Is Honda switching to timing chains?

Page 1 of 3  
My neighbor just bought a new CR-V and he says that not only that model uses timing chain instead of belt, but that Honda is doing that with other new models as well. I've never heard this before. Is this true?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 04 Sep 2010 19:43:26 -0700, Cameo wrote:

My 03 accord has a chain. I wouldn't ever buy another car with a belt!!!!!!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/5/2010 12:14 AM, Matt wrote:

    Why not? If one keeps up with regular maintenance, there's no issue with a vehicle with a timing belt.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Brian Smith" wrote

I'd think the issue is with the cost to replace the belt, whereas the chain is.... maintenance-free. ?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/5/2010 7:20 AM, Howard Lester wrote:

    If one can not afford to maintain a vehicle (or anything one owns), then one should not attempt to own anything. With ownership comes responsibilities. It's only a minor expense every few years, so that argument doesn't really hold.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

My guess would be that many owners forget to have their timing belt replaced at the given interval and it results in belt failure that can be catastrophic for interference engines. Honda probably got tired of the bad publicity from these cases and that's why they decided to switch to chains. I assume they still make the interference engines with the timing chains, right?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Honda (and Toyota) started migrating to chains around 2003. The engines are still interference.
Most owners do in fact hate the belt-change interval on account of its cost, and the fact that they find it hard to justify such an expense when there appears to be nothing wrong with the car. They tend to think this is a ripoff by either Honda or the dealer.
And many did ignore the belt-change interval and had the belt slip/break on them (my boss was one of those).
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tegger wrote:

How many miles did he get?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

He had about double the recommended mileage interval, but a few years under the time limit. And he had no valve damage.
It's important to know that his CR-V was driven very long distances between shut-downs, so the belt underwent relatively little startup/shutdown stress. Startup/shutdown is extremely tough on timing belts, much tougher than steady running.
The vehicle is still on the road, sold to one of our plant employees. It now has about 280,000 miles on it.
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tegger wrote:

I'm asking because my Accord has nearly 190k and I'm debating skipping pricey change out at 210k & letting it ride, hoping to get about 230k when brakes, tires, battery, more fluid changes, etc will all be due when it may be a good time to call it quits.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Just an extra 20K miles? Provided you're currently on an OEM belt, and it doesn't take you 2-years over the time-limit to get to that 20K, you'll be be fine. Honda builds-in quite a safety margin into its specified timing- belt life.

230K for a well-maintained Honda is nothing. With tall-enough gearing (such as that found in the Accord), and proper care, they go over 400K, easy.
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I can testify to that. My '94 Accord has now 292K in it and runs just great. I easily expect 500 K from it. Of course I stick to the recommended maintenance schedule religiously, which is every 7,500 miles, with (Castrol) oil change in between (every 3,750 miles). I had my 3rd timing belt replacement at 270 K and checking the old belt I could definitely see the wear on it. Heck, after switching to Chevron gas consistently about 2 years ago, I don't even hear the cylinder pings uphill in hot weather anymore. It must have cleaned out some of the carbon build-up. The only thing I might have the mechanic check next time is why my idle seem to be somewhat uneven at times. I wonder if cleaning the choke body could fix that. I don't think it was ever cleaned. Any ideas?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tegger wrote:

Next year will be seven years since the 105k mile change out. Guess I'll make that decision next summer when it'll be about 210k miles / 7 years , depending on how well it's running.
Average mileage cost (nearly 25 cents / mile including depreciation, gas and maintenance, but excluding taxes & insurance) has increased marginally over the past few years primarily due to a second replacement of tires, brakes and battery plus a relatively costly pollution device repair and new ball joints, but yearly maintenance is still lower than the cost of taxes & insurance on a late model.
Of course at this stage, cost is just gas & maintenance (plus a small insurance and registration cost). Considering it still runs well (better & more quiet than any of the new cars I test drove a few years ago), my primary concern is an unexpected break down on extended mileage trips. Added advantage for this car is the extra headroom that was cut in Accord's 2003 year which is also lacking in most other compact & mid size cars.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And what will they think when the chain stretches or otherwise needs UNexpected attention?
That's a REPAIR--equally deadly on the market chart, right up there with "maintenance expense".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The chains used these days are nothing like the beefed-up bicycle-chains of yore.

They're awfully well-made these days. If oil-changes are done according to the Maintenance Minder, that chain will outlast the car. Even the tensioners look like they'll last forever.
The oldest chains are now about 8-years-old. My dealer tells me they've never had a single one come in with a chain problem, no matter the mileage. I'd be very surprised if /any/ of the new chains /ever/ break or slip.
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tegger wrote:

Thank you for bringing some sense of reality back to this thread.
--
JD..

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Don't they make the engine noisier though?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No. The old bicycle-chains did, but not these. Go listen to any '03 CR-V's engine.
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Thanx. I wonder how they changed those chains to make them so quiet. Can you point to a picture of such chains?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

<http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=silent+chain&aq=f&aqi=g8g-m2&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fphea58825d28d998
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.