On May 5, 10:41=A0pm, "Mortimer" <m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "John S." <hjs...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
news:77805c1f-1dfa-42f9-89b5-0247af126658@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On May 5, 5:47 pm, "HLS" <nos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > "John S." <hjs...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:6010c494-0cdd-406e-a687-=
>
> > Again, have you determined that this is a broken timing belt. And
> > have asked the dealer how long parts that they install are warranted
> > for. Those are questions that you will not get straight answers to on
> > an internet discussion forum.
>
> > You certainly wont, and you wont get them from some dealer****ps
EITHER.
>
> > 50 k (miles, I assume) is a bit less than one would expect. You are
darn=
> > lucky that, if this turns out to be a snapped belt, you dont have an
> > interference
> > engine.
>
> You work with strange dealer****ps. =A0The legitimate dealer****ps I deal
> with provide a very legible disclosure of how long replacement parts
> are warranted for. =A0But the real point here is that the original
> poster should first determine what the problem is. =A0He hasn't
> determined that the belt broke, but just seems to be fi****ng for
> attention.
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> First of all, what's an "interference engine"? I've never heard that
term
> before.
>
> Secondly, I'm puzzled by some people's reluctance to answer the OP's
> question: "Is 50K a short lifetime for a timing belt?". It's immaterial
> whether he's established whather this is the cause of his problem - and
in=
> his followup he even said "Lets just assume it is the timing belt".
>
> I'd say that if the replacement interval for routinely replacing the
timin=
g
> belt is X thousand miles and the replacement belt fails within that
time,
> someone should be held liable - whether it's the manufacturer (defective
> part), garage who fitted it (defective workman****p) or car maker
(incorrec=
t
> service interval specified).
>
> On a related note, I'd like to know how a garage can examine my fan-belt
> (well, alternator and power-steering belt) amongst other things at a
> service, and mark it as "visually checked - OK", and yet the belt breaks
o=
ne
> week later... =A0Surely the reason for visually checking a belt is to
dete=
ct
> imminent failure *before* it happens, to avoid stranding me in the
middle =
of
> nowhere late at night, requiring me to be towed home. To add insult to
> injury, the replaced belt broke one month later because there had been
> undiagnosed damage to the crankshaft pulley that hadn't been picked up
whe=
n
> the belt and idler pulley were replaced :-( =A0The garage reluctantly
made=
a
> goodwill payment of a mere =A320 - less than a tenth of the cost of the
be=
lt
> replacement.
Given the limited amount of information the original poster knows
about his car it is literally impossible for anyone to say whether 50k
miles or 50 miles is a reasonable life. We do not know what the
recommended change level is. Nor do we know whether another component
failed and took out the belt. And finally, and most im****tantly we do
not even know if the belt is broken. The OP doesn't know either.
|
