ndccpf1

I see the fuel rail line go down the firewall but no traditional "can"
filter....

e.meyer

On Dec 25, 6:56 pm, ndccpf1 <ndcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I see the fuel rail line go down the firewall but no traditional "can"
> filter....

Honda switched to a "permanent" filter in the gas tank around the 2000
time frame. Its no longer a convenient preventive maintenance item.
Only worry about it if you have fuel starvation issues that point
directly to a clogged filter.

jim beam

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 07:29:59 -0800, e.meyer wrote:

> On Dec 25, 6:56 pm, ndccpf1 <ndcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I see the fuel rail line go down the firewall but no traditional "can"
>> filter....
>
> Honda switched to a "permanent" filter in the gas tank around the 2000
> time frame. Its no longer a convenient preventive maintenance item.
> Only worry about it if you have fuel starvation issues that point
> directly to a clogged filter.

indeed.

it's amazing how detroit has brainwashed so many people into constantly
paying for "maintenance" they don't need.

Elle

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 07:29:59 -0800, e.meyer wrote:
>
>> On Dec 25, 6:56 pm, ndccpf1 <ndcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I see the fuel rail line go down the firewall but no
>>> traditional "can"
>>> filter....
>>
>> Honda switched to a "permanent" filter in the gas tank
>> around the 2000
>> time frame. Its no longer a convenient preventive
>> maintenance item.
>> Only worry about it if you have fuel starvation issues
>> that point
>> directly to a clogged filter.
>
> indeed.
>
> it's amazing how detroit has brainwashed so many people
> into constantly
> paying for "maintenance" they don't need.

Come on. Prior to this new filter design, Honda also
recommended changing the fuel filter every few years.

jim beam

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 08:42:31 -0700, Elle wrote:

> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 07:29:59 -0800, e.meyer wrote:
>>
>>> On Dec 25, 6:56 pm, ndccpf1 <ndcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I see the fuel rail line go down the firewall but no traditional
>>>> "can"
>>>> filter....
>>>
>>> Honda switched to a "permanent" filter in the gas tank around the 2000
>>> time frame. Its no longer a convenient preventive maintenance item.
>>> Only worry about it if you have fuel starvation issues that point
>>> directly to a clogged filter.
>>
>> indeed.
>>
>> it's amazing how detroit has brainwashed so many people into constantly
>> paying for "maintenance" they don't need.
>
> Come on. Prior to this new filter design, Honda also recommended
> changing the fuel filter every few years.

my 306k mile crx was on its original filter. sure, you might need to
change if you're a farmer in the habit of fueling from a muddy can, but to
most folk, you'll never need to touch it - changes should be on the basis
of need, not recreation.

Elle

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 08:42:31 -0700, Elle wrote:
>
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 07:29:59 -0800, e.meyer wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Dec 25, 6:56 pm, ndccpf1 <ndcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I see the fuel rail line go down the firewall but no
>>>>> traditional
>>>>> "can"
>>>>> filter....
>>>>
>>>> Honda switched to a "permanent" filter in the gas tank
>>>> around the 2000
>>>> time frame. Its no longer a convenient preventive
>>>> maintenance item.
>>>> Only worry about it if you have fuel starvation issues
>>>> that point
>>>> directly to a clogged filter.
>>>
>>> indeed.
>>>
>>> it's amazing how detroit has brainwashed so many people
>>> into constantly
>>> paying for "maintenance" they don't need.
>>
>> Come on. Prior to this new filter design, Honda also
>> recommended
>> changing the fuel filter every few years.
>
> my 306k mile crx was on its original filter. sure, you
> might need to
> change if you're a farmer in the habit of fueling from a
> muddy can, but to
> most folk, you'll never need to touch it - changes should
> be on the basis
> of need, not recreation.

It is the maintenance schedule that prescribes changing the
fuel filter in older Civics after x years/y miles. The
maintenance schedule is not "recreation." Using your
criterion, a person would never change the timing belt.

jim beam

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 10:35:37 -0700, Elle wrote:

> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 08:42:31 -0700, Elle wrote:
>>
>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
>>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 07:29:59 -0800, e.meyer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:56 pm, ndccpf1 <ndcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I see the fuel rail line go down the firewall but no traditional
>>>>>> "can"
>>>>>> filter....
>>>>>
>>>>> Honda switched to a "permanent" filter in the gas tank around the
>>>>> 2000
>>>>> time frame. Its no longer a convenient preventive maintenance item.
>>>>> Only worry about it if you have fuel starvation issues that point
>>>>> directly to a clogged filter.
>>>>
>>>> indeed.
>>>>
>>>> it's amazing how detroit has brainwashed so many people into
>>>> constantly
>>>> paying for "maintenance" they don't need.
>>>
>>> Come on. Prior to this new filter design, Honda also recommended
>>> changing the fuel filter every few years.
>>
>> my 306k mile crx was on its original filter. sure, you might need to
>> change if you're a farmer in the habit of fueling from a muddy can, but
>> to
>> most folk, you'll never need to touch it - changes should be on the
>> basis
>> of need, not recreation.
>
> It is the maintenance schedule that prescribes changing the fuel filter
> in older Civics after x years/y miles. The maintenance schedule is not
> "recreation." Using your criterion, a person would never change the
> timing belt.

no, there are no symptoms for a timing belt - there are for a fuel
filter. your argument is like saying change oil on schedule as an over-
ride to analysis. in reality, if you have analysis, that over-rides a
schedule.

Elle

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:dd95l.35371$PO4.2220@fe10.news.easynews.com.. .
> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 10:35:37 -0700, Elle wrote:
>
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 08:42:31 -0700, Elle wrote:
>>>
>>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
>>>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 07:29:59 -0800, e.meyer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:56 pm, ndccpf1 <ndcc...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I see the fuel rail line go down the firewall but no
>>>>>>> traditional
>>>>>>> "can"
>>>>>>> filter....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Honda switched to a "permanent" filter in the gas
>>>>>> tank around the
>>>>>> 2000
>>>>>> time frame. Its no longer a convenient preventive
>>>>>> maintenance item.
>>>>>> Only worry about it if you have fuel starvation
>>>>>> issues that point
>>>>>> directly to a clogged filter.
>>>>>
>>>>> indeed.
>>>>>
>>>>> it's amazing how detroit has brainwashed so many
>>>>> people into
>>>>> constantly
>>>>> paying for "maintenance" they don't need.
>>>>
>>>> Come on. Prior to this new filter design, Honda also
>>>> recommended
>>>> changing the fuel filter every few years.
>>>
>>> my 306k mile crx was on its original filter. sure, you
>>> might need to
>>> change if you're a farmer in the habit of fueling from a
>>> muddy can, but
>>> to
>>> most folk, you'll never need to touch it - changes
>>> should be on the
>>> basis
>>> of need, not recreation.
>>
>> It is the maintenance schedule that prescribes changing
>> the fuel filter
>> in older Civics after x years/y miles. The maintenance
>> schedule is not
>> "recreation." Using your criterion, a person would never
>> change the
>> timing belt.
>
> no, there are no symptoms for a timing belt - there are
> for a fuel
> filter. your argument is like saying change oil on
> schedule as an over-
> ride to analysis. in reality, if you have analysis, that
> over-rides a
> schedule.

If you want to use logic then you will have to concede that
(1) Honda as well as Detroit for many years recommended
changing the oil filter; and (2) it is on the maintenance
schedule for older Hondas. I do not have any problem with
your noting you do not feel the filter needs to be changed.
Just do not insist (1) and (2) oare otherwise.

If you do not like the TB example there are many other
components for which "analysis" is difficult or impossible
or waiting can affect other opponents, so good practice is
to replace X every Y/Z years/miles.

ndccpf1

On Dec 26, 10:29 am, "e.meyer" <epmeye...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 25, 6:56 pm, ndccpf1 <ndcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I see the fuel rail line go down the firewall but no traditional "can"
> > filter....
>
> Honda switched to a "permanent" filter in the gas tank around the 2000
> time frame. Its no longer a convenient preventive maintenance item.
> Only worry about it if you have fuel starvation issues that point
> directly to a clogged filter.

Thanks !

jim beam

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 12:46:05 -0700, Elle wrote:

> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:dd95l.35371$PO4.2220@fe10.news.easynews.com.. .
>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 10:35:37 -0700, Elle wrote:
>>
>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
>>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 08:42:31 -0700, Elle wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
>>>>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 07:29:59 -0800, e.meyer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:56 pm, ndccpf1 <ndcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I see the fuel rail line go down the firewall but no traditional
>>>>>>>> "can"
>>>>>>>> filter....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Honda switched to a "permanent" filter in the gas tank around the
>>>>>>> 2000
>>>>>>> time frame. Its no longer a convenient preventive maintenance
>>>>>>> item.
>>>>>>> Only worry about it if you have fuel starvation issues that point
>>>>>>> directly to a clogged filter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> indeed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it's amazing how detroit has brainwashed so many people into
>>>>>> constantly
>>>>>> paying for "maintenance" they don't need.
>>>>>
>>>>> Come on. Prior to this new filter design, Honda also recommended
>>>>> changing the fuel filter every few years.
>>>>
>>>> my 306k mile crx was on its original filter. sure, you might need to
>>>> change if you're a farmer in the habit of fueling from a muddy can,
>>>> but
>>>> to
>>>> most folk, you'll never need to touch it - changes should be on the
>>>> basis
>>>> of need, not recreation.
>>>
>>> It is the maintenance schedule that prescribes changing the fuel
>>> filter
>>> in older Civics after x years/y miles. The maintenance schedule is not
>>> "recreation." Using your criterion, a person would never change the
>>> timing belt.
>>
>> no, there are no symptoms for a timing belt - there are for a fuel
>> filter. your argument is like saying change oil on schedule as an
>> over-
>> ride to analysis. in reality, if you have analysis, that over-rides a
>> schedule.
>
> If you want to use logic then you will have to concede that (1) Honda as
> well as Detroit for many years recommended changing the oil filter; and
> (2) it is on the maintenance schedule for older Hondas. I do not have
> any problem with your noting you do not feel the filter needs to be
> changed. Just do not insist (1) and (2) oare otherwise.

er, the oil filter gets changed when the oil gets changed. you change it
on a schedule if you don't do analysis, you change it on determined
mileage if you do.

the same would go for fuel filters if you had access to analysis, which in
fact, you do, if you're bothering to observe the vehicle's behavior,
because you it exhibits telltale symptoms when it needs service. you'd
know this is you'd run a vehicle in an environment where fuel cleanliness
is a problem. i have, and it's basic stuff. and trivial to handle.



>
> If you do not like the TB example there are many other components for
> which "analysis" is difficult or impossible or waiting can affect other
> opponents, so good practice is to replace X every Y/Z years/miles.

you're clutching at straws. just like tires where you can directly
observe usage, the fuel filter you can also directly observe based on the
vehicle's behavior. you don't replace tires on a schedule do you?

Elle

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 12:46:05 -0700, Elle wrote:

>> If you want to use logic then you will have to concede
>> that (1) Honda as
>> well as Detroit for many years recommended changing the
>> oil filter; and
>> (2) it is on the maintenance schedule for older Hondas. I
>> do not have
>> any problem with your noting you do not feel the filter
>> needs to be
>> changed. Just do not insist (1) and (2) oare otherwise.
>
> er, the oil filter gets changed when the oil gets changed.

Obviously I meant fuel filter.

I could list a number of components where wear is not
obvious, yet the maintenance schedule and good practices
says they should be changed out, but you will just continue
to play games.

Michael Pardee

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
newso75l.159361$hm4.138935@fe05.news.easynews.co m...
>
> my 306k mile crx was on its original filter. sure, you might need to
> change if you're a farmer in the habit of fueling from a muddy can, but to
> most folk, you'll never need to touch it - changes should be on the basis
> of need, not recreation.
>
>

There have been 4 cars in my family that really needed fuel filter changes.
In two of the cases the symptoms were sporadic - the engine would run fine
for a while than quit. Let it sit a few minutes and it would work again for
minutes, hours or days. There is no need preemptively change fuel filters
unless you are averse to the engine dying while on the road or taking the
car in for repair and being told there doesn't appear to be anything wrong
with it. However, the troublesome filters were also small.

Mike

jim beam

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 18:56:12 -0700, Elle wrote:

> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote
>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 12:46:05 -0700, Elle wrote:
>
>>> If you want to use logic then you will have to concede that (1) Honda
>>> as
>>> well as Detroit for many years recommended changing the oil filter;
>>> and
>>> (2) it is on the maintenance schedule for older Hondas. I do not have
>>> any problem with your noting you do not feel the filter needs to be
>>> changed. Just do not insist (1) and (2) oare otherwise.
>>
>> er, the oil filter gets changed when the oil gets changed.
>
> Obviously I meant fuel filter.
>
> I could list a number of components where wear is not obvious, yet the
> maintenance schedule and good practices says they should be changed out,
> but you will just continue to play games.

i'm not playing games elle, i'm pointing out facts. but you've taken it
all personally and are reacting inappropriately.

jim beam

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 20:22:11 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:

> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> newso75l.159361$hm4.138935@fe05.news.easynews.co m...
>>
>> my 306k mile crx was on its original filter. sure, you might need to
>> change if you're a farmer in the habit of fueling from a muddy can, but
>> to most folk, you'll never need to touch it - changes should be on the
>> basis of need, not recreation.
>>
>>
>>
> There have been 4 cars in my family that really needed fuel filter
> changes. In two of the cases the symptoms were sporadic - the engine
> would run fine for a while than quit. Let it sit a few minutes and it
> would work again for minutes, hours or days. There is no need
> preemptively change fuel filters unless you are averse to the engine
> dying while on the road or taking the car in for repair and being told
> there doesn't appear to be anything wrong with it. However, the
> troublesome filters were also small.
>
> Mike

ok, there is something to be said for preempting idiot mechanics that
can't diagnose a basic problem like this, but then again, maybe not. when
i went to vehicle tech classes, we'd be given bench motors with
undisclosed problems and tested on our diagnosis and repair. basic flow-
chart stuff. if you can sit down with the honda manual and the honda
diagnostic charts, there really is no reason anyone should be giving you a
vehicle back unable to find out the problem. just changing fuel filters
doesn't make your mechanic good at their job.

Michael Pardee

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:_Bk5l.170472$hm4.46276@fe05.news.easynews.com ...
> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 20:22:11 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>> There have been 4 cars in my family that really needed fuel filter
>> changes. In two of the cases the symptoms were sporadic - the engine
>> would run fine for a while than quit. Let it sit a few minutes and it
>> would work again for minutes, hours or days. There is no need
>> preemptively change fuel filters unless you are averse to the engine
>> dying while on the road or taking the car in for repair and being told
>> there doesn't appear to be anything wrong with it. However, the
>> troublesome filters were also small.
>>
>> Mike
>
> ok, there is something to be said for preempting idiot mechanics that
> can't diagnose a basic problem like this, but then again, maybe not. when
> i went to vehicle tech classes, we'd be given bench motors with
> undisclosed problems and tested on our diagnosis and repair. basic flow-
> chart stuff. if you can sit down with the honda manual and the honda
> diagnostic charts, there really is no reason anyone should be giving you a
> vehicle back unable to find out the problem. just changing fuel filters
> doesn't make your mechanic good at their job.
>

You can't fix it if it ain't broke. Intermittents are the bane of
troubleshooters everywhere, and fuel filters are notorious for producing
intermittent stalling... it's their favorite failure mode. The value of
replacing fuel filters either preemptively or on suspicion is that the
approach is cheap and in accordance with good maintenance practices. I've
recommended and done it myself several times. Most people know I favor cheap
and easy measures when clues are sparse. I never feel more stupid than when
I have spent days fighting something I could have fixed for half an hour's
work and $20. There is also a lot to be said for not stranding somebody on
the road when a predictable failure strikes. Just do the PMs and have done
with it.

Mike