RVS <rahulvsamant@gmail.com> wrote in
news:1178124103.583814.178120@n59g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com:


>
> The manual is pretty clear, however i am sure the guy writing it did
> not think of cases where the car had 30000 miles lesser than the life
> of the belt.




He absolutely did. That is why there is a TIME factor in there.

You will notice further that the manual does not say
84 months AND 105K miles,
it says
84 months OR 105K.
Whichever comes first. And something did come first for you: the time
factor.

Your engine is what is known as an "interference" design. This means
that should the belt skip or break, there is a great chance of the
valves hitting the pistons. If that happens, your repair bill goes from
$400 to almost $2,000.

At your current pace, the belt will be ten years old before you rack up
another 30K miles. This is bad bad bad.

While it is possible the belt may well last another 30K and three more
years, it is extremely unwise to push the life of this belt because of the
potential consequences.

Of course, it's not my money, but yours. If you want to risk a $2,000
repair bill in order to delay the expenditure of $400, be my guest.

And hey, do you think you'll still have the car in another seven years?
No?
Then what does it matter if you spend the $400 now or later? Either way it
needs to get done, and either way it will be the car's last belt change.



--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/