Timing belts vs timing chains
- Thread starter ricerocket
- Start date
Never.
Toyota's M series engines were the complete opposite.
The original M (1965) had a chain, after that they switched to DOHC belt driven.
The 5M, 7M, or 2JZ only had timing belts.
Other Toyota engines had chains.
The R series and AZ series were a couple, there are plenty of others.
Toyota's M series engines were the complete opposite.
The original M (1965) had a chain, after that they switched to DOHC belt driven.
The 5M, 7M, or 2JZ only had timing belts.
Other Toyota engines had chains.
The R series and AZ series were a couple, there are plenty of others.
What he said. Most 90s engines were belt driven whereas most 2000s are chain driven. Belts were used to reduce noise, advancements in engine design have resulted in less noise and the use of chains has been brought back also due to the fact that manufacturers wont have to warranty them. (For the most part-some chains have recalls on tensioners).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So a 1988 MKIII turbo would have a belt? Is there a mileage limit on changing it? The car runs great! It has about 140,000 miles on it.
Maintenance interval is listed for the timing belt in the TSRM, along with everything else.
http://www.cygnusx1.net/Supra/Library/TSRM/MK3/manual.aspx?Section=MA&P=2
Every 60,000 miles.
Better replace it soon, valves don't like to kiss the tops of the pistons.
It is called an interference engine for a reason.
http://www.cygnusx1.net/Supra/Library/TSRM/MK3/manual.aspx?Section=MA&P=2
Every 60,000 miles.
Better replace it soon, valves don't like to kiss the tops of the pistons.
It is called an interference engine for a reason.
Piratetip;2094501 said:
Um , Yeah, 7M's aren't interference... so they're not called interference motors..
Cp2295;2094499 said:
To add to this, chains have less stretch. Both stretch a very slight amount, the chain even less slight, and then the variable timing is more accurate.
