My manual says to change the timing belt at 60,000 on my 2003TL...I'm at a
little over 60,000 and my car still runs and looks brand new...Has anyone
else waited to change theirs or should I do it now?
Tegger - 05 Sep 2007 22:07 GMT
> My manual says to change the timing belt at 60,000 on my 2003TL...I'm
> at a little over 60,000 and my car still runs and looks brand
> new...Has anyone else waited to change theirs or should I do it now?
Where do you live?
Your regularly scheduled replacement is at 105K miles or 84 months. The 60K
is for extreme temperature conditions.

Signature
Tegger
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
John Horner - 05 Sep 2007 23:25 GMT
> My manual says to change the timing belt at 60,000 on my 2003TL...I'm at a
> little over 60,000 and my car still runs and looks brand new...Has anyone
> else waited to change theirs or should I do it now?
Hmmm, our 2003 Accord V-6 with a similar engine calls for timing belt
change at 105k miles. Are you looking at the extreme services interval
instead of normal service?
apdicenzo - 05 Sep 2007 23:41 GMT
I live in Rhode Island...maybe I did look at the extreme instead of normal
service...Thanks allot
>> My manual says to change the timing belt at 60,000 on my 2003TL...I'm at
>> a little over 60,000 and my car still runs and looks brand new...Has
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> change at 105k miles. Are you looking at the extreme services interval
> instead of normal service?
Old Rob - 19 Sep 2007 17:03 GMT
Whatever you do, don't skip the timing belt replacement. If left
too long, they will fail, causing potentially major engine damage.
Speaking from experience!
--
--------------------------------- --- -- -
Posted with NewsLeecher v3.9 Beta 8
Web @ http://www.newsleecher.com/?usenet
------------------- ----- ---- -- -