I was dead wrong about timing chains vs belts

For years I swore timing chains were always better than belts. Thought belts were just a way to squeeze money out of customers every 60k miles. Then I had a 2012 Ford with a 3.5 that snapped a chain at 85k miles, no warning, no noise. Totaled the engine, cost the owner $4,200 for a used motor swap. Meanwhile my buddy's Toyota with a belt went 105k miles before he changed it, still ran perfect. Now I tell people belts and chains each have their place, and a good belt replacement schedule beats gambling on a chain failure. Has anyone else had a chain fail way earlier than expected?

3 comments

3 Comments

rowan9691mo ago

Did you check the oil regularly on that Ford?

gibson.avery1mo ago

Wait though @rowan969, did you ever figure out if that cap thing was just a Ford thing or all cars that year?

lewis.terry1mo ago

The 2007 Ford Focus I had actually didn't have a dipstick for the oil - you had to check it through the fill cap with a special tool. I learned that the hard way when my uncle told me to check the oil and I spent ten minutes looking for a dipstick that wasn't there. Regular oil changes were every 5,000 miles on that engine which is pretty standard, but without a dipstick you're really stuck relying on the dashboard light. You had the right idea about checking it regularly though, just on the wrong year of car. Did yours have the normal dipstick or the weird cap thing?