Hi there,

Service manual says change timing belt at 100k miles??

Isn't this kinda odd/unsafe???

 

Do it at 60-70k there are tons of threads on this just use the search.

 

think of it this way: The manual says 100k, but who shells out the bill if it breaks before that? Unless you have a 100k warranty, YOU DO. If it breaks theres a large price tag to it. Every 60-80k is fine.

 

If you have a 2000 (from the second half of that year) ora 2001, your car has updated tensioners, which is the part that causes our belts to brake. These cars can wait until 90,000 miles. Otherwise, you want to do it at 60-70K miles.

If you push it and your belt brakes, your engine will require a couple thousands of dollars to repair. Just like frequent oil changes, it's part of owning the car. Gotta pay to play.

 

If you don't intend to keep the car 200K mi. , do it at the half-way point. I did mine at 84K mi. , and
I plan to trade the car before 170K mi.

 

Mine was changed at 90k. I bought the car used in the mid 70k's. Previous owner wasn't sure if he'd done it or not (he was a "sure mechanic, the blinker fluid does look a little brown, go ahead and change it, i'll foot the bill" type of guy). He also didn't have service records. I bought the car b/c it was a deal that couldn't be passed up, and he did have his last bill which was for 6k worth of suspension work and motor tune up.

When i brought the car in for the 90k the mechanic said the water pump was leaking pretty bad, and needed to be changed.

So they can last that long, but it's not recomended. Timing belt snapping is basically a roasted motor due to valves getting bent, and water pump going out could risk seizing up the motor (especially on a hot day).