Mazda 626

tccmn1 · April 2003

I don't own a 626, but drove a 2002 LX for two days while my MPV was serviced. I had a 4 banger and felt it was not very refined at all.
The unit had 13K miles on it and looked to be in good shape. I felt it was noisy and handling and ride was rough. This compares to my 03 MPV 6cyl, granted, and my Toy Camry 4 banger. While 4's are noisy, I found the 02 626 to be noisier than my Camry and not as nice a ride. It just felt small in comparison and rough on the road.
I like the cute electronic vanes that move back and forth...but that's about it.

Just my 2 cents. I know the new Mazda 6 is the replacement, and they needed one based on my experience!

p100 · April 2003

I would gladly give up "the cute electronic vanes that move back and forth" for good quality heavy duty axles and CV joints, blemish free alloy wheels, folding outside mirrors, and ABS, and better engineered suspension in general. In fact I would give up the leather seats, sunroof, and the Bose stero as well. Unfortunately it is cheap gimmics like these vanes that make the car attractive to potential buyers at first glance. BTW, I never turn on the oscilating center A/C duct vents on in my car.

It looks like Mazda finally realized that they cannot compete with the existing 626. Mazda 6 appears to be a much better vehicle. However, some of us who have been sold junk by Mazda will not be lining up to buy the new 6 any time soon.

maxx4me · April 2003

he, he, he....I use my "swing" feature to circulate the AC all the time. Since I'm running the car into the ground, I want to take advantage of every button and gizmo the thing has before I take it to the junk heap. My biggest complaints on the 6 is that it is still too low to the ground and hard to get in and out of, and the engine takes on a Chrysler cab forward design, not allowing me to change the oil myself since the engine area is so small. The driver's leg room is poor as well. I am more comforatable in a Neon, than I am in the new 6.

p100 · April 2003

Speaking of Neon, do they still make that vehicle? I know several people who have these cars and without exception, the head gaskets blew on their cars around 45K miles. Appears to be a chronic problem with these cars. You can get a used one really cheap. A good alternative to a used 4 cyl auto 626, I think. Replacing a head gasket is a lot cheaper than replacing an auto transmission...every 45K miles.

maxx4me · April 2003

geez, I'll be very happy if I can get 45K out of my 3rd transmission, since that would allow my 626 to last long enough to buy the new Maxx next fall. My second Ford tranny only lasted 7 months. I had to go to 2 Mazda dealers before I could get it replaced. The one dealer was claiming it wasn't the transmission. Yeah, right. As for Chryslers, I see those cars as Venus fly traps. They are so beautifully designed except for under the hood, where it can get awfully scary.

p100 · April 2003

I have done this on my V6 at 60K miles but could not find a drain plug on the engine block. Draining the radiator and disconnecting the lower radiator hose will drain only about half of the total coolant capacity. I asked a Mazda mechanic about a drain plug on the engine and he told me something about a plate on the engine block that could be removed to drain the coolant but he recommended against it. Anyway, I used the original Mazda orange long service coolant (about $12 a gallon). I only used about 2 quarts of it because I mixed it 50-50 with two quarts of distilled water.

Any comments? I do not have the service manual for this car and if I keep it any longer, I will get one. Is there anything revealing in the service manual on this subject? And I think that the coolant replacement should be about 30K miles instead of 60 if all you can drain is half the coolant capacity.

windowphobe6 · April 2003

30k seems reasonable to me, even with the orange stuff. Coolant will retain its thermal properties for longer periods, but the additives to protect the cooling system don't last quite as long.

I haven't heard this about the V6, but the four seems to be somewhat susceptible to air bubbles; if you don't purge the system carefully during coolant replacement, you're inviting a problem.

(Neons are still in production, though only under the Dodge brand; Plymouth has rung down the curtain and joined the Choir Invisible.)

tccmn1 · April 2003

I didn't know that the 626 was known as a bad vehicle until I posted my little opinion about my short use of one. I had thought that it was a good unit in comparison to the Camry and Altima...but I've learned a lot here. You folks support my opinion of it being a little rough around the edges. Thanks for enlightening me on this model. Glad I never pursued one in 99 when I bought my Camry 4 banger.

I hope my MPV doesn't turn out to be sour grapes. So far it seems pretty refined and well put together...but that's after only 4K miles.

maxx4me · May 2003

thanks for making me feel bad tccmn1. If I had half a brain and a little more money, I would be have bought a Camry Wagon (last model year) back in 1996, rather than this fine Ford 626. I too hope you have good luck with your MPV. I really like the current model, even though I don't come close to fitting in the driver seat. Keep sharing your experiences with it. You just might save someone from making a bad choice, or may help them into a great purchase.

p100 · May 2003

I could have bought a brand new 99 base model GXE Nissan Maxima for $1,500 less than I paid for the 99 626 ES V6 (considering all rebates and discounts at the time). The Maxima would have been worth at least $ 1500 more on resale right now, so I essentially lost $ 3K. Not to mention getting an unrefined and uneconomical car with high maintenance requirements.

skibry1 · May 2003

Our DoubleOught 626, 130 ponies w/ left-leg-flexor, has been the most trouble free auto we have ever owned. She only has a wee bit over 40K on the odo and has been inside a service bay for preventitve attention....Zoom/Zoom.
Bryan

slickdog · May 2003

But so could your expensive BMW if you owned one. I've owned a couple bad cars (my wife has one right now, a Taurus), and I do not consider my 626 to be one of them. Seems to me that the negative attitude about this car is spreading a bit too fast here lately, so I'll throw my (positive) opinion of the car out there.

My '00 LX-V6 (with the manual tranny) has not suffered a major mechanical failure yet, and I'm extremely pleased with it so far. It's no Maxima, but I can't imagine why any 626 owner would even consider comparing those two vehicles. I'm not sure about now, but three years ago, the 626 really compared more with the Altima than the Maxima (although Altima didn't have a V6 at the time). In my opinion there are too many differences between 626 and Maxima for a direct comparison (price being one).

I too looked at the Maxima GXE when I purchased my 626, but in my area the Nissan dealers couldn't even get close to the price of a 626 (not even the ES-V6). If they had, I would probably be driving a Maxima now, although the 626 did have it beat in the handling department when I test drove back in '00.

I completely disagree that the 626 is a "bad vehicle", as tccmn1 states. That's an awfully broad statement to make, simply based on a few posts in a message board. Just because a few folks on the board have had a bad experience doesn't mean the 626 is something to avoid. Let's face it, nearly every manufacturer turns out some lemons, even Honda and Toyota. Ok, I agree that one should probably walk away from a recent I4/Ford tranny equipped 626, even if it's real cheap. That doesn't mean the the entire model line is bad.

At any rate, I for one have had a rather positive experience, and don't regret purchasing the vehicle in the least. It offered me something the Japanese big three and domestic automakers couldn't, with a V6, manual transmission, good handling, and a pretty low price. In addition, it's reliability has been flawless so far.

I'd also like to mention that with my local Mazda dealer, I was able to obtain a vehicle with no ABS, no electric seat (I HATE electric seats), no leather, no expensive alloy wheels and really no other stupid frivolous options I didn't want to pay for. The Honda and Toyota salesmen laughed when I told them what I wanted (and didn't want). And no, I don't consider the swing vents all that unreasonable to have on the car, although I don't use them much. I mean really, how much extra $$$ do you think those cheesy things could possibly add onto production cost? Furthermore, are you going to bother to fix it when it breaks? Who cares? Now an electric seat, that's something that adds cost and is expensive to fix. Not swing vents.

maxx4me · May 2003

slickdog: surely you do not want me to post the entire list of service bulletins on the 93-97 model of 626. It would shut down the Edmunds server. P100, you and I need to go have some beers together. I will sulk over my missed opportunity of buying a Camry wagon, and you the Maxima. mmmmmm beer (8 ^ (l)

windowphobe6 · May 2003

"Data" is not the plural of "anecdote". Never has been, never will be.

bdogg24 · May 2003

Hello Everyone,

I am looking at a 2002 626 4 cylinder auto with around 7500 miles, the dealer is currently a little under the edmunds TMV price around $13,300. I am concerned about the transmission after reading these posts and looked at the maintaince schedule. According to Mazda they first recommended transmission fluid change at 105,000 miles, then every 30,000 after that.
Did they change to synthetic fluid or did they improve the unit? I am concerned about long term use and thinking of adding an auxillary cooler if I purchase it. Does anyone have any thoughts about the newer 626's transmission's?
Thanks in advance for any advice.

p100 · May 2003

These fluid change intervals for the auto transmission are rather strange. Why not EVERY 105K miles? Would this suggest that these transmissions might last 210K and more? If I owned one of these auto transmission cars I would probably change the fluid and filter every 30K miles regardless. How can you go wrong with that? Adding an auxiliary cooler could not hurt because excessive heat generation is number one reason for an auto transmission failure.

p100 · May 2003

Speaking of swinging vents, and other gismos, please name one other car company that would delete standard fog lights, traction control system and anti-lock brakes from their identical next year model. Mazda did this with the 99 model 626 ES V6. The 98 ES V6 had all those as standard equipment. Do you think they may have saved a penny or two by doing that? I think that most manufacturers add such features to promote safety at no cost, rather than delete them once they are made standard equipment. Safety first, right?
Well, at least they did not delete the famous swinging vents. And they added an emergency trunk release button inside the trunk for those who like to travel inside the trunk.

windowphobe6 · May 2003

At least they're suggesting a fluid change; as recently as 2000, the manual was silent on this topic.

The CD4E has been improving over the years, though it's still not what I'd call bulletproof; p100's suggestion of 30k intervals seems quite reasonable, and I'm doing 15-20k intervals on my 2000 model, partly because they dovetail nicely with my actual driving habits.

And tacking on an auxiliary cooler is a Good Thing, since overheating is indeed the worst enemy of an automatic.

If you're thinking of switching to a synthetic - I don't believe Mazda has done so - make sure you flush out all the old ATF first.

windowphobe6 · May 2003

They took a lot of stuff out for the fifth-generation cars: they deleted the crotch vent, the dead pedal, the heater ducting for the rear, the vanity light on the sun visors. They even shaved some expense on the swinging vents; previously, they would stop swinging if the center vents were closed, but the later versions run when the button is pushed, whether the vents are open or not. Even Consumer Reports railed at Mazda for this sort of thing, which is why some of the goodies (though by no means all) were restored for 2000.

Emergency trunk releases, incidentally, don't have much to do with traveling Sopranos-style; it's one of those Protect The Children schemes. (Like the kids are going to play in the trunk, given the amount of stuff I schlep around in there.)

p100 · May 2003

I read a number of posts on Dodge Ram pickup truck automatic transmission failures. According to some of these posts Dodge maintenance schedule for these trucks now requires changing transmission fluid and filter every 12,000 miles!!!! Bad transmission history or not, this surely appears excessive. Maybe they are insuring themselves against those who pull 10K lb fifth wheels cross country day after day with these trucks. I wonder if this is a severe duty maintenance schedule or a universal maintenance schedule. There certainly is a big difference between 12K and 105K miles, which is Mazda's first fluid change recommendation.

maxx4me · May 2003

Guys, I'm not sure where you got the 105k from, but I am going to heed the advice of this earlier post from my friend zoomzoom. Please note paragraph #2: "The factory specified interval of 2yrs/24,000 miles is too long."

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/dorothy.bradbury/probemx/p_m20.htm

p100 · May 2003

Your link is very informative. So they too are recommending the Dodge schedule of 12000 miles between transmission oil changes. Well, I guess if you get manual transmission you do not have to do any of this. I never changed oil in my 92 Protege LX 5 speed, never had any problems when I sold it with 125K miles.

windowphobe6 · May 2003

I did it twice in my old Toyota Celica (1975 GT); the gearbox was still in good shape when I sold the car at 195,000 miles. (I did once lose a third-gear synchro, which I had replaced, which mandated one of those oil changes.)

p100 · May 2003

I am getting ready to change my manual transmission oil and replace it with Redline MTU 75W90 synthetic oil. I am somewhat concerned about possibility of gearbox axle seals developing a leak as a result of this. The car has 65K miles now. The gearbox oil is still the original oil from the factory, which I assume is not synthetic. Should I be concerned about this? I read somewhere that replacing mineral oil with synthetic oil can cause older seals to leak. Is there some substance to this? Did somebody try this (Redline)oil in a manual gearbox?

p100 · May 2003

Has anybody tried one? Any improvement in fuel economy?

Also, I am curious if Millenia Axles would fit the 626 V6. I talked to an axle rebuilt shop and was told that this is possible and that Millenia axles and CV joints are much more heavy duty than those on 626.

slickdog · May 2003

p100, are you saying that traction control and ABS are "no cost" safety features? I can't believe that they wouldn't add to production and warranty cost, because they add complexity to the vehicle. Perhaps omitting those feautures eventually cost Mazda with reduced sales for the model year, but I'm sure they must have saved some money initially. I do agree that safety features should at least be offered as options, though (whether they cost anything extra or not) for those who want or need to have them.

I've seen the TSB's for 93-97 626's before, and I agree that it's not a good sign (the list for my wife's Taurus is pretty long, too), but it still doesn't mean much in and of itself. Many owners will never experience the problems described in the TSB's. I know someone who owns a '97 which was purchased new, and has had very little trouble with it. For him, it has been a *good car*, certainly not a disaster like yours.

BTW, I did the switch to the Redline oil in my transaxle last year (but with only 21K miles), and I've been pleased with it. I've also heard that switching to synthetic causing seals to (shrink?) and leak in an engine, but I'm not sure how it would affect a manual transaxle/transmission. Of course on an engine, the seals are under pressure (albeit low) from the oil pump. Manual transaxles/transmissions just bathe themselves in the stuff by splashing it up out of the bottom of the case, and I think the only cause of pressure in there would be the heat, so perhaps the risk of leakage is lower.

p100 · May 2003

You misunderstood what I said. I said that many manufacturers will add ABS and traction control, and fog lights to their models at no additional cost (to the buyer) in order to boost sales. This does not mean these features do not cost the manufacturer substantial amount of money to incorporate in a vehicle. Mazda did just the opposite here - they deleted the ABS, fog lights, and traction control from the 99 626 ES V6 standard equipment list. If you wanted these features in the 99 model, they would cost about $ 1500 extra. All these safety features were standard on the 98 ES V6 model.

By the way, my car has not been exactly a nightmare to own because it never left me stranded or cost me much money out of pocket for repairs (warranty covered those), but the satisfaction factor is missing. This car has a potential to be a really good vehicle. Some of the critical parts,however(in my case axles and CV joints)are of substandard quality, which will make any car less than pleasant to drive. And the suspension in general has a rough feel to it. This Mazda is not what I would call a refined vehicle.

lngtonge18 · May 2003

Yes, Mazda deleted those features on the 99 model, but they also lowered the base price by about $900. Their thought was that if they lowered the base price of their top line 626 model, more people could afford it and the price would look better compared to the more expensive Accord/Camry/Maxima. It also gave people the option of buying the safety features instead of forcing them to pay for something they didn't want. It sort of made sense because the Maxima, Altima, and Camry didn't have standard anti-lock brakes and traction control at the time. It was unfortunate though that Mazda decided to tease people with all the nice standard features and than made them options the very next year.

p100 · May 2003

Yes, and the game of deleting the standard equipment continued. On later models the standard sunroof on the ES V6 model was deleted and made optional. Mazda always managed to lower the base price by only a fraction of what the deleted equipment would cost if ordered. Somehow I do not see this as advantageous to the customer, who could opt for a lesser equipped LX model if interested in saving money.
If you look at the Honda Accord line-up, the EX V6 model comes standard with just about every feature, including heated leather seats, ABS, sunroof, 6 air bags, and a 6 CD in dash changer.

maltb · May 2003

it may be advantageous to compare what it costs to get a similarly equipped vehicle from any manufacturer. Grade designations mean nothing.

p100 · May 2003

Apparently Mazda learned their lesson here because the 626 replacement ( Mazda 6) has ABS and traction control as standard equipment and they finally got away from that pesky timing belt and went with the timing chain (at least that is what I heard). And they greatly improved the suspension and probably used better components.

BTW, a fully loaded 2002 626 ES V6 MSRP was just about the same as that of 2003 Honda Accord EX V6 - about $ 26K. This comparison will not be applicable when you compare the resale value - Mazda will bring about $ 4 K less after three years. I do not know about the resale value of Mazda 6, but a fully loaded 2003 V6 model does retail for around $ 26K also. And you do not get a 240 HP engine with it.

windowphobe6 · May 2003

Like in the Accord, for instance?

p100 · May 2003

Yes, Accord still uses a timing belt for some reason, but at least the replacement interval is 105K miles, not 60k.

qbrozen · May 2003

MSRPs may have been close, but actual street prices were quite a different story. If you caught it at the right time, the 626 could be had for substantial discounts, many times below invoice. Definitely can't say the same for the Accord, especially the V6. So, in reality, you're probably looking at more like a couple thousand better resale with the Honda.

maltb · May 2003

I do not know about the resale value of Mazda 6, but a fully loaded 2003 V6 model does retail for around $ 26K also. And you do not get a 240 HP engine with it.

Nope, but you get 220hp in a chassis that is much more fun to drive. Every vehicle will have its trade-off. Personally, I like 160 ponies in the most balanced FWD car I've ever driven.

slickdog · May 2003

I'm not going to swap my timing belts at 60K. My manual says 105K, so I'll probably replace them before 100K, but certainly not at 60K. From what I can gather the 2.5 is a non-interference engine, so I won't be risking engine damage, just failure. Not sure I'll have the car that long anyway, as I'm only putting about 10-12K a year on it at this point.

I'd also like to add that aside from the significant maintenance cost of replacing them (if you don't do it yourself), timing chains actually have some advantages over chains. They're cheaper, quieter, don't stretch, and don't require any lubrication.

p100 · May 2003

You mean timing BELTS actually have some advantages over chains.

They are cheaper to make, but not necessarily cheaper to buy for all makes and models. I bought a timing chain and sprocket set for a V8 American car for $ 26 vs $ 72 for a Mazda 626 V6 timing belt without cam sprockets. True, timing belts do not require lubrication, but if your cam sprocket seals or the front crankshaft seal start leaking, you can loose your belt prematurely if it gets soaked in hot oil.

One good thing about timing chains is that if they stretch too far, they usually jump a tooth or two on one of the sprockets, but they will rarely break or fly off. On the other hand, belts can break unexpectedly and cause thousands of dollars worth of damage to valves and pistons in interference engines (e.g. 95 Nissan Truck V6).

As far as quietness is concerned, I have dual timing chains on the 98 Maxima and overall this engine is much quieter than the 626 engine, which has a single timing belt.

maltb · May 2003

wow, Mazda's MSRP for that belt is $60. Of course, if you compare it to your Maxima with its 3 chains (about $175 MSRP) it's a different story than a timing set for a small block Chevy that can be had for $26 at your local 7-11 in the mid-west.

maxx4me · May 2003

geez, I hope parts for my future Malibu Maxx won't be found at the 7-11!!! Apu, give me a tranny and a squishy!

p100 · May 2003

Now that this profound exchange of opinions is over, can we talk about something useful? Other than 7-11 car parts stores? Something that other readers can benefit from? Incidentally, the $ 26 timing chain/gear set was for a '67 big block Ford 390. And the set was US made too!

Here is a good topic: how to keep the polished clear coated factory Mazda alloy wheels from pitting. Some suggestions:

1. When you have your wheels balanced, ask them to tape the centering cone or use a plastic washer of some type to prevent scratching the clearcoat from the edge of the center hole. some places may use a flange adaptor (a rare occurrence), which centers the wheel by the lug holes so there is not need to worry about damaging the clearcoat. If they damage the clearcoat, buy some clear spray paint and apply the paint with a brush around the edges of the hole. This will prevent moisture from getting under the clearcoat, which causes rapid formation of aluminum oxide under the clearcoat and ugly veins of corrosion under the clearcoat that quickly radiate outwards.

2. Always insist that they use coated wheel weights, such as polyester coated, on these wheels. It is important too that they use the correct weights. Some places use universal alloy wheel uncoated weights and these will damage your clearcoat and cause corrosion behind the wheel weight. I know, because the local Mazda dealer used these on my wheels once and they nicked the clearcoat in each case. When I asked why they do not use the proper weights, I was told that the tires should be balanced every 5K miles and therefore the weights do not stay on long enough to cause corrosion. What a lame excuse for being cheap. I do not know many people who rebalance their wheels every 5K miles, especially at $ 10 a wheel.

3. Keep your wheels clean and wax often. These wheels are extremely impractical as far as corrosion resistance goes. Silver painted rough cast wheels are the best and do not cause the headaches these polished clearcoated wheels do.

4. Insist that they torque your lug nuts to proper specifications after the wheels have been removed and reinstalled. Removing the lug nuts with an impact wrench is OK if you use a deep socket, but impact wrenches should not be used on locking lug nuts. If you use a shallow socket (as one character used on my old Mazda years ago) you will pock mark every aluminum skin coverd lug nut. These lug nuts cost $ 5 a piece to replace from the Mazda dealer. Periodic retorquing of your lug nuts is recommended on alloy wheels. I do it about every 5K miles. I use about 85-90 ft-lbs torque for these.

lpearce1 · May 2003

Just bought a 98 626 2.0 - is the 2.0 a non interferance motor? ? ? ...but bottom line, CHAINS are better!!! I have NEVER replaced one, older Celicas had 'em, took one over 200k on original - rusted out first. Take ny chances on the belt. And please use hisitation when comparing a Maxima here, differnt league, maybe compare a pre-redesigned Altima. And Accords? The resale value is a wash CAUSE YOU CAN NEVER GET A GOOD DEAL ON ONE! ...snobby dealers too, hate 'em.

I was laid off and my 02 Max SE 6spd was REPOED! Arrgghhh! Anywho, face it chains are more reliable and more durable, I doubt Mazda switched to Chains 'cause they suck, and the labor is what kills ya, not so much the price, huh? who cares about noise if thay insulate well (like on the Max)

lpearce1 · May 2003

Sorry to dbl post, Maxda-Ford musta over invested in .coms, oh, wrong subject. It's all marketing crap, many models probably came through with those options at discounted prices anyway. (It's like buying that $8k Huyndai that doesn't exist cause they ship 'em with options anyway that makes 'em $10k).

Guys, I think the emergency trunk release was a Federally mandated thing for all cars, so at least pick on them for things in their control.

p100, hey Neon got a bad rap on the head gasgets. Only early models had this, and it was a vendor provided poor material. A different gasget fixed this permanently -(not every 45k) I had an 00 Neon I beat the snot out of, drove to CA and PA back twice, never an issue at 45k when I dumped it. So a cheap priced Neon 96 and after is a good buy. ...and take me along for BEERS! heh heh!

carguy58 · May 2003

Depends what dealer you go to. I've been to a Honda dealer once to look at the previous generation Accord Coupe. The salesman was really nice. I bought the Acura CL though instead.

As far as discounts and resale. Thats about even. Cars like Mazda Protege or a Chrysler Sebring are selling well below invoice. A Honda Accord or a VW Jetta are not discounted at all. Its all about supply and demand. I can't believe Misubishi is selling a car for MSRP now: the EVO. If you told me Mitsu was going to sell a car for MSRP a few months ago I would be speechless.

maltb · May 2003

the prices I posted were fact...your belief that a 390 timing chain has any comparison to any motor built today was opinion.

maxx4me · May 2003

Any 626 owners ever experience this: every time I get in my car, I never know which 626 I am going to drive with the turn of the ignition. The car seems to have a mind of its own. On one drive, I might have a zoom zoom automobile, which does what I ask when I step on the gas; another turn of the key, and its like I'm driving something totally different, with the engine ignoring my need for speed. I've chalked it up to all the crap Ford parts in the car not playing well with one another. On the day when the Malibu Maxx comes in and it is time to get rid of this psychotic car, it will be interesting to see which car I give away: the one I'll cry over; missing the comfortable driving position and fun cornering; or the one which I will personally launch off a cliff, watching with pleasure as it incinerates on the rocks below.

p100 · May 2003

Opinion? There are thousands of push rod V8 engines made by GM for their trucks and SUVs today and they all use timing chains. Also, boat industry uses GM blocks for their sterndrive and inboard engines, and they all have timing chains. And they are very similar to that of the 390 Ford engine because the cam location in the block is identical. The timing chains for the overhead cam engines are longer, and probably more expensive, and that's about it. Are you telling me they make these chains of some exotic materials these days?

maltb · May 2003

Exotic materials...

I don't know, but since you brought your Maxima into the equation, maybe you can tell me why it has 2 chains (between cams) shorter than your 390 yet cost $64 each.

When talking about the expense of chain drive, don't forget to factor in tensioners/guides on an OHC engine like your Max that run over $200 themselves.

BTW, got any idea how much a timing set for a current (<2000) small block is? I don't have that info handy.

newcar31 · May 2003

"Are you telling me they make these chains of some exotic materials these days?"

Don't know about the chains, but I do know that GM is using some sort of diamond coating on their chain sprockets on their new I6.

slickdog · May 2003

My comparison between timing belts/chains was generic, not specific to the 626, Maxima or any other car. Yes, one car's timing chain(s)/sprocket set can certainly be cheaper than another car's timing belt(s), but variations in supply and demand probably explain the difference in most cases. I'm sure that many of the parts in a 626 are more expensive than those in similar vehicles which are produced in larger numbers.

Furthermore, I wasn't really saying that belts are better than chains, just trying to point out that there are *some* valid reasons for using them. Seems like many folks don't understand why a manufacturer would even consider putting timing belts in their engines. Would I rather have timing chains? Absolutely. Did I know the 626 had belts? You bet, and I purchased it anyway. You really shouldn't single out Mazda for criticism over using belts either - MANY other manufacturers have in the past, and some still do.

p100 · May 2003

VW still uses a timing belt in their latest 1.9 liter TDI turbo diesel engine. Breaking a belt on a diesel practically guarantees severe engine damage. Mercedes Benz has been using chains in their diesels for decades. The best and most trouble free set up I have seen is on some diesel engines. I owned an 82 Datsun pickup with a diesel engine. It did not use either a belt or a chain. Instead, cam was driven by a cam gear meshing with the crankshaft drive gear and the injection pump drive gear. The same set-up is used on large diesel engines(e.g. 2.5 ton Army truck 472 cu in Hercules multifuel diesel). No maintenance required. This type of arrangement does not work with overhead cam diesels, such as Mercedes Benz diesels for obvious reasons (crankshaft is too far away from the cam),so this is why MB uses a chain.

Mazda 626

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles