Nissan Frontier Forum banner

Timing belt - age vs. mileage

36K views 63 replies 22 participants last post by  dmcdade 
#1 ·
My 2000 V6 has about 85k miles. By the time I reach 105k miles, the truck will probably be 12-13 years old.

Is it recommended that I change the timing belt earlier than the 105k mile spec based on the age of the truck?
 
#3 · (Edited)
i had a buddy just do his belt and his truck is an 04 , the belt was starting to crack in a few places thats only 6 years old

so yes i would look at replacing it before the 105k

i plan on doin mine very soon , i have an 02 with 73k
 
#4 ·
Time is just as important as mileage. If it is at the recommended time before the mileage change it. Just like oil changes, time is as important.
 
#6 ·
Probably not a bad idea to do it sooner rather than later as Mathster stated.

Cheap insurance...
I changed my 01 when it had 135xxx
It actually looked ok but every truck is different.
 
#7 ·
Thanks for all the great advice. It does make sense to err on the side of caution. Here's an excerpt from a highly-respected independent garage near where I live.

"According to Nissan, the timing belt depends on both miles and age .... whichever comes first.

I made a call to Nissan Corp. to find out how many years until timing belt needs to be changed but to my surprise they did not know that information and told me to call a dealership.

According to OC Nissan, the age on when the timing belt needs to be replaced is 7 years.
I usually don't believe what the dealerships says and usually go with Nissan corporation (car manual) but since we have no choice, I would have to go with the dealership.

I know that oil changes are 3750 miles or 3 month. So if you calculate that, 105K miles would be 7 years.

I usually tell my customers what Nissan corporation says is good to follow if you want to be safe. On my own car, if I go over the time by a few years, I don't worry about it but 12-13 years may be pushing it. Hard to predict, some timing belts last little over 7 years and I know a couple cars that have lasted 200,000 miles and 20 years. Not worth the risk."
 
#8 ·
According to the Gates brand, based on time replacement would be 5 years on their belts. Based on driving averages I'd say 6-7 years @15,000 miles per year.
There is too much potential costly damage by waiting too long.

Clint
 
#10 ·
I know this is a really old thread, but the answer IS:

The manual says 105K miles OR 105 months, whichever comes first.

(105 months / 12 months per year = 8.75 years)

I'm just about to do mine, in the next week or three. I'm a 2004, with just about 100K miles, so I'm WAY over on time, not including the time from manufacture til I bought it (didn't check).

I'll try to remember to take a pic of the belt condition, if anyone responds to this and is interested...
 
#13 ·
Yup, 2001 with about 230,000 km on it (which is about 140k miles)...

I bought the truck a few months ago, and the previous owner didn't know much about these trucks so he didn't know if the timing belt had been changed or not which obviously concerned me. I was lucky though, because it looks like a mechanic changed the timing belt at 140,000 km (around 87k miles) and etched the words "timing belt" and the odometer reading on the front cover of the engine that protects the drive belts. Cool!
 
#14 ·
I bought my 2003 with 88K on it and after a 1000 mile drive home the timing belt made noise almost like legos rattling in a plastic jug sound. changed it the next day. The belt itself looked ok but the tensioners looked like ****. Water pump looked good too.
 
#15 ·
Mine runs and sounds fine and no leaks, etc. Original everything under there, including drive belts - never even adjusted them. Just doing because overdue on time and I'm getting a little nervous. Doing everything: Timing and drive belts, water pump, thermostat, all hoses, seals, radiator cap, tensioner and spring. Replacing plugs, since they're out for this job anyway, but not wires and cap/rotor - will do later if needed - spent too much money already. (Prestone 50/50 $14 a gallon - WTF???)
 
#16 ·
These are interference engines, and one cannot assess remaining lifetime on a timing belt by looking.

My Mazda truck has a timing belt but is a non-interference engine, and at 60K timing belt changes each time the belt looked perfect. I have 201K on that now, last timing belt change was at 178K, so doubt that I'll be changing that ever again unless I need a tensioner or something, since I rarely take that out of town, and have AAA to get it home if that belt snaps, but shouldn't have other damage. You wouldn't be as lucky in the 6-cylinder Frontiers !!!
 
#17 · (Edited)
You can assess AFTER replacing whether the belt was still healthy when it was changed. You do this by turning the belt inside-out and inspecting closely with good lighting and perhaps magnification, for minute cracking, particularly at the tooth roots. (Of course, you should never do this, or even bend the correct way, smaller than the crank pulley diameter, any belt you plan to use/re-use.)

Again, I'll post pics after removal, inside-out per the above.

For what it's worth, every belt I've ever done, even way overdue, has come off looking very good, with no notable cracking. This in no way means that I advocate being remiss, however!!

Interestingly, I had a couple of old Subaru's, years ago and they had inspection ports to look at the belt, but you could only see the drivers-side camshaft pulley and maybe 4 inches on either side, so it's benefit was questionable. Nevertheless, you could see the gross condition (not frayed, no chunks missing, etc.) and so it was SOMEWHAT helpful. If you've never changed a Subaru timing belt, you haven't lived. Some have 4 cams and they have a tensioner, it goes around the water pump and then there are TWO idler pulleys. You have to be very creative to hold everything in place while you put the belt on, for sure - lol. In any event, ALL Subaru's leak oil freakin everywhere and so there's always oil inside the belt cover and yet I've not seen one even close to failure...

Anyway - too much caffeine today and WAY too many words - lol
 
#18 ·
Changed the belt in my 2000 just this year. Was made in Jan of '00. Belts looked a bit cracked but nothing major. Truck only had 70k on it but i didnt want to be a horror story so I changed it. They should put a time limit on it as well but I guess that all depends on climate and driving conditions. Don't be cheap about the timing belt. Just pay to get it fixed and forget about it for another 100k. 14 -15 yrs is freaking old! Change It!
 
#19 ·
Changed belt yesterday. And water pump, hoses, thermostat, can seals, belts, etc. Ended up taking almost 10 hours, as crank pulley would NOT play nice... Bolt came right out, pulley not so much. And it took forever to clean the gasket surface for water pump...

Anyway, belt ended up looking practically new. No tiny cracks, etc. Looked good for a lot longer. Tensioner sounded slightly roller-skate-wheelish, though. Water pump still good.

One thing, though: When I started it, there's a whine just between 1000-1200 rpm. The timing belt is too tight, which is making that noise. I used the adjustment procedure and I have a calibrated (from work...) push/pull gauge, so I wasn't just guessing it was tensioned correctly - it was. Between 0.51 and 0.59 inches of deflection at 22 lbf.

I read online a few places that this is common and goes away with a few miles, as the belt stretches. Local dealer says common, too.

Anybody else have this experience??
 
#21 ·
So, update:

The belt is NOT too tight and it's not exactly a whine. It's more of a soft 'whoo-whoo-whoo', like a bearing. Specifically, like a water-pump, which was also changed. I (engineer and experienced mechanic) went through everything with a stethoscope and had a buddy (ex-master mechanic) do the same. Pretty much isolated to the timing cover, at the point directly over the tensioner. So, it would seem that perhaps one of the bearing races is bad. This is not good news, since as you all know, that requires a complete disassembly to correct.

I plan to remove all the drive belts and listen again, to definitively isolate the tensioner before taking the rest of the crap off again and will advise the results of that...
 
#22 ·
I just changed mine this past weekend and had a similar issue. Upon inspection we found that we had put one of the timing cover bolts in the wrong hole. The bottom timing belt cover bolt does not use a rubber grommet and we installed one with a grommet so the head was actually rubbing the back of the crank pulley. We were able to pull the radiator and the drive belts and get the crank pulley loosened to change out the screw and the noise was gone.
 
#23 ·
Huh! I will have to check that! I DO seem to remember the bottom one being much more rusted and that I put this in another spot.

Thanks and I'll let you know what I find!

Couple of questions:

Was the crank pulley completely bottomed (and so the drive belts and timing belt behind the cover, aligned properly)? I would think it would have to be, since the tightening torque is 150-something (can't remember) foot-lbs.

How much was the pulley contacting?

Why did you have to pull the radiator, etc? I believe it is possible to remove the bottom shroud, then the fan/clutch, loosen the drive belts a bit and break loose the crank pulley nut?
 
#24 ·
You're right, I don't think I pulled the radiator at that point...I was exhausted at that point and on autopilot. The bolt head was actually digging in to the rubber part on the back of the crank pulley and the crank pulley was bottomed out. It actually broke the tab on the block that the bottom timing belt cover bolt threads into. I just put the correct bolt in and JB welded the tab. I wasn't worried about losing any seal or anything as there is actually a slight vent hole made into the tab. You'll see what I'm talking about.
 
#25 ·
As soon as I get home, I'm gonna check that out. I don't remember seeing anything strange when I was under there to put the lower radiator hose, lower shroud and skid-plate back on, though.

My big concern, in the event that this is the case, would be that the pulley is fully bottomed out and that the bolt does not loosen as the interface between the pulley and the bolt head wears.

Furthermore, it would seem that if they pulley is not bottomed, the timing belt crank sprocket would be free to walk back and forth on the shaft more than design...

I was pretty tired and my back was killing me at that point, too, so who really knows? lol

Hopefully it is possible to simply loosen the crank bolt some (after gaining access and loosening drive belts) and push it out far enough to get the offending bolt out...

BTW: I don't think my crank pulley HAS a rubber piece at the back of it? Is it recessed into the back? I thought the whole thing was cast-iron?
 
#26 ·
I didn't think mine had a rubber piece either, it's actually embedded in the back side. I believe it's used as a balancer.

Hopefully that is your issue. It was a pretty easy fix for me. If it is the case, then you'll have to find where you put the bolt with the lock washer ( it's the same thread just a little shorter) so you can put that one in the right place. I had put the one without a grommet in one of the more easily accessible locations in the timing cover (luckily).
 
#28 ·
LOL...yes it will be one of those "wow I can't believe I did that" moments. You will see the head of the bolt dug into the rubber and you'll be asking yourself: "How did I not see that?" You should easily be able to see it and feel it.

My buddy and I had already put the crank pulley back on and actually pondered for several minutes why one of the bolts didn't have a grommet. When we were tightening that crank pulley we heard an audible pop that sounded very unsettling. When we finally figured out what was going on we realized it was that tab breaking.

Definitely update when you find out what's going on.

Oh yeah, the head of the bolt that we removed was pretty messed up so we had to use a grinder to reshape the head so we could use it to complete the timing belt cover.
 
#29 ·
Well, I'm happy to report that I didn't commit that particular sin (correct bolt in bottom hole), however that unfortunately leads me back to the original hypothesis of the tensioner bearings... lol NOT

Thank you VERY much for taking the time out of your day to answer me, however!!! Greatly appreciated!!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top