Toyota DD: Valve adjustments, really?

DD is a '05 Scion xB. The book calls for a valve inspection and adjustment every 30k. I didn't do it at 30k (bought the car at 22k).

I looked at the procedure in the service manual. While the inspection procedure is relatively straightforward, I feel the adjustment (removing timing chain and cams, mic'ing and replacing shims) is really something I'm not comfortable tackling.

But really, how necessary is a valve inspection/adjustment every 30k? By contrast, my co-worker bought his '99 Tacoma V-6 new in 1998. At 180k (and my insistence) he finally had the timing belt changed. The cam covers have never been off. The truck runs swell.

Does one really need to inspect and adjust valves every 30k, or is Toyota doing a CYA?

It's necessary on a motor with solid lifters, I remember it was required at 50k ish on my rsx-s

Check them. That part is pretty easy if you have any skills at all, and if they start to tighten up too much, get somebody to do it.

I've fixed rough idle problems on a ton of vehicles over the years with a valve adjustment- latest being a fairly new (in my opinion) but higher mileage Acura MDX.

Needs to be done, but not that often. Almost all high milage yotas have valve clatter.

My mothers vibe thingy has had synthetic since new, and now at 140,000 miles I really think it needs an adjustment soon. Problem being I don't want to "borrow" the car for a weekend to do it myself, I also don't want it to turn into "new guides, water pump etc." While your in there.

Garages quote 700+ for an adjustment... Measuring then ordering shims can be tedious, and they are too expensive to just buy all the sizes.

My opinion is to adjust every 70-80k. But hey, I don't honor your warranty.

That seems pretty ridiculous that Toyota would sell a "cheap" consumer car like that, which requires 30k valve adjustments.

My old R6 only required them every 25k miles and it turned 15,000 RPMs on a regular basis.

there are cars that still use solid lifters on non-high rpm engines?

Ford . with a similar setup on the Zetec, never mentioned checking/adjusting the valves, althought the manual does have a how too. In fact, they eliminated the shims and went with solid tappets. There were three different sizes as I remember. Mine went 75K miles without every doing anything. Wonder why Toyota is different.

I got about 200,000 miles on my old tacoma with the 2rz 4 banger before the valves got tight on it. It started missing at idle when warmed up. I have about the same mileage on my current tacoma with the 5vz v6 and just checked them the other day when i changed my leaky vc gaskets and they sere all within spec. Its hard to imagine needing to swap shims under 100k but if it gives you peace of mind buy a vc gasket and whip out the feeler gauges.

If you're so inclined, check them. I'd wager dollars to donuts they won't need adjusting at 30k, 60k, probably even 90k or 120k. Not a bad idea to keep an eye on them, though.

iceracer wrote: In fact, they eliminated the shims and went with solid tappets. There were three different sizes as I remember. Mine went 75K miles without every doing anything. Wonder why Toyota is different.

Toyota has done this on some of their motors. No shims, you have to change the lifters. My guess is that they do it for warranty reasons.

iceracer wrote: Ford . with a similar setup on the Zetec, never mentioned checking/adjusting the valves, althought the manual does have a how too. In fact, they eliminated the shims and went with solid tappets. There were three different sizes as I remember. Mine went 75K miles without every doing anything. Wonder why Toyota is different.

I think Ford is embarrassed by having solid lifters. The original Rangers, and even some of the first Aerostars, used the Cologne 2.8 V6. They needed valve adjustments just as often as every other Euro engine designed in the 60's, but nobody knew, and Ford certainly wouldn't tell. They got LOUD.

z31maniac wrote: That seems pretty ridiculous that Toyota would sell a "cheap" consumer car like that, which requires 30k valve adjustments.

There's a difference between "check every 30k and adjust if needed" and "requires 30k valve adjustments."

Checking them is way easier than actually tweaking them, but my money's on most of the time you check them after 30k you basically check them and then move on no adjusting needed. Still somewhat annoying, but not as bad as you portray.

"That seems pretty ridiculous that Toyota would sell a "cheap" consumer car like that...."

You just answered your own "question". Not using hydraulic valve actuators saves Toyota money on every engine built like that.

As far as Ford not mentioning the need to adjust the valves on it's "Cologne" V6s, Ford (and other manufacturers) have a bad "habit" of omitting needed maintenance from the schedules they provide in the owner's manual. I once owned a Pinto and a Ranger with the 2.3 and neither owner's manual "suggested" ever having the timing belt changed. I'm guessing that Ford figured the water pump would start to make noise and force you to replace it BEFORE the timing belt broke. My sister and brother both "lost" engines in their Escorts when the timing belt wasn't changed. Tho in Ford's defense, both cars "warned" their owners that the water pump was on it's last legs.

Yeah, 'checking' isn't that hard, just need a 'go/no go' feeler gauge set. One should be the minimum and one should be the maximum. If the minimum fits but the maximum doesn't you are golden. OTOH, if the minimum won't fit it's shimmin' time. Also, on bucket non hydraulic tappet OHC motors like that if you DON'T hear some valve noise now it's time to panic.

OBTW: the earliest Escort 1.6's had a 30k recommendation for TB replacement. I think the Pinto 2.0/2.3 had the same but the difference was the Pinto motors were not interference. In 1984 Ford stretched the TB interval on Escorts to 60k and made it a non interference as well. The earlier cars were coverd by (IIRC) the M10 program which would cover replacement of the engine if the belt let go before 30k. And they did on a rather regular basis!

The Lotus motor in my J-H has a 24k interval. It's interference as well and is damn 'spensive to replace valves in.

the Fiat 124 engine was one of the first production engines with a TB.. said interval was 25,000 miles.. it also has solid lifters with shims ontop.. usually would not need adjusting till around 75,000 miles

my kia has a 30k check as well, I'm at 66k and I am going to check them soon.
in the OP you said remove timing chain and cams, shouldn't you just be able to pop the VC off and use feeler gauges as suggested above?
my car is shimless as well, btw. it's a bummer because I would much rather be able to order shims if it's out than have to order new buckets. but Oh well.

this is also how most, if not all, Newish Nissan engines are btw

Streetwiseguy wrote:

iceracer wrote: Ford . with a similar setup on the Zetec, never mentioned checking/adjusting the valves, althought the manual does have a how too. In fact, they eliminated the shims and went with solid tappets. There were three different sizes as I remember. Mine went 75K miles without every doing anything. Wonder why Toyota is different.

I think Ford is embarrassed by having solid lifters. The original Rangers, and even some of the first Aerostars, used the Cologne 2.8 V6. They needed valve adjustments just as often as every other Euro engine designed in the 60's, but nobody knew, and Ford certainly wouldn't tell. They got LOUD.

Odd, they are still using them

integraguy wrote: "That seems pretty ridiculous that Toyota would sell a "cheap" consumer car like that...." You just answered your own "question". Not using hydraulic valve actuators saves Toyota money on every engine built like that. As far as Ford not mentioning the need to adjust the valves on it's "Cologne" V6s, Ford (and other manufacturers) have a bad "habit" of omitting needed maintenance from the schedules they provide in the owner's manual. I once owned a Pinto and a Ranger with the 2.3 and neither owner's manual "suggested" ever having the timing belt changed. I'm guessing that Ford figured the water pump would start to make noise and force you to replace it BEFORE the timing belt broke. My sister and brother both "lost" engines in their Escorts when the timing belt wasn't changed. Tho in Ford's defense, both cars "warned" their owners that the water pump was on it's last legs.

I was talking of more present day engines. No American Escort has ever lost an engine due to a failed tining belt. The CVH, SPI and Zetec are all NON[interference. Not sure about the Mazda engine in the GT.

My 07 Honda fit required it at 90k, mainly because the car was stuttering like all hell when cold. The manual recommended adjustment is "when needed".

It's a single cam, rocker arm engine so it was stupid easy. It took about 4 hours total being ultra cautious by checking and rechecking. And other than parts (valve cover gasket) and lunch for the buddy that helped me, I avoided the $489 dealer cost.

Now that I have done it, I could do it alone in about 2 hours.

z31maniac wrote: That seems pretty ridiculous that Toyota would sell a "cheap" consumer car like that, which requires 30k valve adjustments.

Mechanical devices require maintenance? Unpossible!

I've never seen anyone ever do valve adjustments on Toyotas. Or Hondas, for that matter. I've only ever seen one Honda engine burn an exhaust valve from never being adjusted, and that engine had close to 200k on it.

And then there are the BMWs, where it's pointless to try adjusting the valves because the eccentric (double entendre) adjuster design almost guarantees that it'll be difficult/impossible to adjust correctly once the engine has miles on it.