Why did Honda design their engines using a belt instead of a chain? I mean it's such a hassle to maintain in terms of changing the belt, and tons of people blow their engines with them snapping.

I don't understand why they don't just use chains? They are so much more hassle free. I used to own a 240 and I have never heard of one snapping, and you basically never have to replace them.

I realize belts might be a tad cheaper, but is money the only reason? Did they really cheap out like that? How much more expensive is a chain vs a belt?

Thanks..

 

less friction and rotational mass of a belt rather than a chain makes the engine more efficient, freeing up a few horsepower and giving a bit better gas mileage... both of which are important in a very small displacement 4 cylinder.

Also, belts tend to run quieter and smoother than chains from what I've heard.

 

just a diff. engine design. belts make less noise, have less friction then chains when running. There is no oilling system needed to lube a belt ect.

 

k24 is chain, i believe.

 

My thoughts exactly. I'm sure this was one of Honda's reasons for going with the belt.

 

K series are Chains, So are F20/F22 S2k's...

 

Not to be a d***, but I think that type of question would be far better answered by a honda engineer than anyone on H-T

You replace them like what, 3 maybe 4 times? over the course of what would be considered the vehicles normal lifespan. I don't think honda really intended for that many 15 year old + civics on the road with over 250,000 miles on them.

Thats kind of a myth, chains don't normally snap, but they do get stretched pretty bad after a while and the sprockets get worn, so yeah you should replace the timing chain and sprockets at some point in time.

Honestly i'm not even sure that they are cheaper. I seem to recall paying more for an aftermarket D15B7 timing belt than my friend paid for a toyota 22-RE timing chain, I realize thats kind of an apples, to oranges to kumquats comparison, just kinda throwing it out there.

 

I don't understand why they don't just use chains? They are so much more hassle free. I used to own a 240 and I have never heard of one snapping, and you basically never have to replace them


im a nissan mechanic in vancouver canada i have seen lots of 240s with broken timing chains that break the front cover and oil pan so u do have to replace them

also the guides wear out and clatter and bang on start-up hardly a problem free design

if you do your timing belts on time you will be ok timing belts break from poor installation or lack of maintance just do you **** on time and you wont have problems

 

first post and its a good one thats fairly uncommon round these parts lol

 

Well if you got your belt replaced when it should be, than you should'nt be worried about a belt snapping. From what I've seen working in a shop it takes ALOT to get one to just snap. Im not trying to say a belt is as strong as a chain but I have been impressed with how much damage one can take before snapping. A question I would like to ask is why they decided not to use non-interference designs on some motors...

 

I was going to say that my wife's cousin (I know sounds like a fake anecdotal story already) had a 1993 240SX in which the timing chain snapped, and when it did it bent valves and all of the fun **** associated with hondas breaking t-belts.

If someone fails to maintain an engine something is going to break, period. Honda belts won't break before 90K unless an outside force such as poor installation, distributor locking up, foreign debris (read up cut valvecover guys!), etc. etc. causes it to. If one changes the water pump, cam seal(s), crank seal, and tensioner when doing the belt job it should be good to go for 90K+ or more.

BTW I'd rather dissassemble the simple timing belt assembly to replace my cam/crank front seals too rather than tearing into a chain design. I know it's not much different mechanically speaking, but I imagine after adding up the chain, tensioners/guides, etc. the job would cost more than a t-belt job.

 

I'm 100% with you on the maintaining it properly.

The issue is with used cars. Some people say they were changed when they weren't, etc. I know, I know, when you buy a used car you should take care of that just in case so you don't have to worry about it.

But say you buy a used EG for 1000-1500. You can either drive it the way it is and take the owner's word for it, OR, you can spend $600+ to take care of the timing belt, etc, which it may not even need. What I'm trying to get it is that most people just decide to take the owner's word for it if they say it has been done recently, since the idea of spending half of what you paid for the car like that isn't really appealing, especially when you consider how small the chance is of the timing belt breaking.

But it does happen.

Either way, thanks for the replies, good insight here and some things were cleared up for me.

 

Well under no circumstance should a belts and water pump job ever cost $600.00 on a 92-95 Civic. Local shops in my area, including the dealership, do that job for about $485.00 out the door. That's genuine Honda parts, labor, tax, etc. You can buy the parts yourself for $150.00 or so.

 

x2