Honda Car Forum


 

Go Back   Honda Car Forum - Accord Parts Civic Tuning Acura Racing > Honda Acura > Honda 2

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 23 Mar 2010, 04:33 am
Cameo
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Honda cars less dependable than Toyotas?

At least according to the latest dependability study by J. D.Powers and
Associates. Porsche, Ford's Lincoln and GM's Buick earned the top 3
spots, respectively. Toyota and its Lexus is 4th. Honda follows Toyota
in the list.

<http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?Feed=OBR&Date=20100318&ID=11282915&Sy mbol=F>

I have a hard time believing that Honda is less dependable than Toyota,
even before all this Toyota fiasco happened.

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 23 Mar 2010, 06:49 am
Joe
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda cars less dependable than Toyotas?

On 2010-03-23, Cameo <cameo@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> At least according to the latest dependability study by J. D.Powers and
> Associates. Porsche, Ford's Lincoln and GM's Buick earned the top 3
> spots, respectively. Toyota and its Lexus is 4th. Honda follows Toyota
> in the list.
>
><http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?Feed=OBR&Date=20100318&ID=11282915&Sy mbol=F>
>
> I have a hard time believing that Honda is less dependable than Toyota,
> even before all this Toyota fiasco happened.
>


And you couldn't convince me, even with a big fat check, that Honda is
less dependable than ANYTHING from Ford or GM.

--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
time..." - Danny, American History X
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 23 Mar 2010, 06:57 am
RC
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda cars less dependable than Toyotas?

This survey only looks at the first 3 years of ownership. I think the
second and third 3 years are more indicative of reliability.

-RC
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 23 Mar 2010, 07:31 am
C. E. White
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda cars less dependable than Toyotas?


"Cameo" <cameo@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:ho9ud5$ilj$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> At least according to the latest dependability study by J. D.Powers
> and Associates. Porsche, Ford's Lincoln and GM's Buick earned the
> top 3 spots, respectively. Toyota and its Lexus is 4th. Honda
> follows Toyota in the list.
>
> <http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?Feed=OBR&Date=20100318&ID=11282915&Sy mbol=F>
>
> I have a hard time believing that Honda is less dependable than
> Toyota, even before all this Toyota fiasco happened.


Most modern cars are very reliable. The differences among most major
brands is in the noise range. The cars are so close that the top dozen
or so are probably in a statistical dead heat. I believe that how you
take care of one of the cars in the upper two thirds of the range has
more to do with depndability than the actual choice of a car.

If you don't count the cars my younger son has abused into failure, I
can only remember a few failures of any note of any car I've owned or
people close to me have owned in the last seven years - my Sister's
Honda needed a muffler, the coil pack failed on s Saturn and the power
window failed (under warranty) on my Expedition. Again, leaving out my
son who can destroy anything out of the discussion and not including
the German cars owned by the SO's children, we've not spent $200 on
car repairs among all of us (5 adults) in the last seven years. My
younger son, the destroyer, has taken out one clutch and one engine
(an beater up Firebird), one horn/air bag and one CVT transission
(warranty - Saturn Vue), one automatic transission (14 year old F150 -
$600 repair). Amazingly he has not been able to destroy a Mustang -
well except for the parts he has replaced with "performance" junk
destined to destroy the car eventually (horrid exhaut, K&N dirt
charger, huge tires and wheels, illegal tint, "performance" chip,
etc.). It must be the most indestructible car made. I keep expecting
him to come home with it in pieces on a rollback.

Ed


Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 23 Mar 2010, 08:50 am
pws
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda cars less dependable than Toyotas?

C. E. White wrote:
> "Cameo" <cameo@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:ho9ud5$ilj$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> At least according to the latest dependability study by J. D.Powers
>> and Associates. Porsche, Ford's Lincoln and GM's Buick earned the
>> top 3 spots, respectively. Toyota and its Lexus is 4th. Honda
>> follows Toyota in the list.
>>
>> <http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?Feed=OBR&Date=20100318&ID=11282915&Sy mbol=F>
>>
>> I have a hard time believing that Honda is less dependable than
>> Toyota, even before all this Toyota fiasco happened.

>
> Most modern cars are very reliable. The differences among most major
> brands is in the noise range. The cars are so close that the top dozen
> or so are probably in a statistical dead heat. I believe that how you
> take care of one of the cars in the upper two thirds of the range has
> more to do with depndability than the actual choice of a car.
>
> If you don't count the cars my younger son has abused into failure, I
> can only remember a few failures of any note of any car I've owned or
> people close to me have owned in the last seven years - my Sister's
> Honda needed a muffler, the coil pack failed on s Saturn and the power
> window failed (under warranty) on my Expedition. Again, leaving out my
> son who can destroy anything out of the discussion and not including
> the German cars owned by the SO's children, we've not spent $200 on
> car repairs among all of us (5 adults) in the last seven years. My
> younger son, the destroyer, has taken out one clutch and one engine
> (an beater up Firebird), one horn/air bag and one CVT transission
> (warranty - Saturn Vue), one automatic transission (14 year old F150 -
> $600 repair). Amazingly he has not been able to destroy a Mustang -
> well except for the parts he has replaced with "performance" junk
> destined to destroy the car eventually (horrid exhaut, K&N dirt
> charger, huge tires and wheels, illegal tint, "performance" chip,
> etc.). It must be the most indestructible car made. I keep expecting
> him to come home with it in pieces on a rollback.
>
> Ed


I also used to be a car destroyer, (those Mustang "upgrades" sound very
familiar, just on a Datsun 280Z instead), but I wouldn't necessarily
hold the 14 year old Ford transmission failure against your son, as that
is not that unusual a lifespan for a Ford tranny, imho, especially if it
was used a lot.

My previous 1990 Thunderbird SC was on the third transmission at just
over 100K miles when I dumped the car, but one replacement transmission
gave out almost immediately after it was installed.

Pat

Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 23 Mar 2010, 09:00 am
pws
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda cars less dependable than Toyotas?

Joe wrote:

> And you couldn't convince me, even with a big fat check, that Honda is
> less dependable than ANYTHING from Ford or GM.



We are in 100% agreement. They can release these reports forever, but
when it comes time for a new car, anyone in my family will be buying
another Japanese vehicle.

This is based on bad personal experiences with Fords and GM's in the
past, and no desire to be a test rat for another expensive domestic car
purchase.

Pat
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 23 Mar 2010, 09:37 am
Dddudley
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda cars less dependable than Toyotas?

On 3/23/2010 8:00 AM, pws wrote:
> Joe wrote:
>
>> And you couldn't convince me, even with a big fat check, that Honda is
>> less dependable than ANYTHING from Ford or GM.

>
>
> We are in 100% agreement. They can release these reports forever, but
> when it comes time for a new car, anyone in my family will be buying
> another Japanese vehicle.
>
> This is based on bad personal experiences with Fords and GM's in the
> past, and no desire to be a test rat for another expensive domestic car
> purchase.



But, but, but, but... That was the OLD GM. Think how much better it
will be now that it's government owned. What could possibly go wrong?
Watch for the recalls to drop dramatically on GM products.<g>



Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 23 Mar 2010, 09:43 am
jim beam
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda cars less dependable than Toyotas?

On 03/23/2010 01:33 AM, Cameo wrote:
> At least according to the latest dependability study by J. D.Powers and
> Associates. Porsche, Ford's Lincoln and GM's Buick earned the top 3
> spots, respectively. Toyota and its Lexus is 4th. Honda follows Toyota
> in the list.
>
> <http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?Feed=OBR&Date=20100318&ID=11282915&Sy mbol=F>
>
>
> I have a hard time believing that Honda is less dependable than Toyota,
> even before all this Toyota fiasco happened.


1. the only toyota "fiasco" is that of p.r., not anything mechanical or
electronic. it was cooked up by the g.m./sympathetic whitehouse retards
who didn't have the brains to realize that it might have legislation
consequences from which they'd be the biggest losers if the proles got
too upset.

2. if anyone believes that a 3-year [or average 36k mile] "survey" is
indicative of lifetime ownership "reliability", they're smoking some
mighty powerful weed.

--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 23 Mar 2010, 09:48 am
jim beam
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda cars less dependable than Toyotas?

On 03/23/2010 04:31 AM, C. E. White wrote:
> "Cameo"<cameo@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:ho9ud5$ilj$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> At least according to the latest dependability study by J. D.Powers
>> and Associates. Porsche, Ford's Lincoln and GM's Buick earned the
>> top 3 spots, respectively. Toyota and its Lexus is 4th. Honda
>> follows Toyota in the list.
>>
>> <http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?Feed=OBR&Date=20100318&ID=11282915&Sy mbol=F>
>>
>> I have a hard time believing that Honda is less dependable than
>> Toyota, even before all this Toyota fiasco happened.

>
> Most modern cars are very reliable. The differences among most major
> brands is in the noise range. The cars are so close that the top dozen
> or so are probably in a statistical dead heat.


right ed. the cheapo chinese componentry your client is using our tax
dollars to make their crap with is really /just/ as reliable as anything
made here or in japan...


> I believe that how you
> take care of one of the cars in the upper two thirds of the range has
> more to do with depndability than the actual choice of a car.


yeah, washing the car prevents solder joint cracking and changing the
oil extends fatigue life.


>
> If you don't count the cars my younger son has abused into failure, I
> can only remember a few failures of any note of any car I've owned or
> people close to me have owned in the last seven years - my Sister's
> Honda needed a muffler, the coil pack failed on s Saturn and the power
> window failed (under warranty) on my Expedition. Again, leaving out my
> son who can destroy anything out of the discussion and not including
> the German cars owned by the SO's children, we've not spent $200 on
> car repairs among all of us (5 adults) in the last seven years. My
> younger son, the destroyer, has taken out one clutch and one engine
> (an beater up Firebird), one horn/air bag and one CVT transission
> (warranty - Saturn Vue), one automatic transission (14 year old F150 -
> $600 repair). Amazingly he has not been able to destroy a Mustang -
> well except for the parts he has replaced with "performance" junk
> destined to destroy the car eventually (horrid exhaut, K&N dirt
> charger, huge tires and wheels, illegal tint, "performance" chip,
> etc.). It must be the most indestructible car made. I keep expecting
> him to come home with it in pieces on a rollback.
>
> Ed
>
>


yeah, ed. you're a reliable source with no vested interests.

--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 23 Mar 2010, 09:50 am
C. E. White
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda cars less dependable than Toyotas?


"pws" <pwshelton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:hoadf0$p2d$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> C. E. White wrote:
>> "Cameo" <cameo@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:ho9ud5$ilj$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> At least according to the latest dependability study by J.
>>> D.Powers and Associates. Porsche, Ford's Lincoln and GM's Buick
>>> earned the top 3 spots, respectively. Toyota and its Lexus is 4th.
>>> Honda follows Toyota in the list.
>>>
>>> <http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?Feed=OBR&Date=20100318&ID=11282915&Sy mbol=F>
>>>
>>> I have a hard time believing that Honda is less dependable than
>>> Toyota, even before all this Toyota fiasco happened.

>>
>> Most modern cars are very reliable. The differences among most
>> major brands is in the noise range. The cars are so close that the
>> top dozen or so are probably in a statistical dead heat. I believe
>> that how you take care of one of the cars in the upper two thirds
>> of the range has more to do with depndability than the actual
>> choice of a car.
>>
>> If you don't count the cars my younger son has abused into failure,
>> I can only remember a few failures of any note of any car I've
>> owned or people close to me have owned in the last seven years - my
>> Sister's Honda needed a muffler, the coil pack failed on s Saturn
>> and the power window failed (under warranty) on my Expedition.
>> Again, leaving out my son who can destroy anything out of the
>> discussion and not including the German cars owned by the SO's
>> children, we've not spent $200 on car repairs among all of us (5
>> adults) in the last seven years. My younger son, the destroyer, has
>> taken out one clutch and one engine (an beater up Firebird), one
>> horn/air bag and one CVT transission (warranty - Saturn Vue), one
>> automatic transission (14 year old F150 - $600 repair). Amazingly
>> he has not been able to destroy a Mustang - well except for the
>> parts he has replaced with "performance" junk destined to destroy
>> the car eventually (horrid exhaut, K&N dirt charger, huge tires and
>> wheels, illegal tint, "performance" chip, etc.). It must be the
>> most indestructible car made. I keep expecting him to come home
>> with it in pieces on a rollback.
>>
>> Ed

>
> I also used to be a car destroyer, (those Mustang "upgrades" sound
> very familiar, just on a Datsun 280Z instead), but I wouldn't
> necessarily hold the 14 year old Ford transmission failure against
> your son, as that is not that unusual a lifespan for a Ford tranny,
> imho, especially if it was used a lot.


It was in a 14 year old farm truck that had led a relatively stressful
life. However, I do blame my Son becasue he was playing truck pull
with it. I had given him the truck, so I guess I can't be too mad. It
turned out the failure was minor. The person who bought the truck paid
$600 to have it fixed and is very happy. He is a meter reader and uses
the truck daly. I sort of wish I had kept it now, but it was old and I
didn't feel like rolling the dice on the transmission. However, I
don't think Ford transmission are particularly failure prone. My
parents, grandparents and various family memebers have owned many
Fords and that was only the third transmission failure ever in the
family (out of something like 34 Ford among various family memebers).
And one of those other failures was a 1967 Fairlane I drove into a
pond (not that submerging the transmission casued it to fail....but it
did stop shigfting out of second the next day).

Your mentioning the Datsun 280Z brought back my memories of the
nightmare problems I had with the clutch/transmission on the one of
those I owned. It never exactly failed, but it never exactly worked
right either. I loved the car, but the clutch/transmission problems
were a constant source of irritation. I replaced the clutch, clutch
master cylinder, pilot bushing, clutch slave cylinder, etc. bt never
solved all the problems. I sold the 280Z to a friend and he eventually
got the problem mostly sorted out (by replacing all the clutch
componets fromt the clutch master cylinder to the transmission input
shaft).

> My previous 1990 Thunderbird SC was on the third transmission at
> just over 100K miles when I dumped the car, but one replacement
> transmission gave out almost immediately after it was installed.
>
> Pat
>



Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pittsburgh PA Financing - New And Used Toyotas For Sale skylight Honda Videos 0 03 Feb 2010 01:20 am
Are Acura TSX cars good, dependable cars? Are parts expensive when need replaced? Rshell Acura Technical 6 17 Feb 2009 09:16 pm
Do honda Elements have timing belts that need to be replaced and are they pretty dependable overall? gemeneye25@prodigy.net Honda Technical 1 28 Oct 2007 10:48 am
when do the new Hondas and toyotas (2009) come out? krowtap Honda Technical 3 16 Oct 2007 06:33 pm
Why doesn't JD Byrider sell Hondas and Toyotas? cwido25 Honda Technical 2 06 Sep 2007 04:36 am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:28 pm.


Attribution:
Honda News | Autoblog
Powered by Yahoo Answers




Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2 © 2011, Crawlability, Inc.
HondaCarForum.com is not affiliated with Honda Motor Company in any way. Honda Motor Company does not sponsor, support, or endorse HondaCarForum.com in any way. Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are not intended or implied.