_Pinto_Case.pdf
And the Rutgers law Review: Rutgers Law Review

 

Go ahead, get a Ford with the oil wetted timing belt.

I'll stick with my Prius. I've owned too many Fords. I will NOT own another.

 

You are free to do so. Just be honest on why when trying to dissuade others from the brand.

 

I am being honest. It's called "experience."

Dore you profile say, Ford Hybrid?

 

Yes, you brought up your experience with traditional timing belts. These aren't traditional timing belts though. Assuming that they couldn't have been made better is the same as assuming motor oil chemistry hasn't improved since the days 3000mile/3month changes.

I agree these oil belts do not have the potential of lasting as long as a chain, but have not seen any evidence that they won't last the life of the engine. When I asked if there is any such evidence, you didn't supply any, and brought up the Pinto. Which my parents owned when I was a kid.

I have owned a; '86 Park Avenue, '96 Taurus, 2000 Ranger, 2004 Matrix, 2005 Prius, 2006 HHR, and now a 2013 Sonic. Having a timing a chain was one of the reasons I upgraded to the 1.4 turbo with the Sonic.

 

I have changed over 30 timing belts in my lifetime, one in my 1971 Pinto.

Even did two in Volkswagen Rabbit diesels.

I did one on my brother's Volvo at 43k miles, when it broke stopped at a traffic signal. Good thing was that it wasn't an "interference" engine.

How many have you changed?