timing belt age as a sole replacement indicator
Richard van der Hoff
quattro at rvanderhoff.org.uk
Tue Apr 22 05:28:12 PDT 2014
Interesting that this should come up. My B5 S4 was in for a service a
few weeks ago, and the shop owner pointed out that the recommended
timing belt replacement interval was 60 months, or (I think) 60k miles.
It was last done over 6 years ago, so I figured I would take a couple of
weekends to do the job myself and replace some seals and gaskets while I
was in there.
Perhaps I'm being over-cautious. Really didn't fancy having to get 30
valves repaired though ;)
On 22/04/14 12:40, Grant Lenahan wrote:
> Rubber dry rots. So yes, age is a determinant as well.
> But i’m fairly convinced that the belt itself is rarely the issue in our cars. More often it is a tensioner or water pump that is failing, placing more drag not he belt, and then poof.
> That said, after 8-9 years, although i will only have 50-55k on my belt, I’ll do another nose job on my C5
> On Apr 21, 2014, at 10:14 PM, DeWitt Harrison <dewitt635 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Some time ago, in fact quite a long time ago, a veteran, very active
>> q-lister by the name of Phil Payne expressed the idea that timing belts can
>> become dangerously damaged by the simple passage of time, mileage
>> notwithstanding. The belt on my venerable 5ktq is in that situation now
>> with maybe one or two hundred miles of use but several years -- I hate to
>> think how many: ten? -- on the clock.
>> I would be very interested to learn what this group thinks about (the
>> late?) Mr. Payne's opinion on this matter.
>> DeWitt Harrison
>> 1988 5000CS
>> quattro mailing list
> quattro mailing list
More information about the quattro