Honda Car Forum

There is a 2000 Honda Odyssey for sale by a private seller about 100 miles
south of me.
The Ody has 60k on it and is in excellant condition, except it had the
transmission failure
issue at about 30k, and was replaced free and has the extended 100k warranty
given for 2000 Oyd trannies.
Anyways, is it a high risk to purchase a 2000 Ody that has its transmission
replaced? I am now thinking to pass
on this van, despite it looks in great shape. That transmission replacement
gives me cause for concern depsite the extended warranty. I did call a local
Honda dealer about the tranny replacement and he said not to worry as it was
common for that year. Any information appreciated on what to do. The price
is right in the ball park, lower than a dealer price, since it is from a
private seller, but again the transmission is the issue. I got an
aging 1992 Dodge Caravan with no tranny troubles at 151,000, must have got
lucky.

In article <qU5Ce.120$SZ3.79@trndny02>, "snow" <dlessard1@verizon.net>
wrote:

> There is a 2000 Honda Odyssey for sale by a private seller about 100 miles
> south of me.
> The Ody has 60k on it and is in excellant condition, except it had the
> transmission failure
> issue at about 30k, and was replaced free and has the extended 100k warranty
> given for 2000 Oyd trannies.
> Anyways, is it a high risk to purchase a 2000 Ody that has its transmission
> replaced?

Yes.

The problem is, Honda apparently replaces them with the same shitty
transmissions.

Now, I'm a Honda guy from 25 years back. I drive and love Hondas--but
Honda really, really dropped the ball big-time on this transmission.

Accord V6 owners (and Acura owners) have the same transmission, and the
exact same troubles.

If you go to http://www.odyclub.com you'll find plenty of people who
have had their 4 speed transmissions replaced multiple times.

The 02 model changed out the transmission completely, to a 5 speed unit
(it also had quite a few other changes, making the 02 model the one you
really want), but even it had issues. Honda put out a VERY expensive
recall for that general transmission (again, also used in Accords and
Acuras), but it's a completely different issue--one of lubrication.
Once the dealership fixes the lubrication issue, either by adding a
small oil jet kit on if the tranny is still good or replacing the tranny
if it's not, it's fixed. It doesn't have the same basic, inherent,
unfixable design issues that the old 4 speed unit had in the 99-01
models.

On the 2000 model you're looking at, you have 40K miles left of warranty
on that tranny. Odds are very good that you're on borrowed time no
matter what. Knowing what you know now, either pay a suitable amount
for the van (you may find yourself buying a $4000 transmission in 45K
miles) or else look elsewhere.

I hate to say that, because it lowers the resale value of the entire
Odyssey line, including my 02. But it's the truth.

snow wrote:
> There is a 2000 Honda Odyssey for sale by a private seller about 100 miles
> south of me.
> The Ody has 60k on it and is in excellant condition, except it had the
> transmission failure
> issue at about 30k, and was replaced free and has the extended 100k warranty
> given for 2000 Oyd trannies.


I would be more worried about one which had not yet had it's
transmission replaced . The failure mode seems indicative of a basic
design flaw, which means that probably all of them are going to fail at
some point.

The $99 question is whether or not Honda's modifications to the
replacement transmission are sufficient to provide a long term robust
solution. For that, only time will tell.

John

In article <uU9Ce.9684$Tx1.968@trnddc03>,
John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I would be more worried about one which had not yet had it's
> transmission replaced . The failure mode seems indicative of a basic
> design flaw, which means that probably all of them are going to fail at
> some point.

The problem is, they're being replaced the THE SAME FAULTY UNITS.

You can't avoid it. Plenty of people are on their third and fourth
transmissions, because Honda won't go back and redesign the transmission
for a no-longer-sold vehicle. They'll just keep slapping remanufactured
units in until every one of them hits the 100K mile mark, and then the
problem "goes away".

Except it doesn't go away; people remember that they got screwed by
owning a Honda product, and they go elsewhere.

GM was on top of the world once. They let it get to their heads, and
they stuck their heads in the sand and ignored the issues that kept
coming up, and now they have to give their cars away. Honda has now a 6
year track record of behavior like that, over the transmissions (both
the 4 speed unit AND the 5 speed unit, with its own separate set of
troubles), the cheapening of the Civic design, their lack of stylish
designs, etc.



> The $99 question is whether or not Honda's modifications to the
> replacement transmission are sufficient to provide a long term robust
> solution. For that, only time will tell.

http://www.odyclub.com

You'll find that Honda either isn't modifying the replacement units to
fix the problem, or else isn't modifying them sufficiently to stop the
transmissions from failing.

Either way, Honda dropped the ball big time on this. And it's just one
in a series of blunders.

I'm a Honda guy from way, way back and my family drives Hondas. But
this has me worried. I remember what they were like, and I see them
going the way of GM.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <uU9Ce.9684$Tx1.968@trnddc03>,
> John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I would be more worried about one which had not yet had it's
>>transmission replaced . The failure mode seems indicative of a basic
>>design flaw, which means that probably all of them are going to fail at
>>some point.
>
>
> The problem is, they're being replaced the THE SAME FAULTY UNITS.
>
> You can't avoid it. Plenty of people are on their third and fourth
> transmissions, because Honda won't go back and redesign the transmission
> for a no-longer-sold vehicle. They'll just keep slapping remanufactured
> units in until every one of them hits the 100K mile mark, and then the
> problem "goes away".
>
> Except it doesn't go away; people remember that they got screwed by
> owning a Honda product, and they go elsewhere.
>
> GM was on top of the world once. They let it get to their heads, and
> they stuck their heads in the sand and ignored the issues that kept
> coming up, and now they have to give their cars away. Honda has now a 6
> year track record of behavior like that, over the transmissions (both
> the 4 speed unit AND the 5 speed unit, with its own separate set of
> troubles), the cheapening of the Civic design, their lack of stylish
> designs, etc.
>
>
>
>
>>The $99 question is whether or not Honda's modifications to the
>>replacement transmission are sufficient to provide a long term robust
>>solution. For that, only time will tell.
>
>
> http://www.odyclub.com
>
> You'll find that Honda either isn't modifying the replacement units to
> fix the problem, or else isn't modifying them sufficiently to stop the
> transmissions from failing.
>
> Either way, Honda dropped the ball big time on this. And it's just one
> in a series of blunders.
>
> I'm a Honda guy from way, way back and my family drives Hondas. But
> this has me worried. I remember what they were like, and I see them
> going the way of GM.
>
i'm with you on this, but what else is there? toyota are boring to
drive. mazda are fords. subaru, which i think are great mechanically,
don't handle very well. they're great off road & in the snow, but when
it comes to road, you have to spend a /lot/ of money to beat the
wish-boned hondas for handling. hyundai? they're still a /long/ way
from being decent. nissan? my jury's still out. it's a real quandry.

In article <a_-dnSThGqxByETfRVn-pw@speakeasy.net>,
jim beam <nospam@example.net> wrote:

> > I'm a Honda guy from way, way back and my family drives Hondas. But
> > this has me worried. I remember what they were like, and I see them
> > going the way of GM.
> >
> i'm with you on this, but what else is there? toyota are boring to
> drive.

I'll take "boring to drive" if it comes with "won't cause me such grief".

Seriously, I'm driving a 94 ES300 right now (my brother gave it to me
for Christmas a couple years ago); with 150K on the clock, it's a very
comfortable and very reliable car.

Boring to drive? Maybe. Maybe I'm getting old and don't care anymore.
I set the XM radio, put the car into gear, and go. It is THE most
comfortable car I've driven, ever.

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-3E3A62.14354116072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <uU9Ce.9684$Tx1.968@trnddc03>,
> John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I would be more worried about one which had not yet had it's
> > transmission replaced . The failure mode seems indicative of a basic
> > design flaw, which means that probably all of them are going to fail at
> > some point.
>
> The problem is, they're being replaced the THE SAME FAULTY UNITS.
>
> You can't avoid it. Plenty of people are on their third and fourth
> transmissions, because Honda won't go back and redesign the transmission
> for a no-longer-sold vehicle. They'll just keep slapping remanufactured
> units in until every one of them hits the 100K mile mark, and then the
> problem "goes away".
>
> Except it doesn't go away; people remember that they got screwed by
> owning a Honda product, and they go elsewhere.
>
> GM was on top of the world once. They let it get to their heads, and
> they stuck their heads in the sand and ignored the issues that kept
> coming up, and now they have to give their cars away. Honda has now a 6
> year track record of behavior like that, over the transmissions (both
> the 4 speed unit AND the 5 speed unit, with its own separate set of
> troubles), the cheapening of the Civic design, their lack of stylish
> designs, etc.
>
>
>
> > The $99 question is whether or not Honda's modifications to the
> > replacement transmission are sufficient to provide a long term robust
> > solution. For that, only time will tell.
>
> http://www.odyclub.com
>
> You'll find that Honda either isn't modifying the replacement units to
> fix the problem, or else isn't modifying them sufficiently to stop the
> transmissions from failing.
>
> Either way, Honda dropped the ball big time on this. And it's just one
> in a series of blunders.
>
> I'm a Honda guy from way, way back and my family drives Hondas. But
> this has me worried. I remember what they were like, and I see them
> going the way of GM.

Honda's reputation for quality is indeed slipping. For the last 5-6 years,
the name Honda has become synonymous with transmission problems and complete
failures. There's a car rental business about 3 miles from one of the local
Honda dealerships where I live. A guy working there told me that the
overwhelming majority of the business that they do is for people that are
having to rent vehicles while their Hondas' transmissions are being repaired
or replaced.

There was a point in time when virtually NO ONE that owned a Honda had
anything negative to say about their vehicle. I believe that those days are
gone. There are probably quite a few people who own newer Hondas that are at
least somewhat dissatisfied with their vehicle. Mainly due to transmission
issues with a few different models.

Fortunately, my wife's 2001 Civic LX sedan has been a really good vehicle
thus far. It has 104,000 miles on it now and about the only thing outside of
routine maintenance that it has required is a driver's side front wheel
bearing. There was a recall for a headlight switch that the local dealership
took care of--but there never was a problem with the original one. The
transmission in her car shifts smoother than any other automatic
transmission that I have experienced. Including the one in my 2002 Lexus!
Can't say enough good things about my wife's Civic.

Let's hope Honda gets it back together soon with some of the other models
that they've been having problems with!!!

Ron M.

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-600DB8.15573916072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <a_-dnSThGqxByETfRVn-pw@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>> > I'm a Honda guy from way, way back and my family drives Hondas. But
>> > this has me worried. I remember what they were like, and I see them
>> > going the way of GM.
>> >
>> i'm with you on this, but what else is there? toyota are boring to
>> drive.
>
> I'll take "boring to drive" if it comes with "won't cause me such grief".
>
> Seriously, I'm driving a 94 ES300 right now (my brother gave it to me
> for Christmas a couple years ago); with 150K on the clock, it's a very
> comfortable and very reliable car.
>
> Boring to drive? Maybe. Maybe I'm getting old and don't care anymore.
> I set the XM radio, put the car into gear, and go. It is THE most
> comfortable car I've driven, ever.
>
Count me in! I had a Lotus Europa when I was a carefree bachelor, and it was
great fun to drive. It also illustrated the saying about an English sports
car being something to work on on the weekends. Nearly three years ago we
traded a Nissan 300ZX for a Toyota Prius. The Nissan was a neverending
challenge to keep on the road, while the Toyota has only needed tires and a
replacement windshield. Oddly, it is also more fun to drive than the Nissan,
probably because it is very manueverable - and that is what I prize most.

Mike

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:a_-dnSThGqxByETfRVn-pw@speakeasy.net...
> i'm with you on this, but what else is there? toyota are boring to drive.
> mazda are fords. subaru, which i think are great mechanically, don't
> handle very well. they're great off road & in the snow, but when it comes
> to road, you have to spend a /lot/ of money to beat the wish-boned hondas
> for handling. hyundai? they're still a /long/ way from being decent.
> nissan? my jury's still out. it's a real quandry.


I really like the Ford Miata.

"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in message
news:W4CdnQZyQNc6G0TfRVn-3g@sedona.net...
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-600DB8.15573916072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> > In article <a_-dnSThGqxByETfRVn-pw@speakeasy.net>,
> > jim beam <nospam@example.net> wrote:
> >
> >> > I'm a Honda guy from way, way back and my family drives Hondas. But
> >> > this has me worried. I remember what they were like, and I see them
> >> > going the way of GM.
> >> >
> >> i'm with you on this, but what else is there? toyota are boring to
> >> drive.
> >
> > I'll take "boring to drive" if it comes with "won't cause me such
grief".
> >
> > Seriously, I'm driving a 94 ES300 right now (my brother gave it to me
> > for Christmas a couple years ago); with 150K on the clock, it's a very
> > comfortable and very reliable car.
> >
> > Boring to drive? Maybe. Maybe I'm getting old and don't care anymore.
> > I set the XM radio, put the car into gear, and go. It is THE most
> > comfortable car I've driven, ever.
> >
> Count me in! I had a Lotus Europa when I was a carefree bachelor, and it
was
> great fun to drive. It also illustrated the saying about an English sports
> car being something to work on on the weekends. Nearly three years ago we
> traded a Nissan 300ZX for a Toyota Prius. The Nissan was a neverending
> challenge to keep on the road, while the Toyota has only needed tires and
a
> replacement windshield. Oddly, it is also more fun to drive than the
Nissan,
> probably because it is very manueverable - and that is what I prize most.
>
> Mike

Mike,

What model year 300ZX did you have? I just gave my stepson a 1990 Nissan
300ZX that I recently had the engine rebuilt in. The 1990 and 1991 models
had a problem with the valves mushrooming and not seating properly after
110,000 miles or so of operation. It doesn't happen to all of them, but it
did with mine. Fortunately I found a guy that loves the Z-32s(second
generation 300ZXs) and he did a complete engine rebuild job for a great
price. My stepson wanted the car a whole lot more than me, so I let him have
it. I had driven the car a lot since purchasing it in July of 1993 with
18,000 miles on it--and not a single scratch, rock chip, door ding or
interior flaw. It was 100% immaculate when I picked it up for $18,150.00. It
was a really good car until I had about 125,000 miles on the odometer. After
that it seemed as though the mechanical and electrical problems were
seemingly endless. I mean it was just one thing after another that had to be
replaced. I kept driving until it had 173,000 miles on it. My stepson is
well aware of how much money I had to put into the car to keep it on the
road, but he still begged me for it. I told him that he better find himself
a very good paying job it he plans on keeping the car for very long. :-)
Parts and labor for repair work on the Zs aren't cheap as you already know.

I told my wife that I am going to replace the Z with a '94-'97 Honda Accord
sedan if I can find a really nice one for a decent price. The Accord is
going to become my daily commuter and general runabout car.

Ron M.