 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Acura Cars / September 20072001 TL Timing Belt/Tune-up
Acura recommends the timing belt and water pump be changed at 160,000km or 7 years. I plan on having that done plus the valves, plugs, filters, etc. The cost here in Canada is $1,500. That's right, $1,500! My 2001 TL will be 7 years old in December, but it only has 95,000km on it (not quite 100,000 miles). Should I have this done or can it wait?  Signature"What, me worry?" - Alfred E. Neuman Venture Rider <dontbother@bogus.dom> wrote in news:46d81b6b$0$7339$c3e8da3 @news.astraweb.com: > Acura recommends the timing belt and water pump be changed at > 160,000km or 7 years. I plan on having that done plus the valves, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > on it (not quite 100,000 miles). Should I have this done or can it > wait? Chances are you can probably get one more year out of the belt, BUT. The big BUT is the probability of very expensive valve damage should the belt slip. Your engine is an "interference" design, so if the belt should jump a few teeth, the valves may contact the pistons. It's not a certainty that they will contact, but more like a 50-50 chance. Your decision will have to balance the benefits of delaying the expenditure against the possibility that the belt may fail during the delay and you may sustain a thousand dollars (or more) in valve damage. The high cost of the job is probably because the of the amount of labor necessary on your V6 engine. You may be able to get a better price (still using OEM parts) at an independent garage. However, I notice you're replacing a bunch of other parts, not just the belt. What's the actual rundown from the quote you were given? Where is the money going? If it were me, I would not try to get one more year out of the belt, just because of the potential financial downside. Are you a gambler? I'm not. SignatureTegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ >Venture Rider <dontbother@bogus.dom> wrote in news:46d81b6b$0$7339$c3e8da3 >@news.astraweb.com: [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >If it were me, I would not try to get one more year out of the belt, just >because of the potential financial downside. Are you a gambler? I'm not. Thanks for the advice. It turns out the belt/water pump job is about $850. With the valve adjustment, the plugs and a few other things thrown in I'll be looking at about a $1000. I can handle that. I'll be good for another 5 years. My car has not one spec of rust on it (and I live in Canada!), and I take it to Krown every year, so $1000 is worth it. And I love that car! Signature"What, me worry?" - Alfred E. Neuman Waiving the right to remain silent, Venture Rider <dontbother@bogus.dom> said: > Acura recommends the timing belt and water pump be changed at > 160,000km or 7 years. I plan on having that done plus the valves, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > on it (not quite 100,000 miles). Should I have this done or can it > wait? Isn't that more like about 58,000 miles..? I don't believe you'd need a new timing belt at that mileage. SignatureLarry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail "A lack of common sense is now considered a disability, with all the privileges that this entails." > Waiving the right to remain silent, Venture Rider <dontbother@bogus.dom> > said: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > new > timing belt at that mileage. He was right. 160,000km = 99419.39 miles Either way - it's still 7 years old for the belt. I agree with Tegger's advice. Valve damage is costly. -Dave Waiving the right to remain silent, "Dave L" <davelieuREMOVEME@yahoo.com> said: >> Waiving the right to remain silent, Venture Rider >> <dontbother@bogus.dom> said: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > He was right. 160,000km = 99419.39 miles Yes, but *HE* has 58,000 miles on it. > Either way - it's still 7 years old for the belt. Does the age of the belt make more difference than it mileage..? SignatureLarry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail "A lack of common sense is now considered a disability, with all the privileges that this entails." > Waiving the right to remain silent, "Dave L" <davelieuREMOVEME@yahoo.com> > said: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Yes, but *HE* has 58,000 miles on it. You're right! Reading is fundamental. Me thinks I have to start studying for "hook'd on foniks". I misread the op. Sorry! >> Either way - it's still 7 years old for the belt. > > Does the age of the belt make more difference than it mileage..? I don't know if it makes "more" difference but it still makes a difference. Unfortunately I know from experience what happens to an interference engine when the timing belt goes. Had a timing belt changed on an '89 prelude Si, around 1999. The odo went up about 30k later, so I was strictly guaging the mileage from the trip meter. (Picked up the car used, and suspect the previous person tampered with the odo.) It went up around 2003 and *approximately* 70k since the tb change. Ended up having a used engine from Japan put in. |
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
|
©2008 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.