wrote in message
...
On Jun 15, 12:04 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
Why would they give up a job - and risk their reputation - when they
have every "right" to just point at the manual and say "replace it at
90K"? Why push off a job now that they might not get a year from now?

=================

Because they'll say anything to get rid of a customer who wastes their
time
with pointless attempts to predict the future. People like that cost them
money.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It's a good question why they would say that. If a mechanic told me
not to replace a timing belt that the manufacturer says to replace at
90K because the mechanic has not seen one fail before 110K, I'd get a
new mechanic. The guy is an obvious idiot. To me, knowing that
you've seen them fail at 110K, 90K sounds like the appropriate place
to change it.

Or how lucky do you feel today? As others have pointed out, it also
makes a big difference if the engine design is interference free or
not. If it is, then failure just means a tow, which by itself could
be bad enough, depending on when it happens and the resulting
consequences and costs. Also, since in this case apparently the car
will be kept for significantly longer, but not long enough to require
a second belt, the only apparent advantage in delaying is if something
else were to happen to the car, eg totalled in a wreck or other repair
that could be done at same time, that would impact on this decision.
================

"failure just means a tow"? Maybe.

Imagine suddenly NOT having engine power to maneuver around some sort of
hazard. That could be fun.