Timing belt on a 3.0

[Tony Hoffman]

Sure, it can be called old school thinking, although Grant has some
good info on the newer intervals also. However, having replaced plenty
of bent valves in my days, I'll have to say the "old school" way of
thinking, i.e. every 60K, has never cost me one single valve!!

But, you (as well as others) also bring up some good points about the
varaibles. Since mine seem to live around 6k quite often, They see
more strretching and heat than your soccer mom's car. Then again, I
never have sludge issues like they do, either ;-)

Tony Hoffman


On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 8:58 AM,  <MXHOWES at aol.com> wrote:
> Is not the 60 K (miles) interval kind of old school thinking? I think  that
> the improvements in timing belt technology have made the 90 K interval more  of
> the norm. Having said that, if I had 86 K on my Audi I would be either  be
> shopping for the parts or a good mechanic ... soon. (depending on how  the car
> has been driven.)
>
> I will open another can of worms by stating that the life of a timing  belt
> should be measured by the total time (in hours, revolutions or  years) that the
> belt has been in service. The soccer mom's Audi is going to have  a lot more
> hours on the engine at 90 K than the person who does a 90 mile a day  commute.
> Also to be considered is how the car is driven ...... do you ever  take it
> over 3500 RPM? If so, how often?
> There are a lot of factors to be considered in making a decision based  on
> mileage. Since I drive my Audi's very easy and spend a lot of  time on the
> freeway, a 90 K interval seams more than reasonable.
>
>
> Jim