 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Acura Cars / April 2007Timing belt question.
My stepson has a '99 TL with about 108,0000 miles on the odometer. I keep after him to have the timing belt replaced. My question: Is the Acura engine one of those where several valves are broken when the timing belt goes or is the worst that can happen is that it will have to be towed? Also, should the water pump be replaced as well at this milage? Your comments will be appreciated. "Squire" <rhfrist@verizon.net> wrote in news:1175461402.312537.84310 @n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com: > My stepson has a '99 TL with about 108,0000 miles on the odometer. I > keep after him to have the timing belt replaced. My question: Is the > Acura engine one of those where several valves are broken when the > timing belt goes or is the worst that can happen is that it will have > to be towed? Also, should the water pump be replaced as well at this > milage? Your comments will be appreciated. Your stepson's engine, like just about every Honda engine ever built, is a valve-bender. Honda's quality control is such that the belt will travel somewhat further before breaking than its specified replacement interval, but it's unwise to tempt fate. It is also not a given that the valves will get damaged when the belt breaks. Occasionally people get lucky and no major harm is done. The odds are rather against you, though. Valve damage repair can run into the thousands. It would be frankly stupid to delay a $500 invoice in order to risk a $3,000 one. The water pump should be replaced at the same time as the timing belt. It's only $60, but you have to take everything else apart to get to it. Do you really want to save $60 now, then spend another $200 in labor later to replace it when it starts leaking or making noise? Besides, the water pump is turned by the timing belt. If the pump should seize, it will tear up the timing belt and give you the aforementioned $3,000 valve repair bill. There is such a thing as "false economy". Do not fall prey to the temptations of false economy.  SignatureTegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ You're right about the logic of replacing a $60 waterpump. Unfortunately it's more like $123 for the pump plus labor plus all the associated belts, fittings, etc. from my Dlr. and so it all ends up a lot closer to a grand than to $500. Yes, it is a calculated risk to skip the WP but it's not such a no-brainer when looking at spending $200+ to "maybe" save $300 sometime later on. I'm still debating. FWIW, it looks to me like your posts are in text and not HTML. > "Squire" <rhfrist@verizon.net> wrote in news:1175461402.312537.84310 > @n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > There is such a thing as "false economy". Do not fall prey to the > temptations of false economy. > You're right about the logic of replacing a $60 waterpump. Unfortunately > it's more like $123 for the pump plus labor plus all the associated belts, > fittings, etc. from my Dlr. and so it all ends up a lot closer to a grand > than to $500. Yes, it is a calculated risk to skip the WP but it's not > such a no-brainer when looking at spending $200+ to "maybe" save $300 > sometime later on. I'm still debating. I think you are underestimating the costs of water pump failure. If the pump has to be replaced in the future, it will cost as much then as doing the whole smash now; what you spend now will be for naught. If the pump seizes (fortunately rather rare in Honda products) it will strip the timing belt and wreck the engine. The choice is yours, but I recommend doing the pump. Mike Hmmm...I had not considered that a seized waterpump could cascade into a timing belt failure. Of course even a new pump still has some risk of failure so it is always a question of weighing the odds but I do take your point and I do appreciate your well considered advice. >> You're right about the logic of replacing a $60 waterpump. Unfortunately >> it's more like $123 for the pump plus labor plus all the associated [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Mike Got to ask... What is the recommended mileage to replace the timing belt on the engine? I am new to Honda / Acura. I just picked up a 2000 3.2 TL with 67k miles on it.... Thanks! the_mahout > Got to ask... What is the recommended mileage to replace the timing > belt on the engine? I am new to Honda / Acura. I just picked up a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > the_mahout Since the interval varies so much from model to model and year to year, the best source of an answer is the owner's manual for that car... if it came with one. Mike > Got to ask... What is the recommended mileage to replace the timing > belt on the engine? I am new to Honda / Acura. I just picked up a > 2000 3.2 TL with 67k miles on it.... Given that your vehicle is 7 years old and is at 67k you might be advised to do it soon. >> Got to ask... What is the recommended mileage to replace the timing >> belt on the engine? I am new to Honda / Acura. I just picked up a >> 2000 3.2 TL with 67k miles on it.... >> > Given that your vehicle is 7 years old and is at 67k you might be advised > to do it soon. Good point: I don't know of any intervals longer than 7 years. It's a good bet the belt hasn't been changed yet. Unfortunately so: http://www.gates.com/landing/import/partlocator.cfm?location_id=510 Ken Signature"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go from thirty-third to Buffalo. From Broadway bright the tubes run right Into the Road of Anthracite" Erie Lackawanna > My stepson has a '99 TL with about 108,0000 miles on the odometer. I > keep after him to have the timing belt replaced. My question: Is the > Acura engine one of those where several valves are broken when the > timing belt goes or is the worst that can happen is that it will have > to be towed? Also, should the water pump be replaced as well at this > milage? Your comments will be appreciated. > Unfortunately so: > > http://www.gates.com/landing/import/partlocator.cfm?location_id=510 Oddly, there are some definitely non-interference engines that Gates lists as interference. The Volvo B230 is non-interference in all versions. In this case I'm sure it's correct. Mike I have seen some discrepancies. Ken Signature"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go from thirty-third to Buffalo. From Broadway bright the tubes run right Into the Road of Anthracite" Erie - Lackawanna >> Unfortunately so: >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Mike >> Unfortunately so: >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Mike Some engines are "officially" non-interference only as-built. This simply means there is some clearance between the parts. The clearance may be as little as a few thousandths of an inch, so once a bit of carbon builds up, the engine effectively becomes an interference setup. SignatureTegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.