Question re: 60,000 Service Program

Why don't you just follow the service schedule?

Recently, Honda has been saying "adjust valves only when noisy." I don't know if this applies to your Accord. I think it's so easy on the

I know the "noisy" recommendation applies to my V6 Odyssey; I think it's because adjusting valves on that baby is expensive, and they don't want the customer to think that it's an expensive vehicle to maintain. My mechanic (Honda-trained, works for the dealership, the only guy I'll take my car to) says if you can hear the noise, it's too late.

I think your owner's manual says 90K miles or 6 years, whichever comes first. You're at the 6 year mark.

It's a gamble; Honda makes interference engines, so if the belt breaks, you ruin the engine.

The service department at the local Honda shop has a different schedule than is stated in the owner's manual. I honestly don't know whether they are trying to rip me off or make sure my car never breaks down. I also noticed that there are some conflicts or differences between the service schedule in the repair manual and the owner's manual.

One could argue that when a change is recommended only every 105 k miles (newer Honda engines) it really isn't a high maintenance item. I have had chains go south before 105K miles. Noise is another argument for belts. but the real story is probably that the additional cost of a chain is a burden on Hondas bottom line, the maintenance of a belt is a burden on the customers bottom line.

Regardless, the i-VTEC engines have chains, not belts.

We are so accustomed to belts that we forget chains also have the wear issue, and about the same service life. My mother-in-law's Buick timing chain jumped with only 60K miles on it, and chains have been known to break, too. I once had a 1984 Dodge 600ES (LeBaron) with a Mitsubishi power train. What a nightmare! At 90K miles the timing chain had worn to the point it was slapping on the housing, and the first step in changing the chain was "remove engine" (no room to remove the cover with the engine in the car).

Mike

Honda made the trade-off for the overall benefit the belt provides.

I think it's a fair trade-off, from what I've seen.

Don't think the chains are low-maintenance or lifetime (despite what VW says with its new Jetta).

belts provide much more accurate valve [and consequently ignition] timing both initially and throughout the life of the belt. chains can wear real bad and get real noisy. they break too. long life belts go over 100k - i see no reason to complain about that.

Honda is going back to chains as well. I believe (and have not gotten this confirmed) that when you have true adjustable valve timing (VTEC did not really adjust the /timing/, it just selected between different cam lobes (the different lobes having different timing and lift)) you get more stress on the cam drive, and thus want a chain rather than a belt. Honda's i-VTEC (true adjustable timing) engines use a chain, as do Toyota's VVT-i (Again, true adjustable valve timing). A quick Google search shows BMW engines with VANOS (true adjustable valve timing) also have chains.

Yes...my g/fs 04 accord lx vtec has a chain

Follow the book. The dealer makes a ton of money on these service packages. If, as you say, you do not drive in severe conditions, the only things specifically due at 60,000 are transmission fluid change, engine air filter, cabin air filters (if you have any), and a boat load of checks that all consist of looking under the hood and under the car to see if anything is falling off yet. Valves should be adjusted if noisy (and on a 4 cyl Accord they usually are). Timing belt is not due until somewhere between 90,000 and 105,000 in normal usage.

If you want a second opinion, register for the owners link at the Honda website. It will give you a maintenance schedule that might be more up to date than the one in your book.