Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

2% is still 2 cars out of every 100. I don't believe Honda feels that a 2%
failure is commendable. If it's commendable then they would make it a
selling point: "We at Honda build quality cars, only 2% of our transmissions
in some models will fail." I don't think it will catch on too well when you
consider the cost of a new transmission. Sure the article talks about Acura
but it's not just Acura models, but Accord, Odyssey, Prelude's as well. If
the root cause of the premature failures as due to the negligence of the
vehicle owners I doubt that Honda would roger up and extend the warranty on
these vehicles. At the same time, I'm sure that there are failures was due
to negligence i.e. not changing fluid, other factors such as exceeding the
vehicles' limitation or it's intended use. The latter is not just on a
Honda but on any vehicle.



"American Honda Motor Co., Inc. announced it will provide extended
warranties on approximately 1.2 million Honda and Acura models equipped with
automatic transmissions due to problems that may result in premature wear or
failure. The extended warranty will cover affected transmissions for seven
years or 100,000 miles.

The standard bumper-to-bumper warranty for Honda vehicles is three years or
36,000 miles, while Acura vehicles are covered for four years or 50,000
miles.

Vehicles covered by the extended warranty include:

2000 - 2001 Honda Accord, Odyssey and Prelude
2000 - 2002 and some 2003 Acura 3.2 TL
2001 - 2002 and some 2003 Acura 3.2 CL

While only two percent of these vehicles have experienced these transmission
problems, American Honda will provide extended transmission warranties on
all potentially affected vehicles.

"Our priorities are making sure our customers are taken care of and
reassured they can continue to depend on their Honda or Acura automobile for
a long time to come," said Tom Elliott, executive vice president for
American Honda.

There is usually plenty of warning to the driver that the transmission is
not operating properly, such as slow or erratic shifting, giving them ample
time to take the vehicle in for service.

American Honda will notify all owners of eligible vehicles via mail in the
coming weeks. "



"Chip Stein" <chip@chipanddebby.com> wrote in message
news:5ddcea74.0308301656.1745a01f@posting.google.c om...
> >
> > Honda has issued a "silent" warranty extension on 2000 and 2001 models.
Why
> > not the others? As far as I know, these transmissions are all the same,
and
> > many owners have experienced similar problems.
>
> it's not a silent warranty at all. letters were mailed out to all
> registered honda owners. and if you have a dealership service your
> vehicle, they should run a vin stat every time and it will show.
> they had a limited run of trannys with a problem. look at
> chrysler... they haven't built a good tranny in 15 years!!. honda's
> 1.6% fail rate is pretty commendable for over a million vehicles.
> as for the article about the acura. that's a different animal if
> you've ever worked on them. that's a five speed auto. honda just got
> that this year. most of the time acura is the experimaental platform.
> out of all the trannys i've seen fail in hondas, most of them have
> never had their fluid changed. and on the oddysey most of them have
> aftermarket trailer hitches with no tranny cooler...
> no matter what people will gripe about it..
>
>
> for those that don't know. a honda automatic is essentially a manual
> gearbox with wet clutch packs. they are built like no domestic tranny
> on the market. a lot of the common complaints are just normal
> characteristics of the vehicle.
> mor often than not engine maintenance and poor running cause a lot of
> tranny malfunctions due to the ecu being confused.
> chip

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

"Chip Stein" <chip@chipanddebby.com> wrote in message
news:5ddcea74.0308301656.1745a01f@posting.google.c om...

> it's not a silent warranty at all. letters were mailed out to all
> registered honda owners. and if you have a dealership service your
> vehicle, they should run a vin stat every time and it will show.
> they had a limited run of trannys with a problem.

I think the "limited run" was 1998 through 2002. Why are only the 2000-2001
models included in the extension?

> never had their fluid changed. and on the oddysey most of them have
> aftermarket trailer hitches with no tranny cooler...
> no matter what people will gripe about it..

Should a 1999 Accord (no trailer hitch) model, with 48,000 miles and
operated under Honda's "Normal" use definition, fail?

> for those that don't know. a honda automatic is essentially a manual
> gearbox with wet clutch packs. they are built like no domestic tranny
> on the market. a lot of the common complaints are just normal
> characteristics of the vehicle.
> mor often than not engine maintenance and poor running cause a lot of
> tranny malfunctions due to the ecu being confused.
> chip

You sound like you know quite a bit about Hondas. Are you a tech? If so,
maybe you can answer this question. The service department reported a PO740
code as "Transmission system failure". Through research I have discovered
the more accurate description of this code is "Torque Converter Clutch
Circuit Malfuction". This sounds like an electrical problem. Is it? And
what kind of damage can it cause to the transmission?

Thanks,

Rick

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

"Chip Stein" <chip@chipanddebby.com> wrote in message
news:5ddcea74.0308301656.1745a01f@posting.google.c om...

> it's not a silent warranty at all. letters were mailed out to all
> registered honda owners. and if you have a dealership service your
> vehicle, they should run a vin stat every time and it will show.
> they had a limited run of trannys with a problem.

I think the "limited run" was 1998 through 2002. Why are only the 2000-2001
models included in the extension?

> never had their fluid changed. and on the oddysey most of them have
> aftermarket trailer hitches with no tranny cooler...
> no matter what people will gripe about it..

Should a 1999 Accord (no trailer hitch) model, with 48,000 miles and
operated under Honda's "Normal" use definition, fail?

> for those that don't know. a honda automatic is essentially a manual
> gearbox with wet clutch packs. they are built like no domestic tranny
> on the market. a lot of the common complaints are just normal
> characteristics of the vehicle.
> mor often than not engine maintenance and poor running cause a lot of
> tranny malfunctions due to the ecu being confused.
> chip

You sound like you know quite a bit about Hondas. Are you a tech? If so,
maybe you can answer this question. The service department reported a PO740
code as "Transmission system failure". Through research I have discovered
the more accurate description of this code is "Torque Converter Clutch
Circuit Malfuction". This sounds like an electrical problem. Is it? And
what kind of damage can it cause to the transmission?

Thanks,

Rick

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

Chip,

Another question. What's up with the internal filter on the transmission?
Does this mean it's never changed?
This can't be a good thing.

Rick

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

Chip,

Another question. What's up with the internal filter on the transmission?
Does this mean it's never changed?
This can't be a good thing.

Rick

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 02:43:30 GMT, "Fluffy"
<no-spamming-bsavanh@mchsi.com> wrote:

>2% is still 2 cars out of every 100. I don't believe Honda feels that a 2%
>failure is commendable. If it's commendable then they would make it a
>selling point: "We at Honda build quality cars, only 2% of our transmissions
>in some models will fail." I don't think it will catch on too well when you
>consider the cost of a new transmission.

I wouldn't call it commendable but it doesn't seem alarmingly high
either. Clearly Honda is not satisfied with the reliability of these
transmissions and is standing behind them. Can't say why they
wouldn't extend the warranty on the earlier cars if they truly have
the same defect rate. According to the Consumer Reports reliability
survey, all years of Accord have excellent transmission reliability,
although it is a little early to expect the defect to show up on the
2000 or 2001 models. The Odyssey's record is nearly as good (and a
lot better than the Chrysler products.)

Automatic transmissions have always been expensive, trouble-prone
devices. Honda units are about as reliable as you can find. If yours
is defective, you are likely to be upset whether the failure rate is 2
in a thousand or 2 in 10. But I certainly wouldn't spend $2000 on an
extended warranty to guard against it - transmission failure is not a
catastrophe. I would consider changing the fluid more often than
recommended, especially if there is any type of severe service
involved.

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 02:43:30 GMT, "Fluffy"
<no-spamming-bsavanh@mchsi.com> wrote:

>2% is still 2 cars out of every 100. I don't believe Honda feels that a 2%
>failure is commendable. If it's commendable then they would make it a
>selling point: "We at Honda build quality cars, only 2% of our transmissions
>in some models will fail." I don't think it will catch on too well when you
>consider the cost of a new transmission.

I wouldn't call it commendable but it doesn't seem alarmingly high
either. Clearly Honda is not satisfied with the reliability of these
transmissions and is standing behind them. Can't say why they
wouldn't extend the warranty on the earlier cars if they truly have
the same defect rate. According to the Consumer Reports reliability
survey, all years of Accord have excellent transmission reliability,
although it is a little early to expect the defect to show up on the
2000 or 2001 models. The Odyssey's record is nearly as good (and a
lot better than the Chrysler products.)

Automatic transmissions have always been expensive, trouble-prone
devices. Honda units are about as reliable as you can find. If yours
is defective, you are likely to be upset whether the failure rate is 2
in a thousand or 2 in 10. But I certainly wouldn't spend $2000 on an
extended warranty to guard against it - transmission failure is not a
catastrophe. I would consider changing the fluid more often than
recommended, especially if there is any type of severe service
involved.

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 00:21:04 GMT, "Fluffy" <no-spamming-bsavanh@mchsi.com>
wrote:

>I had a 2002 Honda Accord EX-V6. In a year we only put 10K miles on it.. it
>was a good car to us. The tranny failure rate I've read in various articles
>was about 2% but the cost for repair if not under warranty is very high.
>One of my co-worker's mom who's working in Germany had a tranny failure on a
>1999 as well and it cost her something crazy like $6,000 to replace.
>
>Though I wasn't afraid that my tranny would fail, I wanted to at least know
>why my 2002 was not part of the warranty extension so I sent letters (four
>letters) to Honda asking for an explanation why the 2002 model was not part
>of the extended warranty models. They would not answer my simple question
>so last month I traded that sucker in for a new Volvo XC90 and VOWED to not
>buy another Honda again and have informed my family members, cousins,
>friends, and their friends to do the same. (As you can see, I'm upset about
>the whole thing.)

You're saying that, though the car worked fine and showed no signs of
problems, you dumped it because the mfr would not tell you why it was not
part of a warranty extension for other model years? Did it not occur to
you that the *known* flaw had been fixed in the 2002 model year
transmission? It's been mentioned here that this is the case, though I
have no reference for that.

Do you think that Volvo is going to respond better to such letters
questioning *potential* warranty issues? I wouldn't bet on it. Good luck
with your Volvo but from what I hear their failure/repair rate in general
has not been all that great in recent years. If your Accord had actually
failed your complaint would have sounded a bit more reasonable.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 00:21:04 GMT, "Fluffy" <no-spamming-bsavanh@mchsi.com>
wrote:

>I had a 2002 Honda Accord EX-V6. In a year we only put 10K miles on it.. it
>was a good car to us. The tranny failure rate I've read in various articles
>was about 2% but the cost for repair if not under warranty is very high.
>One of my co-worker's mom who's working in Germany had a tranny failure on a
>1999 as well and it cost her something crazy like $6,000 to replace.
>
>Though I wasn't afraid that my tranny would fail, I wanted to at least know
>why my 2002 was not part of the warranty extension so I sent letters (four
>letters) to Honda asking for an explanation why the 2002 model was not part
>of the extended warranty models. They would not answer my simple question
>so last month I traded that sucker in for a new Volvo XC90 and VOWED to not
>buy another Honda again and have informed my family members, cousins,
>friends, and their friends to do the same. (As you can see, I'm upset about
>the whole thing.)

You're saying that, though the car worked fine and showed no signs of
problems, you dumped it because the mfr would not tell you why it was not
part of a warranty extension for other model years? Did it not occur to
you that the *known* flaw had been fixed in the 2002 model year
transmission? It's been mentioned here that this is the case, though I
have no reference for that.

Do you think that Volvo is going to respond better to such letters
questioning *potential* warranty issues? I wouldn't bet on it. Good luck
with your Volvo but from what I hear their failure/repair rate in general
has not been all that great in recent years. If your Accord had actually
failed your complaint would have sounded a bit more reasonable.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

On 8/30/03 11:10 PM, in article birsgg$clt7c$1@ID-194065.news.uni-berlin.de,
"Pete" <pete_nagurski@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Chip,
>
> Another question. What's up with the internal filter on the transmission?
> Does this mean it's never changed?
> This can't be a good thing.
>
> Rick
>
>

I'm not Chip, but I'm looking at the diagram of the 5 speed automatic in the
2000 TL Helms book. It doesn't have a filter in the traditional sense.
There are screens in the fluid passageways at various places in the
transmission. It would have to be disassembled to get to them.

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

On 8/30/03 11:10 PM, in article birsgg$clt7c$1@ID-194065.news.uni-berlin.de,
"Pete" <pete_nagurski@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Chip,
>
> Another question. What's up with the internal filter on the transmission?
> Does this mean it's never changed?
> This can't be a good thing.
>
> Rick
>
>

I'm not Chip, but I'm looking at the diagram of the 5 speed automatic in the
2000 TL Helms book. It doesn't have a filter in the traditional sense.
There are screens in the fluid passageways at various places in the
transmission. It would have to be disassembled to get to them.

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 10:50:03 GMT, fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com
(George Macdonald) wrote:

>On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 00:21:04 GMT, "Fluffy" <no-spamming-bsavanh@mchsi.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I had a 2002 Honda Accord EX-V6. In a year we only put 10K miles on it.. it
>>was a good car to us. The tranny failure rate I've read in various articles
>>was about 2% but the cost for repair if not under warranty is very high.
>>One of my co-worker's mom who's working in Germany had a tranny failure on a
>>1999 as well and it cost her something crazy like $6,000 to replace.
>>
>>Though I wasn't afraid that my tranny would fail, I wanted to at least know
>>why my 2002 was not part of the warranty extension so I sent letters (four
>>letters) to Honda asking for an explanation why the 2002 model was not part
>>of the extended warranty models. They would not answer my simple question
>>so last month I traded that sucker in for a new Volvo XC90 and VOWED to not
>>buy another Honda again and have informed my family members, cousins,
>>friends, and their friends to do the same. (As you can see, I'm upset about
>>the whole thing.)
>
>You're saying that, though the car worked fine and showed no signs of
>problems, you dumped it because the mfr would not tell you why it was not
>part of a warranty extension for other model years? Did it not occur to
>you that the *known* flaw had been fixed in the 2002 model year
>transmission? It's been mentioned here that this is the case, though I
>have no reference for that.
>
>Do you think that Volvo is going to respond better to such letters
>questioning *potential* warranty issues? I wouldn't bet on it. Good luck
>with your Volvo but from what I hear their failure/repair rate in general
>has not been all that great in recent years. If your Accord had actually
>failed your complaint would have sounded a bit more reasonable.

As a long-time owner of both Volvos and Hondas, I would say that
trading a Honda for a Volvo for reliability reasons because Honda
isn't extending your warranty is like moving from Chicago to Baghdad
for safety reasons because you heard that purse snatching is up in
Chicago.

If Honda or Toyota had a car that was a direct substitute for my Volvo
240 wagon, I would be at the dealership when it opened Tuesday
morning. And I wouldn't be asking about an extended warranty.

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 10:50:03 GMT, fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com
(George Macdonald) wrote:

>On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 00:21:04 GMT, "Fluffy" <no-spamming-bsavanh@mchsi.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I had a 2002 Honda Accord EX-V6. In a year we only put 10K miles on it.. it
>>was a good car to us. The tranny failure rate I've read in various articles
>>was about 2% but the cost for repair if not under warranty is very high.
>>One of my co-worker's mom who's working in Germany had a tranny failure on a
>>1999 as well and it cost her something crazy like $6,000 to replace.
>>
>>Though I wasn't afraid that my tranny would fail, I wanted to at least know
>>why my 2002 was not part of the warranty extension so I sent letters (four
>>letters) to Honda asking for an explanation why the 2002 model was not part
>>of the extended warranty models. They would not answer my simple question
>>so last month I traded that sucker in for a new Volvo XC90 and VOWED to not
>>buy another Honda again and have informed my family members, cousins,
>>friends, and their friends to do the same. (As you can see, I'm upset about
>>the whole thing.)
>
>You're saying that, though the car worked fine and showed no signs of
>problems, you dumped it because the mfr would not tell you why it was not
>part of a warranty extension for other model years? Did it not occur to
>you that the *known* flaw had been fixed in the 2002 model year
>transmission? It's been mentioned here that this is the case, though I
>have no reference for that.
>
>Do you think that Volvo is going to respond better to such letters
>questioning *potential* warranty issues? I wouldn't bet on it. Good luck
>with your Volvo but from what I hear their failure/repair rate in general
>has not been all that great in recent years. If your Accord had actually
>failed your complaint would have sounded a bit more reasonable.

As a long-time owner of both Volvos and Hondas, I would say that
trading a Honda for a Volvo for reliability reasons because Honda
isn't extending your warranty is like moving from Chicago to Baghdad
for safety reasons because you heard that purse snatching is up in
Chicago.

If Honda or Toyota had a car that was a direct substitute for my Volvo
240 wagon, I would be at the dealership when it opened Tuesday
morning. And I wouldn't be asking about an extended warranty.

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

Looks like yet another foreign car buyer has awakened in the real
world. Like many buyers, you fell for this myth of superior
Japanese quality. They are good cars but every day more people
are realizing that they too breakdown on occasion just like all
other vehicles on the road. When they do, they cost a lot more
to repair than domestics. They paid a lot more to buy that so
called superior car over a domestic. When it comes time to buy
another new car they are much less likely to pay all that extra
money to buy another Japanese car. Drive
by any domestic new car dealer and see all the foreign cars
sitting on their used car lot if you have any doubt ;)



mike hunt



Pete wrote:
>

>
> Perhaps in your world a $4-5,000 repair bill on a 3 1/2 year old car with
> 48,000 miles isn't a catastrophe. In mine it is.
>
> This is Honda we're talking about. The supposed king of reliability. I just
> sold a 1985 GMC diesel Suburban. It had 250,000 miles. And the original
> transmission. My company vehicle is a 1996 Jeep Cherokee. It has 95,000
> miles. And the original transmission.

Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
 

Looks like yet another foreign car buyer has awakened in the real
world. Like many buyers, you fell for this myth of superior
Japanese quality. They are good cars but every day more people
are realizing that they too breakdown on occasion just like all
other vehicles on the road. When they do, they cost a lot more
to repair than domestics. They paid a lot more to buy that so
called superior car over a domestic. When it comes time to buy
another new car they are much less likely to pay all that extra
money to buy another Japanese car. Drive
by any domestic new car dealer and see all the foreign cars
sitting on their used car lot if you have any doubt ;)



mike hunt



Pete wrote:
>

>
> Perhaps in your world a $4-5,000 repair bill on a 3 1/2 year old car with
> 48,000 miles isn't a catastrophe. In mine it is.
>
> This is Honda we're talking about. The supposed king of reliability. I just
> sold a 1985 GMC diesel Suburban. It had 250,000 miles. And the original
> transmission. My company vehicle is a 1996 Jeep Cherokee. It has 95,000
> miles. And the original transmission.