"Chrome," in a response about why replacing the timing belt is not required in California said: "Low emissions belts, last longer by law." ......
That may be part of it, but I also know that the California Attorney General's office got deluged with complaints in the early days of timing belts, when companies (especially Honda) started making them part of required maintenance.
Since maintenance used to involve oil, plugs, fluids (even points and condenser years back), all of which were reasonably priced, this was worse than sticker shock. No matter what the car was (and is), replacing it is very expensive and time consuming.
So California actually passed a law banning automakers from REQUIRING timing belt replacement.
Nice idea, but the timing belts still break, even in California. What I am told is that what some of the dealers are now doing is, if they break during, say a 100,000 mile warranty, after 60,000 but before 100,000, they will look for proof that you had the belt inspected.
Say what you will. Until a car gives a relatively reliable feel of how long it can go between timing belts, (that is several years of the same motor showing many mechanics about how long it goes), best stick with the maintenance schedule, or close to it.
Hope this helps.
Tom Wenndt