- This topic has 22 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Topic
-
2005 Kia Rio 1.6L, 91k miles, recommended timing belt replacement interval 105k miles. The spine of the belt didn’t break but it had about 10 teeth sheared off by the crank sprocket’s normal turning force, causing it to no longer drive the belt. The camshafts stopped turning while the crankshaft was still turning at speed, resulting in the following:
The customer did a great impression of the sound it made. Their aftermarket warranty is covering a engine replacement because the belt was not supposed to have been changed until 105k.
-
Replies
-
This topic has been brought up in another thread, but the quatily and formulation of automotive rubber components has been taking an obvious nosedive during the past decade.
Wiper blades and weather seals just don’t last anymore, and in the last 5 years I’ve seen more failed vibration dampers than I ever did in the previous 30 years.
A timing belt shouldn’t fail before the recommended service interval, unless it’s been the victim of an oil leak. You’d think there’s a “safety factor” built into service intervals, but that doesn’t seem to be the case any more.
When those Kias go, they go ugly… Had a friend of the family call me in when his kids piano teacher (a financially strapped older lady) had hers blow up…. Albeit she was over the belt change interval, it was a mess like that…. it made it even worse that she still had 18 more months of payments on it… Nothing I could do for her….
-Karl
[quote=”ToyotaKarl” post=144467] Nothing I could do for her….
-Karl[/quote]That’s when you just price out a used engine with a new belt.
Neither the customer nor the warranty company wanted to do a timing belt on the used motor I put in this car. We even discounted the labor by 50% because the serp belts/crank and water pump pulleys would be off anyway and the engine out of the car. One of my co-workers that subscribes to my YouTube channel swears a video of this engine damage would be a hit, although I’m not so sure. Although one of my experienced service advisors then took pictures of it to show to his buddies, so maybe I’ll do something up and see what happens. This thing is still laying around.
ToyotaKarl, I worked for Suzuki for a few years and we sold a rebadged Daewoo called the Verona, which I saw many owners of cry. It had incredible engine problems that would get bad really quick right after the warranty expired. I started with them on the tail end of the Verona fiasco, and I still saw 2 incidents myself where a customer would be emptying out their car in the back lot crying. They would need a $9000 engine to fix it, out of warranty, and still owed a similar amount of money on the car loan. The guy who had been there since the dealership opened told me there were at least a dozen of those situations.
[quote=”Fopeano” post=144752]Neither the customer nor the warranty company wanted to do a timing belt on the used motor I put in this car. [/quote]
What? That has to be one of the dumbest things I’ve heard in a long time. Belt fails prematurely, absolutely destroys old engine without prejudice. Putting in used motor and won’t put in a new timing belt? So. Much. Fuck.
I think r/justrolledintotheshop would enjoy the pictures. Something different than the usual posts of messed up tires and brakes.
The worst part about something like a car dying just outside of warranty is that the manufacturer wouldn’t really care, the dealer wouldn’t care, just nobody would care. They would end up at some other dealer lumping that chunk of “negative equity” into another car to the point where that one would likely die before it was paid off. Man am I glad I’m not the one that has to break information like that to a person, I think I would be crying too.
Oh my God. Unfortunately I’ve heard that same story more times than I care to remember on Kia/Hyundais, particularly of that mid 2000s vintage. Other than don’t buy Korean junk, I think the lesson is to replace those belts, or really any rubber, by time and not mileage.
I seen that before,dad bought a Kia Rio just like this situation.I ended up replacing the engine in it and did install a new timing belt in the used engine.This is the only Kia Model that does this.Sometimes the book is wrong on engines that break timing belts being interference engines.The Chrysler 2.4 and 2.0 engines are two examples,book says they are interference and are not including the 1993 to 1997 3.5 V6 engines.
I think part of the damage from a failure has to do with when and how it failed. At speed? It’s toast. Skips on startup? Maybe you have a chance. And of course just plain dumb luck.
The timing belt has been an experiment by the materials science engineers. Apparently, it has been an experiment in which some customers have suffered horribly. To me, having a vehicle that you are still making payments on but cant drive because of a major failure defines suffering.
What was the reasoning for moving away from timing chains? Does anyone know?
[quote=”lar1969″ post=145175]The timing belt has been an experiment by the materials science engineers. Apparently, it has been an experiment in which some customers have suffered horribly. To me, having a vehicle that you are still making payments on but cant drive because of a major failure defines suffering.
What was the reasoning for moving away from timing chains? Does anyone know?[/quote]
There are probably a number of complimentary reasons. Off the top of my head, I’d assume price plays a significant factor, which is reflected in a couple of different areas. It’s probably cheaper to manufacture a belt compared to a timing chain, which is assembled out of several hundred bits and pieces.
Also, belts don’t require lubrication, which makes engine design a bit simpler and cheaper, and also eliminates one potential source of oil contamination. And chains live behind cast metal covers which must be liquid-tight, while belts run behind cheap plastic covers which don’t have to be a highly precise fit.
Cogged belts have been used in Harley primary and secondary drives almost exclusively for well over a decade now with no reliability problems. Belts aren’t bad technology, as long as the belt system is properly designed and made of quality materials. Regarding the OP, I’d say the premature failure of the belt (excluding the possibility of an oil leak) was poor material. Manufacturers have been engineering too much robustness out of their products, and some modern cars tend to behave like Cinderella’s carriage; they turn into pumpkins as soon as the warranty period expires. In the OP’s case, the manufacturer went a fraction of a penny too far.
[quote=”Evil-i” post=145198][quote=”lar1969″ post=145175]The timing belt has been an experiment by the materials science engineers. Apparently, it has been an experiment in which some customers have suffered horribly. To me, having a vehicle that you are still making payments on but cant drive because of a major failure defines suffering.
What was the reasoning for moving away from timing chains? Does anyone know?[/quote]
There are probably a number of complimentary reasons. Off the top of my head, I’d assume price plays a significant factor, which is reflected in a couple of different areas. It’s probably cheaper to manufacture a belt compared to a timing chain, which is assembled out of several hundred bits and pieces.
Also, belts don’t require lubrication, which makes engine design a bit simpler and cheaper, and also eliminates one potential source of oil contamination. And chains live behind cast metal covers which must be liquid-tight, while belts run behind cheap plastic covers which don’t have to be a highly precise fit.
Cogged belts have been used in Harley primary and secondary drives almost exclusively for well over a decade now with no reliability problems. Belts aren’t bad technology, as long as the belt system is properly designed and made of quality materials. Regarding the OP, I’d say the premature failure of the belt (excluding the possibility of an oil leak) was poor material. Manufacturers have been engineering too much robustness out of their products, and some modern cars tend to behave like Cinderella’s carriage; they turn into pumpkins as soon as the warranty period expires. In the OP’s case, the manufacturer went a fraction of a penny too far.[/quote]
The belts in the Harleys don’t last if high performance items are install in them,have to change to a high tensile strength belt for this reason.My dad built a custom built motorcycle once and the belt did not last switching to a chain.People are behaving like belts are evil alien technology that we are trying to adapt for our own purposes.
We’ve been making belt drives for a long time, and we know how to make them last and work well. If there’s a problem with a stock OEM belt, as in the OP, it’s because somebody got over zealous with cost cutting, resulting in a sub-par component. The technology itself is not to blame.
As far as wafrederick’s experience with Harley belt drives, it should be no surprise that when a machine is modified for increased horsepower and torque, other stock components in the system may not be up to the job. If you drop a built 454 into a 6 cylinder Nova and destroy the stock driveshaft’s U joints, it would be ridiculous to say U joints are poor technology.
A friend of mine had a Kia Optima… I believe it was a 2004… and she went through two engines because of premature timing belt failure. She followed the service schedule perfectly and never abused the car… happened anyway. It, too, was under warranty. After the second one went, she just unloaded the car and got a lease. The thing is that it really wasn’t a bad car, but this problem is widespread and obviously catastrophic.
What a pile of scrap iron…… 🙁
The car is a 2005 probably built in 2004 so that makes the belt 11 years old. The give up because of age, temperature extremes, and so on. It’s not always miles driven.
Installing a used engine into a car without a new belt kit, rear main seal, and torque converter seal is pure insanity IMO.
That pretty well illustrates why dealing with warranty companies and cheapaxx customers can be more trouble than it’s worth.Let that used belt break in the near future and guess which innocent party will get the blame if not the legal liability. Word of mouth will be the mechanic botched it and anyone hearing the tale will not hear the “refused service” part of it…..
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.