Do you replace tBelts due to "time", regardless of miles?
- Thread starter jf308
- Start date
most of us NSX owner here take great care of our car to the point of obsession. as far as recommendation goes from Honda its 7 years or 105k which ever comes first. so if you sway from the recommendation than drive at your own risk, but be worn a broken timing belt is very costly with bent valves etc. i personally would replace mine at 7 year interval regardless of miles just to have a piece of mind due to age and cracking.
For MOST NSX's the major maintenance schedule is six years or 60K miles. So, to answer your question, yes it is time sensitive as well as mileage sensitive. That means timing belt, water pump, spark pugs, probably cam plugs, etc. Some people never do it, most probably comply with the schedule. It gives me peace of mind and ensures my resale value. Do a search on WIKI and that will give you a full review of maintenance schedules. Oh, don't forget hoses and fluids as well.
Last edited:
As he said, every 7 years regardless of mileage to be safe, tensioner as well.
It all depends how much of a risk taker you are. You don't mention what year your car is. For all we know it could be a 1991 and has never had the brake fluid flushed or hoses changed. If you live by the book, then follow the book. I've extended the time period by 1-2 years on my tb/wp changes, however I was always well below the mileage intervals. The two timing belts that I've changed both looked to be in fairly good condition. However, you can never be sure if and when it will break.
I do the 6/60K rule because for many thats a long time inbetween changes already unless you daily drive yours.
Use the search function to best answer your question as there is volumes on this subject. My 14 year old timing belt with 24,000 miles on it was like new when replaced. Some say..."the stig".... the water pump offers greater risk than timing belt.
5 years and 12,000 miles..I'd wait at least another 5 years with the same annual mileage. No tracking your car right!! Some prime members are worry warts, I'd say let it ride for your car, there is minimal risk. Disclaimer: its your call :wink::wink:
Well, worry warts or just common sense.
How many accidents have you been in with your NSX? Do you still carry insurance? Why?
Odds are you won't need it... but what if?
I'm about to change mine on my 2003... has 32k miles... 28 of them I didn't drive. You better damn well believe she's getting the 7 year treatment.
You want to be a risk taker or gambler, roll the dice. It's a honda... great odds... but the house always wins in the end.
Not going to beat the timing belt dead horse any further, the other guys have covered it pretty well. Definitely have the hoses checked, if not replaced outright. A slow drip of coolant on my car turned out to be the entire set of hoses dry-rotted so bad they were about to burst.
LarryB is working on my TB/WP right now. I will see what the old one looked like when I pick the car up next week. My belt was 10 years old with about 20K miles on it.
-Greg
-Greg
My 1993 had 63k miles and is having the original belt changed now. Previous owners liked to stretch things, I guess. I just bought the car and set up an appointment to have it done immediately. I'll ask how it looked.
Me, I'd be inclined to stretch the time intervals a little, but not the mileage.
Me, I'd be inclined to stretch the time intervals a little, but not the mileage.
With all due respect to DrVolkl's comments "worry warts or just common sense", I think your comments and letting it ride a few years are spot on/good judgement.
Now that we know the car is 20yrs old, all of the hoses must be replaced. I wouldn't drive the car until that is done, regardless if the TB/WP is due.
So the question you posted doesn't even concern a car that you currently own, nor do you have the money to be able to afford even buying the car being discussed.
Thanks for wasting our time and being a tire-kicker.
Ditto.
We did help. Maybe you need to go back and read our responses in this thread before we found out you were just a tire kicker with this particular car.
I sincerely wish you good luck. However your childish response here is a good indicator that your intentions are different.
Oh yeah, thanks for calling us "jerks". That will get you real far in life.
DocL, so I got 24,000 miles on my 1996 that has been garaged kept most if not all its life. Your starting to turn me into a "worry wart". Don at Hilltop said last October that my hoses looked/felt okay so I think I'll have him check it out again this year October. You know, like going for an annual physical at the doctors. I've decided my NSX gets an annual check-up the same time I do. I'm in tune with the hoses are rubber and rubber dries mode. Just changed my tires that were 13 years old. I've budgeted $750 - $1,000 per year for routine maintenance. I've seen in other posts as well as working on my 1987 Grand National, you need to take car of them and replace certain parts due to age. Maybe in all this message, I'm saying thanks doc for helping me potentially spend more money on my car........but what a car.
I'm not a "worry wart", and I do let certian maintanence items go a little past their due date. However, my letting the hoses get 16 yrs old was my cut off point. My NSX has never left me stranded on the side of the road and I want it to continue to be reliable. I now have the confidence that my car is good to go for at least 10 more years without needing a major service. My next challenge is to get 100k miles on my OEM clutch.
Sorry ole JF got his feelings hurt - sometimes we can come off a little bit funny - the tire kicker thing was perhaps a little uneccessary. We are a friendly bunch here and we try to help. BUT .....you can't just pull our chain about some particular issue and then when we find out it's not even a car your looking at nor have the funds for - maybe JF should have just lurked for a while and done a little more research.
See JF if you had money and were seriously looking to buy it's a lot easier to help. Then we feel like we are helping someone that actually needs it NOW not whenever. So in the future if you find a car and you wanna know something about it or about what maintenance might be prudent - we'll be helpful - till then read and listen and research. You'll find out plenty.
Now with all that said I really liked this particular discussion a lot cause there were many real life mileage vs maintenance examples brought to light that our members have with thier own cars and that is good info. I love hearing that someone has a car with 63k on it and the tb/wp had never been changed - and it's a 93 - our buddy CaptCarl - wow! I personally am a little more inclined towards "Sid"wac's comments and timewise thinking. But it does go to show that our cars are quite reliable and have safety factors. I surely wouldn't recommend CapCarl's maintenance interval - but there are others I thought were fine. It's good food for thought.
Sometimes I believe we get a little too carried away with the TB time interval - Shawn I believe stipulated - no tracking- if you go over that limit of time. It seems everyone is concerned with high mileage and that is surely prudent! I believe that the instances that can be recounted on broken TBs were all tracking oriented - weren't they? Seems like I remember that. Anyway, it's good we go over this stuff as it comes up - it helps everyone and it seems there is always a little "new" slant on each thread - even if we have beat the "dead horse".
Great exchange here and good info - should one decide to accept and read it.:wink:
See JF if you had money and were seriously looking to buy it's a lot easier to help. Then we feel like we are helping someone that actually needs it NOW not whenever. So in the future if you find a car and you wanna know something about it or about what maintenance might be prudent - we'll be helpful - till then read and listen and research. You'll find out plenty.
Now with all that said I really liked this particular discussion a lot cause there were many real life mileage vs maintenance examples brought to light that our members have with thier own cars and that is good info. I love hearing that someone has a car with 63k on it and the tb/wp had never been changed - and it's a 93 - our buddy CaptCarl - wow! I personally am a little more inclined towards "Sid"wac's comments and timewise thinking. But it does go to show that our cars are quite reliable and have safety factors. I surely wouldn't recommend CapCarl's maintenance interval - but there are others I thought were fine. It's good food for thought.
Sometimes I believe we get a little too carried away with the TB time interval - Shawn I believe stipulated - no tracking- if you go over that limit of time. It seems everyone is concerned with high mileage and that is surely prudent! I believe that the instances that can be recounted on broken TBs were all tracking oriented - weren't they? Seems like I remember that. Anyway, it's good we go over this stuff as it comes up - it helps everyone and it seems there is always a little "new" slant on each thread - even if we have beat the "dead horse".
Great exchange here and good info - should one decide to accept and read it.:wink:
jf308 might not have benefited from this discussion, but I did. I'm facing the timing belt/water pump decision right now (mine is six years old with 28,000 miles) and I appreciate the informed judgment of DocL and the rest of you.
The condition of the coolant hoses are difficult to determine by visual inspection. My car (before I owned it) had a main radiator hose blow up in 2008 when it was 17 years old. The PO only replaced the bad hose. Needless to say, one of my first services I had LarryB do was replace the rest of the hoses. They "looked fine" too, but I wasn't going to gamble. Same thing with the TB/WP. There are plenty of NSX owners out there runnning on 20-year old TB's, so you just have to decide how much you're willing to gamble with your engine. Mine is due in 2013 and I'm definitely doing it (as an excuse to ask my wife for the $ to do a complete overhaul + perhaps a high-compression upgrade
).
Last edited:
