A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Honda
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Timing belt - mileage vs time



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 12th 05, 11:40 AM
SadaYama
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

>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.

Ads
  #12  
Old July 12th 05, 07:50 PM
Pete from Boston
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Rattus The RAT wrote:
> "TeGGeR=AE" > 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.

  #13  
Old July 12th 05, 08:41 PM
TeGGeR®
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Pete from Boston" > wrote in
ups.com:

>
> Rattus The RAT wrote:
>> "TeGGeR®" > 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/
  #14  
Old July 13th 05, 12:49 AM
Rattus The RAT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"TeGGeR®" > wrote in message
...
> "Pete from Boston" > wrote in
> ups.com:
>
>>
>> Rattus The RAT wrote:
>>> "TeGGeR®" > 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!


  #15  
Old July 13th 05, 04:39 AM
Alex Rodriguez
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My family has an '88 Accord with 45k miles. The belt has never been changed.
I probably won't get to it till next year.
-----------------
Alex



  #16  
Old July 13th 05, 06:18 AM
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.

  #17  
Old July 13th 05, 06:38 AM
SoCalMike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.
  #18  
Old July 13th 05, 01:51 PM
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.

  #19  
Old July 13th 05, 07:20 PM
Elle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Peabody" > wrote
> SoCalMike says...
>
>
> > 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.

>
> Yes in fact, Earl said that the water pump is what usually
> goes out at somewhere around 90-100k miles, at which point
> they do the belt too.


If that's the case, it makes sense to be pre-emptive and just do the belt
per the maintenance schedule, at the same time replacing the water pump.
That is, in fact, what any good shop will do, since the labor for each
overlaps greatly.

But I realize you're focused on the time interval at the moment, since this
is what you've exceeded.

> He said he sees a lot of early-80's models with their
> original belt, and presumably the original water pump. But I
> would still guess that most of them get replaced at some
> point, either because the water pump goes out or because the
> dealer hounds you about it at each oil change.
>
> I was frankly surprised at how confident Earl was about his
> advice. Of course it isn't his car or his risk, but even so
> I would have expected him to hedge a little, or do one of
> those disclaimers about no guarantees, and so forth. But he
> just said "You don't need to do this," and there were no
> qualifiers. I mean, I had my checkbook with me. It would
> have been $595.
>
> Well, I may check with some other places locally just to see
> what they say, but having gotten the answer I wanted... :-)
>
> I just want to point out that in my owner's manual, there is
> only one column that says 90,000 miles, and that column also
> says 6 years. There is no 90k/8yrs or 90k/4yrs.


What does the / mark mean to you here?

My 91 Civic's manual explicitly notes that the interval is 90k miles or six
years, "whichever comes first."

> All of the
> columns assume 15k miles per year. But it's clear that some
> things are really mileage based, like brake pads,


Brake pads are not at all strictly mileage based. Nor does the manual say
they are. What it does say is _inspect_ the brake pads after certain mileage
and time intervals.

Brake pad wear very much depends on individual driver habits and where the
car is driven.

> while
> others (I don't know - maybe antifreeze, or maybe even
> engine oil) have a significant time component. But you
> aren't going to get your valves adjusted based on time even
> though the 30k/2yr major service includes it.


The valve clearances are supposed to be checked every15k/2 years, whichever
comes first, on my 91 Civic. It's likely the check will indicate they need
no adjustment, though. I've never had the valves adjusted on my car. I
checked the clearances a year ago.

> So it's not completely unreasonable to suggest that just
> because that column says 90k miles or 6 yrs it shouldn't
> necessarily be taken literally. The question is how
> important time is for big honking belts like these. It's
> too bad we don't have statistics that would tell us.


What you have is an engineering design which is also supported by many
anecdotal reports of broken timing belts destroying engines shortly after
the time and/or mileage interval is exceeded.

It's a cost vs. risk analysis. Save $600 now but risk destroying your engine
from a broken timing belt. These do happen on Hondas of your year.

So, are you driving a clunker that you're ready to abandon and replace with
a newer car? If so, then it may make sense to drive it into the ground and
roll the dice on NOT replacing the belt. If OTOH it's your principal
transportation and you don't have several thousand or more dollars lying
around to buy a new car with, then I think you should definitely replace the
timing belt. Now.


  #20  
Old July 13th 05, 08:51 PM
Abeness
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Elle wrote:
> Brake pad wear very much depends on individual driver habits and where the
> car is driven.


That's for sure. I do a fair amount of long distance driving late at
night, when I hardly ever apply the brakes, thereby racking up a lot of
mileage without braking in comparison to the small amount of city
driving I do.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Timing belt / water pump mpet500 Honda 15 March 16th 05 05:18 PM
1992 Camry Timing Belt [email protected] Technology 4 March 8th 05 04:11 PM
90 civic timing belt = blown valves? [email protected] Honda 6 February 19th 05 01:24 AM
replacing timing belt Sven Agardh VW water cooled 17 January 15th 05 01:08 AM
Honda Passport - Timing Belt ajpdla Honda 3 December 12th 04 04:12 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.