Reply With QuoteCan't help you with what that Accord has, but YES it does make a
difference... With the chain you can have this ancient engine and
mechanics can listen to the car and say... naaa you don't need to change
it yet at around 180+ With the belt, you pretty much need to do it when
the manual (or someone who knows the car) says.
Just my 2 cents.
-D
Jim White wrote:
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4
Honda: Timing belt or chain?
-
LinkBack
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks- Bookmark & Share
- Add Thread to del.icio.us
- Tweet this thread
- 09-13 12:26 AM #1JimGuest
Timing belt or chain?
Does the 2003 Accord have a timing belt or chain? Does it make a
difference?
TIA
- 09-13 04:43 AM #2meld_bGuest
Re: Timing belt or chain?
- 09-13 02:32 PM #3harrisonGuest
Re: Timing belt or chain?
"Jim White" <com> wrote in message
news:bjtob1$n32n4$news.uni-berlin.de...
4 cylinder has a chain
6 cylinder has a belt
The primary difference to you the owner is that the belt requires a periodic
change and the chain does not. Other differences are slightly lower engine
noise with a belt, perhaps better efficiency with a belt.
Dave
- 09-14 06:22 PM #4BillGuest
Re: Timing belt or chain?
I'd vote for the belt over the chain. Chains, while reliable, can
stretch over time and chain tensioners can fail. Belts go a reliable
distance, are quiet and when they need changing . .. you'd probably better
change your water pump too. This makes for greater reliability at high
mileages albeit with some greater expense.
"harrison" <com> wrote in message
news:bjv69r$dse$news.rcn.net...
periodic
engine
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts