thanks all so very much. I appreciate it - I know so little about cars.
It has only been four years on the timing belt, which is why I was concerned about the recommendation to change it at 65K. The Honda guy said, the mileage on the car (202K), the age of the car, and NYC traffic combined warranted an earlier change.
I’m inclined to agree with the Honda guy. Your timing belt at 4 years old in NYC probably has as many hours on it as mine would have at 10 years.
The age of the car comes into play primarily because older engines even in excellent shape can have remnants of oil seepage around the main seal (and from other sources) that can reduce the belt’s life if it gets on it. Other than that, the age of the engine really isn’t relevant to the life expectancy of the belt.
I wouldn’t go past 5 years on the belt under your driving conditions. 4 years would even be prudent.
thanks. This does illuminate for me the Honda point of view