“owner’s manual says change the timing belt at 7 years or 105,000 miles”
What is ambiguous about that wording (which also includes the words, “whichever comes first”)?
“the car only has 65,000 miles and has been well maintained”
I’m sorry, but I beg to differ.
When you delay timing belt replacement by at least 7 years, your car is NOT “well-maintained”.
So, to answer the OP’s question, not only are you tempting fate, but you are also ignoring very clearly-stated advice from the folks who designed and manufactured your car. Because this car has an “interference design” engine, you would be VERY foolish to continue to ignore the advice that Honda provided.
The belt might continue to stay in one piece for a few more years, or it could self-destruct tomorrow–with no warning whatsoever. Do you really want to gamble when a snapped timing belt will result in repairs that are at least double the cost of simply replacing that over-aged belt?