Honda Car Forum

> i've seen all these discussions about "should i change it at 60k? or
> 90k?" .. my recently acquired car is 7 years old and only has 15.2k on
> it..
> so i REALLY need to know what the *time* limit is on a timing belt... if
> any?

Change it IMMEDIATELY. Time is more the enemy than mileage is on a
timing belt. A timing belt is made of rubber and subjected to heat
cycles every time you drive the car. Rubber deteriorates over time and
the strength of the timing belt will be compromised when it falls
beyond its life expectancy. That is why most timing belts break. If
it doesn't break, the teeth on the timing belt can sheer right off
doing the same damage to your engine as a timing belt breakage. You
are way over the *safe* life expectancy of your timing belt. You are
courting disaster with this car. You can't check to see if a timing
belt is good. Have this service done by a qualified technician who is
familiar with your car. A timing belt service will be much cheaper
than an engine damaged by a snapped timing belt. You can pay the
mechanic now or pay him a LOT more later.

Check your owners manual for the timing belt service interval. The
average is four to six year and about 60K miles.

Apexmeister <Apexmeister@cornercarver.net> decided to join the
conversation on 14 Aug 2003 with message
news:140820031640460283%Apexmeister@cornercarver.n et:

>> i've seen all these discussions about "should i change it at 60k? or
>> 90k?" .. my recently acquired car is 7 years old and only has 15.2k
>> on it..
>> so i REALLY need to know what the *time* limit is on a timing belt...
>> if any?
>
> Change it IMMEDIATELY.

hm.. i posted the original post almost a month ago.. and had it done the
next day.. but thanks for your concern

--
-Chris

http://www.ChrisGarcia.com <- My Homepage
http://www.chrisgarcia.com/cars/ <- *NEW* My cars
http://www.chrisgarcia.com/dogs/ <- *Sort-of NEW* My dogs
http://starwars.chrisgarcia.com/ <- Centerpoint Station, the "ghost-
town" of the Star Wars Universe!

In article <UWz%a.746024$3C2.17312443@news3.calgary.shaw.ca >, Andrew
<aaco@shaw.ca> wrote:

> replaced in 91 Accord after 100 K miles and some 8.5 years, looked v.good

You can't check a timing belt to see if it's good. Most of them look
very good visually but that's in no way an indicator that it will
continute to do its job. Time is more the enemy than mileage is the
enemy on a timing belt. The manufacturer always states a service (be
it oil, transmission, timing belt, etc.) based on *time* and mileage,
whichever comes first. I see a lot of car owners going by mileage and
not paying attention to time recommendation. If the service was not
based on time, then the service manual wouldn't mention it.

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 06:48:18 GMT, Apexmeister
<Apexmeister@cornercarver.net> wrote:

>You can't check a timing belt to see if it's good. Most of them look
>very good visually but that's in no way an indicator that it will
>continute to do its job.

My mechanic keeps one from a GSR on a nail on his wall as an example.
It looks absolutely perfect and factory new, except for the place
where it broke in half.