Generally the dealer 'checkups' are a rip off, however if its a good dealer,
I don't think its a bad idea to pay for them to look it over, as long as its
not too exhorbitant.

The timing belt could be inspected for tension at this mileage. Belts
stretch over time, and the tensioner could need adjusting. The process on my
civic is something like 1. Loosen Tensioner, 2. Turn crank pulley clockwise 1
turn, 3. tighten tensioner.

That just takes the slack out of the belt. Maybe thats what they were
planning to do?

t

High Tech Misfit wrote:
>> Hey fellas,
>> According to dealer schedule I have to do maintenance type D on my Civic
>[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>> Does the engine really need that at this milage. Thanks guyes for advice.
>> Regards
>
>If you really do mean 40,000km as opposed to 140,000km, you do not need a
>timing belt replacement at this time. However, if your car also has a
>time-based interval for the belt, then you should replace it when that time
>comes. Assuming the interval is 6 years, since your car is almost 5 years
>old, the belt would be due for replacement in late 2006 or early 2007
>(assuming of course you don't reach the distance-based interval beforehand).
>Check the maintenance schedule in your manual.
>
>And $60 for air filter is a huge rip-off. Have you tried other dealers? I
>bought an air filter for my '93 Accord at a Honda dealer last year for $20
>(I did the labour myself, but that takes only a few minutes anyway). As far
>as I know, it should cost about the same for your Civic.


--
Message posted via CarKB.com
http://www.carkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx...-cars/200508/1