Once again this involves my '97 Integra GS-R, since most of us know the S2K has a chain.

Has anyone owned a Honda/Acura product that has suffered failure of the timing belt? My confusion involves the fact that my owners manual states the timing belt should be changed at 105,000 miles/7 years. The new Honda/Acura owners link website tells me I should change it at 90,000 miles, and then to make matters more confusing, my dealer wants to change it at 60,000 but of course we know there's profit motive at work in that situation.

So I called the Acura customer information number and asked them when I should have it done, and they stated 105,000 miles, but when I asked if I would be liable for repairs if it should fail prematurely, they said "oh yes indeed!."

So... I was wondering if anyone with an Integra (or any Honda product for that matter) has gone the full 105,000 before having the timing belt done, and if not, when you've had yours done, and of course if anyone has had a failure and when it happened, how much damage it caused, etc.

Thanks!

 

A friend's 1987 CIVIC timing belt broke at around 140,000 miles. It was never fixed because the repair cost was more than the car's value. It was the original timing belt.

 

Should we maybe start a GS-R forum?

[B][QUOTE]
Has anyone owned a Honda/Acura product that has suffered failure of the timing belt?

 

I tried going 90K on my '93 GSR, but broke down and had it down around 75K. I have never heard of one failing with less than 100K miles. That includes some fellow enthusiasts that live near redline more than I do.

Jimbo

 

Thanks guys, you are most helpful.

Wish I could inspect the belt, but it seems the valve cover and timing belt cover are now one unit, so unless I'm getting my valves adjusted it would seem wasteful to have them do all that work to inspect the belt, and of course they're the ones telling me I should do it at 60,000!

I'm definitely not going to get it done anytime soon (almost 60K on the car now) but I may not wait until 90K either, much food for thought.

 

Never hurts to at least check it, The general number is 60k no matter what the make of engine, BMW/Subaru/Honda . . . The shops Ive worked at all recommend 60k because there are few out there that do break that early, but thats only A FEW, they just dont want it to break at 80-90 (an early break) and then an irate customer come back and give 'em hell. Heck the belts are cheap (if you can get 'em at whole sale, about 12-20 bucks for an average one) and they're not all that hard to change.

But anyway, its normal for a dealer to say 60,000mi. But its also normal to pass up 100,000mi.

Isuzu, just had a recall on the 98 Rodeo's, those belts were breaking at 60k, apparantly enough for a recall.

 

I did mine at 80K and the car was driven very hard during those miles. I think the recommended mileage is 90K - I did it early just to be safe.

 

I just ahd the timing belt in my Prelude changed at 75K. I usually do them at 60K, but the newer cars can go longer. It;s definitely worth it to replace it early, since it'll cost a lot more to fix the car if the belt snaps.

 

I had the timing belt on my CRX stripe several teeth at 80K miles. Nothing broke, but left me stranded on the Bay Bridge. Replaced the belt and it snapped again, this time at 140K miles. I seem to have really bad luck with timing belts. I drive my CRX very hard, so the premature failures should be expected. I pretty much redline every gear whenever I can.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Voodoo_S2K
[B]I had the timing belt on my CRX stripe several teeth at 80K miles.