1MZ-FE is non-interference
in [Toyota]
|
From: johngdole on 19 Dec 2007 22:56 Yes, your 98 1MZFE Avalon is non-interference. But for Mira to say it is because it's got a timing belt is plain WRONG. Some Fords and many Hondas use timing belts and are INTERFERENCE engines!! On Dec 19, 12:13 pm, Keith Lee <cmar...(a)NOSPAM.nethere.com> wrote: > Hi Keith, > Your 1998 Avalon has a 6cylinder engine and a timing belt, this constitutes that your engine is non- > interference. If you have any further questions please respond to this email or feel free to call us directly at > the phone number listed below. > > Mira Winsby - Service Coordinator
From: johngdole on 19 Dec 2007 22:57 Right on Jeff. It just tells you the kind of "service coordinator" quality (or lack of) we are dealing. On Dec 19, 12:27 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...(a)verizon.net> wrote: > I have to take issue with the comment. > > I can't say if the motor is a non-interference type or not, but the > determining factor is not the presence of a timing belt. That is, simply > using a belt as opposed to a chain does not prescribe interference or > non-interference. It's possible that Toyota makes such a distinction, but > this is not the determining factor in the grand scheme of things. > > Interference, or the lack of it, describes the ability of the pistons and > valves to collide should something go astray. Interference is more > accurately denoted by the compression ratio -- a low ratio will have more > room in the combustion chamber for the piston and valve to peacefully > co-exist. > > I have to wonder at the response you received because I do not expect the > ability for the pistons and valves to collide to be related to the kind of > valve timing mechanism. I suspect the motor is the non-interference type, > but not because it uses a timing belt as opposed to a timing chain. > > "Keith Lee" <cmar...(a)NOSPAM.nethere.com> wrote in message > > news:pan.2007.12.19.20.13.03(a)NOSPAM.nethere.com... > > > All: > > I just received this email from a Service Coordinator at my local Toyota > > dealership and repair place. It's > > now official that my 1998 Toyota Avalon engine is non-interference. Thank > > you to everyone who helped me > > with this question. Here is Mira's email below. > > > Keith Lee > > > Hi Keith, > > Your 1998 Avalon has a 6cylinder engine and a timing belt, this > > constitutes that your engine is non- > > interference. If you have any further questions please respond to this > > email or feel free to call us directly at > > the phone number listed below. > > > Mira Winsby - Service Coordinator
From: Ray O on 20 Dec 2007 00:53 "Jeff Strickland" <crwlr(a)verizon.net> wrote in message news:Y8faj.28686$JW4.9295(a)trnddc05... >I have to take issue with the comment. > > I can't say if the motor is a non-interference type or not, but the > determining factor is not the presence of a timing belt. That is, simply > using a belt as opposed to a chain does not prescribe interference or > non-interference. It's possible that Toyota makes such a distinction, but > this is not the determining factor in the grand scheme of things. > > Interference, or the lack of it, describes the ability of the pistons and > valves to collide should something go astray. Interference is more > accurately denoted by the compression ratio -- a low ratio will have more > room in the combustion chamber for the piston and valve to peacefully > co-exist. > > I have to wonder at the response you received because I do not expect the > ability for the pistons and valves to collide to be related to the kind of > valve timing mechanism. I suspect the motor is the non-interference type, > but not because it uses a timing belt as opposed to a timing chain. > The service coordinator provided the correct answer (that the 1MZ-FE engine is non-interference) but provided the incorrect reasoning for the answer. It used to be that Toyotas with timing belts were all non-interference, and Toyotas with Timing chains were interference, but that is no longer always the case. -- Ray O (correct punctuation to reply)
From: Keith Lee on 20 Dec 2007 08:00 On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:53:29 -0600, Ray O wrote: > The service coordinator provided the correct answer (that the 1MZ-FE > engine is non-interference) but provided the incorrect reasoning for the > answer. It used to be that Toyotas with timing belts were all > non-interference, and Toyotas with Timing chains were interference, but > that is no longer always the case. Ray: How do you know it is non-interference? I have seen some websites say yes and some say no. I have talked to some former auto technical people who say it isn't. Just curious about your info. Thanks! Keith
From: mrsteveo on 20 Dec 2007 10:36
On Dec 20, 5:00 am, Keith Lee <cmar...(a)NOSPAM.nethere.com> wrote: > On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:53:29 -0600, Ray O wrote: > > The service coordinator provided the correct answer (that the 1MZ-FE > > engine is non-interference) but provided the incorrect reasoning for the > > answer. It used to be that Toyotas with timing belts were all > > non-interference, and Toyotas with Timing chains were interference, but > > that is no longer always the case. > > Ray: > How do you know it is non-interference? I have seen some websites say yes and some say no. I have talked > to some former auto technical people who say it isn't. Just curious about your info. Thanks! > > Keith Ray O is a former employee of Toyota who donates his time and energy to this newsgroup among many others. So on this note, is there a comprehensive list of Toyota's or any vehicles where you can find out if they're interference or not? I have a 2002 Corolla -- it's a chain -- is it interference? Thanks, Steve |