“I’d like some proof of your assertion. None of the three dealers I called have ever heard of it happening on the VG30-series engine.
On the VG30, it’s not cheap engine design but a desire for a quieter, more refined sounding engine, which was something the Japanese had to do to get market share in the US. Horsepower has nothing to do with it. Higher horsepower engines these days use chains, especially blower cars.”
The VG-30I engine in my first Pathfinder had the belt tensioner seize, shredding the belt and trashing the engine. A tensioner that had been replaced less that 30K miles before it seized.
We’ve had 2 Pathfinders with that engine family. The first being an ‘87 VG-30I with a throttle body, the last being a ‘93 VG-30E with port injection.
I consider both of them to be POS’s Underpowered, inefficient, and with marginal timing system and head gasket reliability. And both with the high maintenance costs that are required by the short timing belt change interval. IOW, complete crap.
Very strange, since most people who own the Pathfinders would disagree with you.
Your belt tensioner (and presumably the entire belt drive system) - who did you have replace it? What parts were used?
Underpowered, sure. Not by the standards of the day, but now certainly. Inefficient? Not so sure. The gas mileage isn’t great but some modern SUVs in the same size and power class don’t do any better.
Short timing belt change interval? It’s 60K or 105K, depending on year. That’s not short. Short is the idiot at GM who produced a V6 that needed timing belt changes every 30K.
Headgasket issues? I’ve never heard of VG30s having headgasket problems. Lifter issues and exhaust manifold bolt problems, yes, but they just don’t have headgasket issues. The early ones even had fire problems due to Hitachi screwing up the fuel hose they supplied, but still.... What makes you say that?