Honda Accord, 2007 3.0L V6
Today I had a Honda dealer replace the timing belt and the serpentine belt on my 2007 Accord, 3.0 L V6. Since I am retired, I have driven the car very little and at this point have only 26,582 miles on it. Since it is around 12 years old I decided to take the timing belt and the serpentine belt replaced along with the water pump. I asked the dealer to give me the old belts so I could observe how they had worn over 12 years and 26,582 miles.
I was intrigued to observe the belts looked almost like new with no visible evidence of wear on either one. I have taken some photos of both belts and will try to upload them to this site. The owners manual says to replace the belts at 105,000 miles but makes no reference to time at all. I did a lot of reading and the general consensus seemed to be a rubber belt should be replace at around 6 to 7 years of age; since the belts on my 2007 were close to twice that amount I had them replaced. Visual inspection would suggest that was not necessary at all as they look just about as good as new.
If I’m going to err in this matter I’d rather err on the side of caution. Research tells me the 3.0L V6 on the Honda 2007 Accord is a non-interference engine so a broken timing belt should not damage the engine. Regardless I’m glad it has new belts now.
Apparently, you are driving only a bit more than 2k miles per year with this car.
I REALLY hope that you are changing its oil on the basis of elapsed time, rather than on the basis of odometer mileage. If not, then the timing belt is the least of your worries.
The owners manual says annual replacement regardless of mileage; I replace it once a year with Mobil 1. The owners manual also says the brake fluid should be replaced every 3 years and I do that too.
Honda has no idea if the customer is going to drive it like a race car vs gently, whether the climate is mild like San Francisco or severe like Houston, etc. So it makes sense that their replacement intervals error on the side of caution. The recommended timing belt change interval for my car is 60k miles, but I changed it at 100k miles, and while it had worn a little, it clearly had a lot more miles left on it. I think it would have lasted to 200k miles. On my prior car it was the same interval recommendation, 60 k miles. I changed it at 60 k miles, and the belt didn’t look like it was worn at all. Yours was the right decision imo. While your engine may technically be described as non-interference (assuming you are correct), that phrase sometimes means there’s no possibility of piston/valve interference, but there can still be a possibility of valve/valve interference. Also if if the valves and pistons have no chance of being damaged at all, if the belt breaks at 75 mph on the freeway it can jam something else and cause damage that way. Since you changed the belts and water pump, seems you are good to go for a lot more miles. Keep those used belts in the trunk as a backup. If your car breaks down in the boondocks, the shop there can just use the old belts so you can drive to the next big town for a proper replacement.
p.s. I expect that somewhere in Honda’s service literature it recommends a time limit on belt replacement. But that might not appear in the owners manual. You might ask this questions at a Honda dealership next time you visit.
Thanks for taking the time to comment! I am the only driver of this car and have driven it gently its whole life; fortunately (or not) the only driving I do is in a Houston suburb and I’m never more than a few miles from a Honda dealer. It has had a pampered life since I bought it in 2007; when it’s not being driven it sits in an enclosed garage away from the weather. I have devoted a considerable amount of time to researching the engine’s design as to whether it’s an interference engine or a non-interference engine; there is conflicting information being circulated on this engine so I contacted Honda and was told it is a non-interference engine. At this point I’ll accept that information as authoritative.
