3 ms·

The main reason why MB lasts so long is due to a single component in the engine, they still use a chain rather than a timing belt. This one little change has

The main reason why MB lasts so long is due to a single component in the engine, they still use a chain rather than a timing belt. This one little change has so much impact on the rest of the engine design that they tend to last very long compared to cars that have timing belts. No. Timing chain vs gear vs belt has little-to-no bearing on the longevity of an engine. You can, for instance, build an engine with a timing chain that's prone prone to catastrophic failure of the timing components. Mercedes has done it twice so far with the M116 and the M272/M273. Suddenly a whole pile of stuff is happening inside the engine enclosure instead of outside of it reducing the number of seals and in general reducing complexity outside of the engine core. It also reduces the need for complex service. Tell that to anyone who's had a Ford with the Duratec or EcoBoost and an internal water pump.

jacquesm 4y ago
So 'yes' except for some exceptions that prove the rule.
- inferiorhuman 4y ago
  So, no. GM's put out a fair number of stinkers including the Ecotec and the High Feature V6. Chrysler actually recalled their late 00s Hemi engines over timing chain problems. The previous owner of my E39 had to tear the whole engine apart because the timing chain guides failed (as they pretty much all do). BMW's later N20, N47, and N57(N) engines are also well known for timing chain problems. VW/Audi had plenty of timing chain issues with both the 1.8T and 2.0T. Let's not forget Audi's famous rear mounted V8 monstrosity. Jaguar's AJ8 was legendary for timing chain problems in its first few years. Nissan's had trouble over the years with the chains on both the V6 and 4 bangers… Meanwhile people put hundreds of thousands of miles on Volvo's old four cylinder with a… timing belt which takes all of thirty minutes to replace. Chains vs gears vs belts has no bearing on longevity. The big difference is that chains are smaller and when you need to work on a chain it's generally far, far more complex than a belt drive. Don't forget that engines like the Ecotec, EcoBoost, M272, N20, and 2.0T are basically the bread and butter of those companies. They are high volume mass market engines. Mercedes tend to last a long time because they're expensive, people pay to repair and maintain them, and nearly any Mercedes part for any Mercedes car can still be purchased new.
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    You're welcome to your opinion, of course. Volvo has an excellent reputation. BMW not so much regardless of how they are constructed, Chrysler (at least the ones that I've had when I was in Canada) never impressed me from a technological point of view and it was in the shop quite frequently. And MB fields cars year-after-year that clock up 300K+ to the point that it isn't even something exceptional and as a rule with the original engine. As for repair and maintenance: that's a nice bit of circular reasoning, the reason those parts can still be bought new is because there is still demand for them: the cars are still running. When you start looking for cars that are 15 years and older (which is my bracket in NL) there really are only two brands that stand out: Volvo and MB. The rest are lucky accidents and this is reflected in the state of the rest of the cars as well. But as a rule car engines will fail well before the body does and with MB (and Volvo) it tends to be the other way around.

jacquesm 4y ago

So 'yes' except for some exceptions that prove the rule.

inferiorhuman 4y ago
So, no. GM's put out a fair number of stinkers including the Ecotec and the High Feature V6. Chrysler actually recalled their late 00s Hemi engines over timing chain problems. The previous owner of my E39 had to tear the whole engine apart because the timing chain guides failed (as they pretty much all do). BMW's later N20, N47, and N57(N) engines are also well known for timing chain problems. VW/Audi had plenty of timing chain issues with both the 1.8T and 2.0T. Let's not forget Audi's famous rear mounted V8 monstrosity. Jaguar's AJ8 was legendary for timing chain problems in its first few years. Nissan's had trouble over the years with the chains on both the V6 and 4 bangers… Meanwhile people put hundreds of thousands of miles on Volvo's old four cylinder with a… timing belt which takes all of thirty minutes to replace. Chains vs gears vs belts has no bearing on longevity. The big difference is that chains are smaller and when you need to work on a chain it's generally far, far more complex than a belt drive. Don't forget that engines like the Ecotec, EcoBoost, M272, N20, and 2.0T are basically the bread and butter of those companies. They are high volume mass market engines. Mercedes tend to last a long time because they're expensive, people pay to repair and maintain them, and nearly any Mercedes part for any Mercedes car can still be purchased new.
- jacquesm 4y ago
  You're welcome to your opinion, of course. Volvo has an excellent reputation. BMW not so much regardless of how they are constructed, Chrysler (at least the ones that I've had when I was in Canada) never impressed me from a technological point of view and it was in the shop quite frequently. And MB fields cars year-after-year that clock up 300K+ to the point that it isn't even something exceptional and as a rule with the original engine. As for repair and maintenance: that's a nice bit of circular reasoning, the reason those parts can still be bought new is because there is still demand for them: the cars are still running. When you start looking for cars that are 15 years and older (which is my bracket in NL) there really are only two brands that stand out: Volvo and MB. The rest are lucky accidents and this is reflected in the state of the rest of the cars as well. But as a rule car engines will fail well before the body does and with MB (and Volvo) it tends to be the other way around.