Bluestone Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 (edited) I've got a 2000 Legacy with only 63k miles on it. For various reasons I've not had occasion to drive it much . It's getting close to 105 months since the car was purchased new. I know that timing belt replacement is at either 105 months or 105K miles. My question is "how much time past 105 months can I safely drive my Legacy without risking timing belt failure"? Edited July 15, 2010 by Bluestone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 105 months and one day. It really is not a question of how much you can drive after 105 months. The question is how much do you want to gamble on the odds of a replacement engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartless Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 (edited) 105 months and one day. It really is not a question of how much you can drive after 105 months. The question is how much do you want to gamble on the odds of a replacement engine. ^ what he said - being an interference engine, do you really want to risk major internal damage if that belt does let go? Edited July 15, 2010 by heartless spelling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 It's your car and your call. My guess is that the 105 month limit is very conservative. Additionally, the 105 month limit probably anticipates the worst possible typical storage conditions for the belt. On the hand, your're probably not looking at a whole lot of money to have the belt changed. A timing belt failure is going to be expensive, possibily very expensive. Timing belts usually go significantly past the replacement mileage limit, but eventually they break. From reading the posts on this board it seems to me that most premature "belt failures" are caused by component failure, and not the actual belt. Seized cams, failed tensioners, the occasional water pump, and especially bad cogged pulleys appear to have a higher failure rate than the belt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 It's your car and your call. My guess is that the 105 month limit is very conservative. Additionally, the 105 month limit probably anticipates the worst possible typical storage conditions for the belt. On the hand, your're probably not looking at a whole lot of money to have the belt changed. A timing belt failure is going to be expensive, possibily very expensive. Timing belts usually go significantly past the replacement mileage limit, but eventually they break. From reading the posts on this board it seems to me that most premature "belt failures" are caused by component failure, and not the actual belt. Seized cams, failed tensioners, the occasional water pump, and especially bad cogged pulleys appear to have a higher failure rate than the belt. And technically that is all part of the timing belt. There have been belts that have jumped a tooth and lost a tooth i the process, but hard to do a true "Chicken or egg" investigation on a chat board. Rubber has a finite age. Ryn on a ten year old tire or a parked ten year old tire and you will see why. Components fail when they are disturbed and not replaced from the info I have gathered here. Seems those idlers do not like being touchy-feely, they get grumpy with old age Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idosubaru Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 it's a curve, a percentage, there's no magic number. risk increases the longer you wait but at 105 months the failure rate is really low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
987687 Posted July 16, 2010 Share Posted July 16, 2010 Mine went on my '96 legacy at 92k miles. Even though I had 13k miles before I was supposed to replace it, it was 12 years old. They get old like any rubber, I'd follow the 105 month thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted July 16, 2010 Share Posted July 16, 2010 If I can highjack this thread for just a second, any thoughts on when to replace the radiator hoses and drive belts? Would you replace the heater hoses at the same time when replacing the radiator hoses? I'll be replacing the timing belt in a few months (105K), I might as well do the whole deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted July 16, 2010 Share Posted July 16, 2010 If I can highjack this thread for just a second, any thoughts on when to replace the radiator hoses and drive belts? Would you replace the heater hoses at the same time when replacing the radiator hoses? I'll be replacing the timing belt in a few months (105K), I might as well do the whole deal. Drive belts same time as the timing belt. Radiator hoses this day in age can last the life of the car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.