# Does a 1.4t use a timing chain or belt?



## radlynx (Jan 4, 2007)

Just curious about this since I plan to get a Jetta soon.


----------



## Poetic50 (Feb 17, 2017)

Belt


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## radlynx (Jan 4, 2007)

I'm contemplating on getting a Jetta with 1.4t with timing belt or an egolf. 

I always keep my car as long as I can and don't want to replace the belt every 60000 miles. 

With the egolf,. I don't have to do that. I'll save a lot on maintenance plus consumption. I only plan to use it for work or short distance driving.

Currently, my Jetta 1.8t has 200000 miles on it and soon will be handed over to my daughter. 

What do you think?


----------



## Romanov (Feb 4, 2018)

The good thing about the 1.4 is the timing belt is cake to replace, the cover is easy to remove and the belt is easily accessible. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ViewlessSquid (Mar 22, 2017)

radlynx said:


> I'm contemplating on getting a Jetta with 1.4t with timing belt or an egolf.
> 
> I always keep my car as long as I can and don't want to replace the belt every 60000 miles.
> 
> ...


The belt on the 1.4T is good to 105k. So you won’t be replacing it that frequently. Also, unless you do a lot of driving, it will take quite a few years for you to break even with the electric over gas. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## radlynx (Jan 4, 2007)

Romanov said:


> The good thing about the 1.4 is the timing belt is cake to replace, the cover is easy to remove and the belt is easily accessible.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's great to know. Thank you. What's your mpg?


----------



## radlynx (Jan 4, 2007)

ViewlessSquid said:


> The belt on the 1.4T is good to 105k. So you won’t be replacing it that frequently. Also, unless you do a lot of driving, it will take quite a few years for you to break even with the electric over gas.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's a good point.


----------



## Romanov (Feb 4, 2018)

radlynx said:


> That's great to know. Thank you. What's your mpg?


I’ve gotten as high as 50 mpg on highway with flat surfaces and low traffic. On average 39-44mpg. City ehh ranges from 25-33 mpg. There’s a lot of hills/inclines where I live and the mpg on these 1.4s quickly go to crap soon as you hit any incline. I use premium 93 in it not sure how much of a factor that is. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ViewlessSquid (Mar 22, 2017)

Romanov said:


> I’ve gotten as high as 50 mpg on highway with flat surfaces and low traffic. On average 39-44mpg. City ehh ranges from 25-33 mpg. There’s a lot of hills/inclines where I live and the mpg on these 1.4s quickly go to crap soon as you hit any incline. I use premium 93 in it not sure how much of a factor that is.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Using 93 in the 1.4T is a waste of money. The car isn’t setup from the factory to benefit from the higher octane. 87 is good enough unless you’re tuned. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Romanov (Feb 4, 2018)

ViewlessSquid said:


> Using 93 in the 1.4T is a waste of money. The car isn’t setup from the factor to benefit from the higher octane. 87 is good enough unless you’re tuned.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The car DOES benefit from the higher octane, even VW says this. Yes it’ll run “just fine” on 87 due to retarded timing and less hp. With the compression and turbo id rather not risk it. I had a stage 1+ tune on it for a while which required 93 octane anyway. Took the tune off for the winter. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Encinoman45 (Jan 13, 2018)

ViewlessSquid said:


> The belt on the 1.4T is good to 105k. So you won’t be replacing it that frequently. Also, unless you do a lot of driving, it will take quite a few years for you to break even with the electric over gas.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Could you double check this? I thought VW considers the 1.4tsi timing belt a lifetime part.


----------



## ViewlessSquid (Mar 22, 2017)

Encinoman45 said:


> Could you double check this? I thought VW considers the 1.4tsi timing belt a lifetime part.


I’ll take a picture of the maintenance book tomorrow. It’s not lifetime. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ViewlessSquid (Mar 22, 2017)

Romanov said:


> The car DOES benefit from the higher octane, even VW says this. Yes it’ll run “just fine” on 87 due to retarded timing and less hp. With the compression and turbo id rather not risk it. I had a stage 1+ tune on it for a while which required 93 octane anyway. Took the tune off for the winter.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Where does VW say this? I’ve read the owners manual a few times, and no where did it ever say to run 93 for the 1.4T to get more power. That was a bonus for the 2.0T GLI to get the 210 ponies, but not the 150hp 1.4T econo car. I’ve ran both 93 and 87 and have not gotten a mileage difference, nor felt a moment where 93 was definitely propelling me past cars. 

Show me a service notice, or where it says 93 octane for added performance and I’ll take back what I said. But using 93 in an econo car is a waste of money. Even Mazda that has even higher compression motors use 87 is most cases except the 2.5T motor. I didn’t design the motor, I don’t know more than the engineers, and if they say 87 is fine, I’m running 87. If the motors start tanking because people were suppose to run 93, there will be a massive lawsuit. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Romanov (Feb 4, 2018)

ViewlessSquid said:


> Where does VW say this? I’ve read the owners manual a few times, and no where did it ever say to run 93 for the 1.4T to get more power. That was a bonus for the 2.0T GLI to get the 210 ponies, but not the 150hp 1.4T econo car. I’ve ran both 93 and 87 and have not gotten a mileage difference, nor felt a moment where 93 was definitely propelling me past cars.
> 
> Show me a service notice, or where it says 93 octane for added performance and I’ll take back what I said. But using 93 in an econo car is a waste of money. Even Mazda that has even higher compression motors use 87 is most cases except the 2.5T motor. I didn’t design the motor, I don’t know more than the engineers, and if they say 87 is fine, I’m running 87. If the motors start tanking because people were suppose to run 93, there will be a massive lawsuit.
> 
> ...


It’s a fine print thing when they advertise cars power and mpgs. Literally says something along the lines of 
*power figures achieved using premium fuel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Romanov (Feb 4, 2018)

Off VW website. Any official quotes regarding the power figures of the engine will say “achieved using premium fuel” for vw models. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cherb32 (Jun 18, 2006)

Romanov said:


> Off VW website. Any official quotes regarding the power figures of the engine will say “achieved using premium fuel” for vw models.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


This.
Even the service manual has figures for only 91 oct (95 RON) for the 1.4T...and it says "at least" therefore at a minimum, 91 should be used. 91 is also written as a recommendation behind the gas door.

Sent from my Samsung Note 8 using Tapatalk


----------



## Encinoman45 (Jan 13, 2018)

Thats strange. My 2017 1.4 Jetta has a label inside the fuel cap that recommends 87 octane, which is all I have used with no issue. The owners manual says "The recommended gasoline octane rating for your engine is listed on a label inside of the fuel filler flap."


----------



## Cherb32 (Jun 18, 2006)

That is odd. Although this is what I see in my manual


----------



## Romanov (Feb 4, 2018)

To make a conclusion to all this YES you can run 87 in these engines and it will probably be fine. However, it won’t be at full potential power due to slightly retarded timing. 87 octane however has more potential for predetonation which i wish to avoid. It really comes down to preference for the most part. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Greasymechtech (Jul 20, 2019)

https://postimg.cc/CRFwfCYq

[https://postimg.cc/gxf4TsJw


2019+ is a little differnent than earlier 1.4T. Above is snapshop from my owners manual for the 1.4t. Marketing dept has 2 or 3 different pn's for the 2019 owners manual and newer wording is different than older manuals to cater to the cheapskate walfart consumers of America. My 1.4t only gets premium 92-93 USA octane fuel always to enhance my engines performance. See above links. 

My 2019 1.4t has a lifetime timing belt. Consider changing it every 100k miles or 10yrs whichever comes 1st. I have no faith in automakers definition of lifetime.


----------



## Encinoman45 (Jan 13, 2018)

Cherb32 said:


> That is odd. Although this is what I see in my manual


That looks like a European manual. I believe they call for 95 Ron in Europe simply due to the fact it is what they consider "Regular", or the lowest octane available. According to the link below, most European pumps deliver 95 (RON) as "regular", which is likely why it is listed in the European manual as 95 Ron, while the USA market 1.4 specifies 87 octane, since that is what the USA pumps consider "regular".

https://www.pei.org/wiki/octane-number

"In most countries (including all of Europe and Australia) the "headline" octane rating, shown on the pump, is the RON, but in the United States, Canada and some other countries the headline number is the average of the RON and the MON, sometimes called the Anti-Knock Index (AKI), Road Octane Number (RdON), Pump Octane Number (PON), or (R+M)/2. Because of the 8 to 10 point difference noted above, the octane shown in the United States is 4 to 5 points lower than the same fuel elsewhere: 87 octane fuel, the "regular" gasoline in the US and Canada, is 91-92 in Europe. However most European pumps deliver 95 (RON) as "regular", equivalent to 90-91 US (R+M)/2, and some even deliver 98 (RON) or 100 (RON)."


----------



## ViewlessSquid (Mar 22, 2017)

Romanov said:


> Off VW website. Any official quotes regarding the power figures of the engine will say “achieved using premium fuel” for vw models.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That is related to a GLI which I stated already gets benefits from 93. But we’re talking about the 1.4T, an economy car that has no frills or whistles. My gas cap says 87aki which is 87 here in the US. 93 is a waste, you are not getting any more performance. If you run a tune, then run whatever they tuned the car for. Other than that, stop wasting money and get more stuff from the money you would be saving. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cherb32 (Jun 18, 2006)

Encinoman45 said:


> That looks like a European manual. I believe they call for 95 Ron in Europe simply due to the fact it is what they consider "Regular", or the lowest octane available. According to the link below, most European pumps deliver 95 (RON) as "regular", which is likely why it is listed in the European manual as 95 Ron, while the USA market 1.4 specifies 87 octane, since that is what the USA pumps consider "regular".
> 
> https://www.pei.org/wiki/octane-number
> 
> "In most countries (including all of Europe and Australia) the "headline" octane rating, shown on the pump, is the RON, but in the United States, Canada and some other countries the headline number is the average of the RON and the MON, sometimes called the Anti-Knock Index (AKI), Road Octane Number (RdON), Pump Octane Number (PON), or (R+M)/2. Because of the 8 to 10 point difference noted above, the octane shown in the United States is 4 to 5 points lower than the same fuel elsewhere: 87 octane fuel, the "regular" gasoline in the US and Canada, is 91-92 in Europe. However most European pumps deliver 95 (RON) as "regular", equivalent to 90-91 US (R+M)/2, and some even deliver 98 (RON) or 100 (RON)."


Ahh got it. I grabbed my 1.4t the fist year it came to the states and this manual was the only one on the market at the time.

Sent from my Samsung Note 8 using Tapatalk


----------



## umeng2002 (Jul 9, 2003)

Knock sensors don't prevent knock or pre-ignition, they only stop it after it already happens.

I run premium when I can. Definitely not "required."


----------

