Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,315
I'd guess because it would cost them too much money.
Ford Ecoboost 1.0 Cambelt Changes starting to be due @ £1000+
- Thread starter jaybee
- Start date
My wife's car has the Puretech 1.2 130, belt failed during motion meaning she lost all power and engine trashed itself at 5 years and ~68k miles.
I have a thread with more details but in summary it's a bit dodgy, the belt was actually subject to a recall (no smoke without fire) which they inspected and it failed less than 6 months later.
She found herself parked next to someone at the weekend with the exact same model and colour, but an 18 plate. Jokes about cars being brothers but being newer wouldn't have had a belt failure? Nope, turned out the 18 plate had had the same problem.
A shame because it's not actually a bad engine apart from that.
Soldato
My car is about 10 years old already, just had a look and they all seem to be going for £5k-£6k roughly. (and I assume most of these won't have had a new cambelt either) I bought it 6 1/2 years ago for £8500. so they don't seem to have come down in price much.
True, although right now seems to be a bit of an odd time for used car prices - we actually sold the fiesta a few weeks ago for only £200 less than we paid for it in 2019!
Soldato
A lot of the cost is from the pure labour involved, the book time is around 7 hours. Even the cheaper garages you're looking at £400-500 in labour alone, plus the cost of the parts themselves. I've only done a couple so far, and the ones I have done were due to taking the timing cover off for fixing coolant leaks rather than the belt being due. I can't see a lot of people forking out the cash to have these belts done really. Most people shy away from the £250-350 it costs on the older Fords to do a belt at 10 years on a Zetec engine.
My Dad's partner has a 1.0 Ecoboost Fiesta, it's on a 62 plate so that's due a belt this year, I'm willing to bet he wont be having it done and taking chances. It's a full spec Titanium X with low miles but it's value is still getting closer to the point of where it's debatable for if it's worth doing.
My Dad's partner has a 1.0 Ecoboost Fiesta, it's on a 62 plate so that's due a belt this year, I'm willing to bet he wont be having it done and taking chances. It's a full spec Titanium X with low miles but it's value is still getting closer to the point of where it's debatable for if it's worth doing.
peugot have the same wet belt issues too(several threads here/oc on that) ... and, closer to my heart only recently realised bmw chains n20/n26 a usa class action
Don
It is dumb, and unless you are able to perform an engine swap yourself would probably end up costing the same as getting the belt replaced.
2013 Fiesta Ecoboosts even base spec sell for 5k plus at the moment. The Titaniums go for often over 6k.
Yeah and are there really a load of ecoboost engines laying around ready to be dropped in? Buying reconditioned ones is going to be more than having your engine belt done as well, since they will have spent the same - you would hope - already doing that.
What alternative small hatchback cars are out there with similarly economic engines, cheap to insure and pack an ok punch though? Nothing can really compare in this segment which is why they are so popular. I think Audi do the A1 1.4tfsi, but if you want 5 seats you have to get the sportsback I think and with them being Audi, they fetch a high price. You have the small city cars like the Toyota Aygo and the similar cars like that, but they again have only 4 seats and are very small. Not as quick either.
My wife has a 2010 cooper D which has been remapped so hits around 140bhp and pulls like a train with 300nm of torque, it does 70mpg also although it does need a good run every now and again to regenerate the partial filter. Only 20 quid tax also.
Caporegime
I didn't even knew such a thing existed. Wet belt just seems like an entirely pointless idea.
Done with the aim of emissions but when the car is scrap way before its time is due the buyer ends up wasting even more emissions replacing it with a new car.
Done with the aim of emissions but when the car is scrap way before its time is due the buyer ends up wasting even more emissions replacing it with a new car.
Caporegime
The problem is these turbo engines have been purely done to cheat emissions. A naturally aspirated 1.6 is no different in the real world but because the emissions tests are how they are it is what it is.
A Suzuki swift sport must be more than a match for the ecoboost fiesta whilst being a naturally aspirated engine.
(wet belt) it's just cheap - less noisy ?
Noise was the primary reason but dont forget timing chains also wear.
I thought the ever moving goal posts on cambelt changes was a VAG speciality 
Seriously though, there seems to be a whole generation of relatively complex cars where the complexity doesn't add much in the way of efficiency or performance. My wife had a 1.4 16V Grande Punto. The 1.4 16V NA "Starjet" engine was an absolute peach. The 1.2 TSI Polo that replaced it has almost the same power output (5 bhp less) but is far less refined, costs more to service and is low single digits better on fuel
Seriously though, there seems to be a whole generation of relatively complex cars where the complexity doesn't add much in the way of efficiency or performance. My wife had a 1.4 16V Grande Punto. The 1.4 16V NA "Starjet" engine was an absolute peach. The 1.2 TSI Polo that replaced it has almost the same power output (5 bhp less) but is far less refined, costs more to service and is low single digits better on fuel
My 63 Focus Titanium X (63k miles) will be due next year. Think I might look to replace the car then
Unless you upgrade to something newer, any 10 year old car is going to need something doing on it. Not a bad excuse to get a new car though.
Don
They aren't purely for emissions, they deliver better mpg, and deliver torque lower down due to the turbo, which makes them feel faster/easier to drive
not sure they have really delivered those mpg savings on motorways - just for the wltp tests
It's probably too late for ICE now to acknowledge that meeting emissions (turbos) has increased long term ownership cost and has secondary enviromental impact,
even for ev's battery lifecycle/cell-replacement costs don't seem to figure in ongoing/initial taxation.
nuclear reactors - they diligently consider decommisioning/maintenance costs, or mobile phones with 'right to repair' ... but cars ?
It's probably too late for ICE now to acknowledge that meeting emissions (turbos) has increased long term ownership cost and has secondary enviromental impact,
even for ev's battery lifecycle/cell-replacement costs don't seem to figure in ongoing/initial taxation.
nuclear reactors - they diligently consider decommisioning/maintenance costs, or mobile phones with 'right to repair' ... but cars ?
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,315
A Model train
. I do find turboed cars much easier to deal with on a daily basis, working an NA engine is a right pain, especially having to change gear to keep the revs high.