a repeat of my Prelude timing chain question

Please excuse this double post which I first put in the other Honda
newsgroup:

I got some good advice here about my '01 Prelude which apparently now
needs a new timing belt because they decay with age, not mileage. I've
gone less than 55,000 km.

I found a mechanic who will do it for a reasonable price, considering
it's a four hour job, but he doesn't want to, thinking it's unnecessary.

Is there a school of thought that says we can ignore the age of a timing
belt? Just what happens to a car if the timing belt breaks?

 

Yes. Those who regret it. Given that your Prelude is turning around 4200
rpm at 80 the result of a breaking belt ought to be a disaster. Honda says
7 years or 90k miles for the Prelude. Of course, you could always risk it
and try for the 90k miles in a few years.

 

what is your climate where you live? hot? cold? extremes accelerate
decay.

many thousands of dollars of engine damage - the valves hit the pistons.

 

I live in a moderate zone - Vancouver BC

 

well, maybe you can persist a little longer. as above, extreme climates
are the worst and age will be more of a factor.

 

My 1986 Prelude is still on its original timing belt with 22 yrs and 70000
miles. I plan to change it this spring, since it's more than double the
change interval and I may be pushing my luck. I have changed the belt on my
1986 Accord twice. Once at 10 yrs and 125000 miles and again at 22 years
and 225000 miles. This is in Seattle where the weather is quite similar to
yours.

Statistically, the odds of failure will be very small at even twice the
change interval (time or mileage, but not both). It's a bit of a gamble,
but you probably have a much better chance of your car being destroyed in an
accident than from a belt failure but you still take it out on the road.
You have to decide on your own comfort level. If you will be losing sleep
over it, or couldn't live with the possible results of being wrong then you
should change the belt.

 

An '86 Prelude with 70k? That's low - but I'd venture to say you're on
borrowed time. I had an '89 prelude Si - people (including the dealership)
said I should change it at 90k. It broke a little over 65k at about 3 years
and took the valves (engine) with it. This was in 2003 - car bought used
and timing belt changed right after I bought it.

-Dave

 

it was probably over-tensioned. unfortunately, that seems to be a
common mistake.