|
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
You are kidding, right? If ANY manufacture had anywhere near
a 2% failure rate they would go out of business. mike hunt Gordon McGrew wrote: > > On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 15:30:12 GMT, IleneDover@mailcity.com wrote: > > >Question! Does anyone think a 2% failure rate for ANYTHING, on > >20,000 cars out of 1,000,000, is extremely high, average or do > >you think it is low? Think about it, there are 18 million new > >vehicles sold in the US yearly. Apply a little logic here. That > >54 to 72 million cars still in warranty. ;) > > > > > >mike hunt > > I would say that a less than 2% failure rate is pretty low, especially > on cars that are a few years old. What is your point? > > The mathematical fact that 20,000 is 2% of 1,000,000 comes as no > revelation. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
From what I see on our business ALL manufactures are building
good dependable vehicle today, the only real difference is price and style. They will all last a long time if given the proper maintenance. Murphy's law is still at work. They ALL build some that are not up to their build standards and they ALL built some that breakdown on occasion, that's why they ALL have a warranty. Anybody that believes that by buying particular brand, or paying a premium price to do so, they are necessarily going go get one that will not have problems is deluding themselves. We warrant and service most brands, I can assure none is free of defects. mike hunt Pete wrote: > > <IleneDover@mailcity.com> wrote in message > news:3F520AD1.3633C553@mailcity.com... > > 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 > > Your trolling, right, Mike? And if not, you're exhibiting an astonishing > ignorance of the facts of present day car manufacturing reality. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
From what I see on our business ALL manufactures are building
good dependable vehicle today, the only real difference is price and style. They will all last a long time if given the proper maintenance. Murphy's law is still at work. They ALL build some that are not up to their build standards and they ALL built some that breakdown on occasion, that's why they ALL have a warranty. Anybody that believes that by buying particular brand, or paying a premium price to do so, they are necessarily going go get one that will not have problems is deluding themselves. We warrant and service most brands, I can assure none is free of defects. mike hunt Pete wrote: > > <IleneDover@mailcity.com> wrote in message > news:3F520AD1.3633C553@mailcity.com... > > 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 > > Your trolling, right, Mike? And if not, you're exhibiting an astonishing > ignorance of the facts of present day car manufacturing reality. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
<MelvinGibson@mailcity.com> wrote in message news:3F536398.CDDEE122@mailcity.com... > From what I see on our business ALL manufactures are building > good dependable vehicle today, the only real difference is price > and style. They will all last a long time if given the proper > maintenance. Murphy's law is still at work. They ALL build some > that are not up to their build standards and they ALL built some > that breakdown on occasion, that's why they ALL have a warranty. > Anybody that believes that by buying particular brand, or paying > a premium price to do so, they are necessarily going go get one > that will not have problems is deluding themselves. We warrant > and service most brands, I can assure none is free of defects. > > > > mike hunt 1. I am a car 2. I am branded by a "domestic" manufacturer 3. Therefore I am a domestic car. Non Sequitur Pete |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
<MelvinGibson@mailcity.com> wrote in message news:3F536398.CDDEE122@mailcity.com... > From what I see on our business ALL manufactures are building > good dependable vehicle today, the only real difference is price > and style. They will all last a long time if given the proper > maintenance. Murphy's law is still at work. They ALL build some > that are not up to their build standards and they ALL built some > that breakdown on occasion, that's why they ALL have a warranty. > Anybody that believes that by buying particular brand, or paying > a premium price to do so, they are necessarily going go get one > that will not have problems is deluding themselves. We warrant > and service most brands, I can assure none is free of defects. > > > > mike hunt 1. I am a car 2. I am branded by a "domestic" manufacturer 3. Therefore I am a domestic car. Non Sequitur Pete |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:14:27 GMT, MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote:
>You are kidding, right? If ANY manufacture had anywhere near >a 2% failure rate they would go out of business. > > >mike hunt You're nuts. Look at a '97 Caravan - five years old at the time of the latest CR reliability survey. Component Failure rate (%) --------- ----------- Engine 9-15 Cooling 5-9 Fuel 5-9 Ignition <2 Transmission 9-15 Electrical >15 A/C 9-15 Suspension 5-9 Brakes 9-15 Exhaust <2 Paint/trim/rust 2-5 Body integrity 5-9 Power equipment 5-9 Body hardware 5-9 Compare to a '97 Ody where only the brakes have a greater than 5% failure rate (5-9%). Most components are <2%. So why is Chrysler still in business? Well, they aren't as an independent company of course, but Ford and GM are no better. BTW, how old are the cars you service? Most (not all ) cars are OK for 2 or 3 years but after that the domestic models start to plummet. > > > >Gordon McGrew wrote: >> >> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 15:30:12 GMT, IleneDover@mailcity.com wrote: >> >> >Question! Does anyone think a 2% failure rate for ANYTHING, on >> >20,000 cars out of 1,000,000, is extremely high, average or do >> >you think it is low? Think about it, there are 18 million new >> >vehicles sold in the US yearly. Apply a little logic here. That >> >54 to 72 million cars still in warranty. ;) >> > >> > >> >mike hunt >> >> I would say that a less than 2% failure rate is pretty low, especially >> on cars that are a few years old. What is your point? >> >> The mathematical fact that 20,000 is 2% of 1,000,000 comes as no >> revelation. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:14:27 GMT, MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote:
>You are kidding, right? If ANY manufacture had anywhere near >a 2% failure rate they would go out of business. > > >mike hunt You're nuts. Look at a '97 Caravan - five years old at the time of the latest CR reliability survey. Component Failure rate (%) --------- ----------- Engine 9-15 Cooling 5-9 Fuel 5-9 Ignition <2 Transmission 9-15 Electrical >15 A/C 9-15 Suspension 5-9 Brakes 9-15 Exhaust <2 Paint/trim/rust 2-5 Body integrity 5-9 Power equipment 5-9 Body hardware 5-9 Compare to a '97 Ody where only the brakes have a greater than 5% failure rate (5-9%). Most components are <2%. So why is Chrysler still in business? Well, they aren't as an independent company of course, but Ford and GM are no better. BTW, how old are the cars you service? Most (not all ) cars are OK for 2 or 3 years but after that the domestic models start to plummet. > > > >Gordon McGrew wrote: >> >> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 15:30:12 GMT, IleneDover@mailcity.com wrote: >> >> >Question! Does anyone think a 2% failure rate for ANYTHING, on >> >20,000 cars out of 1,000,000, is extremely high, average or do >> >you think it is low? Think about it, there are 18 million new >> >vehicles sold in the US yearly. Apply a little logic here. That >> >54 to 72 million cars still in warranty. ;) >> > >> > >> >mike hunt >> >> I would say that a less than 2% failure rate is pretty low, especially >> on cars that are a few years old. What is your point? >> >> The mathematical fact that 20,000 is 2% of 1,000,000 comes as no >> revelation. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
Perhaps if you took a course on statistical analysis you might
understand. mike hunt Gordon McGrew wrote: > > On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:14:27 GMT, MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote: > > >You are kidding, right? If ANY manufacture had anywhere near > >a 2% failure rate they would go out of business. > > > > > >mike hunt > > You're nuts. Look at a '97 Caravan - five years old at the time of > the latest CR reliability survey. > > Component Failure rate (%) > --------- ----------- > Engine 9-15 > Cooling 5-9 > Fuel 5-9 > Ignition <2 > Transmission 9-15 > Electrical >15 > A/C 9-15 > Suspension 5-9 > Brakes 9-15 > Exhaust <2 > Paint/trim/rust 2-5 > Body integrity 5-9 > Power equipment 5-9 > Body hardware 5-9 > > Compare to a '97 Ody where only the brakes have a greater than 5% > failure rate (5-9%). Most components are <2%. So why is Chrysler > still in business? Well, they aren't as an independent company of > course, but Ford and GM are no better. > > BTW, how old are the cars you service? Most (not all ) cars are OK > for 2 or 3 years but after that the domestic models start to plummet. > > > > > > > > >Gordon McGrew wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 15:30:12 GMT, IleneDover@mailcity.com wrote: > >> > >> >Question! Does anyone think a 2% failure rate for ANYTHING, on > >> >20,000 cars out of 1,000,000, is extremely high, average or do > >> >you think it is low? Think about it, there are 18 million new > >> >vehicles sold in the US yearly. Apply a little logic here. That > >> >54 to 72 million cars still in warranty. ;) > >> > > >> > > >> >mike hunt > >> > >> I would say that a less than 2% failure rate is pretty low, especially > >> on cars that are a few years old. What is your point? > >> > >> The mathematical fact that 20,000 is 2% of 1,000,000 comes as no > >> revelation. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
Perhaps if you took a course on statistical analysis you might
understand. mike hunt Gordon McGrew wrote: > > On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:14:27 GMT, MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote: > > >You are kidding, right? If ANY manufacture had anywhere near > >a 2% failure rate they would go out of business. > > > > > >mike hunt > > You're nuts. Look at a '97 Caravan - five years old at the time of > the latest CR reliability survey. > > Component Failure rate (%) > --------- ----------- > Engine 9-15 > Cooling 5-9 > Fuel 5-9 > Ignition <2 > Transmission 9-15 > Electrical >15 > A/C 9-15 > Suspension 5-9 > Brakes 9-15 > Exhaust <2 > Paint/trim/rust 2-5 > Body integrity 5-9 > Power equipment 5-9 > Body hardware 5-9 > > Compare to a '97 Ody where only the brakes have a greater than 5% > failure rate (5-9%). Most components are <2%. So why is Chrysler > still in business? Well, they aren't as an independent company of > course, but Ford and GM are no better. > > BTW, how old are the cars you service? Most (not all ) cars are OK > for 2 or 3 years but after that the domestic models start to plummet. > > > > > > > > >Gordon McGrew wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 15:30:12 GMT, IleneDover@mailcity.com wrote: > >> > >> >Question! Does anyone think a 2% failure rate for ANYTHING, on > >> >20,000 cars out of 1,000,000, is extremely high, average or do > >> >you think it is low? Think about it, there are 18 million new > >> >vehicles sold in the US yearly. Apply a little logic here. That > >> >54 to 72 million cars still in warranty. ;) > >> > > >> > > >> >mike hunt > >> > >> I would say that a less than 2% failure rate is pretty low, especially > >> on cars that are a few years old. What is your point? > >> > >> The mathematical fact that 20,000 is 2% of 1,000,000 comes as no > >> revelation. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:27:05 GMT, MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote:
>From what I see on our business ALL manufactures are building >good dependable vehicle today, the only real difference is price >and style. They will all last a long time if given the proper >maintenance. Murphy's law is still at work. They ALL build some >that are not up to their build standards and they ALL built some >that breakdown on occasion, that's why they ALL have a warranty. And all the warranties expire. >Anybody that believes that by buying particular brand, or paying >a premium price to do so, they are necessarily going go get one >that will not have problems is deluding themselves. We warrant >and service most brands, I can assure none is free of defects. Nope, no guaranty only a warranty. However, all sources indicate that your odds are better with a Toyota or Honda than a Ford or GM (or Volvo, VW, Mitsubishi, BMW, etc.) > > > >mike hunt > > > >Pete wrote: >> >> <IleneDover@mailcity.com> wrote in message >> news:3F520AD1.3633C553@mailcity.com... >> > 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 >> >> Your trolling, right, Mike? And if not, you're exhibiting an astonishing >> ignorance of the facts of present day car manufacturing reality. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:27:05 GMT, MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote:
>From what I see on our business ALL manufactures are building >good dependable vehicle today, the only real difference is price >and style. They will all last a long time if given the proper >maintenance. Murphy's law is still at work. They ALL build some >that are not up to their build standards and they ALL built some >that breakdown on occasion, that's why they ALL have a warranty. And all the warranties expire. >Anybody that believes that by buying particular brand, or paying >a premium price to do so, they are necessarily going go get one >that will not have problems is deluding themselves. We warrant >and service most brands, I can assure none is free of defects. Nope, no guaranty only a warranty. However, all sources indicate that your odds are better with a Toyota or Honda than a Ford or GM (or Volvo, VW, Mitsubishi, BMW, etc.) > > > >mike hunt > > > >Pete wrote: >> >> <IleneDover@mailcity.com> wrote in message >> news:3F520AD1.3633C553@mailcity.com... >> > 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 >> >> Your trolling, right, Mike? And if not, you're exhibiting an astonishing >> ignorance of the facts of present day car manufacturing reality. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:28:22 GMT, "Miniman"
<dasutcliffe@earthlink.net> wrote: >In terms of a 2% defect rate, my opinion is that it is far too high. Honda >(and other Japanese manufacturers) hold their suppliers to a 15 parts per >million defect rate which is 0.0015%. Keep in mind a couple things. If there are 500 parts in an AT, the chance of one of them failing with the above defect rate is 0.75%. If one sneaks in with a 1% defect rate, the chances of a transmission failure reach 1.75%. Also, what constitutes a defective part? A measurable defect on receipt or a failure within the warranty period? The concern here is cars with failures before 100,000 miles. Add to this the risk of a design problem that may add to the failure rate and varying levels of owner abuse and you could easily exceed 2% failures before the warranty period expires. In fact, if your name isn't Toyota or Honda, you can pretty much count on it. If the vehicle says Caravan on the back, expect about 15%. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:28:22 GMT, "Miniman"
<dasutcliffe@earthlink.net> wrote: >In terms of a 2% defect rate, my opinion is that it is far too high. Honda >(and other Japanese manufacturers) hold their suppliers to a 15 parts per >million defect rate which is 0.0015%. Keep in mind a couple things. If there are 500 parts in an AT, the chance of one of them failing with the above defect rate is 0.75%. If one sneaks in with a 1% defect rate, the chances of a transmission failure reach 1.75%. Also, what constitutes a defective part? A measurable defect on receipt or a failure within the warranty period? The concern here is cars with failures before 100,000 miles. Add to this the risk of a design problem that may add to the failure rate and varying levels of owner abuse and you could easily exceed 2% failures before the warranty period expires. In fact, if your name isn't Toyota or Honda, you can pretty much count on it. If the vehicle says Caravan on the back, expect about 15%. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 16:44:34 GMT, MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote:
>Perhaps if you took a course on statistical analysis you might >understand. > > >mike hunt Perhaps if you took a course in arithmetic you wouldn't be confused. > > >Gordon McGrew wrote: >> >> On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:14:27 GMT, MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote: >> >> >You are kidding, right? If ANY manufacture had anywhere near >> >a 2% failure rate they would go out of business. >> > >> > >> >mike hunt >> >> You're nuts. Look at a '97 Caravan - five years old at the time of >> the latest CR reliability survey. >> >> Component Failure rate (%) >> --------- ----------- >> Engine 9-15 >> Cooling 5-9 >> Fuel 5-9 >> Ignition <2 >> Transmission 9-15 >> Electrical >15 >> A/C 9-15 >> Suspension 5-9 >> Brakes 9-15 >> Exhaust <2 >> Paint/trim/rust 2-5 >> Body integrity 5-9 >> Power equipment 5-9 >> Body hardware 5-9 >> >> Compare to a '97 Ody where only the brakes have a greater than 5% >> failure rate (5-9%). Most components are <2%. So why is Chrysler >> still in business? Well, they aren't as an independent company of >> course, but Ford and GM are no better. >> >> BTW, how old are the cars you service? Most (not all ) cars are OK >> for 2 or 3 years but after that the domestic models start to plummet. >> >> > >> > >> > >> >Gordon McGrew wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 15:30:12 GMT, IleneDover@mailcity.com wrote: >> >> >> >> >Question! Does anyone think a 2% failure rate for ANYTHING, on >> >> >20,000 cars out of 1,000,000, is extremely high, average or do >> >> >you think it is low? Think about it, there are 18 million new >> >> >vehicles sold in the US yearly. Apply a little logic here. That >> >> >54 to 72 million cars still in warranty. ;) >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >mike hunt >> >> >> >> I would say that a less than 2% failure rate is pretty low, especially >> >> on cars that are a few years old. What is your point? >> >> >> >> The mathematical fact that 20,000 is 2% of 1,000,000 comes as no >> >> revelation. |
Re: 1999 Accord V6 transmission problems
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 16:44:34 GMT, MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote:
>Perhaps if you took a course on statistical analysis you might >understand. > > >mike hunt Perhaps if you took a course in arithmetic you wouldn't be confused. > > >Gordon McGrew wrote: >> >> On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:14:27 GMT, MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote: >> >> >You are kidding, right? If ANY manufacture had anywhere near >> >a 2% failure rate they would go out of business. >> > >> > >> >mike hunt >> >> You're nuts. Look at a '97 Caravan - five years old at the time of >> the latest CR reliability survey. >> >> Component Failure rate (%) >> --------- ----------- >> Engine 9-15 >> Cooling 5-9 >> Fuel 5-9 >> Ignition <2 >> Transmission 9-15 >> Electrical >15 >> A/C 9-15 >> Suspension 5-9 >> Brakes 9-15 >> Exhaust <2 >> Paint/trim/rust 2-5 >> Body integrity 5-9 >> Power equipment 5-9 >> Body hardware 5-9 >> >> Compare to a '97 Ody where only the brakes have a greater than 5% >> failure rate (5-9%). Most components are <2%. So why is Chrysler >> still in business? Well, they aren't as an independent company of >> course, but Ford and GM are no better. >> >> BTW, how old are the cars you service? Most (not all ) cars are OK >> for 2 or 3 years but after that the domestic models start to plummet. >> >> > >> > >> > >> >Gordon McGrew wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 15:30:12 GMT, IleneDover@mailcity.com wrote: >> >> >> >> >Question! Does anyone think a 2% failure rate for ANYTHING, on >> >> >20,000 cars out of 1,000,000, is extremely high, average or do >> >> >you think it is low? Think about it, there are 18 million new >> >> >vehicles sold in the US yearly. Apply a little logic here. That >> >> >54 to 72 million cars still in warranty. ;) >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >mike hunt >> >> >> >> I would say that a less than 2% failure rate is pretty low, especially >> >> on cars that are a few years old. What is your point? >> >> >> >> The mathematical fact that 20,000 is 2% of 1,000,000 comes as no >> >> revelation. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:47 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands