I have a 1992 Honda Accord EX with 34,000
original miles. The owners manual recommends changing
the belt every 7 years or 60,000 miles. It also says you
should change the oil every 3 months and 3,000 miles.
Suppose one drives 3,000 miles in a year. Does that mean
they need 3 oil changes instead of one. Do you all think I
should get the timing belt replaced even though the car
has very low mileage?

 

60000?? i think its 90000 miles. as for when it says 3 months or 3000 miles, i'm sure it says somewhere, "which ever comes first". its like those powertrain warrenties fer cars, "10 years, or 100000 miles, whichever comes first"

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Happs &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> Do you all think I
should get the timing belt replaced even though the car
has very low mileage?
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yes.

 

I'd change it just to be on the safe side

 

change it, belts are given the "mileage/year" rating because just like tires can dry-rot over time even if they have low mileage, belt can deteriorate

 

my grandma has a 1989 civic with 27000 miles on it and i just changed the timing belt and it was pretty cracked and looked ready to break so i would recomend it sence my car is in almost the same position as your car is .... and besides there is a update on the countershaft seal so just do it and on the oil i would do it every 6 months....

 

my grandma has a 1989 civic with 27000 miles on it and i just changed the timing belt and it was pretty cracked and looked ready to break so i would recomend it sence my car is in almost the same position as your car is .... and besides there is a update on the countershaft seal so just do it and on the oil i would do it every 6 months....

 

92 accords' requirement is 90,000 or 6 years whichever comes first. The oil only breaks down under use....every 3,570 miles would be fine..both suggestions are in your owner's manual and required by the manufacture.