Timing belt: Age vs. Mileage

On 12/8/04 9:55 AM, in article
feb12ec2710b802718e4dfab2c1f5c47.RemoveThis@localhost.talkaboutautos.com, "zonie"
<sjemoomaw@nospam> wrote:

 > Depending on when that car was built , it could be nearly seven years old.
 > Even though the miles are low if it was my car I would replace the belt. I
 > have always gone 5 years or 60,000 miles ans have no problems. Scott
 >

Unless you live in an area of severe heat or severe cold, you are changing
it about half again more often than necessary. I would expect that you would
have no problems, except in the wallet.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Timing belt: Age vs. Mileage 

I live In Phoenix summer highs 110 -120. And from his e-mail I think he
lives In Russia. One extreme to the Other
 >> Stay informed about: Timing belt: Age vs. Mileage 

In article <52cbee22fb5d20f0d1d243c8fec6d050 DeleteThis @localhost.talkaboutautos.com>
"zonie" <sjemoomaw@nospam> writes:

 >I live In Phoenix summer highs 110 -120. And from his e-mail I think he
 >lives In Russia. One extreme to the Other

I'm in Houston, summer highs 95~99 and a long "summer" with 90º + temps
beginning in June and extending through early October some years.

My wife's car is a '96 Lexus LS400 w/55k miles on it (recommended
replacement at 90k). My dealer inspected the factory-original T-belt last
year at 52k miles and said "it's fine, let's look at it again in another
couple years if you get to 60k by then" ;^)

Manufacturer's "recommended" replacement intervals are always way
conservative, designed to avoid any problems long before you might expect
some.

I bought a used '91 Accord w/120k on the clock for my son when he first
started driving. The original owner kept meticulous records, but only
changed oil every 5k miles and had never put a T-belt on it. My son ran
the mileage out to 149k before driving it into 4-feet of water during
tropical storm Allison, (June 2001) ruining it.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Timing belt: Age vs. Mileage 

In article <52cbee22fb5d20f0d1d243c8fec6d050
@localhost.talkaboutautos.com>, sjemoomaw@nospam says...

 > I live In Phoenix summer highs 110 -120. And from his e-mail I think he
 > lives In Russia.

Uh, maybe not. Hint: Google his "name" and "organization".

Dave<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Timing belt: Age vs. Mileage 

In article <2nafr09tauj8mf1esfr2mklbu18j2tk5ui RemoveThis @4ax.com>, wdg@
[204.52.135.1] says...
 > In article <52cbee22fb5d20f0d1d243c8fec6d050 RemoveThis @localhost.talkaboutautos.com>
 > "zonie" <sjemoomaw@nospam> writes:
 >
  > >I live In Phoenix summer highs 110 -120. And from his e-mail I think he
  > >lives In Russia. One extreme to the Other

 > I'm in Houston, summer highs 95~99 and a long "summer" with 90º + temps
 > beginning in June and extending through early October some years.
 >
 > My wife's car is a '96 Lexus LS400 w/55k miles on it (recommended
 > replacement at 90k). My dealer inspected the factory-original T-belt last
 > year at 52k miles and said "it's fine, let's look at it again in another
 > couple years if you get to 60k by then" ;^)
 >
 > Manufacturer's "recommended" replacement intervals are always way
 > conservative, designed to avoid any problems long before you might expect
 > some.

An alternate data point: I'm in Houston too, and the T-belt recently
broke on my '91 CRX with just under 115K on the clock. It had been
replaced at 60K per factory recommendation, but that had been almost
seven years ago. It had dry-rotted to the point where several teeth were
almost stripped off.

Fortunately, I was incredibly lucky and didn't suffer any top-end damage
as a result of the failure, but that experience made a believer out of
me when it comes to replacing the T-belt every five years regardless of
mileage, at least on the older Honda engines.

Dave<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Timing belt: Age vs. Mileage 

In article <MPG.1c2191693b4b98ba989f00.TakeThisOut@207.14.113.17> Dave Garrett
<dave.TakeThisOut@compassnet.com> writes:


>An alternate data point: I'm in Houston too, and the T-belt recently
>broke on my '91 CRX with just under 115K on the clock. It had been
>replaced at 60K per factory recommendation, but that had been almost
>seven years ago. It had dry-rotted to the point where several teeth were
>almost stripped off.

Hmmm, OK, have to ask, was the replacement belt OEM from the dealership or
one from the aftermarket? Rubber dry-rotting early smacks of a possible
quality issue. OZONE and U/V light (along with heat) are the enemies of
rubber products. We can probably rule out the sunlight, but good quality
belts are designed to withstand punishment. Sounds like the replacement
didn't measure up to the quality of the original.
 >> Stay informed about: Timing belt: Age vs. Mileage 

In article <oq0ir01pqv7g5ra196loa13n2mr2rp4fe5.TakeThisOut@4ax.com>, wdg@
[204.52.135.1] says...
> In article <MPG.1c2191693b4b98ba989f00.TakeThisOut@207.14.113.17> Dave Garrett
> <dave.TakeThisOut@compassnet.com> writes:

> >An alternate data point: I'm in Houston too, and the T-belt recently
> >broke on my '91 CRX with just under 115K on the clock. It had been
> >replaced at 60K per factory recommendation, but that had been almost
> >seven years ago. It had dry-rotted to the point where several teeth were
> >almost stripped off.
>
> Hmmm, OK, have to ask, was the replacement belt OEM from the dealership or
> one from the aftermarket? Rubber dry-rotting early smacks of a possible
> quality issue. OZONE and U/V light (along with heat) are the enemies of
> rubber products. We can probably rule out the sunlight, but good quality
> belts are designed to withstand punishment. Sounds like the replacement
> didn't measure up to the quality of the original.

The replacement wasn't done at a dealership, but at an independent shop
specializing in Hondas that used to be highly regarded locally (I no
longer use them, but that decision was largely unrelated to the quality
of the work performed there). I don't know if the belt was aftermarket
or not, but it's certainly possible that it was.

Dave
 >> Stay informed about: Timing belt: Age vs. Mileage 

On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 20:06:14 -0600, Bubba <wdg@[204.52.135.1]> wrote:
>In article <MPG.1c2191693b4b98ba989f00.RemoveThis@207.14.113.17> Dave Garrett
><dave.RemoveThis@compassnet.com> writes:
>>An alternate data point: I'm in Houston too, and the T-belt recently
>>broke on my '91 CRX with just under 115K on the clock. It had been
>>replaced at 60K per factory recommendation, but that had been almost
>>seven years ago. It had dry-rotted to the point where several teeth were
>>almost stripped off.
>
>Hmmm, OK, have to ask, was the replacement belt OEM from the dealership or
>one from the aftermarket? Rubber dry-rotting early smacks of a possible
>quality issue. OZONE and U/V light (along with heat) are the enemies of
>rubber products. We can probably rule out the sunlight, but good quality
>belts are designed to withstand punishment. Sounds like the replacement
>didn't measure up to the quality of the original.

Even "best quality" belts have a determinable Mean Time Between
Failure: Honda has figured theirs at comfortably more than
100,000miles OR 7years, lately.

It's an interference engine and the belt replacement is considerably
less expensive than a top-end engine rebuild: Why act foolishly?
 >> Stay informed about: Timing belt: Age vs. Mileage