Notices
95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners 4th gen pickups and 3rd gen 4Runners

3.4 - Non Interference confirmed

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-26-2009, 11:40 PM
  #21  
Registered User
 
02_Limited's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: McLean, Virginia
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mt_goat
Yuo guys that had one break, how many miles were on them?
I had a little under 79k when all of that happened. The same squeak from the engine bay is starting to resurface - it started making the same noise about 3k before my timing belt and WP failure
Old 02-27-2009, 04:57 AM
  #22  
Registered User
 
BigBallsMcFalls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by GVOLCRunner
Oh and I resent being referred to as a noob. Ive rebuilt engines, trannys...been a garage monkey longer than some of you have been alive... was simply curious DANG IT!
what are we supposed to think then ?

1) you didn't google toyota engines
2) you are saying gates site is incorrect. I can't find that. I find correct info

right on the gates site for 'model year' and 'engine type' toyota,
it does NOT say interference. check my link, look at the charts.
Old 02-27-2009, 06:00 AM
  #23  
Contributing Member
 
mt_goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oklahoma State
Posts: 10,666
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by 02_Limited
I had a little under 79k when all of that happened. The same squeak from the engine bay is starting to resurface - it started making the same noise about 3k before my timing belt and WP failure
Wow, they are suppost to go 90K. Wonder if you have a bad pulley or something.
Old 02-27-2009, 06:12 AM
  #24  
Registered User
 
hross14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Austin Texas
Posts: 1,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Definitely a non-interference engine--My crank pulley came off right in as i hit the strip in Vegas (RUSH HOUR). what a friggin joke. And people crossing the street just looked at me pushing like--HHHmmm wonder why he is pushing that car.

I like non-interfernce motors though--i do
Old 02-27-2009, 06:25 AM
  #25  
Contributing Member
 
mt_goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oklahoma State
Posts: 10,666
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by hross14
Definitely a non-interference engine--My crank pulley came off right in as i hit the strip in Vegas (RUSH HOUR). what a friggin joke. And people crossing the street just looked at me pushing like--HHHmmm wonder why he is pushing that car....
Yeah in Texas or Oklahoma there would have been 6 guys running to help you push it. Funny how people in some areas aren't helpful at all, that's one reason I left San Diego.
Old 02-27-2009, 06:35 AM
  #26  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
GVOLCRunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
first off, you seemed to be looking at a different parts list. I was looking at the gates "timing belt" replacement guide. It gives the recomended milage and type...check my first posted link.

and no offense to your tone...but googling came back with different opinions. SO I ASKED HERE. WOW. I came and asked toyota guys.

I teach at a university and the first thing I saw is dont trust everything you see online. I mean seriously, the web, google included, full of wack jobs and conspiracy nuts and different info.
Old 02-27-2009, 07:01 AM
  #27  
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
survivorman97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Missouri
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
yeah like everyone has been saying.... my friend owns a repair shop and he got in a 2001 with a timing belt that had snapped. All he had to do was was put on a new belt and water pump (which seized and broke the belt) and it started right up....btw i think mine had like 134,000 before it had been changed for the first time when I got the truck
Old 02-27-2009, 07:22 AM
  #28  
Registered User
 
cackalak han's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by GVOLCRunner
I teach at a university and the first thing I saw is dont trust everything you see online. I mean seriously, the web, google included, full of wack jobs and conspiracy nuts and different info.
Who says this WEBsite is any different?
Old 02-27-2009, 07:31 AM
  #29  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
GVOLCRunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
hahaha. True. Suppose at least on here everyone has had a cup of the SAME koolaid.
Old 02-27-2009, 09:28 AM
  #30  
Registered User
 
hross14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Austin Texas
Posts: 1,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Some of those cities and thier people are like walking zombies--No culture and no soul some cities.....

Originally Posted by mt_goat
Yeah in Texas or Oklahoma there would have been 6 guys running to help you push it. Funny how people in some areas aren't helpful at all, that's one reason I left San Diego.
Old 02-27-2009, 04:33 PM
  #31  
Registered User
 
97ltd4x4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by slacker
there is a simple rule with Toyota engines .. up to 2005 anyway .. and i'm sure will spark up a few skeptics and nay sayers but here is a fact!

any toyota vehicle with a timing BELT .. is NON- interferance .

any toyotas vehicle with a timing CHAIN ... is and interferance engine .



.
This is correct!

I would also add that the water pump is way more important than the T-belt...#1 reason for the T-belt to fail.
Old 02-27-2009, 04:48 PM
  #32  
Registered User
 
rbh261's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Martinsville, VA
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by slacker
there is a simple rule with Toyota engines .. up to 2005 anyway .. and i'm sure will spark up a few skeptics and nay sayers but here is a fact!

any toyota vehicle with a timing BELT .. is NON- interferance .

any toyotas vehicle with a timing CHAIN ... is and interferance engine .



.
x2 I think this goes for most engines. That's what the mechanic at work has told me is a good rule of thumb.
Old 02-27-2009, 05:57 PM
  #33  
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
slacker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: BC Canada
Posts: 6,300
Received 274 Likes on 185 Posts
some bodies listening !!!
Old 02-27-2009, 06:04 PM
  #34  
Banned
iTrader: (-1)
 
waskillywabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3
Received 20 Likes on 9 Posts
I have heard timing chains that needed replacing...would think it would be kinda hard to hear a belt?

All of my new vehicles just come with maintenance packages...the old ones that make noise before they die I can work on myself.

Old 02-28-2009, 08:45 AM
  #35  
Registered User
 
jdsdj98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by slacker
any toyota vehicle with a timing BELT .. is NON- interferance .

any toyotas vehicle with a timing CHAIN ... is and interferance engine .



.
Always verify this about your particular engine, however. Theoretically, there is no direct correlation between chains/interference and belts/non-interference. The little bit of reading I've done on this turned up the design philosophy that a chain's higher reliability makes it more suitable for an interference engine. The other side of that is evident in a non-interference engine being timed by a belt, which is less reliable than a chain.

So yes - that's a great rule of thumb, especially with regard to Toyota's approach. But philosophically, these are not inherent design characteristics of chains/belts in relation to interference/non-interference engines.

Sounds like a lot of these timing belt failures are the result of either bad workmanship or a water pump failure. What about outright, timing belt failure from the belt itself wearing out and snapping? Has that happened to anyone? If so, how many miles did the belt have on it?

Last edited by jdsdj98; 02-28-2009 at 08:46 AM.
Old 06-01-2009, 08:45 AM
  #36  
Registered User
 
dallison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i had a 1987 camry with 185k when some teeth went missing on the timing belt. The car was parked and when i went to start it, it didn't. IT sounded like it wanted to start in a weird way. I had a new tb and wp installed and it was as good as new.
Old 06-12-2009, 03:31 AM
  #37  
Registered User
 
conundrum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have seen belts go from 70k and up. out of aprox 60, the median would be 140 to 160k, second belt, due to orig water pump brng failure.

Phoenix,AZ 6 years toyota mastertech.
Old 06-12-2009, 05:45 AM
  #38  
Contributing Member
 
X-AWDriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Littleton,CO
Posts: 10,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I waited til 138k miles to change mine and the belt still looked acceptable and the water pump was still fine but I didn't want to push it much longer.
Old 06-12-2009, 06:43 AM
  #39  
Registered User
 
zlathim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,235
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by slacker
there is a simple rule with Toyota engines .. up to 2005 anyway .. and i'm sure will spark up a few skeptics and nay sayers but here is a fact!

any toyota vehicle with a timing BELT .. is NON- interferance .

any toyotas vehicle with a timing CHAIN ... is and interferance engine .



.
I guess I'll be one of those skeptics. You are confused.

The 2uz (4.7L) engines have a timing belt and they are interference engines.

Last edited by zlathim; 06-12-2009 at 07:02 AM.
Old 06-12-2009, 06:56 AM
  #40  
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
slacker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: BC Canada
Posts: 6,300
Received 274 Likes on 185 Posts
Originally Posted by zlathim

The 2uz (4.7L) engines have a timing belt and they are interference engines.

you are correct ... and I have miss lead the info with the year .. I forgot about this post , otherwise I would have corrected it long ago ....

2000 is the end year of the "rule" .. not 2005 . and always an exception to the rule is the V8 . and as far as I know newer overseas diesels .


.

Last edited by slacker; 06-12-2009 at 07:18 AM.


Quick Reply: 3.4 - Non Interference confirmed



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:13 PM.