Who Approved This and Why Is It Still Being Made? Wet Belt aka Belt in Oil Engines

Something that’s very important when it comes to rubber timing belts and that was beaten into the heads of mechanics, diyers and even consumers when belts started becoming widespread was that rubber belts must not be contaminated with engine oil. Oil will cause the rubber to swell up, delaminate, and crack which leads to premature belt failure. And belt failure results in catastrophic engine damage because it leads to a loss of timing synchronization between the camshaft and the crankshaft which means that the piston will hit and bend the valve on interference engines which requires an engine rebuild.

This means that if you accidentally spill a significant amount of oil on your belt you should replace your belt. If you detect an oil leak that was also exposing the belt to oil…you should fix that leak and replace your belt.

So after 40 years of being taught that oil and timing belts don’t mix almost everyone was surprised when Ford in late 2007 introduced an engine where the belt was exposed to engine oil ALL the time. Heck it wasn’t just exposed, part of it was actually submerged in engine oil.

The engine in question is the Ford 1.8 tdci diesel engine. Before late 2007 the engine timing system consisted of a timing chain running from the crankshaft to the high-pressure diesel injection pump and a dry rubber timing belt running from the fuel pump to the camshaft. In late 2007 the timing chain was replaced with a rubber timing belt that was exposed to oil just like the timing chain was.

But here’s the interesting thing, Ford did not only submerge the timing belt into something that was called a contaminant for 40 years it even increased the service interval because according to Ford the submersion of the belt in oil reduces belt wear. The dry belt was given a service interval of 160.000 km or 5 years whereas the wet belt was given a service interval of 200.000 or 10 years because according to Ford the wet belt benefited from additional lubrication. So before when you spilled oil on the belt the belt was considered contaminated, now the contaminant was considered a lubricant. Understandably many mechanics, engineers, journalists, and other members of the general public with a pinch of common sense and a basic understanding of physics and chemistry thought that Ford’s belt in oil system was a bad idea.

In 2012 it became evident that Ford considered the new wet belt technology a success and a good idea because it was also introduced in the new 1.0 three-cylinder turbocharged EcoBoost engine which soon spread to the majority of models in Ford’s fleet. Other European manufacturers also considered Ford’s approach a success and a good idea because they started introducing it very soon after Ford. Renault was an early adopter of this technology as early as 2008 with their 1.5 DCI diesel engines. Wolkwagen put wet belts on their 1.5 tsi turbo petrol around 2010. Opel and Vauxhall did it on their 1.2 and 1.5 turbo petrol models around the same time. Peugeot also joined in with their 1.2 pure-tech 3-cylinder turbo petrol around 2013. It seems that everyone was after that 1% fuel savings.

But today in 2024 we have more than enough data and reports to say with great certainty that wet belts are a stupid idea. Just like many mechanics, engineers, journalists, and other members of the general public with a pinch of common sense and a basic understanding of physics and chemistry claimed when the technology was first introduced.

Wet timing belts have led to a great number of premature belt failures which have led to catastrophic engine failures costing owners thousands of euros. The vast majority of wet belts never made it anywhere near the recommended service interval of 200.000 km an above. Most required replacement at half that and there are reports of belts that have failed even before the vehicle reached 100.000 kilometers. But wait, we must not forget the 1% fuel savings!. The average European covers 13.000 kilometers with their vehicle every year. If we take the average fuel consumption to be 6.5 liters per 100 kilometers this gives us an annual fuel consumption of 845 liters and an annual cost of fuel of 1.521 EUROS. 1% of that is 15.2. This is how much money a wet belt saves the consumer every year. 15.2 Euros per year in exchange for the financial as well as environmental burden of thousands of prematurely failed engines

A special thank you to my patrons:
Daniel
Pepe
Brian Alvarez
Peter Della Flora
Dave Westwood
Joe C
Zwoa Meda Beda
Toma Marini
Cole Philips

#d4a #ecoboost #puretech

[cameron]

BMW also earns extra points for making timing chains that fail before timing belts.

[Isthatyoudermot]

But, a snapped belt means 100% fuel savings and a 100% silent engine.
Now, where did I leave my carbon fiber submersible? 😂

[GuagoFruit]

Engineer: uhhh wet belt would break down so much quicker
Exec: yeah but it saves $10 per engine and makes us even more money per failure *fires engineer*

[icarossavvides]

I've worked in the automotive industry and you're correct, everything and that IS everything is driven by profit! I've been in meetings where a known problem is being discussed and the conclusion has been to leave it alone, fight any warranty claims and, if compensation is paid out it's still cheaper than a production line change.

[mdude]

The continued use of wet belts despite the known drawbacks only reinforces the
belief that modern cars are not being built for long-term reliability.

Awesome job on this video. 👏👏👏

[Bapate-rhbe]

Polymer scientist here: All polymers have in common, that chemical, mechanical and thermal loading/aging are not independent but reinforce each other, leading to drastically accelerated aging/failure. It is not completely impossible to develop a wet timing belt, but: The materials used would be drastically more expensive and development and accurate lifetime predictions would be extremely complicated.

[alphadiallo]

Most people choose their cars by liking the headlights and grill. Good Content

[RobertMcGahan-rh]

The engine in my 1943 Farmall tractor has timing gears and has been running reliably for 81 years. Yeah, maybe could use a ring job, but still basically bulletproof.

[olegpisarenkov]

I never understand exactly what I like the most in this channel... Now I realized - it is the philosophical background! "Humanity uses technologies to make problems instead of solving problems..." - well spotted!

[andrewmasto]

I owned an engine machine shop in California - lots of BMWs. I love them! Made a TON of money on BMW. When the belt or chain fails on a normal engine, the valves hit the piston (some "non-interference" engines don't, but most do), the valve is bent and the valve guides are ruined. So you cut out the valves, remove and replace the guides, hone them to fit do the other normal machine work ( machine the valve seats that are serviceable, replace seats that were damaged, deck the head, etc) and then it's good as new. With a BMW, the piston hits the valve and it breaks the overhead cam saddles right out of the head castings! We had tooling (custom designed and made) that allowed us to weld up the heads to form new saddles, which we would then re-machine. It was still cheaper for the Customer than buying a new head from BMW, and our head was stronger. The Customer gets back on the road with a lower cost, and I make money. It was so lucrative that I kept various BMW heads rebuilt and ready to go on the shelf. There was always demand! The workmanship from BMW was beautiful... but the engineering wasn't.

[NelsonKNelson]

"I'm a fan of objectivity and rationality." A-effing-men, brother, speak it! This is the best-explained, best-reasoned takedown of the industry's painfully obvious wet belt scam. Absolutely beautiful.

[joellamoureux]

I am a mechanic. I WILL NOT OWN A BELT driven This video is extremely informative. Thank you sir. Everyone needs to see this.

[Bravolvi]

I'm from Brazil, Yes we have middle age problems AND wet belts. I always recommend people to ask before purchasing a new car, if it has wet belt don't go any further. But most of people just choose cars by their design and comfort items

[SmileyTom]

As an ex-ford tech, we replaced quite a few transit custom engines due to wet belt failure at around 180k kms, pretty consistently. They would just rip teeth off the belt.

[elektro]

I'm am an automotive metallurgical engineer and a lot of my work engine R&D including both the specification side and the wear and failure analysis side. I have never witnessed a conversation that involved intentionally reducing the service life or reliability of any engine component, but I have been part of many conversations where my push (or the powertrain engineers' push) for more durable or reliable components got shot down on cost limitations. Management ALWAYS asks for more reliable engines, but they often set cost as a higher priority, and they almost always set fuel efficiency and emissions as the top priorities. Yes, the customer wants to pay for a reliable engine, but governments are forcing us to shave every tenth of a percent on both fuel efficiency and emissions. Automakers get fined hundreds of millions of dollars for selling customers the powerful, reliable engines they want instead of the 1% cleaner, 1% more efficient engines that sacrifice everything the customers want.

[einoware]

It is hilarious how Ford now makes 1.0L Ecoboost with a timing chain but it still has a wet rubber belt for the oil pump.

[Hydrogenblonde]

That one percent fuel saving would go straight out the window as soon as the engine goes into rich mode because of engine knock.
So Infact there is no saving at all, just more expense.
I must say this channel is one of the best, if not the best automotive channel on YouTube. Great work.

[jonathonspears]

I work in the auto industry and can 100% tell you, this sort of thing is absolutely intentional. If they could get away with it, they would make them even worse so they could make money. As long as it survives the warranty duration, that is all they care about. Anything after that is profit.

[hakjobtm]

The enshittification. It's bad, they know it's bad, they know we know it's bad, but they'll keep making things worse because they 'know better.'

[anthonymoore]

We had a Ford Ecosport fail the wet belt at 19, 000 miles. Fully Dealer serviced and under warranty. Service manager accidently slipped and said, "Oh, we have had a few of these this year"! We shopped for another vehicle without a wet belt!