Re: Timing chains vs belts

davidtowle@lycosmail.com
Fri, 19 Jun 1998 23:34:50 -0400 (EDT)

I should have explained more, its not the belt itself that's cheaper. With a belt the head and block can each be an inch shorter and that's less metal and therefore less money. The belt uses a cheap plastic cover to go over this one inch space. The only other extra cost of a belt is the camshaft seal and they're dirt cheap.

Car companies will do about anything to save $1 per car. I would guess a belt saves on the order of $10 per car. Anyone out there from an auto company that might have some real numbers?

Of course I'm sure they and the dealers don't mind at all the extra revenue from belt repairs either.

---- you wrote:
> The significant cost difference is not in the belt versus chain. A
> replacement chain for an XN6 engine is $17 which is less than most
> belts.

-----------------------------------------------------
Get free personalized email at http://email.lycos.com