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

 

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.

 

Wow, they are suppost to go 90K. Wonder if you have a bad pulley or something.

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

Who says this WEBsite is any different?

 

hahaha. True. Suppose at least on here everyone has had a cup of the SAME koolaid.

 

Some of those cities and thier people are like walking zombies--No culture and no soul some cities.....

 

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.

 

x2 I think this goes for most engines. That's what the mechanic at work has told me is a good rule of thumb.

 

some bodies listening !!!

 

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.

 

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?

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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 .


.