 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Honda Cars / July 2005Timing belt - mileage vs time
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. > For what it may be worth: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's > saying, even if he may not be right. id likely believe him,... ive got 49k on my 98 CX, and am in no particular hurry to replace the belt. i doubt ill wait til 108k, but 90 sounds reasonable if i still ahve the car. part has to do with the weather the car is driven in, how its stored, etc. i park in a garage. FWIW, i change all my fluids every 3 years, and they always come out looking almost as clean as the new stuff. > id likely believe him,... ive got 49k on my 98 CX, and am in no > particular hurry to replace the belt. i doubt ill wait til 108k, but 90 > sounds reasonable if i still ahve the car. part has to do with the > weather the car is driven in, how its stored, etc. i park in a garage. That's what I was thinking. Perhaps changing the belt based on time is recommended for so-called "severe" conditions such as winter weather. > id likely believe him,... ive got 49k on my 98 CX, and am in no > particular hurry to replace the belt. Ah. Because you don't WANT to replace the belt, you've chosen to believe someone who confirms what you want to do. Got it. >> id likely believe him,... ive got 49k on my 98 CX, and am in no >> particular hurry to replace the belt. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Got it. So at 7k a year, he'll wait until nearly 13 years on the original belt. Yikes. You figure you'll change it by 2011, do you, Mike? > 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 [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's > saying, even if he may not be right. My experience has been different. I replaced the t-belt on my '90 CRX Si at 60K miles. Last year, at around 115K miles, it occurred to me that it was nearing time to replace it again, and resolved to do so as it got closer to the 120K mile mark. Shortly thereafter, it failed while I was on the freeway. Fortunately, I was able to coast into the breakdown lane safely, and even more fortunately, the valvetrain wasn't damaged. It had been seven years since it was replaced at 60K (my daily commute is short, hence the relatively low mileage on the car for its age), and the snapped belt had dry-rotted badly enough to where it was easy to strip teeth off it with my bare hands. Now, I live in an area with high humidity, very hot summers, and mild winters, so you might consider that to be the "extreme conditions" Honda typically stipulates a different maintenance schedule for. But when I told my mechanic how long it had been since the 60K replacement, he said he would be reluctant to trust a t-belt for much more than 5 years regardless of mileage. Perhaps the newer belts are constructed differently, as the maintenance interval for most of them has gone up in recent years. As always, YMMV. Especially when it comes to t-belts. :-) Dave > For what it may be worth: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's > saying, even if he may not be right. ---------------------- Earl is honest, but mis-informed. Please read this: http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/faq.html#interference 'Curly' High milage in my opinion is not the only killer of timing belts. Heat / below freezing temps. and starting the engine put a lot more stress on the belt than driving on long trips. You also have a tensioner pulley that may have the grease drying out. And the biggest issue is that Honda's are not free-wheeling engines. Normally, when the belt breaks, pistons and valves collide. Will Earl stand by you with assistance if your belt breaks before its scheduled milage interval? And will he put it in writing? Honda is now recommending a time as well as milage interval. Good luck on your decision. Honda always recommended a time with their timing belt change. I believe it's 5 years. > High milage in my opinion is not the only killer of timing belts. Heat / > below freezing temps. and starting the engine put a lot more stress on the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Honda is now recommending a time as well as milage interval. Good luck on > your decision. 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. When I changed my belt at 90K on my car, the water pump was almost shot, it was slowly leaking and the bearings were making a loud noise. Without taking the belt out, I wouldn't have known. My car is also a 94. > For what it may be worth: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's > saying, even if he may not be right. > For what it may be worth: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's > saying, even if he may not be right. 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.  SignatureTeGGeR® The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ >> For what it may be worth: >> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > To me, $200 is worth the peace of mind. $200! You know a good place man! Any such places around DFW? RAT >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. > "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message > > Timing belt replacement: $200 or so. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > $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. >> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message >> > Timing belt replacement: $200 or so. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > 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. :) SignatureTeGGeR® The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ >>> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message >>> > Timing belt replacement: $200 or so. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > 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! 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 > For what it may be worth: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > 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. > 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. >> without any form of visible deterioration. i say, do a visual >> inspection. if it apears to be in bad shape, cracking, fraying, teeth [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > 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. SoCalMike says... >> 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. 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. All of the columns assume 15k miles per year. But it's clear that some things are really mileage based, like brake pads, 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. 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. > SoCalMike says... > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > 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 [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > 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 $600 now but risk destroying your engine from a broken timing belt. These do happen on Hondas of your year. So, are you driving a clunker that you're ready to abandon and replace with a newer car? If so, then it may make sense to drive it into the ground and roll the dice on NOT replacing the belt. If OTOH it's your principal transportation and you don't have several thousand or more dollars lying around to buy a new car with, then I think you should definitely replace the timing belt. Now. > Brake pad wear very much depends on individual driver habits and where the > car is driven. That's for sure. I do a fair amount of long distance driving late at night, when I hardly ever apply the brakes, thereby racking up a lot of mileage without braking in comparison to the small amount of city driving I do. > > Brake pad wear very much depends on individual driver habits and where the > > car is driven. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > mileage without braking in comparison to the small amount of city > driving I do. I get 18-22K on OEM Honda pads in NYC. -------------------- http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-31-then-and-now-usat_x.htm "Other top officials, including Cheney and Rumsfeld, said the war would last "weeks, not months."" http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2005b/052705/052705w.php "More than two years into a war that was supposed to be quick and easy, and the justification for which has spun from removing a dictator to eliminating weapons of mass destruction to fighting terrorism and, finally, to planting democracy that would then spread across the Middle East, Iraq is in chaos." RayGun sends his lackey to kiss Saddam's a.s. http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/weapons.html#wms http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html WHY IRAQ?: http://www.angelfire.com/creep/gwbush/remindus.html http://www.quantumphilosophy.net/files/clips/TimRyan_Medium.mov http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/shockwave/chickenhawks.htm "Bubba got a BJ, BU$H screwed us all!" - Slim Elle says... > 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." The question is what does it mean to Honda. And it clearly says whichever comes first. At the risk of being cynical, I view a lot of this as being dealer revenue enhancement. You may disagree, but I think that for a car like mine which averages less than 5000 miles per year, following these guides literally would just mean wasting a lot of money. > 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. Perhaps, but pad wear clearly does not depend on time at all. If the car sits idle for a month, the brake pads don't wear down even a little bit during that period. Well, if you don't count the relativistic effects and quantum uncertainty. > 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. Mine says 15k/1yr. I see no point in even checking the clearance before 15k miles. I would have to pay someone to do that, and I think that's silly. I acknowledge that there's a question about the timing belt, but stuff like valve clearance, spark plugs and brake pads are just not related to time, and I'm not going to follow the manual literally on such items. > 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. Anecdotal reports with respect to miles, but I haven't seen much with respect to time alone. > 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. They do happen, but I haven't heard of any breaking at 49,000 miles. But you're right. It's cost vs risk, but that depends on what you think the risk really is. I still don't have a clear picture of what that is, and I don't think that picture exists in statistical form, unfortunately. > So, are you driving a clunker that you're ready to > abandon and replace with a newer car? If so, then it may [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > think you should definitely replace the timing belt. > Now. Perhaps so. But I have high deductibles on all my insurance coverage, and I don't buy extended warranties on anything. In the long run I make money that way. If you protect yourself against every conceivable risk, you end up spending all your money doing that. I'll check with some other shops and see what they say. The problem of course is getting a straighforward answer from someone. That's what impressed me about Earl. > Elle says... > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > per year, following these guides literally would just mean > wasting a lot of money. Being thrifty myself, I can understand your concern. But I think one has to consider for whom the guidelines are written. Honda should be conservative, as it can't be sure to what kind of driving people are subjecting their cars. You might note the manual says not to replace the oil until 7500 miles or six months have passed. There is discussion on the net of why the six month interval is there. Honda could probably easily get away with saying 3000 miles/6 months, because that's the mantra at places like Jiffy Lube and one's local dealer. Now 3000 miles is a profit-driven figure. > > Brake pads are not at all strictly mileage based. Nor > > does the manual say they are. What it does say is [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Perhaps, but pad wear clearly does not depend on time at > all. Dude, the manual is not saying to go replace the brake pads every six months. It's saying to go inspect them. It's a guideline. It strikes me as perfectly reasonable, since the manual has to assume all kind of extreme driving conditions. What interval, in years or miles, would you would recommend for the brake pads? Bear in mind that someone's safety is quite arguably at stake here. > If the car sits idle for a month, the brake pads don't > wear down even a little bit during that period. Well, if > you don't count the relativistic effects and quantum > uncertainty. Don't go there, dude. You're not ready. > > The valve clearances are supposed to be checked > > every15k/2 years, whichever comes first, on my 91 Civic. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > related to time, and I'm not going to follow the manual > literally on such items. You might note that the manual says to replace the oil every 7500 miles or six months, whichever comes first. > > What you have is an engineering design which is also > > supported by many anecdotal reports of broken timing [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > They do happen, but I haven't heard of any breaking at > 49,000 miles. Do you understand why the two constraints--time and mileage--are not both required to be met here? > But you're right. It's cost vs risk, but that depends on > what you think the risk really is. I still don't have a > clear picture of what that is, and I don't think that > picture exists in statistical form, unfortunately. I personally have no doubt the engineering design does incorporate statistics on likelihood of breakage. Speaking as a licensed professional engineer. snip > I'll check with some other shops and see what they say. The > problem of course is getting a straighforward answer from > someone. That's what impressed me about Earl. Well, you don't really know if it's straightforward or just someone pretending to know more than the others, do you? Of course, you shouldn't do what you're uncomfortable with. If you trust Earl, then it's not for me to say otherwise. Just saying I suspect with a little googling you will find reports of timing belts going at less than 11 years. If you want to risk it and can afford to do so, then your decision-making is rational. But I absolutely object to your claim that Honda is wrong to put a guideline of 90k miles/6 years down for the Civic. >>Elle says... >> [quoted text clipped - 110 lines] > decision-making is rational. But I absolutely object to your claim that > Honda is wrong to put a guideline of 90k miles/6 years down for the Civic. elle, at the time the 94 manual was written, belts weren't as good as they are today - hence modern belts have 100-120k mile intervals. if it's a modern belt of premium brand and operated in not too extreme an environment, there's no real reason why a change interval couldn't be extended. while sudden failure is possible, my experience is that belts that break are usually in pretty bad condition on visual inspection and most of the time, they make noise in use, particularly when the motor is revved high. good condition belts are all but silent and generally don't break. if you want to be prudent, sure, change at the service interval. if you want to be thrifty, visually inspect. if you want to be chancy, listen for the most distinctive belt whine. "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote snip, something others shoud learn. > > But I absolutely object to your claim that > > Honda is wrong to put a guideline of 90k miles/6 years down for the Civic. > > > elle, at the time the 94 manual was written, belts weren't as good as > they are today - I was referring above to my 91 Civic's interval, as well as Civics of years around 1991. > "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote > snip, something others shoud learn. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I was referring above to my 91 Civic's interval, as well as Civics of years > around 1991. it's the same interval as the 94 isn't it? post 96 is the extended interval. > Elle wrote: > > "jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > > it's the same interval as the 94 isn't it? According to my Chilton's covering 1984-1995 Civics, Yes. I think we're having a miscommunication. At the top, I meant I object to anyone's claim that it's flat-out wrong for Honda to put a guideline of 90k/6 years for the 91 Civic (and other Civic years near it that also specify 90k/6 years). Of interest though is that there is a footnote next to the timing belt interval spec for the 1992-1995 Civics, whereas there is not for the 1988-1991 Civics. The footnote states: "This service is recommended only." > post 96 is the extended > interval. People can google or look at their owner's manual. I realize the interval is higher for certain newer Hondas. We're splitting hairs. Somewhat related is that the recommended interval tends to be different in Canada, most likely because of the more severe weather. As you know... I don't want to try to twist the original poster's arm. (Like that can be done on Usenet.) I mean, he knows the risk he's taking at this point. That's what is important. He may very well roll the dice and win. Elle says... > Dude, the manual is not saying to go replace the brake > pads every six months. It's saying to go inspect them. > It's a guideline. It strikes me as perfectly reasonable, > since the manual has to assume all kind of extreme > driving conditions. > What interval, in years or miles, would you would > recommend for the brake pads? > Bear in mind that someone's safety is quite arguably at > stake here. Well, I first inspected mine at about 32,000 miles when the dealership "inspected" mine and told me they needed to be replaced. They did this with a straight face. I took the wheels off and looked, and it was obvious I was being bullshitted, and I complained to the service manager. The second time was last week. At 49,300 miles, I thought it probably wasn't too early to check them again. Still a good bit of pad thickness left. I'll check them again in a few years, but you know, that's what those little warning tabs are for. When they start to chatter, you still have pad left, but not much, and it's time to get that brake job. >> They do happen, but I haven't heard of any breaking at >> 49,000 miles. > Do you understand why the two constraints--time and > mileage--are not both required to be met here? Oh sure. But saying that if either is met you have to replace the belt - that just may not be true. > I personally have no doubt the engineering design does > incorporate statistics on likelihood of breakage. > Speaking as a licensed professional engineer. I agree, although I only play a licensed professional engineer on TV. I have less confidence that the statistical analysis has much to do with what's in the owner's manual, except in the most general way. > If you want to risk it and can afford to do so, then > your decision-making is rational. But I absolutely > object to your claim that Honda is wrong to put a > guideline of 90k miles/6 years down for the Civic. I don't care what they put in the manual. I just don't want to be bound by assumptions on which the manual is based that don't apply to me. [re: brake pads] > Well, I first inspected mine at about 32,000 miles when the > dealership "inspected" mine and told me they needed to be > replaced. They did this with a straight face. I took the > wheels off and looked, and it was obvious I was being > bullshitted, and I complained to the service manager. Unh-hunh. I took my Civic in to the local dealer for a pre-purchase assessment, upon which they found about $3000 worth of work they could do. One item was to replace the front rotors, which were "rusted", and pads, to the tune of $400. Yeah, right. When I got a look at them I found that they were perfectly solid and displayed no more than a reasonably normal amount of rust. No thumping during braking at any speed. They also said the clutch slave cylinder was leaking, which it did not appear to be on visual inspection when I replaced it last week. Don't expect I'll be going back there for any work beyond a seatbelt problem. Anyway, I was honest with the seller and let her know that the dealer was largely full of sh.t and that many of the real problems they found were regular maintenance items. Did bargain her down another $200, though, splitting a couple of the real things. All in all, it was a good deal. "Peabody" <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote E wrote > > What interval, in years or miles, would you would > > recommend for the brake pads? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > are for. When they start to chatter, you still have pad > left, but not much, and it's time to get that brake job. (It should be a squeal, not chatter.) So again: What interval do you think should be listed in the owner's manual? If you don't have enough information to respond to this, what information do you think would be helpful? snip > I don't care what they put in the manual. I just don't want > to be bound by assumptions on which the manual is based that > don't apply to me. I see. I'm glad you know which assumptions those are. "Peabody" <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote E wrote > Well, I first inspected mine at about 32,000 miles when the > dealership "inspected" mine and told me they needed to be [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > second time was last week. At 49,300 miles, I thought it > probably wasn't too early to check them again. My 91 Civic's first brake pads wore to the warning tabs after 43k miles. > "Peabody" <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote > E wrote [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > My 91 Civic's first brake pads wore to the warning tabs after 43k miles. The Scumbags at Paragon Honda in LIC told me at 12K that "they had to" replace my pads to keep my warranty intact. -------------------- http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-31-then-and-now-usat_x.htm "Other top officials, including Cheney and Rumsfeld, said the war would last "weeks, not months."" http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2005b/052705/052705w.php "More than two years into a war that was supposed to be quick and easy, and the justification for which has spun from removing a dictator to eliminating weapons of mass destruction to fighting terrorism and, finally, to planting democracy that would then spread across the Middle East, Iraq is in chaos." RayGun sends his lackey to kiss Saddam's a.s. http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/weapons.html#wms http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html WHY IRAQ?: http://www.angelfire.com/creep/gwbush/remindus.html http://www.quantumphilosophy.net/files/clips/TimRyan_Medium.mov http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/shockwave/chickenhawks.htm "Bubba got a BJ, BU$H screwed us all!" - Slim "slim" <pickin's@nyc.rr.com> wrote E wrote > > My 91 Civic's first brake pads wore to the warning tabs after 43k miles. > > The Scumbags at Paragon Honda in LIC told me at 12K that "they had to" > replace my pads to keep my warranty intact. Outrageous. The bustards. Thank god for the internet to convey info like this to the mere mortals (or just the young among us) who are so easily duped. Happens to everyone. >>"Peabody" <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote >>E wrote [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > The Scumbags at Paragon Honda in LIC told me at 12K that "they had to" > replace my pads to keep my warranty intact. I hope you reported them to Honda. > >>"Peabody" <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote > >>E wrote [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > I hope you reported them to Honda. "Each dealership is independently owned and operated and the repair fell into accepted standards." Just like when the SCUMBAGS tell you they HAVE to charge you four hours labor for a two hour job. They HAVE to. The Honda book says so. -------------------- http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-31-then-and-now-usat_x.htm "Other top officials, including Cheney and Rumsfeld, said the war would last "weeks, not months."" http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2005b/052705/052705w.php "More than two years into a war that was supposed to be quick and easy, and the justification for which has spun from removing a dictator to eliminating weapons of mass destruction to fighting terrorism and, finally, to planting democracy that would then spread across the Middle East, Iraq is in chaos." RayGun sends his lackey to kiss Saddam's a.s. http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/weapons.html#wms http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html WHY IRAQ?: http://www.angelfire.com/creep/gwbush/remindus.html http://www.quantumphilosophy.net/files/clips/TimRyan_Medium.mov http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/shockwave/chickenhawks.htm "Bubba got a BJ, BU$H screwed us all!" - Slim >>>>"Peabody" <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote >>>>E wrote [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > "Each dealership is independently owned and operated True, but a Honda dealership is a license to print money and Honda probably cares about how the public regards it. Dealers cannot afford to jeopardize their relationship with Honda. > and the repair fell into accepted standards." Which standards are those? If the pads weren't worn to their service life, this was fraud, along with false claim about being required to keep the "warranty intact". If it were me, I'd report them to Honda (plus the BBB & the state agency which deals with this sort of thing) and see what Honda had to say, after telling the dealer to get stuffed. Be sure to note which service adviser told you this. > Just like when the SCUMBAGS tell you they HAVE to charge > you four hours labor for a two hour job. If a new mechanic took six hours, would you have a problem paying that six hour charge? If the experienced mechanic, with a huge personal investment in the proper tools, does it in two hours, why should he be paid less? Because he's better? Same result, same charge. > If a new mechanic took six hours, would you have a problem paying that six > hour charge? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Same result, same charge. Sure with one of the publishers I work for felt this way... will NEVER happen! > > Just like when the SCUMBAGS tell you they HAVE to charge > > you four hours labor for a two hour job. > > If a new mechanic took six hours, would you have a problem paying that six > hour charge? Nice attempt at a strawman. > If the experienced mechanic, with a huge personal investment in the proper > tools, does it in two hours, why should he be paid less? > Because he's better? > > Same result, same charge. Not true. The Scumbag says he "has" to charge $675 for a belt/pump job. Most mechanics around me will do the job for $400-475. -------------------- http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-31-then-and-now-usat_x.htm "Other top officials, including Cheney and Rumsfeld, said the war would last "weeks, not months."" http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2005b/052705/052705w.php "More than two years into a war that was supposed to be quick and easy, and the justification for which has spun from removing a dictator to eliminating weapons of mass destruction to fighting terrorism and, finally, to planting democracy that would then spread across the Middle East, Iraq is in chaos." RayGun sends his lackey to kiss Saddam's a.s. http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/weapons.html#wms http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html WHY IRAQ?: http://www.angelfire.com/creep/gwbush/remindus.html http://www.quantumphilosophy.net/files/clips/TimRyan_Medium.mov http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/shockwave/chickenhawks.htm "Bubba got a BJ, BU$H screwed us all!" - Slim >> > Just like when the SCUMBAGS tell you they HAVE to charge >> > you four hours labor for a two hour job. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Nice attempt at a strawman. Thanks! Enjoyed your rebuttal as well! >> If the experienced mechanic, with a huge personal investment in the >> proper [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Not true. Ok, so what's the difference between the two jobs above? > The Scumbag says he "has" to charge $675 for a belt/pump job. > > Most mechanics around me will do the job for $400-475. So what's the problem? Didn't shop around? > >> > Just like when the SCUMBAGS tell you they HAVE to charge > >> > you four hours labor for a two hour job. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > So what's the problem? Didn't shop around? I got mine done for $400 by a mechanic who does a lot of Hondas. -------------------- http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-31-then-and-now-usat_x.htm "Other top officials, including Cheney and Rumsfeld, said the war would last "weeks, not months."" http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2005b/052705/052705w.php "More than two years into a war that was supposed to be quick and easy, and the justification for which has spun from removing a dictator to eliminating weapons of mass destruction to fighting terrorism and, finally, to planting democracy that would then spread across the Middle East, Iraq is in chaos." RayGun sends his lackey to kiss Saddam's a.s. http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/weapons.html#wms http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html WHY IRAQ?: http://www.angelfire.com/creep/gwbush/remindus.html http://www.quantumphilosophy.net/files/clips/TimRyan_Medium.mov http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/shockwave/chickenhawks.htm "Bubba got a BJ, BU$H screwed us all!" - Slim >> > The Scumbag says he "has" to charge $675 for a belt/pump job. > I got mine done for $400 by a mechanic who does a lot of Hondas. Well, that's clear. Thanks for playing. > > If a new mechanic took six hours, would you have a problem paying that six > > hour charge? > > Nice attempt at a strawman. no, it's the truth. >>>If a new mechanic took six hours, would you have a problem paying that six >>>hour charge? >> >>Nice attempt at a strawman. > > no, it's the truth. book rate is book rate. obviously it can be fudged by a "nice" independant. thats why good, quick ASE certified mechanics can make good money- by doing more work. FWIW, when i got the engine on my rabbit convertible replaced years ago, i had to upsell the independant mechanic by ASKING him to do the CV joints. > > > If a new mechanic took six hours, would you have a problem paying that six > > > hour charge? > > > > Nice attempt at a strawman. > > no, it's the truth. What dealer would hire (and keep) a wrench who does a two hour job in six? Strawman....burned. -------------------- http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-31-then-and-now-usat_x.htm "Other top officials, including Cheney and Rumsfeld, said the war would last "weeks, not months."" http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2005b/052705/052705w.php "More than two years into a war that was supposed to be quick and easy, and the justification for which has spun from removing a dictator to eliminating weapons of mass destruction to fighting terrorism and, finally, to planting democracy that would then spread across the Middle East, Iraq is in chaos." RayGun sends his lackey to kiss Saddam's a.s. http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/weapons.html#wms http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html WHY IRAQ?: http://www.angelfire.com/creep/gwbush/remindus.html http://www.quantumphilosophy.net/files/clips/TimRyan_Medium.mov http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/shockwave/chickenhawks.htm "Bubba got a BJ, BU$H screwed us all!" - Slim >> > > If a new mechanic took six hours, would you have a problem paying >> > > that six [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Strawman....burned. You work hourly, don't you.... > Well, I first inspected mine at about 32,000 miles when the > dealership "inspected" mine and told me they needed to be > replaced. They did this with a straight face. I took the > wheels off and looked, Did you look at both inside *and* outside pads, on both sides? > I'll check them again in a few > years, but you know, that's what those little warning tabs > are for. Those warning tabs are only on the inside pad. If the inside pad seizes, extra load will be forced on the outer pad, and it will wear twice as fast. You won't know until you get the grinding noise that tells you your rotors are already damaged. If you leave your brakes a "few years", you'd better hope you live in an area that gets no snow. SignatureTeGGeR® The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ >At the risk of being cynical, I view a lot of this as being >dealer revenue enhancement. You may disagree, but I think >that for a car like mine which averages less than 5000 miles >per year, following these guides literally would just mean >wasting a lot of money. However, low mileage is often severe service (e.g. city driving, short cold start trips). > > Brake pad wear very much depends on individual driver > > habits and where the car is driven. > >Perhaps, but pad wear clearly does not depend on time at >all. If the car sits idle for a month, the brake pads don't >wear down even a little bit during that period. However, if the low mileage car is a city car, it is likely to wear out its brake pads before a high milage highway car does. Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ Timothy J. Lee Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome. No warranty of any kind is provided with this message. > >At the risk of being cynical, I view a lot of this as being > >dealer revenue enhancement. You may disagree, but I think [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > However, if the low mileage car is a city car, it is likely to > wear out its brake pads before a high milage highway car does. Damn right. I get 18-22 on OEM pads in NYC. -------------------- http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-31-then-and-now-usat_x.htm "Other top officials, including Cheney and Rumsfeld, said the war would last "weeks, not months."" http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2005b/052705/052705w.php "More than two years into a war that was supposed to be quick and easy, and the justification for which has spun from removing a dictator to eliminating weapons of mass destruction to fighting terrorism and, finally, to planting democracy that would then spread across the Middle East, Iraq is in chaos." RayGun sends his lackey to kiss Saddam's a.s. http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/weapons.html#wms http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html WHY IRAQ?: http://www.angelfire.com/creep/gwbush/remindus.html http://www.quantumphilosophy.net/files/clips/TimRyan_Medium.mov http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/shockwave/chickenhawks.htm "Bubba got a BJ, BU$H screwed us all!" - Slim > SoCalMike says... > [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > important time is for big honking belts like these. It's > too bad we don't have statistics that would tell us. But if you DO decide to keep a car that long, its cheap insurance to get the belt/pump thing done. My 1996 Civic Coupe only has 62K on it, and every time I look at a new car, I remember that my Baby runs great, always starts, gets 33 MPG @ 80 MPH and 21 in NYC and the AC is still chilly! The $400 bucks it cost just bought me another ten years....hehehe. -------------------- http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-31-then-and-now-usat_x.htm "Other top officials, including Cheney and Rumsfeld, said the war would last "weeks, not months."" http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2005b/052705/052705w.php "More than two years into a war that was supposed to be quick and easy, and the justification for which has spun from removing a dictator to eliminating weapons of mass destruction to fighting terrorism and, finally, to planting democracy that would then spread across the Middle East, Iraq is in chaos." RayGun sends his lackey to kiss Saddam's a.s. http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/weapons.html#wms http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html WHY IRAQ?: http://www.angelfire.com/creep/gwbush/remindus.html http://www.quantumphilosophy.net/files/clips/TimRyan_Medium.mov http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/shockwave/chickenhawks.htm "Bubba got a BJ, BU$H screwed us all!" - Slim > My 1996 Civic Coupe only has 62K on it, and every time I look > at a new car, I remember that my Baby runs great, always starts, > gets 33 MPG @ 80 MPH and 21 in NYC and the AC is still chilly! yeah. my 98 CX hatch has 49k, and the only thing thats ever gone wrong was an O2 sensor, which i replaced myself. part of me wants a new car, but i really really like the one i have. Well, last year i bought a 1987 civic w/31,000 original miles. Paid $1200 for it and my goal is to get 5 years out of the car. 12,000 miles a year driven only to work on the highway. In 5 years it will have close to 90-100,000 miles on it. If it makes it that far,and i think it will, i will treat it to a new belt. Then i will continue to drive it until the rust gets too bad. I'd like to buy a new Cr-v so i might not go through with my plan. No great loss if the belt breaks and trashes the engine as i have other vehicles to drive but i have faith in it. > 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. > > without any form of visible deterioration. i say, do a visual > > inspection. if it apears to be in bad shape, cracking, fraying, teeth [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > im sure some live their whole lives with one belt, then it gets replaced > when the water pump starts spewing coolant. The phrase, "they don't make 'em like they used to" comes to mind. -------------------- http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-31-then-and-now-usat_x.htm "Other top officials, including Cheney and Rumsfeld, said the war would last "weeks, not months."" http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2005b/052705/052705w.php "More than two years into a war that was supposed to be quick and easy, and the justification for which has spun from removing a dictator to eliminating weapons of mass destruction to fighting terrorism and, finally, to planting democracy that would then spread across the Middle East, Iraq is in chaos." RayGun sends his lackey to kiss Saddam's a.s. http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/weapons.html#wms http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html WHY IRAQ?: http://www.angelfire.com/creep/gwbush/remindus.html http://www.quantumphilosophy.net/files/clips/TimRyan_Medium.mov http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/shockwave/chickenhawks.htm "Bubba got a BJ, BU$H screwed us all!" - Slim > 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 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > and you /know/ for sure mileage is within spec, i'd stick with earl's > advice. How do I inspect the TB? It appears to be under a cover that's between the water pump and the engine? Some info FWIW: 90 Civic (bought new 2/90); 116k miles, original timing belt and water pump. (previous Usenet research indicated engine damage from a break was relatively rare? Anybody got real data on this?) ~8k miles/year, 1500 highway, rest 4 miles/day to work. Recent problems: Transmission made a grinding noise while in neutral/park, did it 3 times then stopped - loose/broken parking pawl? Minor oil leak - a few drips a day. Mild "rubbing" noise from left front wheel; goes away when brakes applied. CV joints replaced with rebuilts a few years ago. Same "hot engine after stopping" as reported in another thread - did it once after a few hours of highway driving, hasn't done it since. Latest problem: Wouldn't start Sunday noon - turned over, but no ignition. Left it, had a friend check it Monday morning, said it fired right up. Went back after work with him, and it wouldn't start again :^( Popped air hose in front of injector in case air filter was clogged (bolts are rusted thus can't check it); didn't seem to help. Let it sit for 5-10 minutes, gave it one last try before giving up and having it towed to dealer, and it fired up - ??? Is it the fuel pump/filter, the timing belt, or something else? On my 81 Civic once I had a vacuum line come off; it would stall, and not start unless I took the air cleaner cover off and waited a few minutes. I really like this hatchback, and until Honda starts making them again, I'd rather not have to replace my 90; but I also need to have the body bondo-ed every year to get through PA inspection, and that's starting to get old too :^( My dealer recently moved off the bus line, and they've never been big on loaners, so I generally have to be desperate to take it to them :^( Ron Bauerle >>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 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > How do I inspect the TB? It appears to be under a cover that's between > the water pump and the engine? take the valve cover off and you can remove the top part of the belt cover easily. > Some info FWIW: > 90 Civic (bought new 2/90); 116k miles, original timing belt and water > pump. > (previous Usenet research indicated engine damage from a break > was relatively rare? Anybody got real data on this?) > ~8k miles/year, 1500 highway, rest 4 miles/day to work. "relatively rare" is too hard to quantify. probability of failure increases with mileage. > Recent problems: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Same "hot engine after stopping" as reported in another thread - did it > once after a few hours of highway driving, hasn't done it since. main relay > Latest problem: > Wouldn't start Sunday noon - turned over, but no ignition. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Let it sit for 5-10 minutes, gave it one last try before giving up and > having it towed to dealer, and it fired up - ??? main relay > Is it the fuel pump/filter, the timing belt, or something else? main relay > On my 81 Civic once I had a vacuum line come off; it would stall, and > not start unless I took the air cleaner cover off and waited a few [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > bondo-ed every year to get through PA inspection, and that's starting > to get old too :^( i'm with you on the hatchback thing. let's all write to honda usa & tell them we want our hatchbacks back! > My dealer recently moved off the bus line, and they've never been big > on loaners, so I generally have to be desperate to take it to them :^( > > Ron Bauerle Well Peabody, I'd say if Mr.Earl will pay for the collateral damage, to the engine, if the timing belt does break before 90k. Then I'd say let-R-run and see who's right. Thermal (heat) cycles and proper tension also factor in on the equation of "when to replace the t/belt." For the record, I replaced the T/Belt on my '90 Integra 3 years ago; it only had 68k miles. The belt didn't look particularly distressed; but at 12 years old the car is hardly worth what it would take to rehabilitate the engine/head if the T/Belt did break... > For what it may be worth: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's > saying, even if he may not be right. -- Tp, -------- __o ----- -\<. -------- __o --- ( )/ ( ) ---- -\<. -------------------- ( )/ ( ) ----------------------------------------- No Lawsuit Ever Fixed A Moron... Well Peabody, I'd say if Mr.Earl will pay for the collateral damage, to the engine, if the timing belt does break before 90k. Then I'd say let-R-run and see who's right. Thermal (heat) cycles and proper tension also factor in on the equation of "when to replace the t/belt." For the record, I replaced the T/Belt on my '90 Integra 3 years ago; it only had 68k miles. The belt didn't look particularly distressed; but at 12 years old the car is hardly worth what it would take to rehabilitate the engine/head if the T/Belt did break... > For what it may be worth: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > firmly turned me down. So, I assume he at least believes what he's > saying, even if he may not be right. -- Tp, -------- __o ----- -\<. -------- __o --- ( )/ ( ) ---- -\<. -------------------- ( )/ ( ) ----------------------------------------- No Lawsuit Ever Fixed A Moron... |
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.