Timing belt - mileage vs time
Guest
Posts: n/a
Timing belt - mileage vs time
For what it may be worth:
I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
saying, even if he may not be right.
I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
saying, even if he may not be right.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
Peabody wrote:
> For what it may be worth:
>
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
>
>
id likely believe him,... ive got 49k on my 98 CX, and am in no
particular hurry to replace the belt. i doubt ill wait til 108k, but 90
sounds reasonable if i still ahve the car. part has to do with the
weather the car is driven in, how its stored, etc. i park in a garage.
FWIW, i change all my fluids every 3 years, and they always come out
looking almost as clean as the new stuff.
> For what it may be worth:
>
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
>
>
id likely believe him,... ive got 49k on my 98 CX, and am in no
particular hurry to replace the belt. i doubt ill wait til 108k, but 90
sounds reasonable if i still ahve the car. part has to do with the
weather the car is driven in, how its stored, etc. i park in a garage.
FWIW, i change all my fluids every 3 years, and they always come out
looking almost as clean as the new stuff.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
In article <4ZBAe.55676$iU.49281@lakeread05>, waybackKILLSPAM44
@yahoo.com says...
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
My experience has been different. I replaced the t-belt on my '90 CRX Si
at 60K miles. Last year, at around 115K miles, it occurred to me that it
was nearing time to replace it again, and resolved to do so as it got
closer to the 120K mile mark. Shortly thereafter, it failed while I was
on the freeway. Fortunately, I was able to coast into the breakdown lane
safely, and even more fortunately, the valvetrain wasn't damaged.
It had been seven years since it was replaced at 60K (my daily commute
is short, hence the relatively low mileage on the car for its age), and
the snapped belt had dry-rotted badly enough to where it was easy to
strip teeth off it with my bare hands. Now, I live in an area with high
humidity, very hot summers, and mild winters, so you might consider that
to be the "extreme conditions" Honda typically stipulates a different
maintenance schedule for. But when I told my mechanic how long it had
been since the 60K replacement, he said he would be reluctant to trust a
t-belt for much more than 5 years regardless of mileage. Perhaps the
newer belts are constructed differently, as the maintenance interval for
most of them has gone up in recent years.
As always, YMMV. Especially when it comes to t-belts. :-)
Dave
@yahoo.com says...
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
My experience has been different. I replaced the t-belt on my '90 CRX Si
at 60K miles. Last year, at around 115K miles, it occurred to me that it
was nearing time to replace it again, and resolved to do so as it got
closer to the 120K mile mark. Shortly thereafter, it failed while I was
on the freeway. Fortunately, I was able to coast into the breakdown lane
safely, and even more fortunately, the valvetrain wasn't damaged.
It had been seven years since it was replaced at 60K (my daily commute
is short, hence the relatively low mileage on the car for its age), and
the snapped belt had dry-rotted badly enough to where it was easy to
strip teeth off it with my bare hands. Now, I live in an area with high
humidity, very hot summers, and mild winters, so you might consider that
to be the "extreme conditions" Honda typically stipulates a different
maintenance schedule for. But when I told my mechanic how long it had
been since the 60K replacement, he said he would be reluctant to trust a
t-belt for much more than 5 years regardless of mileage. Perhaps the
newer belts are constructed differently, as the maintenance interval for
most of them has gone up in recent years.
As always, YMMV. Especially when it comes to t-belts. :-)
Dave
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
SoCalMike wrote:
> id likely believe him,... ive got 49k on my 98 CX, and am in no
> particular hurry to replace the belt. i doubt ill wait til 108k, but 90
> sounds reasonable if i still ahve the car. part has to do with the
> weather the car is driven in, how its stored, etc. i park in a garage.
That's what I was thinking. Perhaps changing the belt based on time is
recommended for so-called "severe" conditions such as winter weather.
> id likely believe him,... ive got 49k on my 98 CX, and am in no
> particular hurry to replace the belt. i doubt ill wait til 108k, but 90
> sounds reasonable if i still ahve the car. part has to do with the
> weather the car is driven in, how its stored, etc. i park in a garage.
That's what I was thinking. Perhaps changing the belt based on time is
recommended for so-called "severe" conditions such as winter weather.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
In article <0_2dnQTrA4t_Z0_fRVn-gw@comcast.com>,
SoCalMike <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote:
> id likely believe him,... ive got 49k on my 98 CX, and am in no
> particular hurry to replace the belt.
Ah. Because you don't WANT to replace the belt, you've chosen to
believe someone who confirms what you want to do.
Got it.
SoCalMike <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote:
> id likely believe him,... ive got 49k on my 98 CX, and am in no
> particular hurry to replace the belt.
Ah. Because you don't WANT to replace the belt, you've chosen to
believe someone who confirms what you want to do.
Got it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
Peabody <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:4ZBAe.55676$iU.49281@lakeread05:
> For what it may be worth:
>
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
>
>
Timing belt replacement: $200 or so.
Engine work if the belt breaks: can be $2,000.
Yes, it's true. Honda is conservative with their timing belt intervals. But
then again, Hondas are interference engines. Your chances are about even
for serious damage if the belt breaks.
To me, $200 is worth the peace of mind.
--
TeGGeR®
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
news:4ZBAe.55676$iU.49281@lakeread05:
> For what it may be worth:
>
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
>
>
Timing belt replacement: $200 or so.
Engine work if the belt breaks: can be $2,000.
Yes, it's true. Honda is conservative with their timing belt intervals. But
then again, Hondas are interference engines. Your chances are about even
for serious damage if the belt breaks.
To me, $200 is worth the peace of mind.
--
TeGGeR®
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
Honda always recommended a time with their timing belt change. I believe
it's 5 years.
"duckbill" <ltcauth13@nospam.cs.com> wrote in message
news:c5f806714664bcc139c1f20349f82a52@localhost.ta lkaboutautos.com...
> High milage in my opinion is not the only killer of timing belts. Heat /
> below freezing temps. and starting the engine put a lot more stress on the
> belt than driving on long trips. You also have a tensioner pulley that
> may
> have the grease drying out. And the biggest issue is that Honda's are not
> free-wheeling engines. Normally, when the belt breaks, pistons and valves
> collide. Will Earl stand by you with assistance if your belt breaks
> before its scheduled milage interval? And will he put it in writing?
> Honda is now recommending a time as well as milage interval. Good luck on
> your decision.
>
it's 5 years.
"duckbill" <ltcauth13@nospam.cs.com> wrote in message
news:c5f806714664bcc139c1f20349f82a52@localhost.ta lkaboutautos.com...
> High milage in my opinion is not the only killer of timing belts. Heat /
> below freezing temps. and starting the engine put a lot more stress on the
> belt than driving on long trips. You also have a tensioner pulley that
> may
> have the grease drying out. And the biggest issue is that Honda's are not
> free-wheeling engines. Normally, when the belt breaks, pistons and valves
> collide. Will Earl stand by you with assistance if your belt breaks
> before its scheduled milage interval? And will he put it in writing?
> Honda is now recommending a time as well as milage interval. Good luck on
> your decision.
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
The belt might not snap, but your water pump might seize and cause the belt
to snap!
And remember, heat and environment make rubber brittle, especially after 11
years.
When I changed my belt at 90K on my car, the water pump was almost shot, it
was slowly leaking and the bearings were making a loud noise. Without taking
the belt out, I wouldn't have known.
My car is also a 94.
"Peabody" <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4ZBAe.55676$iU.49281@lakeread05...
> For what it may be worth:
>
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
>
>
to snap!
And remember, heat and environment make rubber brittle, especially after 11
years.
When I changed my belt at 90K on my car, the water pump was almost shot, it
was slowly leaking and the bearings were making a loud noise. Without taking
the belt out, I wouldn't have known.
My car is also a 94.
"Peabody" <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4ZBAe.55676$iU.49281@lakeread05...
> For what it may be worth:
>
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
High milage in my opinion is not the only killer of timing belts. Heat /
below freezing temps. and starting the engine put a lot more stress on the
belt than driving on long trips. You also have a tensioner pulley that may
have the grease drying out. And the biggest issue is that Honda's are not
free-wheeling engines. Normally, when the belt breaks, pistons and valves
collide. Will Earl stand by you with assistance if your belt breaks
before its scheduled milage interval? And will he put it in writing?
Honda is now recommending a time as well as milage interval. Good luck on
your decision.
below freezing temps. and starting the engine put a lot more stress on the
belt than driving on long trips. You also have a tensioner pulley that may
have the grease drying out. And the biggest issue is that Honda's are not
free-wheeling engines. Normally, when the belt breaks, pistons and valves
collide. Will Earl stand by you with assistance if your belt breaks
before its scheduled milage interval? And will he put it in writing?
Honda is now recommending a time as well as milage interval. Good luck on
your decision.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
Peabody wrote:
> For what it may be worth:
>
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
----------------------
Earl is honest, but mis-informed. Please read this:
http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/faq.html#interference
'Curly'
> For what it may be worth:
>
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
----------------------
Earl is honest, but mis-informed. Please read this:
http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/faq.html#interference
'Curly'
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-7E053C.21055611072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <0_2dnQTrA4t_Z0_fRVn-gw@comcast.com>,
> SoCalMike <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> id likely believe him,... ive got 49k on my 98 CX, and am in no
>> particular hurry to replace the belt.
>
> Ah. Because you don't WANT to replace the belt, you've chosen to
> believe someone who confirms what you want to do.
>
> Got it.
So at 7k a year, he'll wait until nearly 13 years on the original belt.
Yikes.
You figure you'll change it by 2011, do you, Mike?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns9690F1CD1D7EDtegger@207.14.113.17...
> Peabody <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:4ZBAe.55676$iU.49281@lakeread05:
>
>> For what it may be worth:
>>
>> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
>> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
>> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
>> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>>
>> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
>> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
>> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
>> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
>> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>>
>> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
>> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
>> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
>> saying, even if he may not be right.
>>
>>
>
>
> Timing belt replacement: $200 or so.
> Engine work if the belt breaks: can be $2,000.
>
> Yes, it's true. Honda is conservative with their timing belt intervals.
> But
> then again, Hondas are interference engines. Your chances are about even
> for serious damage if the belt breaks.
>
> To me, $200 is worth the peace of mind.
$200! You know a good place man! Any such places around DFW?
RAT
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
>Nightdude
>The belt might not snap, but your water pump >might seize and cause the belt to snap!
>And remember, heat and environment make >rubber brittle, especially after 11 years.
I agree with what this Nightdude says. Unless you have garaged your car
at room temperature, you need to replace the belt because the extreme
heat under the hood and cold makes the rubber brittle. Not just the
timing belt but also alternator, powersteering and water pump belts,
including the water pump, even if it is not broken -- because it costs
same amount of money to replace a H2O pump as replacing a timing belt.
>The belt might not snap, but your water pump >might seize and cause the belt to snap!
>And remember, heat and environment make >rubber brittle, especially after 11 years.
I agree with what this Nightdude says. Unless you have garaged your car
at room temperature, you need to replace the belt because the extreme
heat under the hood and cold makes the rubber brittle. Not just the
timing belt but also alternator, powersteering and water pump belts,
including the water pump, even if it is not broken -- because it costs
same amount of money to replace a H2O pump as replacing a timing belt.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
Rattus The RAT wrote:
> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
> > Timing belt replacement: $200 or so.
> > Engine work if the belt breaks: can be $2,000.
> >
> > Yes, it's true. Honda is conservative with their timing belt intervals.
> > But
> > then again, Hondas are interference engines. Your chances are about even
> > for serious damage if the belt breaks.
> >
> > To me, $200 is worth the peace of mind.
>
> $200! You know a good place man! Any such places around DFW?
$200? I paid maybe $300 on my 1987 Accord, had the dealer do it free on
my present 1990 Accord at 46,000 (car was 8 years old then), and am
expecting $600 to have the belts and water pump done on the same car
now at 143,000. But if it comes in under, even better.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
"Pete from Boston" <masspete@my-deja.com> wrote in
news:1121194232.658041.18480@g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com:
>
> Rattus The RAT wrote:
>> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
>> > Timing belt replacement: $200 or so.
>> > Engine work if the belt breaks: can be $2,000.
>> >
>> > Yes, it's true. Honda is conservative with their timing belt
>> > intervals. But
>> > then again, Hondas are interference engines. Your chances are about
>> > even for serious damage if the belt breaks.
>> >
>> > To me, $200 is worth the peace of mind.
>>
>> $200! You know a good place man! Any such places around DFW?
>
> $200? I paid maybe $300 on my 1987 Accord, had the dealer do it free
> on my present 1990 Accord at 46,000 (car was 8 years old then), and am
> expecting $600 to have the belts and water pump done on the same car
> now at 143,000. But if it comes in under, even better.
>
>
OK, OK, OK. Everybody keeps telling me I keep quoting high, so this time I
quoted low.
However, notice my weasel clause: "...OR SO". So I'm covered. :)
--
TeGGeR®
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
news:1121194232.658041.18480@g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com:
>
> Rattus The RAT wrote:
>> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
>> > Timing belt replacement: $200 or so.
>> > Engine work if the belt breaks: can be $2,000.
>> >
>> > Yes, it's true. Honda is conservative with their timing belt
>> > intervals. But
>> > then again, Hondas are interference engines. Your chances are about
>> > even for serious damage if the belt breaks.
>> >
>> > To me, $200 is worth the peace of mind.
>>
>> $200! You know a good place man! Any such places around DFW?
>
> $200? I paid maybe $300 on my 1987 Accord, had the dealer do it free
> on my present 1990 Accord at 46,000 (car was 8 years old then), and am
> expecting $600 to have the belts and water pump done on the same car
> now at 143,000. But if it comes in under, even better.
>
>
OK, OK, OK. Everybody keeps telling me I keep quoting high, so this time I
quoted low.
However, notice my weasel clause: "...OR SO". So I'm covered. :)
--
TeGGeR®
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns96919F88EC31Ategger@207.14.113.17...
> "Pete from Boston" <masspete@my-deja.com> wrote in
> news:1121194232.658041.18480@g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com:
>
>>
>> Rattus The RAT wrote:
>>> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
>>> > Timing belt replacement: $200 or so.
>>> > Engine work if the belt breaks: can be $2,000.
>>> >
>>> > Yes, it's true. Honda is conservative with their timing belt
>>> > intervals. But
>>> > then again, Hondas are interference engines. Your chances are about
>>> > even for serious damage if the belt breaks.
>>> >
>>> > To me, $200 is worth the peace of mind.
>>>
>>> $200! You know a good place man! Any such places around DFW?
>>
>> $200? I paid maybe $300 on my 1987 Accord, had the dealer do it free
>> on my present 1990 Accord at 46,000 (car was 8 years old then), and am
>> expecting $600 to have the belts and water pump done on the same car
>> now at 143,000. But if it comes in under, even better.
>>
>>
>
>
> OK, OK, OK. Everybody keeps telling me I keep quoting high, so this time I
> quoted low.
>
> However, notice my weasel clause: "...OR SO". So I'm covered. :)
When i got mine done last year I called maybe 10 places and cheapest quote
i got was around 495 OR SO!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
Peabody wrote:
> For what it may be worth:
>
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
>
>
i've spent a whole lot of time in junk yards over the years [a great
place to see a lot of failures] and gotta say, it's pretty unusual to
see a [honda] timing belt that's in such bad condition that i'd be
concerned about failure just through age. theoretically, yes, belts
crack, belt fibers fatigue and teeth fall off, but this is seldom
without any form of visible deterioration. i say, do a visual
inspection. if it apears to be in bad shape, cracking, fraying, teeth
worn or deformed, yes, replace regardless of mileage. but if it's not,
and you /know/ for sure mileage is within spec, i'd stick with earl's
advice.
> For what it may be worth:
>
> I have a 94 Accord (soon to be 11 years old) with only 49,000 miles
> on it. Today I went to see Earl, who for the last 15 years has run
> a local repair shop specializing in Hondas and Acuras, and who is
> highly respected for the quality of his work and his expertise.
>
> Earl said the timing belt is almost exclusively a mileage item, and
> he would not recommend replacing mine until I reach 90k miles,
> pretty much no matter how long that takes. He said failures at
> fewer miles are extremely rare, and he routinely sees low-mileage
> early 80's Accords which still have their original timing belts.
>
> Earl had the opportunity to relieve me of several hundred dollars,
> since I went in to schedule the belt replacement, but he pretty
> firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's
> saying, even if he may not be right.
>
>
i've spent a whole lot of time in junk yards over the years [a great
place to see a lot of failures] and gotta say, it's pretty unusual to
see a [honda] timing belt that's in such bad condition that i'd be
concerned about failure just through age. theoretically, yes, belts
crack, belt fibers fatigue and teeth fall off, but this is seldom
without any form of visible deterioration. i say, do a visual
inspection. if it apears to be in bad shape, cracking, fraying, teeth
worn or deformed, yes, replace regardless of mileage. but if it's not,
and you /know/ for sure mileage is within spec, i'd stick with earl's
advice.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
jim beam wrote:
> without any form of visible deterioration. i say, do a visual
> inspection. if it apears to be in bad shape, cracking, fraying, teeth
> worn or deformed, yes, replace regardless of mileage. but if it's not,
> and you /know/ for sure mileage is within spec, i'd stick with earl's
> advice.
id be curious to know how many 80s/90s vintage civics *ever* get their
timing belt replaced. its something 99% of people dont even think about.
im sure some live their whole lives with one belt, then it gets replaced
when the water pump starts spewing coolant.
> without any form of visible deterioration. i say, do a visual
> inspection. if it apears to be in bad shape, cracking, fraying, teeth
> worn or deformed, yes, replace regardless of mileage. but if it's not,
> and you /know/ for sure mileage is within spec, i'd stick with earl's
> advice.
id be curious to know how many 80s/90s vintage civics *ever* get their
timing belt replaced. its something 99% of people dont even think about.
im sure some live their whole lives with one belt, then it gets replaced
when the water pump starts spewing coolant.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Timing belt - mileage vs time
SoCalMike wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>
>> without any form of visible deterioration. i say, do a visual
>> inspection. if it apears to be in bad shape, cracking, fraying, teeth
>> worn or deformed, yes, replace regardless of mileage. but if it's
>> not, and you /know/ for sure mileage is within spec, i'd stick with
>> earl's advice.
>
>
> id be curious to know how many 80s/90s vintage civics *ever* get their
> timing belt replaced. its something 99% of people dont even think about.
> im sure some live their whole lives with one belt, then it gets replaced
> when the water pump starts spewing coolant.
from the junk yard viewpoint, i'd say pretty much never. at the bottom
end of the market, does it make sense to spend $300 on a $500 car?
people just keep running those cars until they break. and you'll not
see many junk yard clunkers with broken belts.
> jim beam wrote:
>
>> without any form of visible deterioration. i say, do a visual
>> inspection. if it apears to be in bad shape, cracking, fraying, teeth
>> worn or deformed, yes, replace regardless of mileage. but if it's
>> not, and you /know/ for sure mileage is within spec, i'd stick with
>> earl's advice.
>
>
> id be curious to know how many 80s/90s vintage civics *ever* get their
> timing belt replaced. its something 99% of people dont even think about.
> im sure some live their whole lives with one belt, then it gets replaced
> when the water pump starts spewing coolant.
from the junk yard viewpoint, i'd say pretty much never. at the bottom
end of the market, does it make sense to spend $300 on a $500 car?
people just keep running those cars until they break. and you'll not
see many junk yard clunkers with broken belts.