This is quite correct.

Dear old VAG (UK) have shot themselves in the foot by starting the myth of a 4 year life for their cambelts in a bit to claw back servicing revenue lost by VAG (D)'s adoption of variable servicing intervals using high spec oils.

Nowhere else in the world to my knowledge has this 4 year interval been advised - my own VAG vehicle came with a scruffy typewritten slip to this effect (+ dire warnings from the supplying dealer) whilst the servicing booklet supplied with the vehicle stipulated no time limit whatever and a perfectly reasonable mileage duration. (Now forgotten).

A scam.

Close examination of the parts I removed from my PD engine at 5 years/60k miles showed them to be servicable for a much longer period - as suggested in the data supplied by the vehicle maker rather than by its importer.

Times are moving on, and it would be interesting to see if VAG (UK) are still peddling this myth or have realised just how uncompetitive their engines become in terms of ownership cost if their "recommendations" are adopted. Two VAG diesels in the family cost about £200 pa in belt "charges" if you follow their advice.

As far as the original poster's questions are concerned, VAG's record of long term survival of chain drives has been truly abysmal for some owners, so it could be wholly incorrect to assume that a chain driven engine supplied by them will be a cheaper proposition to own.

The increasing use of electrical actuators mounted on diesel engines gives me more cause for concern, including the use of gear-stripping self-digesting intake flaps, cooked turbocharger vane control actuators, indifferent piezo injectors etc. An over complex emissions control system including valving in the exhaust system (madness) and multiple EGR systems completes the recipe for long term misery.

Compared with that lot, the humble timing belt is a problem down in the noise.

659.

How many of those miles were on Direct Injection petrols?

I've never known anyone personally suffer any of the supposedly endemic diesel failures (turbo, piezo injectors, HP fuel pump, DMF, DPF failing to regenerate etc.) it doesn't mean that those problems don't exist.

As an occassional Briskoda contributor I am amused at the number of diesel drivers who find it necessary to "soup up" der diesels.

This could have some bearing on engine reliability & longivity.

I am currently having "issues" with the DSG as fitted to our Skoda, being resolved under warrenty.

But I knew when I made the choice that this gearbox technology was still "cutting edge", and possibly subject to teething problems.

I also reckon in a few years such technology will be commonplace/standard.

I do also feel that HJ has a "bee in his bonnet" about diesel problems and more than a wee bit of an anti VW skew forby.

Plus just possibly a bias in favour of Ford?

Plus the constant twaddle about the benefits of overpriced "Premium " diesel over supermarket rubbish.

Pah!

All from a totally unbiased fan of German diesel engineering you understand.

Edited by dieseldogg on 22/02/2012 at 09:07

Everyone's opinion is prejudiced (mine included). HJ does dispense odd advice regarding the frequency of oil changes and the use of branded fuels which don't really stand up to objective scrutiny.

There are people whose car usage pattern does not merit diesel-and they should stick to petrol. But the hysteria regarding DMF/DPF/swirl flap failure failure is out of proportion to the scale of the problem.

Absolutely right. Most of the people I know are diesel drivers who do fairly high mileage including myself. IMHO the people who spread the myth of diesel unreliability are those that buy diesels, hardly ever use the motorways and potter around the shops at tickover or sub 1800 RPM and then wonder why their cars always seem a bit flakey. From my days as a teenager working on the farm it has always been a fact that diesels are like the human body, the more hard exercise the better..