non-interference engine
08-13-2006, 03:20 PM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
Very simple....if it is a non-interference engine and your timing belt or
chain breaks it doesn't hurt the engine....
"Steve Mackie" <smackie@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
news:JSHDg.2948$395.490@edtnps90...
>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the engine
>> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>
> Why would it matter if it is or it isn't?
>
>
chain breaks it doesn't hurt the engine....
"Steve Mackie" <smackie@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
news:JSHDg.2948$395.490@edtnps90...
>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the engine
>> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>
> Why would it matter if it is or it isn't?
>
>
08-13-2006, 06:05 PM
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
"High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
> Michael Rose wrote:
>
>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the engine
>> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>
> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing chain
> instead of a belt.
IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts. Maybe
they have improved, but the last car I had with a chain (an 84 Dodge with a
Mitsu engine) didn't make it 100K miles before the chain was worn enough to
jump. The first step in replacement was: remove engine from car.
Mike
news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
> Michael Rose wrote:
>
>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the engine
>> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>
> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing chain
> instead of a belt.
IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts. Maybe
they have improved, but the last car I had with a chain (an 84 Dodge with a
Mitsu engine) didn't make it 100K miles before the chain was worn enough to
jump. The first step in replacement was: remove engine from car.
Mike
08-13-2006, 06:05 PM
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
"High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
> Michael Rose wrote:
>
>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the engine
>> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>
> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing chain
> instead of a belt.
IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts. Maybe
they have improved, but the last car I had with a chain (an 84 Dodge with a
Mitsu engine) didn't make it 100K miles before the chain was worn enough to
jump. The first step in replacement was: remove engine from car.
Mike
news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
> Michael Rose wrote:
>
>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the engine
>> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>
> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing chain
> instead of a belt.
IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts. Maybe
they have improved, but the last car I had with a chain (an 84 Dodge with a
Mitsu engine) didn't make it 100K miles before the chain was worn enough to
jump. The first step in replacement was: remove engine from car.
Mike
08-13-2006, 06:05 PM
#19
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
"High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
> Michael Rose wrote:
>
>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the engine
>> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>
> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing chain
> instead of a belt.
IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts. Maybe
they have improved, but the last car I had with a chain (an 84 Dodge with a
Mitsu engine) didn't make it 100K miles before the chain was worn enough to
jump. The first step in replacement was: remove engine from car.
Mike
news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
> Michael Rose wrote:
>
>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the engine
>> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>
> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing chain
> instead of a belt.
IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts. Maybe
they have improved, but the last car I had with a chain (an 84 Dodge with a
Mitsu engine) didn't make it 100K miles before the chain was worn enough to
jump. The first step in replacement was: remove engine from car.
Mike
08-13-2006, 06:22 PM
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
In all my years, I've spun more bearings (2) than I've ever broken a timing
chain (0), or belt for that matter.
Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
Steve
> Very simple....if it is a non-interference engine and your timing belt or
> chain breaks it doesn't hurt the engine....
> "Steve Mackie" <smackie@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
> news:JSHDg.2948$395.490@edtnps90...
> >> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
engine
> >> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
> >> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
> >
> > Why would it matter if it is or it isn't?
> >
> >
>
>
chain (0), or belt for that matter.
Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
Steve
> Very simple....if it is a non-interference engine and your timing belt or
> chain breaks it doesn't hurt the engine....
> "Steve Mackie" <smackie@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
> news:JSHDg.2948$395.490@edtnps90...
> >> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
engine
> >> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
> >> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
> >
> > Why would it matter if it is or it isn't?
> >
> >
>
>
08-13-2006, 06:22 PM
#21
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
In all my years, I've spun more bearings (2) than I've ever broken a timing
chain (0), or belt for that matter.
Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
Steve
> Very simple....if it is a non-interference engine and your timing belt or
> chain breaks it doesn't hurt the engine....
> "Steve Mackie" <smackie@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
> news:JSHDg.2948$395.490@edtnps90...
> >> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
engine
> >> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
> >> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
> >
> > Why would it matter if it is or it isn't?
> >
> >
>
>
chain (0), or belt for that matter.
Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
Steve
> Very simple....if it is a non-interference engine and your timing belt or
> chain breaks it doesn't hurt the engine....
> "Steve Mackie" <smackie@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
> news:JSHDg.2948$395.490@edtnps90...
> >> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
engine
> >> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
> >> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
> >
> > Why would it matter if it is or it isn't?
> >
> >
>
>
08-13-2006, 06:22 PM
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
In all my years, I've spun more bearings (2) than I've ever broken a timing
chain (0), or belt for that matter.
Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
Steve
> Very simple....if it is a non-interference engine and your timing belt or
> chain breaks it doesn't hurt the engine....
> "Steve Mackie" <smackie@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
> news:JSHDg.2948$395.490@edtnps90...
> >> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
engine
> >> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
> >> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
> >
> > Why would it matter if it is or it isn't?
> >
> >
>
>
chain (0), or belt for that matter.
Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
Steve
> Very simple....if it is a non-interference engine and your timing belt or
> chain breaks it doesn't hurt the engine....
> "Steve Mackie" <smackie@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
> news:JSHDg.2948$395.490@edtnps90...
> >> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
engine
> >> was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
> >> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
> >
> > Why would it matter if it is or it isn't?
> >
> >
>
>
08-13-2006, 06:41 PM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
news:A5-dnehaCoSgP0LZnZ2dnUVZ_oGdnZ2d@sedona.net:
> "High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
>> Michael Rose wrote:
>>
>>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
>>> engine was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>>
>> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing
>> chain instead of a belt.
>
> IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts.
Depends on the engine design. Certain cars were notorious for eating timing
chains. The Nissan Axxess had one such. On the the opposite side, the old
Toyota timing chains were very well designed. They'd wear and get noisy,
but never break or jump.
--
TeGGeR®
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
news:A5-dnehaCoSgP0LZnZ2dnUVZ_oGdnZ2d@sedona.net:
> "High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
>> Michael Rose wrote:
>>
>>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
>>> engine was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>>
>> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing
>> chain instead of a belt.
>
> IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts.
Depends on the engine design. Certain cars were notorious for eating timing
chains. The Nissan Axxess had one such. On the the opposite side, the old
Toyota timing chains were very well designed. They'd wear and get noisy,
but never break or jump.
--
TeGGeR®
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
08-13-2006, 06:41 PM
#24
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
news:A5-dnehaCoSgP0LZnZ2dnUVZ_oGdnZ2d@sedona.net:
> "High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
>> Michael Rose wrote:
>>
>>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
>>> engine was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>>
>> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing
>> chain instead of a belt.
>
> IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts.
Depends on the engine design. Certain cars were notorious for eating timing
chains. The Nissan Axxess had one such. On the the opposite side, the old
Toyota timing chains were very well designed. They'd wear and get noisy,
but never break or jump.
--
TeGGeR®
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
news:A5-dnehaCoSgP0LZnZ2dnUVZ_oGdnZ2d@sedona.net:
> "High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
>> Michael Rose wrote:
>>
>>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
>>> engine was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>>
>> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing
>> chain instead of a belt.
>
> IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts.
Depends on the engine design. Certain cars were notorious for eating timing
chains. The Nissan Axxess had one such. On the the opposite side, the old
Toyota timing chains were very well designed. They'd wear and get noisy,
but never break or jump.
--
TeGGeR®
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
08-13-2006, 06:41 PM
#25
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
news:A5-dnehaCoSgP0LZnZ2dnUVZ_oGdnZ2d@sedona.net:
> "High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
>> Michael Rose wrote:
>>
>>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
>>> engine was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>>
>> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing
>> chain instead of a belt.
>
> IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts.
Depends on the engine design. Certain cars were notorious for eating timing
chains. The Nissan Axxess had one such. On the the opposite side, the old
Toyota timing chains were very well designed. They'd wear and get noisy,
but never break or jump.
--
TeGGeR®
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
news:A5-dnehaCoSgP0LZnZ2dnUVZ_oGdnZ2d@sedona.net:
> "High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:hpqnzvtbujv8.dlg@hightech.misfit...
>> Michael Rose wrote:
>>
>>> I was looking at a 2006 Honda Civic and I asked the saleman if the
>>> engine was a Non-interference engine and I got a blank look
>>> So guys help me out here...is it or isn't it!....Thanks
>>
>> I don't know, but it doesn't matter because the engine uses a timing
>> chain instead of a belt.
>
> IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts.
Depends on the engine design. Certain cars were notorious for eating timing
chains. The Nissan Axxess had one such. On the the opposite side, the old
Toyota timing chains were very well designed. They'd wear and get noisy,
but never break or jump.
--
TeGGeR®
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
08-13-2006, 07:10 PM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
"Steve Mackie" <smackie@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
news:7DNDg.5231$365.4900@edtnps89...
>
> Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
> maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
>
> Steve
>
Even an engine maintained on schedule is susceptible to sudden death by
valve crash. Usually that comes from water pump failure if the water pump is
driven by the timing belt. In that respect chain driven engines are "safer."
Mike
news:7DNDg.5231$365.4900@edtnps89...
>
> Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
> maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
>
> Steve
>
Even an engine maintained on schedule is susceptible to sudden death by
valve crash. Usually that comes from water pump failure if the water pump is
driven by the timing belt. In that respect chain driven engines are "safer."
Mike
08-13-2006, 07:10 PM
#27
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
"Steve Mackie" <smackie@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
news:7DNDg.5231$365.4900@edtnps89...
>
> Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
> maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
>
> Steve
>
Even an engine maintained on schedule is susceptible to sudden death by
valve crash. Usually that comes from water pump failure if the water pump is
driven by the timing belt. In that respect chain driven engines are "safer."
Mike
news:7DNDg.5231$365.4900@edtnps89...
>
> Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
> maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
>
> Steve
>
Even an engine maintained on schedule is susceptible to sudden death by
valve crash. Usually that comes from water pump failure if the water pump is
driven by the timing belt. In that respect chain driven engines are "safer."
Mike
08-13-2006, 07:10 PM
#28
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
"Steve Mackie" <smackie@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
news:7DNDg.5231$365.4900@edtnps89...
>
> Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
> maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
>
> Steve
>
Even an engine maintained on schedule is susceptible to sudden death by
valve crash. Usually that comes from water pump failure if the water pump is
driven by the timing belt. In that respect chain driven engines are "safer."
Mike
news:7DNDg.5231$365.4900@edtnps89...
>
> Again, why would it matter if it is or it isn't? Do you plan on not
> maintaining your vehicle after you purchase it?
>
> Steve
>
Even an engine maintained on schedule is susceptible to sudden death by
valve crash. Usually that comes from water pump failure if the water pump is
driven by the timing belt. In that respect chain driven engines are "safer."
Mike
08-13-2006, 07:36 PM
#29
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
Michael Pardee wrote:
> IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts. Maybe
> they have improved, but the last car I had with a chain (an 84 Dodge with a
> Mitsu engine) didn't make it 100K miles before the chain was worn enough to
> jump. The first step in replacement was: remove engine from car.
Toyota 4-cylinders have been chain-driven since the late 90s (starting with
the '98 Corolla I believe), and I am not aware of any chain-related failures
in properly maintained cars. Nissan was using chains long before that,
although I don't know how reliable they have been.
> IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts. Maybe
> they have improved, but the last car I had with a chain (an 84 Dodge with a
> Mitsu engine) didn't make it 100K miles before the chain was worn enough to
> jump. The first step in replacement was: remove engine from car.
Toyota 4-cylinders have been chain-driven since the late 90s (starting with
the '98 Corolla I believe), and I am not aware of any chain-related failures
in properly maintained cars. Nissan was using chains long before that,
although I don't know how reliable they have been.
08-13-2006, 07:36 PM
#30
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: non-interference engine
Michael Pardee wrote:
> IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts. Maybe
> they have improved, but the last car I had with a chain (an 84 Dodge with a
> Mitsu engine) didn't make it 100K miles before the chain was worn enough to
> jump. The first step in replacement was: remove engine from car.
Toyota 4-cylinders have been chain-driven since the late 90s (starting with
the '98 Corolla I believe), and I am not aware of any chain-related failures
in properly maintained cars. Nissan was using chains long before that,
although I don't know how reliable they have been.
> IMHO chains have not proven themselves much more reliable than belts. Maybe
> they have improved, but the last car I had with a chain (an 84 Dodge with a
> Mitsu engine) didn't make it 100K miles before the chain was worn enough to
> jump. The first step in replacement was: remove engine from car.
Toyota 4-cylinders have been chain-driven since the late 90s (starting with
the '98 Corolla I believe), and I am not aware of any chain-related failures
in properly maintained cars. Nissan was using chains long before that,
although I don't know how reliable they have been.