Problem deciding

[SD1too]

Originally Posted by hellofadriver75

... it has only 22 000 on the milege but the age is 04 so should I put a new timing belt on it ...

Hello Sarah,

You have raised a contentious subject here which has been debated many times on the forum. My answer to your question is no, you do not need to renew the timing belts until the engine has covered 90,000 miles. In saying that, I am putting my money where my mouth is. I am just about to change my timing belts for the first time in my car's life. It was built in 1999!

The reason that MG Rover specified the six year period is commercial. The average mileage of Rover owners was set at 15,000 miles (to equal manufacturers in competition with Rover). That's when the engine oil is changed. The life of the timing belts is 90,000 miles so it was calculated that drivers would reach this mileage after six years. Of course this is unrealistic because people's actual annual mileage varies enormously. For example, a driver who covers 10,000 miles p.a. will be safe for nine years. It is therefore the mileage which you should observe not the six year period which is meaningless.

I changed the timing belt on one of my other cars at the manufacturer's specified mileage (the time period had been exceeded). When removed it was indistinguishable from a new one. There was no sign of deterioration whatsoever.

You have the evidence, now the decision is yours.

Simon

[marinabrian]

Originally Posted by SD1too

Hello Sarah,

You have raised a contentious subject here which has been debated many times on the forum. My answer to your question is no, you do not need to renew the timing belts until the engine has covered 90,000 miles. In saying that, I am putting my money where my mouth is. I am just about to change my timing belts for the first time in my car's life. It was built in 1999!

The reason that MG Rover specified the six year period is commercial. The average mileage of Rover owners was set at 15,000 miles (to equal manufacturers in competition with Rover). That's when the engine oil is changed. The life of the timing belts is 90,000 miles so it was calculated that drivers would reach this mileage after six years. Of course this is unrealistic because people's actual annual mileage varies enormously. For example, a driver who covers 10,000 miles p.a. will be safe for nine years. It is therefore the mileage which you should observe not the six year period which is meaningless.

I changed the timing belt on one of my other cars at the manufacturer's specified mileage (the time period had been exceeded). When removed it was indistinguishable from a new one. There was no sign of deterioration whatsoever.

You have the evidence, now the decision is yours.

Simon

What utter nonsense Simon, what evidence are you referring to?, anecdotal I suspect based upon your rather limited experience in this field, which can lead unsuspecting owners to make very poor maintenance choices based upon your quite frankly in this case dangerous opinion

As a word of advice to the OP, I would based upon time expiry alone seriously consider having the belts changed by a competent person, using quality parts if you are in any way shape or form thinking of keeping the car long term.

If it is simply a cheap runaround, then no don't bother having them done, but be aware that if they fail the engine will most likely be rendered scrap.

I make a point of every new car that I purchase that the timing belt(s) and auxiliary belts are changed before using the car in earnest, however I am not paying labour charges, but simply parts, so the cost compared to vehicular worth ratio is very different

Anyway don't let my ramblings get in the way of you enjoying your car

Brian

[sworks]

Timing belts are due to be changed on a pre set age or mileage whichever comes first. This topic comes up a lot and if it was a commercial decision would all manufacturers cam belt changes not be at the same age / mileage rather than manufacturers having different schedules? 90,000 miles or 6 years old whichever comes first is the recommended change point that I personally would advise and stick to. However, I’ve only been in the motor trade 31 years, 18 years with MGR so the choice is yours.....

[NigelOBB]

Originally Posted by bazyerma

Out of interest, has anyone had a low mileage but old belt snap on them?

I just replace my belts on my Ducati, after 4 years but with only 2000 miles on them and I think I might have just wasted money looking at them!

(They are supposed to be replaced every 2 years or 12400 miles)

They may look good but over time the belt hardens and degrades, which is why there’s an interval as well as mileage..

Tyres are another example, they may have loads of tread but the rubber degrades and hardens


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[COLVERT]

Originally Posted by bazyerma

Out of interest, has anyone had a low mileage but old belt snap on them?

I just replace my belts on my Ducati, after 4 years but with only 2000 miles on them and I think I might have just wasted money looking at them!

(They are supposed to be replaced every 2 years or 12400 miles)

DUCATI--??????????????--

[COLVERT]

I do agree with the time/age limits.

Engines with failed timing belts look such a MESS.

The damage also dents your wallet quite badly.----

[SD1too]

With reference to recent posts reiterating the official line but providing no substantive evidence in support of it:

Originally Posted by bazyerma

Out of interest, has anyone had a low mileage but old belt snap on them?

Originally Posted by chris75

Good question
Anyone ?

Do I hear the sound of leaves blowing down a deserted street?

Simon

[marinabrian]

Originally Posted by SD1too

With reference to recent posts reiterating the official line but providing no substantive evidence in support of it:



Do I hear the sound of leaves blowing down a deserted street?

Simon

Yes, below the mileage change interval, but in excess of the time interval

In this case, an early 190, the damage was fortunately limited to eight bent valves, however given the choice between stripping a head replacing valves then refitting with new belts, tensioner and water pump, and performing the correct planned preventative maintenance, I know what I'd be doing, and no it would be advising other owners that I was simply fortunate that the inevitable hasn't happened yet

Simon you should count yourself as very lucky, doing things by halves, nay thirds in this case

Brian

[COLVERT]

Originally Posted by marinabrian

Yes, below the mileage change interval, but in excess of the time interval

In this case, an early 190, the damage was fortunately limited to eight bent valves, however given the choice between stripping a head replacing valves then refitting with new belts, tensioner and water pump, and performing the correct planned preventative maintenance, I know what I'd be doing, and no it would be advising other owners that I was simply fortunate that the inevitable hasn't happened yet

Simon you should count yourself as very lucky, doing things by halves, nay thirds in this case

Brian

Hence to old saying.


A stitch in time saves nine.----------

[solarsailor]

I may be completely wrong here, but I'm a little concerned that the mileage of your car might be higher than you believe it to be. I took the liberty of checking the MOT history and from that there are two reasons why I suspect this:

1. During its first MOT on 25/5/07, it's noted that there was 'No odometer' - so no recorded mileage exists. Why this should be I don't know but other, more knowledgable members, might have the answer.

2. During its MOT on 24/10/13 one of the fail points was the nearside front tyre tread depth being below the legal requirement. The three other tyres all have an advisory for being worn close to the legal limit - and this at only a supposed 17,000 miles. Now I can accept that the front tyres may be getting worn, especially if the car had been driven by a boy racer, but the rear tyres should have lasted for double that mileage.

And you have brake pad warning at only 22,000 miles? Mine are still the originals at 45,000. Was the elderly owner Stirling Moss by any chance?

Anyway, that aside, I wholeheartedly agree with Brian. The car is approaching its 14th birthday, so I'd recommend getting the belts done sooner rather than later.