17 replies to this topic

[gazza82]

The BMW chain problem is mainly due to the stupid service intervals BMW state ...

Mainly done to appease the leasing companies who would baulk if service intervals were shorter. Imagine having to replace the belt or chain 2 or 3 times during the life of the lease. (For the few that broke a new engine was probably less cost to BMW overall than the loss of that lucrative leasing market!)

In my Alfa's case, the cambelt change was first set at 60,000 miles but after a few started to go around that point Alfa told dealers it should be 36,000 miles! But not after most cars were 3 years old ... and not on leasing companies books. Then it was set back to 60,000 by Alfa when they discovered it was the plastic belt tensioner pulley wheel causing the failures and a metal one appeared on the parts shelf.

[viz139]

The MINI PSA engines had the chain at the front with standard service intervals . When they switched to BMW engines they had a chain for life fitted at the back of the engine, unfortunately it turned out not to be a chain for life. To the best of my knowledge the idea of a chain for life idea comes from Californian law which requires a chain or belt to have a 100k miles lifespan.

[MiniMadRacer]

My understanding, was / is most manufacturers work on a life span of 100,000 miles or 10 years. This is not to say they expect things to fall apart after 100,000 miles or 10 years, but they have kind of covered their a,, and they know by 10 years or 100,000 the chances are it will no longer be owned by the original purchaser from new, so they can swerve all sorts of warranties and gtees..