Timing Belt or Timing Chain??

Chains are the way to go. Belts give no warning but chains rattle when worn and they can last the life of the engine.

Full_of_Regrets-. OK, but, the timing belt is more easily replaced and there's a stated interval , like 90 to 105,000 miles depending upon car... If the chain failure occurs, isn't it a much bigger deal?

You probably would never need to replace the chain even if you go over 200k miles, I have gone well of 300,000 miles with no issues other than a little rattling. Chains will likely give you ample warning before failing but the engine damage if any would be the same as a belt.

Full_of_Regrets - thanks, the ONLY reason I asked is that a number of recent HONDA CRVs have had chain failures and the results are devastating. I agree that CHAINS if engineered properly should last the lifetime of the car.... But, the older I get I keep asking whose lifetime are we talking about, LOL. ???

If an engine is interference then you will have a lot of damage when the belt/chain fails. Why does the CRV chain break?

See this, https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/Discussion-c3861_ds435270

https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/Discussion-c3861_ds435270

The only real reason for car makers to us belts instead of chains is cost. Chins cost more then belts. Belts are suppose to be quieter then chains. Doubt if the majority of people would be able to hear the difference since the sound difference is so insignificant. It was only until the 1990s when smaller engined were introduced that the belt was used instead of a chain. The smaller engines with lower HP worked well with a belt. The previous larger V-8s would tare up a belt. I will pick a chain over the belt always especially if you intend to keep the vehicle well over 100K miles. Also Honda engines don't have ZERO Clearance engines so if the belt breaks while the engine is running the chances are several vital internal engine parts will be ruined. Toyota engines had ZERO Clearance engines so even if the rare occasion of the chain breaking does occur the engine will merely stop running w/o damage to any internal parts such as pistons or valves. You would be far better off buying a vehicle which uses a timing chain.

I always would like to buy a car with a timing chain as it last the life of the engine. there is a lot of information out there that try to sell the idea using the belt is quieter etc. Have you ever notice the difference driving inside the car? I have not. Using the belt is a way for car companies make a few more dollars off you. Replacing the chain is not much more work than replacing the belt. I was a Licensed mechanic before and did my share of replacing these items.

Agree - you might hear the difference at idle but that is it.

MarkW, I believe replacing a timing chain takes about the same amount of time as replacing a timing belt.

Timing chains typically do not break like belts which in some cases may destroy the engine. However chains can stretch with age. Given a choice, I will go with a chain and avoid the 100K mile repair shop bill and of course avoid major engine damage as the car ages.

Keeping your oil clean will extend the life of a chain. Chains have hundreds of little parts and tiny bits of wear add up to a stretched chain.