C3 Picasso - Cambelt or Timing Chaiin?

[petra]

hi all

i'm going to look at the following cars at the beginning of next week some distance away

2009 Citroen C3 PICASSO 1.6 HDi 16V VTR+ 5dr diesel

2009 C3 PICASSO 1.4 VTi 8v VTR+ 5dr petrol


are the engines timing chain or cambelt? - my preference is for a timing chain only.

i need the car to transport my huskies one of which has to be put in a L3' x W2' x H2' in the boot with rear seats up - a 7 seater car would do the latter job but the insurance nearly doubles.

any additional info appreciated.

cheers.

[wheeler]

The HDi has a timing belt with a small chain linking the camshafts.
Not sure what engine the 1.4 will be but suspect it is the ET3. In which case this also has a timing belt.

[411514]

Am I right in thinking that nearly all pure PSA engines have belts rather than chains. The only chained PSA engine I can think of is the 2.7 V6 HDi, but this was an engine that pretty much every car manufacturer had a hand in as far as I can tell.

[Gibbo2286]

Although they have occasional failures I think timing belts are far better than chains in most vehicles, and much easier to fix in case of failure.
Nissan have had a lot of trouble recently with timing chains, having to recall quite a large number of their stuff to have stretched chains and faulty tensioners replaced.

[RichardW]

Don't buy the 1.6 HDi....! Or only if you go in with your eyes open: https://www.frenchcarforum.co.uk/forum/ ... 11&t=49995

[wheeler]

Although they have occasional failures I think timing belts are far better than chains in most vehicles, and much easier to fix in case of failure.

Second that, would much prefer a timing belt to a chain, if your thinking get a car with a chain as they don't need any maintenance/replacement think again, they can stretch over time & the full kit needs replacement, normally much more expensive than replacing a timing belt kit. If the chain does break it can often be a more catastrophic failure as casings often get broken along with the chain.

[ekjdm14]

Although they have occasional failures I think timing belts are far better than chains in most vehicles, and much easier to fix in case of failure.

Second that, would much prefer a timing belt to a chain, if your thinking get a car with a chain as they don't need any maintenance/replacement think again, they can stretch over time & the full kit needs replacement, normally much more expensive than replacing a timing belt kit. If the chain does break it can often be a more catastrophic failure as casings often get broken along with the chain.

I'd tend to agree here, timing chains of late seem to have been designed with noise/price and little else in mind & are woefully under-specced IMO compared to traditional chain setups. Also, in the time they've been the accepted 'norm' belts have progressed immensely and the manufacturers (with a few exceptions) seem to have managed to spec them so that they easily last their service interval, usually 5 years or so.

I'd personally much rather have a belt than a chain for the reasons above Re- replacement costs & amount of work involved to replace, potential damage caused by failure and the like. Also, modern chains don't give you plenty of warning when they're failing if that's your thoughts. they are generally silent until they let go from what I've seen.

Also agree with the advice to avoid the 1.6HDi unless you're fully aware of the potential pitfalls and how to rectify/prevent them & it has a good genuine service history showing correct specs & intervals for the oil.

[RichardW]

1.6 HDi belt is 150k/ 10 years, and I've not heard of a belt failure on one - that at least they did get right(*)! Or, perhaps none have got that far as they have eaten their turbos before that...

* many get replaced early as they do tend to go noisy - I put a new one on the C4 at 75k. 307 is at 130k / over ten years - I don't know if it's been changed (quite possibly I think as it is not noisy), so it is on the list for a major service later in the summer.