Btw I drive a 97 accord ex 4

My manual says to change my timing belt at 115k, I think.

My friend said “to change it every 60k.” I’m at 66k right now.

What yallz think, should I have my timing belt changed or should I wait until the Honda recommended interval?

 

I have gone 85k without a change. Can't tell till it snaps. I would say you are asking for it after 90k.

If you are bothered, change it.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by businessmanph &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">What yallz think, should I have my timing belt changed or should I wait until the Honda recommended interval?</TD></TR></TABLE>

I think that the interval is 105,000 or 110,000 miles. If you stick with OE belts, don't drive it like you stole it and don't meet any of the severe service criteria you'll be fine at the Honda specified interval. 60,000 (with the exception of severe service) was the norm 10 years ago or more. The new belts are a lot stronger.

I chnage mine every 100,000 just to keep it even and easy to remember. I just changed the timing belt in the Honda, 1996 LX Accord, and the belt that I took off looked just as good as the new belt.

 

Honda changed the replacement interval from 90k to 105k, part of the reason for the change is because 90k is also time for the major service, and they didn't want to slam customers with both bills at the same time.

 

I changed mine at 100K. Somethings, you do not want to take chance for. This is one thing, you want to change at or before the recommended interval.