Honda Car Forum

I have a 2000 Accord. When I start the car the Maint. Required light
flashes for a while. I think I recall that means routine maintenance.
The car has 51,000 miles. One of the service techs at Honda told me
once that timing chains should automatically be changed at 50,000 before
they go. Is this hype, or should I do that. Is this connected with
the light? It's abouit a $1000 job, so I don't want to do it if it's
not highly recommended. thanks,
mm

"Michael Muderick" <michael@muderick.com> wrote in message
news:gumXj.16$kZ1.11@trndny02...
>I have a 2000 Accord. When I start the car the Maint. Required light
>flashes for a while. I think I recall that means routine maintenance. The
>car has 51,000 miles. One of the service techs at Honda told me once that
>timing chains should automatically be changed at 50,000 before they go.
>Is this hype, or should I do that. Is this connected with the light?
>It's abouit a $1000 job, so I don't want to do it if it's not highly
>recommended. thanks,

You didn't talk to "techs at Honda". You spoke to one or more techs at your
local dealer. Find a new dealer. Your car requires a timing belt change (I
don't think they were using chains in the Accord in 2000) at 90k or 105k.
Check your manual to see which it is (my '01 V6 is 105k for example).

As for the light, yes that is the maint reminder. See the service schedule
in your owners manual. It may be just the oil change that's due, or more
depending on what was done at your last scheduled maintenance.

Michael Muderick wrote:
> I have a 2000 Accord. When I start the car the Maint. Required light
> flashes for a while. I think I recall that means routine maintenance.
> The car has 51,000 miles. One of the service techs at Honda told me
> once that timing chains should automatically be changed at 50,000 before
> they go. Is this hype, or should I do that. Is this connected with
> the light? It's abouit a $1000 job, so I don't want to do it if it's
> not highly recommended. thanks,
> mm

it's belt, not chain.

in one respect, they're correct - the belt has two service criteria -
mileage or time. time is usually 7 years, mileage is usually 105k
miles. change at whichever comes sooner.

if this were my car however, and i lived in a moderate climate, not too
hot or too cold, i'd shoot closer to miles than years. honda are pretty
conservative with their service schedules. and shop around until you
get a better price quote - $1000 is very high.

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:AoCdnRQnk7QVp7PVnZ2dnUVZ_oHinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> Michael Muderick wrote:
>> I have a 2000 Accord. When I start the car the Maint. Required light
>> flashes for a while. I think I recall that means routine maintenance.
>> The car has 51,000 miles. One of the service techs at Honda told me once
>> that timing chains should automatically be changed at 50,000 before they
>> go. Is this hype, or should I do that. Is this connected with the
>> light? It's abouit a $1000 job, so I don't want to do it if it's not
>> highly recommended. thanks,
>> mm
>
> it's belt, not chain.
>
> in one respect, they're correct - the belt has two service criteria -
> mileage or time. time is usually 7 years, mileage is usually 105k miles.
> change at whichever comes sooner.

My issue with the tech in question (or at least the telling of the story) is
that according to the OP, the tech says 50k is the basis of changing it.

> if this were my car however, and i lived in a moderate climate, not too
> hot or too cold, i'd shoot closer to miles than years. honda are pretty
> conservative with their service schedules. and shop around until you get
> a better price quote - $1000 is very high.

Seth wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:AoCdnRQnk7QVp7PVnZ2dnUVZ_oHinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> Michael Muderick wrote:
>>> I have a 2000 Accord. When I start the car the Maint. Required
>>> light flashes for a while. I think I recall that means routine
>>> maintenance. The car has 51,000 miles. One of the service techs at
>>> Honda told me once that timing chains should automatically be changed
>>> at 50,000 before they go. Is this hype, or should I do that. Is
>>> this connected with the light? It's abouit a $1000 job, so I don't
>>> want to do it if it's not highly recommended. thanks,
>>> mm
>>
>> it's belt, not chain.
>>
>> in one respect, they're correct - the belt has two service criteria -
>> mileage or time. time is usually 7 years, mileage is usually 105k
>> miles. change at whichever comes sooner.
>
> My issue with the tech in question (or at least the telling of the
> story) is that according to the OP, the tech says 50k is the basis of
> changing it.

that's what the op says the tech says - doesn't mean its /actually/ what
the tech says. in this case, the tech would be correct if time were the
criteria. but $1000 is still way too much so i wouldn't use them for
that reason alone.



>
>> if this were my car however, and i lived in a moderate climate, not
>> too hot or too cold, i'd shoot closer to miles than years. honda are
>> pretty conservative with their service schedules. and shop around
>> until you get a better price quote - $1000 is very high.
>

I'm not sure why anyone would bring an 8-year old car to the dealer
for anything. Once my warranty expires, I never go back. I have a good
local shop that can do everything they do, cheaper.

Dan D
'07 Ody EX
Central NJ USA

In article
<844c501d-7b2b-496c-a293-9965b77a4cef@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Dano58 <dan.dibiase@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm not sure why anyone would bring an 8-year old car to the dealer
> for anything.

Because they do a good job and know how to work on 8 year old
brand-specific cars?

Some dealers do fantastic jobs. Some independent shops do shitty jobs.

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-E93BA0.16413119052008@nntp9.usenetserver.com...
> In article
> <844c501d-7b2b-496c-a293-9965b77a4cef@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
> Dano58 <dan.dibiase@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure why anyone would bring an 8-year old car to the dealer
>> for anything.
>
> Because they do a good job and know how to work on 8 year old
> brand-specific cars?
>
> Some dealers do fantastic jobs. Some independent shops do shitty
> jobs.

Some dealers do shitty jobs. Some independent shops do great jobs.

>

"L Alpert" wrote

>>> I'm not sure why anyone would bring an 8-year old car to the dealer
>>> for anything.

>> Because they do a good job and know how to work on 8 year old
>> brand-specific cars?
>>
>> Some dealers do fantastic jobs. Some independent shops do shitty jobs.

> Some dealers do shitty jobs. Some independent shops do great jobs.

So I guess the answer to this argument is to take it to a facility you like
and trust. My dealer is great (*I* think), and so is a local independent
Honda shop. What a dilemma....

*sigh*

In article <d%nYj.4559$7k7.807@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com>,
"L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> wrote:

> > Some dealers do fantastic jobs. Some independent shops do shitty
> > jobs.
>
> Some dealers do shitty jobs. Some independent shops do great jobs.

Yeah, but some indies do shitty jobs and some dealers do great jobs.

The OP seemed to think that ALL dealers did shitty jobs and ALL indies
did great jobs. Wrong-o.