timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

Hi all,
Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of trouble.
I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has never been
changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic the next a
month or so.

Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being quoted
that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k miles?

Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better head
for a mechanic ASAP?
Thank you for reading & replying.

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

For a 97 Civic, the interval is 7 years or 105k miles, whichever comes first. If
the car has seen severe duty, then the frequency is every 60k miles

People have posted here with their reports of their Honda's timing belt failing.
It potentially can damage the engine, particularly the valves, because when the
timing belt fails, the valves' openings and closings are out of synch with the
pistons' motion. On a 1997 Civic and many other Honda models, the pistons may
hit the valves. Repairing such damage can run into the thousands of dollars.

You're rolling the dice. There's no saying for sure how long the timing belt
will last. It might very well fail tomorrow. It might last a few more months or
even longer. You have to decide how much risk you want to take.

"l-talk" <ls_plovdiv@yahoo.com> wrote
> Hi all,
> Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of trouble.
> I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has never been
> changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic the next a
> month or so.
>
> Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being quoted
> that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k miles?
>
> Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better head
> for a mechanic ASAP?
> Thank you for reading & replying.

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

For a 97 Civic, the interval is 7 years or 105k miles, whichever comes first. If
the car has seen severe duty, then the frequency is every 60k miles

People have posted here with their reports of their Honda's timing belt failing.
It potentially can damage the engine, particularly the valves, because when the
timing belt fails, the valves' openings and closings are out of synch with the
pistons' motion. On a 1997 Civic and many other Honda models, the pistons may
hit the valves. Repairing such damage can run into the thousands of dollars.

You're rolling the dice. There's no saying for sure how long the timing belt
will last. It might very well fail tomorrow. It might last a few more months or
even longer. You have to decide how much risk you want to take.

"l-talk" <ls_plovdiv@yahoo.com> wrote
> Hi all,
> Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of trouble.
> I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has never been
> changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic the next a
> month or so.
>
> Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being quoted
> that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k miles?
>
> Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better head
> for a mechanic ASAP?
> Thank you for reading & replying.

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

For a 97 Civic, the interval is 7 years or 105k miles, whichever comes first. If
the car has seen severe duty, then the frequency is every 60k miles

People have posted here with their reports of their Honda's timing belt failing.
It potentially can damage the engine, particularly the valves, because when the
timing belt fails, the valves' openings and closings are out of synch with the
pistons' motion. On a 1997 Civic and many other Honda models, the pistons may
hit the valves. Repairing such damage can run into the thousands of dollars.

You're rolling the dice. There's no saying for sure how long the timing belt
will last. It might very well fail tomorrow. It might last a few more months or
even longer. You have to decide how much risk you want to take.

"l-talk" <ls_plovdiv@yahoo.com> wrote
> Hi all,
> Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of trouble.
> I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has never been
> changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic the next a
> month or so.
>
> Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being quoted
> that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k miles?
>
> Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better head
> for a mechanic ASAP?
> Thank you for reading & replying.

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

l-talk wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of trouble.

Yeah, if you change it now he won't fall behind on his boat payment.

> I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has never been
> changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic the next a
> month or so.
>
> Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being quoted
> that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k miles?

The factory service manual specifies 105k miles or 7 years, whichever
comes first.

> Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better head
> for a mechanic ASAP?
> Thank you for reading & replying.

You can safely wait a few months, even if you cram 40k miles of driving
into those few months.

For my car the recommendation is every 90k miles or 6 years. I changed
it at 94k miles and 9 years. Exceeding the recommended time by 50% was
probably not a good idea, but running a few months over is harmless.

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

l-talk wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of trouble.

Yeah, if you change it now he won't fall behind on his boat payment.

> I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has never been
> changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic the next a
> month or so.
>
> Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being quoted
> that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k miles?

The factory service manual specifies 105k miles or 7 years, whichever
comes first.

> Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better head
> for a mechanic ASAP?
> Thank you for reading & replying.

You can safely wait a few months, even if you cram 40k miles of driving
into those few months.

For my car the recommendation is every 90k miles or 6 years. I changed
it at 94k miles and 9 years. Exceeding the recommended time by 50% was
probably not a good idea, but running a few months over is harmless.

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

l-talk wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of trouble.

Yeah, if you change it now he won't fall behind on his boat payment.

> I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has never been
> changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic the next a
> month or so.
>
> Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being quoted
> that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k miles?

The factory service manual specifies 105k miles or 7 years, whichever
comes first.

> Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better head
> for a mechanic ASAP?
> Thank you for reading & replying.

You can safely wait a few months, even if you cram 40k miles of driving
into those few months.

For my car the recommendation is every 90k miles or 6 years. I changed
it at 94k miles and 9 years. Exceeding the recommended time by 50% was
probably not a good idea, but running a few months over is harmless.

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

l-talk wrote:

> Hi all,
> Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of
> trouble. I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has
> never been changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic
> the next a month or so.
>
> Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being
> quoted that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k
> miles?
>
> Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better
> head for a mechanic ASAP?
> Thank you for reading & replying.

Some, Great fellow Said I remember in this NW that, Timing belt may
not break today or even in a year to come, but surely it will break if
you ignore it . if you belong to Cold Country like I do in Finland, do
it on 75000 miles or 120,000 KM I am not sure how much mileage depends
on size of Engine, mine is Accord 2.0

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

l-talk wrote:

> Hi all,
> Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of
> trouble. I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has
> never been changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic
> the next a month or so.
>
> Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being
> quoted that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k
> miles?
>
> Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better
> head for a mechanic ASAP?
> Thank you for reading & replying.

Some, Great fellow Said I remember in this NW that, Timing belt may
not break today or even in a year to come, but surely it will break if
you ignore it . if you belong to Cold Country like I do in Finland, do
it on 75000 miles or 120,000 KM I am not sure how much mileage depends
on size of Engine, mine is Accord 2.0

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

l-talk wrote:

> Hi all,
> Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of
> trouble. I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has
> never been changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic
> the next a month or so.
>
> Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being
> quoted that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k
> miles?
>
> Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better
> head for a mechanic ASAP?
> Thank you for reading & replying.

Some, Great fellow Said I remember in this NW that, Timing belt may
not break today or even in a year to come, but surely it will break if
you ignore it . if you belong to Cold Country like I do in Finland, do
it on 75000 miles or 120,000 KM I am not sure how much mileage depends
on size of Engine, mine is Accord 2.0

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

The book on my 97 Civic says 90,000 miles.
"Jon" <aidplus@fastmail.com.au> wrote in message
news:4162f8dd$0$10350$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
> It deepends on whether you have a main seal oil leak onto the belt or not.
> If it has, get it done and the seals asap. If it not no harm in the little
> extra time,
> but try and get the genuine belt for the car.
> I'd have the seals done too at that time.
> "George Kinley" <georgekinley@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:UNQ5d.26239$k4.509766@news1.nokia.com...
>> l-talk wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> > Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of
>> > trouble. I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has
>> > never been changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic
>> > the next a month or so.
>> >
>> > Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being
>> > quoted that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k
>> > miles?
>> >
>> > Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better
>> > head for a mechanic ASAP?
>> > Thank you for reading & replying.
>>
>> Some, Great fellow Said I remember in this NW that, Timing belt may
>> not break today or even in a year to come, but surely it will break if
>> you ignore it . if you belong to Cold Country like I do in Finland, do
>> it on 75000 miles or 120,000 KM I am not sure how much mileage depends
>> on size of Engine, mine is Accord 2.0
>
>

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

The book on my 97 Civic says 90,000 miles.
"Jon" <aidplus@fastmail.com.au> wrote in message
news:4162f8dd$0$10350$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
> It deepends on whether you have a main seal oil leak onto the belt or not.
> If it has, get it done and the seals asap. If it not no harm in the little
> extra time,
> but try and get the genuine belt for the car.
> I'd have the seals done too at that time.
> "George Kinley" <georgekinley@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:UNQ5d.26239$k4.509766@news1.nokia.com...
>> l-talk wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> > Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of
>> > trouble. I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has
>> > never been changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic
>> > the next a month or so.
>> >
>> > Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being
>> > quoted that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k
>> > miles?
>> >
>> > Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better
>> > head for a mechanic ASAP?
>> > Thank you for reading & replying.
>>
>> Some, Great fellow Said I remember in this NW that, Timing belt may
>> not break today or even in a year to come, but surely it will break if
>> you ignore it . if you belong to Cold Country like I do in Finland, do
>> it on 75000 miles or 120,000 KM I am not sure how much mileage depends
>> on size of Engine, mine is Accord 2.0
>
>

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

The book on my 97 Civic says 90,000 miles.
"Jon" <aidplus@fastmail.com.au> wrote in message
news:4162f8dd$0$10350$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
> It deepends on whether you have a main seal oil leak onto the belt or not.
> If it has, get it done and the seals asap. If it not no harm in the little
> extra time,
> but try and get the genuine belt for the car.
> I'd have the seals done too at that time.
> "George Kinley" <georgekinley@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:UNQ5d.26239$k4.509766@news1.nokia.com...
>> l-talk wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> > Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of
>> > trouble. I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has
>> > never been changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic
>> > the next a month or so.
>> >
>> > Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being
>> > quoted that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k
>> > miles?
>> >
>> > Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better
>> > head for a mechanic ASAP?
>> > Thank you for reading & replying.
>>
>> Some, Great fellow Said I remember in this NW that, Timing belt may
>> not break today or even in a year to come, but surely it will break if
>> you ignore it . if you belong to Cold Country like I do in Finland, do
>> it on 75000 miles or 120,000 KM I am not sure how much mileage depends
>> on size of Engine, mine is Accord 2.0
>
>

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

It deepends on whether you have a main seal oil leak onto the belt or not.
If it has, get it done and the seals asap. If it not no harm in the little
extra time,
but try and get the genuine belt for the car.
I'd have the seals done too at that time.
"George Kinley" <georgekinley@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UNQ5d.26239$k4.509766@news1.nokia.com...
> l-talk wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> > Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of
> > trouble. I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has
> > never been changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic
> > the next a month or so.
> >
> > Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being
> > quoted that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k
> > miles?
> >
> > Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better
> > head for a mechanic ASAP?
> > Thank you for reading & replying.
>
> Some, Great fellow Said I remember in this NW that, Timing belt may
> not break today or even in a year to come, but surely it will break if
> you ignore it . if you belong to Cold Country like I do in Finland, do
> it on 75000 miles or 120,000 KM I am not sure how much mileage depends
> on size of Engine, mine is Accord 2.0

Re: timing belt on Civic '97, 62k
 

It deepends on whether you have a main seal oil leak onto the belt or not.
If it has, get it done and the seals asap. If it not no harm in the little
extra time,
but try and get the genuine belt for the car.
I'd have the seals done too at that time.
"George Kinley" <georgekinley@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UNQ5d.26239$k4.509766@news1.nokia.com...
> l-talk wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> > Most mechanics say 60k change of timing belt may save a lot of
> > trouble. I have a Honda Civic '97 with 62k on it and timing belt has
> > never been changed. For different reasons I can't take it to mechanic
> > the next a month or so.
> >
> > Don't have the manual at hand, but saw somewhere on the web being
> > quoted that the recommended timing belt change (Civic '97) is 105 k
> > miles?
> >
> > Will it be ok to keep driving it for another 300-500 mi, or I better
> > head for a mechanic ASAP?
> > Thank you for reading & replying.
>
> Some, Great fellow Said I remember in this NW that, Timing belt may
> not break today or even in a year to come, but surely it will break if
> you ignore it . if you belong to Cold Country like I do in Finland, do
> it on 75000 miles or 120,000 KM I am not sure how much mileage depends
> on size of Engine, mine is Accord 2.0