Timing Belt Luck?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

allsixesandsevens - 10 Nov 2006 15:59 GMT

I've got a 96 Outback Legacy 2.5L with 193K miles, and everything I've
read seems to indicate that this is an interference type engine. (I'm
not sure if I have that correct or not...)

A week ago, I was crusing at about 75 mph when "thump", the timing belt
broke. The water pump had failed, which caused the timing belt to
snap. The timing belt cover got all cracked up, etc., and things felt
bad, as I was SURE there'd be all kinds of damage to the valves. BUT,
when my mechanic got down to it, it seemed that I only needed a new
water pump and a new timing belt. I have the car back now, and it's
running like a dream...

My question: did I get lucky here, and why weren't the valves damaged?

Thanks....

Reply to this Message

Edward Hayes - 10 Nov 2006 16:14 GMT

Super lucky I'd say because Subaru states that ALL 2.5L engines are of
the interference type.

> I've got a 96 Outback Legacy 2.5L with 193K miles, and everything
> I've
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> Thanks....

Reply to this Message

Carl 1 Lucky Texan - 11 Nov 2006 04:48 GMT

> Super lucky I'd say because Subaru states that ALL 2.5L engines are of
> the interference type.
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>>
>>Thanks....

Could he have a 2.2 ?

I dunno

Carl

Signature

to reply, change ( .not) to ( .net)

Reply to this Message

Todd H. - 11 Nov 2006 07:50 GMT

> I've got a 96 Outback Legacy 2.5L with 193K miles, and everything I've
> read seems to indicate that this is an interference type engine. (I'm
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> My question: did I get lucky here, and why weren't the valves
> damaged?

Buy a lottery ticket now.

--
Todd H.
2001 Legacy Outback Wagon, 2.5L H-4
Chicago, Illinois USA

Reply to this Message

hippo - 12 Nov 2006 10:44 GMT

>I've got a 96 Outback Legacy 2.5L with 193K miles, and everything I've
>read seems to indicate that this is an interference type engine. (I'm
>not sure if I have that correct or not...)

>A week ago, I was crusing at about 75 mph when "thump", the timing belt
>broke. The water pump had failed, which caused the timing belt to
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>water pump and a new timing belt. I have the car back now, and it's
>running like a dream...

>My question: did I get lucky here, and why weren't the valves damaged?

>Thanks....

Isn't the 96 a 2.2? I think it was out here! If it *is* a 2.5, then
consider yourself blessed, because AFAIK 2.5s *are* interference engines.
Cheers

Reply to this Message