I agree with that. But what is suspicious is why VW have suddenly changed it to 4 years in the UK but not worldwide?
I strongly disagree with your comment that it is only VW UK who have downwards revised to the 4 year mark!
Yes its part rubber, not strawberry lace! Unless its been contaminated by oil the belts will last much longer than 4 years.
Disagree again. OK, I accept that oil contamination on a rubber belt is going to cause issues, but then any 'oil leak' is way outside the scope of 'routine maintenance' or 'scheduled servicing'. Oil leaks, and their co-related problems need repairing under a term such as 'unscheduled repairs'.
As has been repeatedly said, rubber naturally deteriorates over time due to the natural atmosphere. Ozone is one of the worst causes of rubber deterioration, and then closely followed is oxygen. Now if you want to kill off all human and animal life on this planet by removing the natural 20% of oxygen present in the earths atmosphere - then you are probably a better scientist than Steven Hawkins, and all the other boffins combined! So, in the interests of preserving life, I would rather keep that oxygen in the atmosphere, and continue to bite the bullet and replace rubber components every 4-6 years!
![tongue :tongue:](https://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/Smileys/modern/tongue.gif.pagespeed.ce.v8SJojVxN9.gif)
That said I guess there is an argument that frequent starts more typical of low mileage are harder on the belt than constant driving high mileage.
I do tend to agree with that. But what about the 'boy racer' who thrashes his car. Or the idiot who thinks it is cool to rev the engine over 3000rpm without any load, or the doddery old farts who never get the car warm enough to burn off any atmospheric contaminents away (and these not necessarily need to be 'frequent start' or 'short journey' - they can actually be long journeys, but are just too scared of exceeding 2,000 rpms, incase it uses more fuel or some other stupid reasons these slow cnuts seem to use). Because all these scenarios will also have a negative effect on the longevitiy of the belt.
5-6 years, 60k is a sensible time to change.
Again, I don't mind agreeing with that - but providing you take into account my other concerns raised.
If they were nylon belts I could see the sense but ASFAIK they are not (on the 2.0T FSI anyway).
WTF are you on about?
![shocked :shocked:](https://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/Smileys/modern/shocked.gif.pagespeed.ce.qWyOSHp_pK.gif)
Timing belts have NEVER used nylon - have you been wearing your grannies tights?
![evil :evil:](https://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/Smileys/modern/evil.gif.pagespeed.ce.Okxx8RMvBG.gif)
All timing belts use continuous strands of kevlar or aramid as a strengthening 'spine', and are simply encased in rubber. But the teeth are generally devoid of any continuous reinforcement - which is why the teeth shear off.
Thanks to long life servicing VW are not seeing as much service related monies coming through the door and have changed the belt schedule to generate a bit more cashflow.
That is just a cynical, ill-informed POV.
If you carefully studied the detail of the LongLife regime, then there is only a small minority of petrol engined cars which are 'cheaper' to maintain on the LL regime (diesels are better in this respect). However, for most cars, which will have been 'default' set to LL regime, but incorrectly set to LL, then the LL regime will actuall cost them MORE to maintain.
I appreciate some of you are taking the safe road without question, and in the words of our resident philosopher, ETTO, hail mary etc. But if VW changed it to 3 years? 2 years? would you still blindly follow this advice without question? Maybe wonder why this change in schedule has not been implemented world wide?
You still have no proof that 'worldwide' VWs interval is still 120,000 miles!
![rolleyes :rolleyes:](https://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/Smileys/modern/rolleyes.gif.pagespeed.ce._1-AYLAFoI.gif)
For the record, virtually ALL motor manufacturers recommend timing belt changes at an absolute maximum of 6 years. Some also recommend upto around 80k miles, the vast majority recommend around 60k miles, and some will state 4 years. As I have repeatedly stated, 40k miles is very much on the lower end of the spectrum, and I have freely recommened going upto 60k miles - but I have also qualified that 60k recommendation with some serious other scenarios to ponder over.
But you now seem to be verging on the rediculous - afterall, what evidence can you provide that either VW, or ANY manufacturer has ever recommended, or might even be considering altering the schedule to 3 years? Absolutely none.
![rolleyes :rolleyes:](https://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/Smileys/modern/rolleyes.gif.pagespeed.ce._1-AYLAFoI.gif)
If it is the case that belts are now failing earlier than expected and there is a sound technical reason why VW have implemented this change then you still have to ask the question why are VW now churning out shyte belts? Why are we taking a step backwards here?
First, Volkswagen do NOT make timing belts. They use ContiTech, probably one THE most highly regarded timing belt manufacturer in the world!
![much smugness :smug:](https://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/Smileys/modern/smug.gif.pagespeed.ce.dtwM3R45Xu.gif)
Next, VWs own 120,000 miles change interval was just pure 'pigs might fly' - simply to artificially create to the motoring press and fleet managers of how cheap their cars were to maintain. Once the Mk5 Golf GTI, and all the associated TFSI engine users 'honeymoon period' was over with the press and fleet managers - then VW sensibly revised their cam belt change intervals to co-incide with the industry standard norms.
But you still completely miss the point. A cam belt change is . . . .