27th Apr 2010, 18:45
Had you read your owner's manual, you would have noticed that the timing belt need changing every 60K.
22nd May 2011, 00:04
There have been cars though that don't just DIE when the timing belt goes by destroying the engine. This is a very retarded mechanical design. It's a very cheap car. If you notice there are a lot of :( faces for the reviews because the car sucks, you don't have to make excuses for Kia.
Sure maintenance is one thing, but these cars are still awful. Look at the reviews on say a Volvo 240 1993, 1992, whatever, and you will see belts can even go rip out, and once they are replaced, BRUUUM! You have a moving mechanical wonder of a car again. That's a good car, and hence you see a lot of :) smiley faces. It's really not that complicated.
The Kia Rio and Sephia suck, period. The only car they made that is OK is the Kia Optima; those are barely decent.
6th Oct 2012, 20:31
There are "interference" and "non interference" engines. Interference engines WILL destroy the engine when the timing belt breaks, because the pistons will hit the valves. The Kia Rio is an interference engine. The Suzuki Forenza is an example of a non interference engine. The advantage of the interference design is higher compression, which translates into better MPG. Most cars today have opted for the interference design for that reason.
12th Nov 2015, 16:18
Incorrect. The 2004 Kia Rio has the Mazda B engine, which is a non-interference design.
15th Nov 2015, 04:13
You are incorrect. The 2004 Rio has a Daewoo engine, which will blow the engine if the timing belt snaps.
27th Nov 2021, 16:01
You are both incorrect. The Kia Rio has a Kia engine, the 1.5D or 1.6D in the North American markets, virtually identical except a small displacement bump in 2003-4. The original poster is correct this is based on a Mazda design, but Kia changed the head design just enough to make it interference. This is why the Kia engine makes more power for the same displacement as the older Mazda B series. You can't have it both ways: more power and more reliability. I personally would rather have a 101HP non interference 1.6 rather than the 107 hp unit I have, but that's my opinion. FYI, Kia purchased all the old patent tech on the old Mazda engines hence why they are also now Kia. Mazda sold it when they joint ventured the Duratec with Ford in the early 2000s.
As a fan of the old Mazda stuff, based on the simplicity and reliability, it's been a fun journey through the years finding the old tech still in production. From the 80s Festiva to the 90s aspire to the late 90s/early 2000s ZX2 to finally the end of the road 2005 Kia Rio, I have been rowing a rod shifted Mazda transmission and Mazda style engine for over 20 years, with tons of reliability and fun along the way. Still hard to imagine in 2005 this engine originally came to life in the mid 80's. There was a lot of tech that developed over that time in engine management. This engine was built with rudimentary fuel management in the 80s and it is not built for the emissions standards of today. It's a miracle it even saw production as long as it did. This also explains why a Kia Rio 1st gen is always throwing the check engine light, it can barely stay running clean even in top form. I'm glad I don't like in an emissions compliance state. You would lose your shirt on this Kia if you had to keep that light off.
30th Nov 2021, 02:10
Just because the Chevy Aveo has a 1.6 liter engine and both of these are made in Korea, does not mean the engines are the same. The Kia 1.5 and 1.6 are Mazda B series derivatives and some parts are still interchangeable between the Mazda B and the Kia. The Daewoo engine is an old Opel engine "Family 1" design and the two have nothing in common except for displacement, cylinder count, and DOHC. The Kia, in North America at least, has only had Mazda derived engines.
Example: engine bearing for Mazda B series: fits Kia Rio, Ford Aspire, and Mazda Protege engines:
https://www.amazon.com/MOCA-Engine-Bearings-Compatible-Protege/dp/B08THR2HP4
23rd Apr 2010, 09:37
I'm sorry, but you should have changed the timing belt by 60,000 miles. If you don't change it then, you should expect the engine to fail. A timing belt is made up of rubber and other compounds. Over time, it stretches, cracks and eventually, breaks. People never seem to think it's necessary to change your timing belt at the recommended interval, and then, they end up writing a review on this site, complaining of what a horrible car they bought and that it should be recalled immediately. If anyone can find a car that doesn't require basic maintenance, tell me. It's never gonna happen.