Honda Car Forum

Always do the "pulleys" with the belt. Usually one idler pulley and
one tensioner pulley. The tensioner pulley gets its tension from a
spring or hydraulic tensioner. I personally like to use Gates Timing
Kits. The lube in the bearings dry up and they start to rattle and
loosen.

The hydraulic tensioners can be reused if they meet specs in the
repair manual on those engines. However, IIRC read about some VW kits
come with it.

http://www.gates.com/index.cfm?location_id=540




On Dec 8, 11:41*pm, "Forrest" <REMOVETHISrunforre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "E. Meyer" <epmeye...@msn.com> wrote in message
>
> news:C562AB1C.1013%epmeyer50@msn.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 12/7/08 9:41 PM, in article
> > aderamey.addw-0B95E6.19411207122...@mara100-84.onlink.net, "W^3"
> > <aderamey.a...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >> Hello, I have a 99 Honda Accord DX four door, manual transmission. I
> >> don't drive very much. I bought the car new in Feb. 99, and there are
> >> less than 25,000 miles on it. So that's about 2,500 miles per year on
> >> average. I'm also a point A to B kind of driver - easy on the brakes,
> >> easy on the clutch, smooth acceleration etc. The weather conditions
> >> have been pretty benign: 7 years in the Bay Area, 3 years in Portland
> >> OR.
>
> >> So the manual says change the timing belt at 105k miles/84 months,
> >> whichever comes first. Obviously, I'm past the 84 months by about 2
> >> years, but a long way from 105,000 miles. I also know there are
> >> several other things that should be replaced if the timing belt is
> >> replaced.
>
> >> I wonder if you experienced mechanics and/or DIYers have an opinion on
> >> how necessary this replacement is at this time. I'm sorry if the
> >> question is annoying. I know the manual says what it says, and it
> >> follows that I'm questioning the recommendations given therein, and
> >> I'm basically clueless on this stuff. But sometimes the cognoscenti
> >> are in posession of knowledge the manufacturers for one reason or
> >> another are reluctant to share. (For example, tire pressure.)
>
> >> Thanks for any input you might have.
>
> > The concern with low mileage but long time is with deterioration of the
> > soft
> > parts in the belt. *Chances are it could continue for a long time with
> > your
> > usage, but then again it could be crumbling apart right now. *The safe
> > thing
> > to do would be to get it changed.
>
> > The other components everyone talks about (water pump, seals, etc.) are
> > not
> > actually required by the manufacturer to be replaced, its just convenient
> > to
> > do them preemptively when the timing cover is off because that's where
> > they
> > are. *I think with your mileage, I would not bother with those things..
> > There is little chance they are anywhere near needing change & would just
> > run up the price unnecessarily.
>
> Someone mentioned changing the tensioner when changing the belt. Why? *What
> is usually bad with that?

"Forrest" <REMOVETHISrunforrest1@gmail.com> wrote
> 1989 Accord here, single overhead cam. I had the belt
> break shortly after buying it used, in around 1998 with
> 140,000 miles on it. No engine damage ... just put on
> another one. It ended up getting oil on it and broke again
> a few months ago (200,000 mi.) when my son was getting off
> of the freeway near the house.(lucky). He cranked it over
> trying to restart it. I didn't even know what an
> interference engine was and turned the cam and crankshaft
> over several times, trying to get things lined up. No
> damage. I later replaced the head gasket and saw that the
> valves and pistons were intact. Wonder if Honda is just
> playing "CYA" in case there is carbon build-up and things
> make contact.

Pardon? What do you mean about the carbon build-up tending
to promote valves hitting piston?

Dillon raises a good point. I do not like my explanation for
why sometimes the engine is not damaged. When driving and
the TB breaks, it's true spark stops pretty instantaneously,
but ISTM the tranny will keep the wheels moving and so the
pistons moving for awhile, yet the cam is disconnected from
the crank, so I would expect pistons to hit valves. Unless
the valves can halt a slow((??) moving piston?

"Forrest" <REMOVETHISrunforrest1@gmail.com> wrote
> "Elle" <honda.lioness@gmail.com> wrote
>> "Forrest" <REMOVETHISrunforrest1@gmail.com> wrote
>>> 1989 Accord here, single overhead cam. I had the belt
>>> break shortly after buying it used, in around 1998 with
>>> 140,000 miles on it. No engine damage ... just put on
>>> another one. It ended up getting oil on it and broke
>>> again a few months ago (200,000 mi.) when my son was
>>> getting off of the freeway near the house.(lucky). He
>>> cranked it over trying to restart it. I didn't even know
>>> what an interference engine was and turned the cam and
>>> crankshaft over several times, trying to get things
>>> lined up. No damage. I later replaced the head gasket
>>> and saw that the valves and pistons were intact. Wonder
>>> if Honda is just playing "CYA" in case there is carbon
>>> build-up and things make contact.
>>
>> Pardon? What do you mean about the carbon build-up
>> tending to promote valves hitting piston?
>>
>> Dillon raises a good point. I do not like my explanation
>> for why sometimes the engine is not damaged. When driving
>> and the TB breaks, it's true spark stops pretty
>> instantaneously, but ISTM the tranny will keep the wheels
>> moving

Post-o. Shoulda been "the wheels will keep the tranny (and
so crank) moving."

>> and so the pistons moving for awhile, yet the cam is
>> disconnected from the crank, so I would expect pistons to
>> hit valves. Unless the valves can halt a slow((??) moving
>> piston?
>
> Pardon? I mean, like I don't think that the valves and
> pistons CAN hit each other.

Okay.

The rest was my re-statement of what Dillon, not you, wrote.

On Tue, 09 Dec 2008 13:05:48 -0700, Elle wrote:

> "Forrest" <REMOVETHISrunforrest1@gmail.com> wrote
>> Someone mentioned changing the tensioner when changing the belt. Why?
>> What is usually bad with that?
>
> Its bearings can fail. Based on advice here, I inspect it at each TB
> change. Barring any sign of bearing failure, I change it only every
> other TB change.

the problem with the tensioner pulley is that the bearings are "loose fit"
from factory. so, people replacing the pulley are often wasting their
money because the new one will be almost exactly the same as the old one.
personally, i wouldn't consider changing the tensioner for the honda d-
series engine for at least the first two belts.

"E. Meyer" <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote in message
news:C5668544.1110%epmeyer50@msn.com...
>
>
>
> On 12/9/08 12:35 PM, in article CqJ%k.9540$yr3.963@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com,
> "Forrest" <REMOVETHISrunforrest1@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Elle" <honda.lioness@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:MTG%k.3538$R43.452@newsfe08.iad...
>>> "Forrest" <REMOVETHISrunforrest1@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> 1989 Accord here, single overhead cam. I had the belt break shortly
>>>> after
>>>> buying it used, in around 1998 with 140,000 miles on it. No engine
>>>> damage
>>>> ... just put on another one. It ended up getting oil on it and broke
>>>> again a few months ago (200,000 mi.) when my son was getting off of the
>>>> freeway near the house.(lucky). He cranked it over trying to restart
>>>> it.
>>>> I didn't even know what an interference engine was and turned the cam
>>>> and
>>>> crankshaft over several times, trying to get things lined up. No
>>>> damage.
>>>> I later replaced the head gasket and saw that the valves and pistons
>>>> were
>>>> intact. Wonder if Honda is just playing "CYA" in case there is carbon
>>>> build-up and things make contact.
>>>
>>> Pardon? What do you mean about the carbon build-up tending to promote
>>> valves hitting piston?
>>>
>>> Dillon raises a good point. I do not like my explanation for why
>>> sometimes
>>> the engine is not damaged. When driving and the TB breaks, it's true
>>> spark
>>> stops pretty instantaneously, but ISTM the tranny will keep the wheels
>>> moving and so the pistons moving for awhile, yet the cam is disconnected
>>> from the crank, so I would expect pistons to hit valves. Unless the
>>> valves
>>> can halt a slow((??) moving piston?
>>
>> Pardon? I mean, like I don't think that the valves and pistons CAN hit
>> each other. If anything were to make contact, it would be the carbon
>> build-up ... not "promoting" valves hitting pistons. Talk about putting
>> words into someone's mouth.
>>
>>
>
> The valves and pistons certainly CAN hit each other. That is the
> definition
> of an "interference" engine. If the timing belt snaps, the cam stops
> turning
> the valves instantly. If you have a manual transmission, the moving car
> forces the crank and hence the pistons to keep moving and damage is almost
> guaranteed. If you have an automatic, the crank MIGHT stop soon enough to
> avoid serious damage.

If it is truly an interference engine, it will almost always trash it out. I
don't believe that the A20A3 SOHC, that is in my 1989 Accord, is. It has
valve relief cut outs in the top of the pistons. The engine can be put at
TDC on number 1 cyl and then have the camshaft turned all day without
hitting the piston. I've done it and later removed the head ... not even a
scratch on valves or pistons.

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
> the problem with the tensioner pulley is that the bearings
> are "loose fit"
> from factory. so, people replacing the pulley are often
> wasting their
> money because the new one will be almost exactly the same
> as the old one.

Doesn't matter whether they're "loose fit" blah blah. It all
depends on a person's experience with ball bearings. I
propose that, at TB change 2, buy a new tensioner, but
compare the old one and new one by spinning them. If they
seem no different, then it is a better gamble to not change
it and just hold onto the new one until the next TB change.

> personally, i wouldn't consider changing the tensioner for
> the honda d-
> series engine for at least the first two belts.

On 12/9/08 12:35 PM, in article CqJ%k.9540$yr3.963@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com,
"Forrest" <REMOVETHISrunforrest1@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> "Elle" <honda.lioness@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MTG%k.3538$R43.452@newsfe08.iad...
>> "Forrest" <REMOVETHISrunforrest1@gmail.com> wrote
>>> 1989 Accord here, single overhead cam. I had the belt break shortly after
>>> buying it used, in around 1998 with 140,000 miles on it. No engine damage
>>> ... just put on another one. It ended up getting oil on it and broke
>>> again a few months ago (200,000 mi.) when my son was getting off of the
>>> freeway near the house.(lucky). He cranked it over trying to restart it.
>>> I didn't even know what an interference engine was and turned the cam and
>>> crankshaft over several times, trying to get things lined up. No damage.
>>> I later replaced the head gasket and saw that the valves and pistons were
>>> intact. Wonder if Honda is just playing "CYA" in case there is carbon
>>> build-up and things make contact.
>>
>> Pardon? What do you mean about the carbon build-up tending to promote
>> valves hitting piston?
>>
>> Dillon raises a good point. I do not like my explanation for why sometimes
>> the engine is not damaged. When driving and the TB breaks, it's true spark
>> stops pretty instantaneously, but ISTM the tranny will keep the wheels
>> moving and so the pistons moving for awhile, yet the cam is disconnected
>> from the crank, so I would expect pistons to hit valves. Unless the valves
>> can halt a slow((??) moving piston?
>
> Pardon? I mean, like I don't think that the valves and pistons CAN hit
> each other. If anything were to make contact, it would be the carbon
> build-up ... not "promoting" valves hitting pistons. Talk about putting
> words into someone's mouth.
>
>

The valves and pistons certainly CAN hit each other. That is the definition
of an "interference" engine. If the timing belt snaps, the cam stops turning
the valves instantly. If you have a manual transmission, the moving car
forces the crank and hence the pistons to keep moving and damage is almost
guaranteed. If you have an automatic, the crank MIGHT stop soon enough to
avoid serious damage.

On 12/9/08 2:04 PM, in article obA%k.3698$Xt.3585@newsfe13.iad, "Elle"
<honda.lioness@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Dillon Pyron" <invaliddmpyron@austin.rr.com> in his words
> "thus spake"
>> "Elle" <honda.lioness@gmail.com> :
>>
>>> All one can deal with here are probabilities. Your belt is
>>> more likely to fail than one changed at seven years; less
>>> likely to fail than one driven in extreme weather over the
>>> last nine+ years. Also reports are that if a timing belt
>>> fails at lower speeds, chances are better that no engine
>>> damage will occur.
>>
>> Not true. If the cam(s) isn't/aren't spinning but the
>> crank is, you
>> will, in all likelyhood, have a piston be introduced to a
>> valve.
>> It's
>> the mechanics of the engine and has nothing to do with
>> speed.
>
> I think you are envisioning a literal breaking of the TB
> apart, whereas I think many TB failures are not that
> extreme. With the less extreme failures, the cam can may
> still be moving somewhat in synch. The mechanics of the
> engine are also such that it comes to a stop sooner when it
> is under less load. Momentum and all.

The one belt that failed on me was a clean snap & as the car had a manual
transmission, you could hear the "ping, ping, ping, ping" as the pistons,
being driven by the wheels, bashed the valves.

Most modern automatic transmissions do not have a reverse pump in the
transmission that will allow it to turn the engine via movement by the
wheels. This is why you need an immobilizer to hold the crank when you
remove the pulley bolt and why you can't push start the car. Even a
catastrophic belt failure might not damage valves if the crank stops soon
enough.

>
> Regardless, I am going by reports. I could be talked out of
> the claims made that lower engine speed lowers the
> probability of engine damage but without knowing more about
> how TBs fail, I will stick with this.
>
>

"E. Meyer" <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote
> The one belt that failed on me was a clean snap & as the
> car had a manual
> transmission, you could hear the "ping, ping, ping, ping"
> as the pistons,
> being driven by the wheels, bashed the valves.
>
> Most modern automatic transmissions do not have a reverse
> pump in the
> transmission that will allow it to turn the engine via
> movement by the
> wheels. This is why you need an immobilizer to hold the
> crank when you
> remove the pulley bolt and why you can't push start the
> car.

Well this is the only other theory I have seen to explain
why at least some Hondas do not experience engine damage
when the TB breaks. Guess I will keep an eye peeled for
whether those reporting no damage had (or tend to have?)
auto trannies.

Not sure I follow your other part. Manual transmission
hondas also require an immobilizer (= pulley holding tool)
to get the pulley bolt off.

> Even a
> catastrophic belt failure might not damage valves if the
> crank stops soon
> enough.

The only other explanation I can think of is that the
pistons either do always hit the valves when the TB breaks,
but it takes repeated hitting--the higher the RPM/torque,
the worse the pounding will be--to do serious damage. Maybe
the latter is baloney though. I am only going by the rough
schematics I have seen of interference engines.

On 12/11/08 10:02 AM, in article XPa0l.14$ah.3@newsfe04.iad, "Elle"
<honda.lioness@gmail.com> wrote:

> "E. Meyer" <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote
>> The one belt that failed on me was a clean snap & as the
>> car had a manual
>> transmission, you could hear the "ping, ping, ping, ping"
>> as the pistons,
>> being driven by the wheels, bashed the valves.
>>
>> Most modern automatic transmissions do not have a reverse
>> pump in the
>> transmission that will allow it to turn the engine via
>> movement by the
>> wheels. This is why you need an immobilizer to hold the
>> crank when you
>> remove the pulley bolt and why you can't push start the
>> car.
>
> Well this is the only other theory I have seen to explain
> why at least some Hondas do not experience engine damage
> when the TB breaks. Guess I will keep an eye peeled for
> whether those reporting no damage had (or tend to have?)
> auto trannies.
>
> Not sure I follow your other part. Manual transmission
> hondas also require an immobilizer (= pulley holding tool)
> to get the pulley bolt off.
>

Require is a strong word. If the clutch is in really good shape & the car
is locked in gear, theoretically you should be able to hold it using the
drive train as the immobilizer. That's how we did it on the 80's Fords &
Mazdas.

>> Even a
>> catastrophic belt failure might not damage valves if the
>> crank stops soon
>> enough.
>
> The only other explanation I can think of is that the
> pistons either do always hit the valves when the TB breaks,
> but it takes repeated hitting--the higher the RPM/torque,
> the worse the pounding will be--to do serious damage. Maybe
> the latter is baloney though. I am only going by the rough
> schematics I have seen of interference engines.
>
>