Subject	No belt age issue was noted here and neither is there>>
Posted by	ZUL8TR on March 01, 2010 at 7:40 AM
	This message has been viewed 351 times.
In Reply To	Timing Belt Change -- Why 60,000 vs. 105,000 posted by giZmo96 on February 28, 2010 at 05:41 PM
Message	one in the manuel. Comments please on that side of the timing belt change. There are some here that put on less than 2k miles a year and it would take some time to rack up 60k. ZUL8TR in Orlando,FL
Follow Ups	Timing Belt Change -- Why 60,000 vs. 105,000 - giZmo96 17:41:34 02/28/10 its not the belt that really needs the changing - cossiemodo2000 17:45:11 02/28/10 Re: its not the belt that really needs the changing - giZmo96 18:01:29 02/28/10 Others here should be able to confirm for the '96 -- but the - jzack 18:16:19 02/28/10 Re: Others here should be able to confirm for the '96 -- but the - giZmo96 18:34:12 02/28/10 Sadly the 120k is a bit more expensive than the 60k... - jzack 21:39:58 02/28/10 Thank you for the link and detail. (n/m) - giZmo96 14:24:37 03/01/10 Your mechanic is right. There is no reason to think that - zellamay 19:03:11 02/28/10 And there is no reason to think a 96 is different is - zellamay 19:06:04 02/28/10 Re: Your mechanic is right. There is no reason to think that - giZmo96 19:51:22 02/28/10 Sorry for not being more clear. He's right that there is no - zellamay 20:45:41 02/28/10 an NA timing belt will last longer than a TT timing belt - njz 19:59:51 02/28/10 Explain please why I'm wrong. Why would an NA belt last - zellamay 20:46:50 02/28/10 Please change the belt every 60,000 miles - dream Z (MD) 20:21:54 02/28/10 Re: Please change the belt every 60,000 miles - giZmo96 20:29:49 02/28/10 No belt age issue was noted here and neither is there>> - ZUL8TR 07:40:17 03/01/10 It's a calculated risk. There isn't a "right" answer. - BobbyT 03:53:05 03/02/10 Reasonable. Would be interesting to see the stats >> - ZUL8TR 06:47:26 03/02/10
Post a Followup	You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.