Matt wrote:
> Did they fix this problem with the 05 Accords?? I am thinking of
> getting a 05 Accord LX or EX V6 and I wanted to know if the
> transmission problem was fixed on the 05's.

Honda has put in place lots of transmission fixes over the years ... but
do they have it right yet??? We will not know until we see at least 5
years of new history.


> Also, Is there a site that
> I can research the problem with the honda transmissions.
>

I don't know of a specific one, but it is discussed in many places.
Just search for "Honda Transmission Failure" and you will find plenty to
read.

John

 

Matt wrote:
> Did they fix this problem with the 05 Accords?? I am thinking of
> getting a 05 Accord LX or EX V6 and I wanted to know if the
> transmission problem was fixed on the 05's.

Honda has put in place lots of transmission fixes over the years ... but
do they have it right yet??? We will not know until we see at least 5
years of new history.


> Also, Is there a site that
> I can research the problem with the honda transmissions.
>

I don't know of a specific one, but it is discussed in many places.
Just search for "Honda Transmission Failure" and you will find plenty to
read.

John

 

John Horner wrote:
>
>>
>> As much as I like and respect the 'Asian Big Three' and many of their
>> vehicle offerings throughout their history, I will openly admit that they
>> haven't been immune to automatic transmissions problems. But neither have
>> the American automobile manufacturers. Part of the problem is the
>> nature of
>> the beast itself. An automatic transmission is an extremely complex
>> assemblage of parts and it is actually a miracle that many of them
>> perform
>> as well as they do.
>
>
> True enough, but on my recent problem the failure mode is a casting
> defects in the main case which allow fluid to leak through. I would
> expect Honda to at least get the basic case casting right.
>
> John

no kidding. casting porosity is not new, but allowing it to suddenly be
present after decades of doing it right indicates a *serious* management
problem.

i /love/ hondas, but i can't see myself buying anything post 2000 until
they fire their current "bean counters make all the decisions"
management team & get some engineering/quality back into the equation.
seriously. honda will /never/ compete with toyota on price, so they
should get back to competing on product offering & product quality.
that was a highly successful strategy before.

trying to "out toyota" toyota has cost them:

1. significant share of the family sedan market that was the accord
thanks to significant reliability issues.

2. significant alienation the cheaper sport/enthusiast market that used
to be civic thanks to CRAP suspension design. the econo crowd also used
to buy the civic, but that brand loyalty is now fading in favor of the
prius.

3. complete anihilation the "mid range" sport/entusiast market that used
to be integra with the abysmal rsx and given it to subaru. or even mazda!

honda are in serious trouble. such a shame. /used/ to be fantastic cars.

 

John Horner wrote:
>
>>
>> As much as I like and respect the 'Asian Big Three' and many of their
>> vehicle offerings throughout their history, I will openly admit that they
>> haven't been immune to automatic transmissions problems. But neither have
>> the American automobile manufacturers. Part of the problem is the
>> nature of
>> the beast itself. An automatic transmission is an extremely complex
>> assemblage of parts and it is actually a miracle that many of them
>> perform
>> as well as they do.
>
>
> True enough, but on my recent problem the failure mode is a casting
> defects in the main case which allow fluid to leak through. I would
> expect Honda to at least get the basic case casting right.
>
> John

no kidding. casting porosity is not new, but allowing it to suddenly be
present after decades of doing it right indicates a *serious* management
problem.

i /love/ hondas, but i can't see myself buying anything post 2000 until
they fire their current "bean counters make all the decisions"
management team & get some engineering/quality back into the equation.
seriously. honda will /never/ compete with toyota on price, so they
should get back to competing on product offering & product quality.
that was a highly successful strategy before.

trying to "out toyota" toyota has cost them:

1. significant share of the family sedan market that was the accord
thanks to significant reliability issues.

2. significant alienation the cheaper sport/enthusiast market that used
to be civic thanks to CRAP suspension design. the econo crowd also used
to buy the civic, but that brand loyalty is now fading in favor of the
prius.

3. complete anihilation the "mid range" sport/entusiast market that used
to be integra with the abysmal rsx and given it to subaru. or even mazda!

honda are in serious trouble. such a shame. /used/ to be fantastic cars.

 

JXStern wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 20:52:38 -0500, Ron Jeremy <ronniej@big12inch.com>
> wrote:
>
>>As early as 1998, I remember reading Car & Driver articles that stated
>>if you were going to buy a Japanese vehicle, make sure you get a
>>standard transmission, because the automatic transmissions were not
>>perfected at that time. Hard to believe it is 2005, and they are still
>>having "issues" with automatic transmissions.
>
>
> Sure that wasn't 1968?
>
> J.
>
Actually, I meant 1988. That was the time my uncle went with a Mazda
626 sedan, but chose to go standard over automatic due to numerous
reviews on problems with Japanese automobiles. He kept that 626 for
over 12 years, and it was still running like a champ when he traded it
in on a Accord for my aunt.

 

JXStern wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 20:52:38 -0500, Ron Jeremy <ronniej@big12inch.com>
> wrote:
>
>>As early as 1998, I remember reading Car & Driver articles that stated
>>if you were going to buy a Japanese vehicle, make sure you get a
>>standard transmission, because the automatic transmissions were not
>>perfected at that time. Hard to believe it is 2005, and they are still
>>having "issues" with automatic transmissions.
>
>
> Sure that wasn't 1968?
>
> J.
>
Actually, I meant 1988. That was the time my uncle went with a Mazda
626 sedan, but chose to go standard over automatic due to numerous
reviews on problems with Japanese automobiles. He kept that 626 for
over 12 years, and it was still running like a champ when he traded it
in on a Accord for my aunt.

 

In article <BtidnazIe7P8T0jfRVn-vA@speakeasy.net>,
jim beam <nospam@example.net> wrote:

> i /love/ hondas, but i can't see myself buying anything post 2000 until
> they fire their current "bean counters make all the decisions"
> management team & get some engineering/quality back into the equation.

Truer words were never spoken.

 

In article <BtidnazIe7P8T0jfRVn-vA@speakeasy.net>,
jim beam <nospam@example.net> wrote:

> i /love/ hondas, but i can't see myself buying anything post 2000 until
> they fire their current "bean counters make all the decisions"
> management team & get some engineering/quality back into the equation.

Truer words were never spoken.

 

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
newsf2Be.17717$xB6.4332@trnddc03...
>
> >
> > As much as I like and respect the 'Asian Big Three' and many of their
> > vehicle offerings throughout their history, I will openly admit that
they
> > haven't been immune to automatic transmissions problems. But neither
have
> > the American automobile manufacturers. Part of the problem is the nature
of
> > the beast itself. An automatic transmission is an extremely complex
> > assemblage of parts and it is actually a miracle that many of them
perform
> > as well as they do.
>
> True enough, but on my recent problem the failure mode is a casting
> defects in the main case which allow fluid to leak through. I would
> expect Honda to at least get the basic case casting right.
>
> John

Hi John,

I agree with you 100%. At this point in time casting defects shouldn't be an
issue. Believe me, I wasn't defending the manufacturer against your
complaint. I was just
stating how several different manufacturers continue to struggle with
automatic
trannys after all these years--and how it's not really that uncommon to have
some
sort of problem with them. The one that surprises me the most is GM's issues
with
the 4L60E transmission which has been used in several different cars, SUVs
and
pickup trucks over the years. Admittedly, they have sold a whole lot of
vehicles with
this particular transmission. So yes, there are going to be some defective
ones. But
you can also view this from another perspective and say that this tranny
should be
100% bulletproof by now. I had a 4L60E to fail in a 2002 Chevy TrailBlazer
LTZ
with only 9,000 miles on the odometer. That's pretty sad! :-(

Ron M.

 

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
newsf2Be.17717$xB6.4332@trnddc03...
>
> >
> > As much as I like and respect the 'Asian Big Three' and many of their
> > vehicle offerings throughout their history, I will openly admit that
they
> > haven't been immune to automatic transmissions problems. But neither
have
> > the American automobile manufacturers. Part of the problem is the nature
of
> > the beast itself. An automatic transmission is an extremely complex
> > assemblage of parts and it is actually a miracle that many of them
perform
> > as well as they do.
>
> True enough, but on my recent problem the failure mode is a casting
> defects in the main case which allow fluid to leak through. I would
> expect Honda to at least get the basic case casting right.
>
> John

Hi John,

I agree with you 100%. At this point in time casting defects shouldn't be an
issue. Believe me, I wasn't defending the manufacturer against your
complaint. I was just
stating how several different manufacturers continue to struggle with
automatic
trannys after all these years--and how it's not really that uncommon to have
some
sort of problem with them. The one that surprises me the most is GM's issues
with
the 4L60E transmission which has been used in several different cars, SUVs
and
pickup trucks over the years. Admittedly, they have sold a whole lot of
vehicles with
this particular transmission. So yes, there are going to be some defective
ones. But
you can also view this from another perspective and say that this tranny
should be
100% bulletproof by now. I had a 4L60E to fail in a 2002 Chevy TrailBlazer
LTZ
with only 9,000 miles on the odometer. That's pretty sad! :-(

Ron M.

 

In article <11ddr70sepe6f01@corp.supernews.com>,
"Ron M." <nobody@nowhere.net> wrote:

> > True enough, but on my recent problem the failure mode is a casting
> > defects in the main case which allow fluid to leak through. I would
> > expect Honda to at least get the basic case casting right.
> >
> > John
>
> Hi John,
>
> I agree with you 100%. At this point in time casting defects shouldn't be an
> issue.

The 02 Odyssey, at least, had some porosity issues with the engine block.

Let me tell you, Honda has stopped being an engineering company.
Non-engineers are running things, and they're running Honda's
hard-earned reputation into the ground.

Once lost, it's lost (GM, anyone?). Hyundai doesn't have a particularly
difficult job ahead of them; all they have to do is make rock-solid cars
and service their customers well, and they'll capture those who came to
expect that kind of service back when Honda did that.

 

In article <11ddr70sepe6f01@corp.supernews.com>,
"Ron M." <nobody@nowhere.net> wrote:

> > True enough, but on my recent problem the failure mode is a casting
> > defects in the main case which allow fluid to leak through. I would
> > expect Honda to at least get the basic case casting right.
> >
> > John
>
> Hi John,
>
> I agree with you 100%. At this point in time casting defects shouldn't be an
> issue.

The 02 Odyssey, at least, had some porosity issues with the engine block.

Let me tell you, Honda has stopped being an engineering company.
Non-engineers are running things, and they're running Honda's
hard-earned reputation into the ground.

Once lost, it's lost (GM, anyone?). Hyundai doesn't have a particularly
difficult job ahead of them; all they have to do is make rock-solid cars
and service their customers well, and they'll capture those who came to
expect that kind of service back when Honda did that.

 

> The 02 Odyssey, at least, had some porosity issues with the engine block.
>

Indeed, problems like that seem to keep coming back in the automotive
industry. Volvo had problems with it's aluminum block straight-6
engines when that design was released in the mid-1990s.

> Let me tell you, Honda has stopped being an engineering company.
> Non-engineers are running things, and they're running Honda's
> hard-earned reputation into the ground.

Sure seems that way.

>
> Once lost, it's lost (GM, anyone?).

Indeed. There was a time in the post-WWII where GM was one of the best
engineering and manufacturing companies in the world.


> Hyundai doesn't have a particularly
> difficult job ahead of them; all they have to do is make rock-solid cars
> and service their customers well, and they'll capture those who came to
> expect that kind of service back when Honda did that.
>

Hyundai is on the right track with long standard warranties. By taking
on a long warranty they take on the costs associated with engineering
and manufacturing problems. That way the costs are born by the people
who were responsible for the problems in the first place.

Most of the repairs (excepting normal wear items) which are needed by
any modern properly maintained vehicle in the 37k-100k mile time frame
are a result of poor engineering and/or poor manufacturing controls.
Honda and most auto makers sidesteps this basic fact by putting those
costs onto the customer. The customer didn't make the mistakes.
Managers, engineers and/or factory workers caused most of the problems,
yet the customer is one stuck paying the bill. Of course customers get
very angry about this.

GM lost it's way first and foremost by getting arrogant; and secondarily
by letting the finance people have the upper hand on most internal
decisions. Honda is in great danger of making that same kind of
long-term mistakes.

One of the crazy things in the modern world is that most companies spend
massive fortunes on advertising to gain customers, but then treat the
customers like dog-doo once said same customer have put their money on
the table. I would love to see an automobile company have the guts to
cut it's advertising budget as needed to fund an immediate increase of
the warranty period for all customers, INCLUDING THOSE WHO HAD ALREADY
BOUGHT A CAR. Imagine the positive buzz if Honda announced tomorrow
that effectively immediately all Honda car purchases would be covered by
a five year, 75k mile comprehensive warranty and that in order to fund
the slight increase in costs to Honda from this change they would be
reducing television advertising buys slightly to cover the potential costs.

If one is to believe Honda's hype/image, this increased warranty period
should cost the company almost nothing.


John

 

> The 02 Odyssey, at least, had some porosity issues with the engine block.
>

Indeed, problems like that seem to keep coming back in the automotive
industry. Volvo had problems with it's aluminum block straight-6
engines when that design was released in the mid-1990s.

> Let me tell you, Honda has stopped being an engineering company.
> Non-engineers are running things, and they're running Honda's
> hard-earned reputation into the ground.

Sure seems that way.

>
> Once lost, it's lost (GM, anyone?).

Indeed. There was a time in the post-WWII where GM was one of the best
engineering and manufacturing companies in the world.


> Hyundai doesn't have a particularly
> difficult job ahead of them; all they have to do is make rock-solid cars
> and service their customers well, and they'll capture those who came to
> expect that kind of service back when Honda did that.
>

Hyundai is on the right track with long standard warranties. By taking
on a long warranty they take on the costs associated with engineering
and manufacturing problems. That way the costs are born by the people
who were responsible for the problems in the first place.

Most of the repairs (excepting normal wear items) which are needed by
any modern properly maintained vehicle in the 37k-100k mile time frame
are a result of poor engineering and/or poor manufacturing controls.
Honda and most auto makers sidesteps this basic fact by putting those
costs onto the customer. The customer didn't make the mistakes.
Managers, engineers and/or factory workers caused most of the problems,
yet the customer is one stuck paying the bill. Of course customers get
very angry about this.

GM lost it's way first and foremost by getting arrogant; and secondarily
by letting the finance people have the upper hand on most internal
decisions. Honda is in great danger of making that same kind of
long-term mistakes.

One of the crazy things in the modern world is that most companies spend
massive fortunes on advertising to gain customers, but then treat the
customers like dog-doo once said same customer have put their money on
the table. I would love to see an automobile company have the guts to
cut it's advertising budget as needed to fund an immediate increase of
the warranty period for all customers, INCLUDING THOSE WHO HAD ALREADY
BOUGHT A CAR. Imagine the positive buzz if Honda announced tomorrow
that effectively immediately all Honda car purchases would be covered by
a five year, 75k mile comprehensive warranty and that in order to fund
the slight increase in costs to Honda from this change they would be
reducing television advertising buys slightly to cover the potential costs.

If one is to believe Honda's hype/image, this increased warranty period
should cost the company almost nothing.


John

 

In article <2LCBe.4025$GB4.873@trnddc02>,
John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Most of the repairs (excepting normal wear items) which are needed by
> any modern properly maintained vehicle in the 37k-100k mile time frame
> are a result of poor engineering and/or poor manufacturing controls.

Yup.

At 35K miles and 42 months of age (right outside the warranty by time),
the idle air control on my Odyssey went bad. That's a $300 repair.
Fortunately, my dealership stepped up to the plate (it's good to have a
good relationship with those folks) and just replaced it for me, and in
the background made Honda pay for it.

And they were right--it wasn't right for me to have suffered something
like that. I'm glad they took care of it, and Honda does indeed take
care of their customers who know to ask, but there are plenty who don't
know to ask--and they're buying some big ticket items like transmissions.

And that's just plain wrong.