The timing belt on my 1998 Acura 1.6EL (same mechanicals as a Honda Civic)
requires changing at 90,000 km. I am on my third. After 330,000 km, the
car runs as well as the day I bought it. My only unscheduled repair has
been a cracked intake manifold, which did not affect how it ran, it just
made a bit of noise.

At this point, the CD player is starting to act up, but that is it.

I would highly recommend these cars if you want both reliability and
durability.

Imants Krumins


"Me" <nathandeunk1@.dontmailme.***.net> wrote in message
news:5h8psv8u909mjbcab1ab5shad3jcemdr9u@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 22:26:05 GMT, "Artfulcodger" <mcbat@rogers.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Other than the obvious body condition and lack of rust, seek out the
> >frequency of oil changes and other mainitenance items -- brakes, tires,
etc
> >and when they were performed last. Also check for the timing belt and
when
> >it was replaced. It may be near due its third belt which can be a costly
> >repair particularly if it goes down on you while driving.
>
> I agree on all counts except one. The timing belt on this car is
> replaced at 90,000miles, not 60,000, so it would be coming up on its
> second belt not its third. Also, ironically enough, Honda says to
> simply inspect at 90k, but I replaced mine at about 95k. I'll be
> changing it again at about 170k.
>
> Nate

 

The timing belt on my 1998 Acura 1.6EL (same mechanicals as a Honda Civic)
requires changing at 90,000 km. I am on my third. After 330,000 km, the
car runs as well as the day I bought it. My only unscheduled repair has
been a cracked intake manifold, which did not affect how it ran, it just
made a bit of noise.

At this point, the CD player is starting to act up, but that is it.

I would highly recommend these cars if you want both reliability and
durability.

Imants Krumins


"Me" <nathandeunk1@.dontmailme.***.net> wrote in message
news:5h8psv8u909mjbcab1ab5shad3jcemdr9u@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 22:26:05 GMT, "Artfulcodger" <mcbat@rogers.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Other than the obvious body condition and lack of rust, seek out the
> >frequency of oil changes and other mainitenance items -- brakes, tires,
etc
> >and when they were performed last. Also check for the timing belt and
when
> >it was replaced. It may be near due its third belt which can be a costly
> >repair particularly if it goes down on you while driving.
>
> I agree on all counts except one. The timing belt on this car is
> replaced at 90,000miles, not 60,000, so it would be coming up on its
> second belt not its third. Also, ironically enough, Honda says to
> simply inspect at 90k, but I replaced mine at about 95k. I'll be
> changing it again at about 170k.
>
> Nate

 

The timing belt on my 1998 Acura 1.6EL (same mechanicals as a Honda Civic)
requires changing at 90,000 km. I am on my third. After 330,000 km, the
car runs as well as the day I bought it. My only unscheduled repair has
been a cracked intake manifold, which did not affect how it ran, it just
made a bit of noise.

At this point, the CD player is starting to act up, but that is it.

I would highly recommend these cars if you want both reliability and
durability.

Imants Krumins


"Me" <nathandeunk1@.dontmailme.***.net> wrote in message
news:5h8psv8u909mjbcab1ab5shad3jcemdr9u@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 22:26:05 GMT, "Artfulcodger" <mcbat@rogers.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Other than the obvious body condition and lack of rust, seek out the
> >frequency of oil changes and other mainitenance items -- brakes, tires,
etc
> >and when they were performed last. Also check for the timing belt and
when
> >it was replaced. It may be near due its third belt which can be a costly
> >repair particularly if it goes down on you while driving.
>
> I agree on all counts except one. The timing belt on this car is
> replaced at 90,000miles, not 60,000, so it would be coming up on its
> second belt not its third. Also, ironically enough, Honda says to
> simply inspect at 90k, but I replaced mine at about 95k. I'll be
> changing it again at about 170k.
>
> Nate

 

The timing belt on my 1998 Acura 1.6EL (same mechanicals as a Honda Civic)
requires changing at 90,000 km. I am on my third. After 330,000 km, the
car runs as well as the day I bought it. My only unscheduled repair has
been a cracked intake manifold, which did not affect how it ran, it just
made a bit of noise.

At this point, the CD player is starting to act up, but that is it.

I would highly recommend these cars if you want both reliability and
durability.

Imants Krumins


"Me" <nathandeunk1@.dontmailme.***.net> wrote in message
news:5h8psv8u909mjbcab1ab5shad3jcemdr9u@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 22:26:05 GMT, "Artfulcodger" <mcbat@rogers.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Other than the obvious body condition and lack of rust, seek out the
> >frequency of oil changes and other mainitenance items -- brakes, tires,
etc
> >and when they were performed last. Also check for the timing belt and
when
> >it was replaced. It may be near due its third belt which can be a costly
> >repair particularly if it goes down on you while driving.
>
> I agree on all counts except one. The timing belt on this car is
> replaced at 90,000miles, not 60,000, so it would be coming up on its
> second belt not its third. Also, ironically enough, Honda says to
> simply inspect at 90k, but I replaced mine at about 95k. I'll be
> changing it again at about 170k.
>
> Nate