In this article we explore the validity of the argument that the timar system, starting with the last quarter of the sixteenth century, was crumbling financially and therefore was unable to perform its military obligations. Based on the energy requirements of an "average" timar contingent together with their horses we calculated the actual money cost of maintaining such a unit in seven different campaigns. We also calculated the depreciation cost of the weaponry in these campaigns. We compared these costs with the annual tax revenue of an "average" timar. We found no evidence of any such financial weakness with the conclusion that the timar system was perfectly viable in the two centuries under consideration.