TheoSqua

I took my car up to a local dealer to see what maintenance it needed for 60k miles. The only recommendation they had was to replace my timing belt.

The car only has 67k miles, but it's an 04, so I was told the belt should be replaced at six years regardless of the mileage. The belt doesn't really look like it needs to be replaced, the rubber isn't really cracking badly or anything (The car was garaged in Florida for 5 years of its life) and I've never heard of replacing a belt based on years and not mileage.

Does anyone else have any experience with that? I can find plenty searching the forum about how many miles the belt should be replaced, but not much about a year limitation.

Also, they want $1,330 to replace it.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

No years but 105,000 is the goal. If the car were constantly driven or operated in temps over 110 F, then it's 60,000 miles.

candrews

the rubber isn't really cracking badly or anything

So which is it? Is the rubber cracking at all or just a littlle or ? Frankly, if my car was 7 years old with 60+K and some cracks in the belt....i'd replace it.

TheoSqua

To my relatively untrained eyes it seems like the Belt looks just fine. They want to replace it because they said all timing belts should be replaced after six years and mine is over 7 years old.

I think they're using the same principle as 3 months/3,000 mile oil changes. I figured I didn't need to get it replaced right now, but figured i'd check with more experienced posters.