asdffdsa

I read a lot about how Hyundai has cleaned up their acts and the quality is
a whole lot better and stuff...

My friend has a 99 Accent, and it looks like new (besides some
cheapness--paint chipping off the door guards, heh)

Umm, are these cars more reliable now? Will they hold up to the test of
time? Who makes the engines/transmissions? Did Mitsubishi used to make the
transmissions?

Thanks

Brian Nystrom

asdffdsa wrote:

> I read a lot about how Hyundai has cleaned up their acts and the quality is
> a whole lot better and stuff...
>
> My friend has a 99 Accent, and it looks like new (besides some
> cheapness--paint chipping off the door guards, heh)
>
> Umm, are these cars more reliable now? Will they hold up to the test of
> time?

Hyundail has made HUGE strides in quality and now ranks with the best.

> Who makes the engines/transmissions? Did Mitsubishi used to make the
> transmissions?

Yes, Mitsubishi used to make the transmissions. I don't believe that's
the case any longer.

hyundaitech

Actually, Mitsubishi didn't make the transmissions, Hyundai was licensed by
Mitsubishi to manufacture transmissions per their designs.

I believe Hyundai is still using Mitsubishi designs for their
transmissions, but I have no verification for that. Even so, I've been
very impressed with their quality turnaround, especially in this area.
Their automatics used to be pure junk and are now rather reliable.

Overall quality is greatly improved and I believe it to be as good as any
American car, but I don't think it's as good as Honda or Toyota. I'll
remind those of you who wish to quote the JDPower survey that these
results are for Initial Quality, which translates to the first 90 days of
ownership. When Hyundai competes well with Honda and Toyota over a 3 to 7
year period, then I'll be more impressed. Consumer Reports is a good
place to look for quality ratings of vehicles of this age, but they get
their results from subscribers who send in their yearly surveys, so the
data pool isn't as scientific as it would ideally be.

Brian Nystrom

hyundaitech wrote:

> Actually, Mitsubishi didn't make the transmissions, Hyundai was licensed by
> Mitsubishi to manufacture transmissions per their designs.

Thanks for clearing that up. That may explain why I never had to have a
Mitsubish (manual) tranny rebuilt, but did with a Hyundai.

> I believe Hyundai is still using Mitsubishi designs for their
> transmissions, but I have no verification for that. Even so, I've been
> very impressed with their quality turnaround, especially in this area.
> Their automatics used to be pure junk and are now rather reliable.

The problems I've had were with bearing and synchro wear, which I assume
would be more related to the quality of the materials than to the
design. Is that your experience?

> Overall quality is greatly improved and I believe it to be as good as any
> American car, but I don't think it's as good as Honda or Toyota. I'll
> remind those of you who wish to quote the JDPower survey that these
> results are for Initial Quality, which translates to the first 90 days of
> ownership. When Hyundai competes well with Honda and Toyota over a 3 to 7
> year period, then I'll be more impressed. Consumer Reports is a good
> place to look for quality ratings of vehicles of this age, but they get
> their results from subscribers who send in their yearly surveys, so the
> data pool isn't as scientific as it would ideally be.

Good points, but at least the trend is promising.

hyundaitech

Hyundai did not use the best quality parts in their vehicles into the mid
nineties. Most managers were rewarded for price shopping suppliers. I'd
say most warranty repairs were for synchronizer issues (a direct
translation of surface machining precision) and later repairs were mostly
for bearing issues. The good news is that on the last transmission I
disassembled, it is evident that Hyundai is making further strides to
improve bearing durability by installing devices to keep the debris away
from the bearings.

One of the reasons early Hyundai transmissions were so crappy was that
they were building Mitsubishi transmissions that already had questionable
design. The Mitsu autos would tend to last about 70k miles, but the
Hyundai counterparts only about 35k miles or so. In many countries, this
isn't a big deal because people there don't drive as much as we do in the
U.S. It was with U.S. sales that Hyundai began to learn that they were
having a problem. One of the more sobering findings was that Hyundai was
purchasing low cost machinery for manufacture that needed to be rebuilt
every 10k units or so (rather than better machinery for a more suitable
unit load like 50k). Then they would run it for 20k to 30k units and
throw it away. Back to the cost reward. The corporate managers saw this
as a savings not realizing what laid in store for their future. The
result in this country was about 1/3 of the auto transmissions lasting
until 70k miles or so, but the other 2/3 crapping out around 30k to 40k
miles.

I haven't yet seen the departure from decreased quality due to part cost
savings that I'd like to see. You're right that they're heading in the
right direction; I just think they need a little more.

Bob

so are you saying that I can only expect 35K-70K miles on my 2004 Sonata
auto transmission? do you replace many?
"hyundaitech" <howitsac@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b417add68e7cf64cf7eca1fa87143e08@localhost.ta lkaboutautos.com...
> Hyundai did not use the best quality parts in their vehicles into the mid
> nineties. Most managers were rewarded for price shopping suppliers. I'd
> say most warranty repairs were for synchronizer issues (a direct
> translation of surface machining precision) and later repairs were mostly
> for bearing issues. The good news is that on the last transmission I
> disassembled, it is evident that Hyundai is making further strides to
> improve bearing durability by installing devices to keep the debris away
> from the bearings.
>
> One of the reasons early Hyundai transmissions were so crappy was that
> they were building Mitsubishi transmissions that already had questionable
> design. The Mitsu autos would tend to last about 70k miles, but the
> Hyundai counterparts only about 35k miles or so. In many countries, this
> isn't a big deal because people there don't drive as much as we do in the
> U.S. It was with U.S. sales that Hyundai began to learn that they were
> having a problem. One of the more sobering findings was that Hyundai was
> purchasing low cost machinery for manufacture that needed to be rebuilt
> every 10k units or so (rather than better machinery for a more suitable
> unit load like 50k). Then they would run it for 20k to 30k units and
> throw it away. Back to the cost reward. The corporate managers saw this
> as a savings not realizing what laid in store for their future. The
> result in this country was about 1/3 of the auto transmissions lasting
> until 70k miles or so, but the other 2/3 crapping out around 30k to 40k
> miles.
>
> I haven't yet seen the departure from decreased quality due to part cost
> savings that I'd like to see. You're right that they're heading in the
> right direction; I just think they need a little more.
>
>

Rick

I've got over 120,000 miles on my 97 Elantra with an auto trannie. It's
still plugging along.

Rick




"asdffdsa" <x@x.x> wrote in message news:Z_fwc.6035$1L4.5281@okepread02...
> I read a lot about how Hyundai has cleaned up their acts and the quality
is
> a whole lot better and stuff...
>
> My friend has a 99 Accent, and it looks like new (besides some
> cheapness--paint chipping off the door guards, heh)
>
> Umm, are these cars more reliable now? Will they hold up to the test of
> time? Who makes the engines/transmissions? Did Mitsubishi used to make the
> transmissions?
>
> Thanks
>
>

theta00k@yahoo.com

In article <Z_fwc.6035$1L4.5281@okepread02>, "asdffdsa" <x@x.x> wrote:
>I read a lot about how Hyundai has cleaned up their acts and the quality is
>a whole lot better and stuff...
>
>My friend has a 99 Accent, and it looks like new (besides some
>cheapness--paint chipping off the door guards, heh)

Identifix poeple once told me it's a very reliable car.
You might want to check this site also.
http://www.reliabilityindex.co.uk/

>Umm, are these cars more reliable now? Will they hold up to the test of
>time? Who makes the engines/transmissions? Did Mitsubishi used to make the
>transmissions?
>
>Thanks
>
>

theta00k@yahoo.com

In article <5f66ce62c43e24f79e1401877b903362@localhost.talkab outautos.com>, "hyundaitech" <howitsac@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:
>Actually, Mitsubishi didn't make the transmissions, Hyundai was licensed by
>Mitsubishi to manufacture transmissions per their designs.
>
>I believe Hyundai is still using Mitsubishi designs for their
>transmissions, but I have no verification for that. Even so, I've been
>very impressed with their quality turnaround, especially in this area.
>Their automatics used to be pure junk and are now rather reliable.
>
>Overall quality is greatly improved and I believe it to be as good as any
>American car, but I don't think it's as good as Honda or Toyota. I'll

Really...how familiar are you with Hondas and Toyotas??
I've never seen a single post from you in the Honda and Toyota newsgroups.

>remind those of you who wish to quote the JDPower survey that these
>results are for Initial Quality, which translates to the first 90 days of

This is very interesting....Nobody brought this up until this point....not a
single post on this year's IQS result...I double-checked it in the Google
archive...

Perhaps you're waiting for someone to bring it up while you're busy building
up credibility as someone in the know in the mean time? And couldn't wait any
longer?

If I remember correctly, it was around the time the IQS result was released
that this "hyundai tech" showed up on this group...March or April..


>ownership. When Hyundai competes well with Honda and Toyota over a 3 to 7
>year period, then I'll be more impressed. Consumer Reports is a good
>place to look for quality ratings of vehicles of this age, but they get
>their results from subscribers who send in their yearly surveys, so the
>data pool isn't as scientific as it would ideally be.

Go read this:
http://www.hyundai-car.co.uk/press/article.asp?id=212
It's from the Hyundai distributor in the UK.

theta00k@yahoo.com

In article <b417add68e7cf64cf7eca1fa87143e08@localhost.talkab outautos.com>, "hyundaitech" <howitsac@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:
>Hyundai did not use the best quality parts in their vehicles into the mid
>nineties. Most managers were rewarded for price shopping suppliers. I'd

Mid-nineties...dude, most current parts suppliers are the same as the ones
used in that time frame.

>say most warranty repairs were for synchronizer issues (a direct
>translation of surface machining precision) and later repairs were mostly
>for bearing issues. The good news is that on the last transmission I

WTF is this??
No right-minded auto manufacturer including Hyundai would pay for internal
repair.
There's a set procedure for determining whether an abnormal condition stems
from an internal failure.
If it is shot internally, the transmission is replaced.

You wouldn't know what has failed inside.

Hyundai only pays for valve body repair and replacement of the transmission
assembly.

Is "synchro" inside a valve body, Mr. "Hyundai tech"??

Besides, most techs, including you "hyundai tech" I bet, don't have a clue
on how the auto tranny works let alone overhauling and fixing the innards.

Are you telling me you did a WARRANTY repair on a Hyundai transmission
involving an overhaul???



BTW, do you know who makes the synchros and bearings?

>disassembled, it is evident that Hyundai is making further strides to
>improve bearing durability by installing devices to keep the debris away
>from the bearings.

If you really knew what you're talking about, you would know that the critical
parts like bearings used in the Hyundai transmissions are from the same
companies that supply major auto manufacturers...It's been like that from
the beginning...ever heard of NTN?

Many service parts are made-in-Korea..., that has not changed, I'm not
suggesting they have somewhat inferior quality, but for OE parts, there's no
compromise...

>One of the reasons early Hyundai transmissions were so crappy was that
>they were building Mitsubishi transmissions that already had questionable
>design. The Mitsu autos would tend to last about 70k miles, but the
>Hyundai counterparts only about 35k miles or so. In many countries, this

WTF?? Do you know what parts fail most inside the automatic transmissions made
by Hyundai? I'm talking about the internal, mechanical failures.

>isn't a big deal because people there don't drive as much as we do in the
>U.S. It was with U.S. sales that Hyundai began to learn that they were
>having a problem. One of the more sobering findings was that Hyundai was
>purchasing low cost machinery for manufacture that needed to be rebuilt
>every 10k units or so (rather than better machinery for a more suitable
>unit load like 50k). Then they would run it for 20k to 30k units and
>throw it away.

Huh? how the did you come up with those figures??
every 10k units?? 20 to 30K?

>Back to the cost reward. The corporate managers saw this
>as a savings not realizing what laid in store for their future. The
>result in this country was about 1/3 of the auto transmissions lasting
>until 70k miles or so, but the other 2/3 crapping out around 30k to 40k
>miles.
>
>I haven't yet seen the departure from decreased quality due to part cost
>savings that I'd like to see. You're right that they're heading in the
>right direction; I just think they need a little more.

Right direction?
You said Hyundai's reliability has improved...how is that possible with
increasing use of CHEAPER domestic parts?

Can't wait what kind of reply I would get from this lying piece of .

theta00k@yahoo.com

In article <chikce$o0u2_038@west.earthlink.net>, theta00k@yahoo.com wrote:
>In article <b417add68e7cf64cf7eca1fa87143e08@localhost.talkab outautos.com>,
> "hyundaitech" <howitsac@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Hyundai did not use the best quality parts in their vehicles into the mid
>>nineties. Most managers were rewarded for price shopping suppliers. I'd
>
>Mid-nineties...dude, most current parts suppliers are the same as the ones
>used in that time frame.
>
>>say most warranty repairs were for synchronizer issues (a direct
>>translation of surface machining precision) and later repairs were mostly
>>for bearing issues. The good news is that on the last transmission I
>
>WTF is this??
>No right-minded auto manufacturer including Hyundai would pay for internal
>repair.
>There's a set procedure for determining whether an abnormal condition stems
>from an internal failure.
>If it is shot internally, the transmission is replaced.
>
>You wouldn't know what has failed inside.
>
>Hyundai only pays for valve body repair and replacement of the transmission
>assembly.

One more. the oil pump seal replacement. not 100% sure on this.

>Is "synchro" inside a valve body, Mr. "Hyundai tech"??

and bearings?? Gimme the part number. Just one.

>Besides, most techs, including you "hyundai tech" I bet, don't have a clue
>on how the auto tranny works let alone overhauling and fixing the innards.
>
>Are you telling me you did a WARRANTY repair on a Hyundai transmission
>involving an overhaul???
>
>
>
>BTW, do you know who makes the synchros and bearings?
>
>>disassembled, it is evident that Hyundai is making further strides to
>>improve bearing durability by installing devices to keep the debris away
>>from the bearings.
>
>If you really knew what you're talking about, you would know that the critical
>parts like bearings used in the Hyundai transmissions are from the same
>companies that supply major auto manufacturers...It's been like that from
>the beginning...ever heard of NTN?
>
>Many service parts are made-in-Korea..., that has not changed, I'm not
>suggesting they have somewhat inferior quality, but for OE parts, there's no
>compromise...
>
>>One of the reasons early Hyundai transmissions were so crappy was that
>>they were building Mitsubishi transmissions that already had questionable
>>design. The Mitsu autos would tend to last about 70k miles, but the
>>Hyundai counterparts only about 35k miles or so. In many countries, this
>
>WTF?? Do you know what parts fail most inside the automatic transmissions made
>by Hyundai? I'm talking about the internal, mechanical failures.
>
>>isn't a big deal because people there don't drive as much as we do in the
>>U.S. It was with U.S. sales that Hyundai began to learn that they were
>>having a problem. One of the more sobering findings was that Hyundai was
>>purchasing low cost machinery for manufacture that needed to be rebuilt
>>every 10k units or so (rather than better machinery for a more suitable
>>unit load like 50k). Then they would run it for 20k to 30k units and
>>throw it away.
>
>Huh? how the did you come up with those figures??
> every 10k units?? 20 to 30K?
>
>>Back to the cost reward. The corporate managers saw this
>>as a savings not realizing what laid in store for their future. The
>>result in this country was about 1/3 of the auto transmissions lasting
>>until 70k miles or so, but the other 2/3 crapping out around 30k to 40k
>>miles.
>>
>>I haven't yet seen the departure from decreased quality due to part cost
>>savings that I'd like to see. You're right that they're heading in the
>>right direction; I just think they need a little more.
>
>Right direction?
>You said Hyundai's reliability has improved...how is that possible with
>increasing use of CHEAPER domestic parts?
>
>Can't wait what kind of reply I would get from this lying piece of .

Jim Vatunz

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 21:21:11 GMT, theta00k@yahoo.com wrote:

>In article <b417add68e7cf64cf7eca1fa87143e08@localhost.talkab outautos.com>, "hyundaitech" <howitsac@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Hyundai did not use the best quality parts in their vehicles into the mid
>>nineties. Most managers were rewarded for price shopping suppliers. I'd
>
>Mid-nineties...dude, most current parts suppliers are the same as the ones
>used in that time frame.
>
>>say most warranty repairs were for synchronizer issues (a direct
>>translation of surface machining precision) and later repairs were mostly
>>for bearing issues. The good news is that on the last transmission I
>
>WTF is this??
>No right-minded auto manufacturer including Hyundai would pay for internal
>repair.
>There's a set procedure for determining whether an abnormal condition stems
>from an internal failure.
>If it is shot internally, the transmission is replaced.
>
>You wouldn't know what has failed inside.
>
>Hyundai only pays for valve body repair and replacement of the transmission
>assembly.
>
>Is "synchro" inside a valve body, Mr. "Hyundai tech"??
>
>Besides, most techs, including you "hyundai tech" I bet, don't have a clue
>on how the auto tranny works let alone overhauling and fixing the innards.
>
>Are you telling me you did a WARRANTY repair on a Hyundai transmission
>involving an overhaul???
>
>
>
>BTW, do you know who makes the synchros and bearings?
>
>>disassembled, it is evident that Hyundai is making further strides to
>>improve bearing durability by installing devices to keep the debris away
>>from the bearings.
>
>If you really knew what you're talking about, you would know that the critical
>parts like bearings used in the Hyundai transmissions are from the same
>companies that supply major auto manufacturers...It's been like that from
>the beginning...ever heard of NTN?
>
>Many service parts are made-in-Korea..., that has not changed, I'm not
>suggesting they have somewhat inferior quality, but for OE parts, there's no
>compromise...
>
>>One of the reasons early Hyundai transmissions were so crappy was that
>>they were building Mitsubishi transmissions that already had questionable
>>design. The Mitsu autos would tend to last about 70k miles, but the
>>Hyundai counterparts only about 35k miles or so. In many countries, this
>
>WTF?? Do you know what parts fail most inside the automatic transmissions made
>by Hyundai? I'm talking about the internal, mechanical failures.
>
>>isn't a big deal because people there don't drive as much as we do in the
>>U.S. It was with U.S. sales that Hyundai began to learn that they were
>>having a problem. One of the more sobering findings was that Hyundai was
>>purchasing low cost machinery for manufacture that needed to be rebuilt
>>every 10k units or so (rather than better machinery for a more suitable
>>unit load like 50k). Then they would run it for 20k to 30k units and
>>throw it away.
>
>Huh? how the did you come up with those figures??
> every 10k units?? 20 to 30K?
>
>>Back to the cost reward. The corporate managers saw this
>>as a savings not realizing what laid in store for their future. The
>>result in this country was about 1/3 of the auto transmissions lasting
>>until 70k miles or so, but the other 2/3 crapping out around 30k to 40k
>>miles.
>>
>>I haven't yet seen the departure from decreased quality due to part cost
>>savings that I'd like to see. You're right that they're heading in the
>>right direction; I just think they need a little more.
>
>Right direction?
>You said Hyundai's reliability has improved...how is that possible with
>increasing use of CHEAPER domestic parts?
>
>Can't wait what kind of reply I would get from this lying piece of .

You can probably expect a good one.
Why would Hyundai have a bulletin listing the parts and labour time
involved in the syncroniser replacement if they didn't expect the
dealer to do it?
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to observe measures that
Hyundai are taking to prevent crud entering their bearings, when you
have the box in pieces on the workbench. Perhaps you should have read
Hyundaitechs post a little more closely before overdoing the vitriol.

I have a webcam in the tropics
http://ii.net/~farmerjim/

theta00k@yahoo.com

In article <r1npj05shb9l1eg0se6oj19ho5ks988ib3@4ax.com>, Jim Vatunz <rot13.snezrewvz@vvarg.arg.nh> wrote:
>On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 21:21:11 GMT, theta00k@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>In article <b417add68e7cf64cf7eca1fa87143e08@localhost.talkab outautos.com>,
> "hyundaitech" <howitsac@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>Hyundai did not use the best quality parts in their vehicles into the mid
>>>nineties. Most managers were rewarded for price shopping suppliers. I'd
>>
>>Mid-nineties...dude, most current parts suppliers are the same as the ones
>>used in that time frame.
>>
>>>say most warranty repairs were for synchronizer issues (a direct
>>>translation of surface machining precision) and later repairs were mostly
>>>for bearing issues. The good news is that on the last transmission I
>>
>>WTF is this??
>>No right-minded auto manufacturer including Hyundai would pay for internal
>>repair.
>>There's a set procedure for determining whether an abnormal condition stems
>>from an internal failure.
>>If it is shot internally, the transmission is replaced.
>>
>>You wouldn't know what has failed inside.
>>
>>Hyundai only pays for valve body repair and replacement of the transmission
>>assembly.
>>
>>Is "synchro" inside a valve body, Mr. "Hyundai tech"??
>>
>>Besides, most techs, including you "hyundai tech" I bet, don't have a clue
>>on how the auto tranny works let alone overhauling and fixing the innards.
>>
>>Are you telling me you did a WARRANTY repair on a Hyundai transmission
>>involving an overhaul???
>>
>>
>>
>>BTW, do you know who makes the synchros and bearings?
>>
>>>disassembled, it is evident that Hyundai is making further strides to
>>>improve bearing durability by installing devices to keep the debris away
>>>from the bearings.
>>
>>If you really knew what you're talking about, you would know that the critical
>
>>parts like bearings used in the Hyundai transmissions are from the same
>>companies that supply major auto manufacturers...It's been like that from
>>the beginning...ever heard of NTN?
>>
>>Many service parts are made-in-Korea..., that has not changed, I'm not
>>suggesting they have somewhat inferior quality, but for OE parts, there's no
>>compromise...
>>
>>>One of the reasons early Hyundai transmissions were so crappy was that
>>>they were building Mitsubishi transmissions that already had questionable
>>>design. The Mitsu autos would tend to last about 70k miles, but the
>>>Hyundai counterparts only about 35k miles or so. In many countries, this
>>
>>WTF?? Do you know what parts fail most inside the automatic transmissions made
>
>>by Hyundai? I'm talking about the internal, mechanical failures.
>>
>>>isn't a big deal because people there don't drive as much as we do in the
>>>U.S. It was with U.S. sales that Hyundai began to learn that they were
>>>having a problem. One of the more sobering findings was that Hyundai was
>>>purchasing low cost machinery for manufacture that needed to be rebuilt
>>>every 10k units or so (rather than better machinery for a more suitable
>>>unit load like 50k). Then they would run it for 20k to 30k units and
>>>throw it away.
>>
>>Huh? how the did you come up with those figures??
>> every 10k units?? 20 to 30K?
>>
>>>Back to the cost reward. The corporate managers saw this
>>>as a savings not realizing what laid in store for their future. The
>>>result in this country was about 1/3 of the auto transmissions lasting
>>>until 70k miles or so, but the other 2/3 crapping out around 30k to 40k
>>>miles.
>>>
>>>I haven't yet seen the departure from decreased quality due to part cost
>>>savings that I'd like to see. You're right that they're heading in the
>>>right direction; I just think they need a little more.
>>
>>Right direction?
>>You said Hyundai's reliability has improved...how is that possible with
>>increasing use of CHEAPER domestic parts?
>>
>>Can't wait what kind of reply I would get from this lying piece of .
>
>You can probably expect a good one.
>Why would Hyundai have a bulletin listing the parts and labour time
>involved in the syncroniser replacement if they didn't expect the
>dealer to do it?

What in the hell? What bulletin? Gimme the TSB number.

>You don't have to be a rocket scientist to observe measures that
>Hyundai are taking to prevent crud entering their bearings, when you

Oh I LOVE TO KNOW what that part is. You know the thingy he discovered? Do you
know the exact name and part number?

>have the box in pieces on the workbench. Perhaps you should have read

Workbench my ***. There's no new car dealer service deapartment in this
world that have a facility for overhauling automatic transmissions.
Do you have any clue what it takes to overhaul, find a faulty part, replace
the clutches and bands AND put all those internal parts back in?

>Hyundaitechs post a little more closely before overdoing the vitriol.

>I have a webcam in the tropics
>http://ii.net/~farmerjim/

Jim Vatunz

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 00:08:48 GMT, theta00k@yahoo.com wrote:

>In article <r1npj05shb9l1eg0se6oj19ho5ks988ib3@4ax.com>, Jim Vatunz <rot13.snezrewvz@vvarg.arg.nh> wrote:
>>On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 21:21:11 GMT, theta00k@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>>In article <b417add68e7cf64cf7eca1fa87143e08@localhost.talkab outautos.com>,
>> "hyundaitech" <howitsac@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>Hyundai did not use the best quality parts in their vehicles into the mid
>>>>nineties. Most managers were rewarded for price shopping suppliers. I'd
>>>
>>>Mid-nineties...dude, most current parts suppliers are the same as the ones
>>>used in that time frame.
>>>
>>>>say most warranty repairs were for synchronizer issues (a direct
>>>>translation of surface machining precision) and later repairs were mostly
>>>>for bearing issues. The good news is that on the last transmission I
>>>
>>>WTF is this??
>>>No right-minded auto manufacturer including Hyundai would pay for internal
>>>repair.
>>>There's a set procedure for determining whether an abnormal condition stems
>>>from an internal failure.
>>>If it is shot internally, the transmission is replaced.
>>>
>>>You wouldn't know what has failed inside.
>>>
>>>Hyundai only pays for valve body repair and replacement of the transmission
>>>assembly.
>>>
>>>Is "synchro" inside a valve body, Mr. "Hyundai tech"??
>>>
>>>Besides, most techs, including you "hyundai tech" I bet, don't have a clue
>>>on how the auto tranny works let alone overhauling and fixing the innards.
>>>
>>>Are you telling me you did a WARRANTY repair on a Hyundai transmission
>>>involving an overhaul???
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>BTW, do you know who makes the synchros and bearings?
>>>
>>>>disassembled, it is evident that Hyundai is making further strides to
>>>>improve bearing durability by installing devices to keep the debris away
>>>>from the bearings.
>>>
>>>If you really knew what you're talking about, you would know that the critical
>>
>>>parts like bearings used in the Hyundai transmissions are from the same
>>>companies that supply major auto manufacturers...It's been like that from
>>>the beginning...ever heard of NTN?
>>>
>>>Many service parts are made-in-Korea..., that has not changed, I'm not
>>>suggesting they have somewhat inferior quality, but for OE parts, there's no
>>>compromise...
>>>
>>>>One of the reasons early Hyundai transmissions were so crappy was that
>>>>they were building Mitsubishi transmissions that already had questionable
>>>>design. The Mitsu autos would tend to last about 70k miles, but the
>>>>Hyundai counterparts only about 35k miles or so. In many countries, this
>>>
>>>WTF?? Do you know what parts fail most inside the automatic transmissions made
>>
>>>by Hyundai? I'm talking about the internal, mechanical failures.
>>>
>>>>isn't a big deal because people there don't drive as much as we do in the
>>>>U.S. It was with U.S. sales that Hyundai began to learn that they were
>>>>having a problem. One of the more sobering findings was that Hyundai was
>>>>purchasing low cost machinery for manufacture that needed to be rebuilt
>>>>every 10k units or so (rather than better machinery for a more suitable
>>>>unit load like 50k). Then they would run it for 20k to 30k units and
>>>>throw it away.
>>>
>>>Huh? how the did you come up with those figures??
>>> every 10k units?? 20 to 30K?
>>>
>>>>Back to the cost reward. The corporate managers saw this
>>>>as a savings not realizing what laid in store for their future. The
>>>>result in this country was about 1/3 of the auto transmissions lasting
>>>>until 70k miles or so, but the other 2/3 crapping out around 30k to 40k
>>>>miles.
>>>>
>>>>I haven't yet seen the departure from decreased quality due to part cost
>>>>savings that I'd like to see. You're right that they're heading in the
>>>>right direction; I just think they need a little more.
>>>
>>>Right direction?
>>>You said Hyundai's reliability has improved...how is that possible with
>>>increasing use of CHEAPER domestic parts?
>>>
>>>Can't wait what kind of reply I would get from this lying piece of .
>>
>>You can probably expect a good one.
>>Why would Hyundai have a bulletin listing the parts and labour time
>>involved in the syncroniser replacement if they didn't expect the
>>dealer to do it?
>
>What in the hell? What bulletin? Gimme the TSB number.

try 01-40-001-1

>
>>You don't have to be a rocket scientist to observe measures that
>>Hyundai are taking to prevent crud entering their bearings, when you
>
>Oh I LOVE TO KNOW what that part is. You know the thingy he discovered? Do you
>know the exact name and part number?

why would it need a part number it could be as simple as a redesign of
the casting.
>
>>have the box in pieces on the workbench. Perhaps you should have read
>
>Workbench my ***. There's no new car dealer service deapartment in this
>world that have a facility for overhauling automatic transmissions.
>Do you have any clue what it takes to overhaul, find a faulty part, replace
>the clutches and bands AND put all those internal parts back in?

how many automatic boxes have syncros in them? Surely Hyundai trust
their servicemen with manual boxes?
>
>>Hyundaitechs post a little more closely before overdoing the vitriol.
>
>>I have a webcam in the tropics
>>http://ii.net/~farmerjim/

I have a webcam in the tropics
http://ii.net/~farmerjim/

theta00k@yahoo.com

In article <sd2qj0p467p56a840d6cu0vedorbdue2c3@4ax.com>, Jim Vatunz <rot13.snezrewvz@vvarg.arg.nh> wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 00:08:48 GMT, theta00k@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>In article <r1npj05shb9l1eg0se6oj19ho5ks988ib3@4ax.com>, Jim Vatunz
> <rot13.snezrewvz@vvarg.arg.nh> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 21:21:11 GMT, theta00k@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <b417add68e7cf64cf7eca1fa87143e08@localhost.talkab outautos.com>,
>>> "hyundaitech" <howitsac@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>Hyundai did not use the best quality parts in their vehicles into the mid
>>>>>nineties. Most managers were rewarded for price shopping suppliers. I'd
>>>>
>>>>Mid-nineties...dude, most current parts suppliers are the same as the ones
>>>>used in that time frame.
>>>>
>>>>>say most warranty repairs were for synchronizer issues (a direct
>>>>>translation of surface machining precision) and later repairs were mostly
>>>>>for bearing issues. The good news is that on the last transmission I
>>>>
>>>>WTF is this??
>>>>No right-minded auto manufacturer including Hyundai would pay for internal
>>>>repair.
>>>>There's a set procedure for determining whether an abnormal condition stems
>>>>from an internal failure.
>>>>If it is shot internally, the transmission is replaced.
>>>>
>>>>You wouldn't know what has failed inside.
>>>>
>>>>Hyundai only pays for valve body repair and replacement of the transmission
>>>>assembly.
>>>>
>>>>Is "synchro" inside a valve body, Mr. "Hyundai tech"??
>>>>
>>>>Besides, most techs, including you "hyundai tech" I bet, don't have a clue
>>>>on how the auto tranny works let alone overhauling and fixing the innards.
>>>>
>>>>Are you telling me you did a WARRANTY repair on a Hyundai transmission
>>>>involving an overhaul???
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>BTW, do you know who makes the synchros and bearings?
>>>>
>>>>>disassembled, it is evident that Hyundai is making further strides to
>>>>>improve bearing durability by installing devices to keep the debris away
>>>>>from the bearings.
>>>>
>>>>If you really knew what you're talking about, you would know that the
> critical
>>>
>>>>parts like bearings used in the Hyundai transmissions are from the same
>>>>companies that supply major auto manufacturers...It's been like that from
>>>>the beginning...ever heard of NTN?
>>>>
>>>>Many service parts are made-in-Korea..., that has not changed, I'm not
>>>>suggesting they have somewhat inferior quality, but for OE parts, there's no
>
>>>>compromise...
>>>>
>>>>>One of the reasons early Hyundai transmissions were so crappy was that
>>>>>they were building Mitsubishi transmissions that already had questionable
>>>>>design. The Mitsu autos would tend to last about 70k miles, but the
>>>>>Hyundai counterparts only about 35k miles or so. In many countries, this
>>>>
>>>>WTF?? Do you know what parts fail most inside the automatic transmissions
> made
>>>
>>>>by Hyundai? I'm talking about the internal, mechanical failures.
>>>>
>>>>>isn't a big deal because people there don't drive as much as we do in the
>>>>>U.S. It was with U.S. sales that Hyundai began to learn that they were
>>>>>having a problem. One of the more sobering findings was that Hyundai was
>>>>>purchasing low cost machinery for manufacture that needed to be rebuilt
>>>>>every 10k units or so (rather than better machinery for a more suitable
>>>>>unit load like 50k). Then they would run it for 20k to 30k units and
>>>>>throw it away.
>>>>
>>>>Huh? how the did you come up with those figures??
>>>> every 10k units?? 20 to 30K?
>>>>
>>>>>Back to the cost reward. The corporate managers saw this
>>>>>as a savings not realizing what laid in store for their future. The
>>>>>result in this country was about 1/3 of the auto transmissions lasting
>>>>>until 70k miles or so, but the other 2/3 crapping out around 30k to 40k
>>>>>miles.
>>>>>
>>>>>I haven't yet seen the departure from decreased quality due to part cost
>>>>>savings that I'd like to see. You're right that they're heading in the
>>>>>right direction; I just think they need a little more.
>>>>
>>>>Right direction?
>>>>You said Hyundai's reliability has improved...how is that possible with
>>>>increasing use of CHEAPER domestic parts?
>>>>
>>>>Can't wait what kind of reply I would get from this lying piece of .
>>>
>>>You can probably expect a good one.
>>>Why would Hyundai have a bulletin listing the parts and labour time
>>>involved in the syncroniser replacement if they didn't expect the
>>>dealer to do it?
>>
>>What in the hell? What bulletin? Gimme the TSB number.
>
>try 01-40-001-1

That one is about MANUAL transmission.. Nothing to do with any failure of
transmission.

>>
>>>You don't have to be a rocket scientist to observe measures that
>>>Hyundai are taking to prevent crud entering their bearings, when you
>>
>>Oh I LOVE TO KNOW what that part is. You know the thingy he discovered? Do you
>
>>know the exact name and part number?
>
>why would it need a part number it could be as simple as a redesign of
>the casting.
>>
>>>have the box in pieces on the workbench. Perhaps you should have read
>>
>>Workbench my ***. There's no new car dealer service deapartment in this
>>world that have a facility for overhauling automatic transmissions.
>>Do you have any clue what it takes to overhaul, find a faulty part, replace
>>the clutches and bands AND put all those internal parts back in?
>
>how many automatic boxes have syncros in them? Surely Hyundai trust
>their servicemen with manual boxes?

yeah right, he was talking about manual tranny all along....
Search the Google newsgroup archive to see how many posts were about manual
transmission failure. You'll find only ONE from this "Bad Moon" dude a couple
of years back.

Check these sites also to see if Hyundai manual gear boxes were really that
unreliable in the mid-90's.
http://www.reliabilityindex.co.uk/
http://autos.msn.com/home/reliabilit....aspx?src=URES



>>
>>>Hyundaitechs post a little more closely before overdoing the vitriol.
>>
>>>I have a webcam in the tropics
>>>http://ii.net/~farmerjim/
>
>I have a webcam in the tropics
>http://ii.net/~farmerjim/