Honda Car Forum

Chip,

Another question. What's up with the internal filter on the transmission?
Does this mean it's never changed?
This can't be a good thing.

Rick

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 02:43:30 GMT, "Fluffy"
<no-spamming-bsavanh@mchsi.com> wrote:

>2% is still 2 cars out of every 100. I don't believe Honda feels that a 2%
>failure is commendable. If it's commendable then they would make it a
>selling point: "We at Honda build quality cars, only 2% of our transmissions
>in some models will fail." I don't think it will catch on too well when you
>consider the cost of a new transmission.

I wouldn't call it commendable but it doesn't seem alarmingly high
either. Clearly Honda is not satisfied with the reliability of these
transmissions and is standing behind them. Can't say why they
wouldn't extend the warranty on the earlier cars if they truly have
the same defect rate. According to the Consumer Reports reliability
survey, all years of Accord have excellent transmission reliability,
although it is a little early to expect the defect to show up on the
2000 or 2001 models. The Odyssey's record is nearly as good (and a
lot better than the Chrysler products.)

Automatic transmissions have always been expensive, trouble-prone
devices. Honda units are about as reliable as you can find. If yours
is defective, you are likely to be upset whether the failure rate is 2
in a thousand or 2 in 10. But I certainly wouldn't spend $2000 on an
extended warranty to guard against it - transmission failure is not a
catastrophe. I would consider changing the fluid more often than
recommended, especially if there is any type of severe service
involved.

On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 00:21:04 GMT, "Fluffy" <no-spamming-bsavanh@mchsi.com>
wrote:

>I had a 2002 Honda Accord EX-V6. In a year we only put 10K miles on it.. it
>was a good car to us. The tranny failure rate I've read in various articles
>was about 2% but the cost for repair if not under warranty is very high.
>One of my co-worker's mom who's working in Germany had a tranny failure on a
>1999 as well and it cost her something crazy like $6,000 to replace.
>
>Though I wasn't afraid that my tranny would fail, I wanted to at least know
>why my 2002 was not part of the warranty extension so I sent letters (four
>letters) to Honda asking for an explanation why the 2002 model was not part
>of the extended warranty models. They would not answer my simple question
>so last month I traded that sucker in for a new Volvo XC90 and VOWED to not
>buy another Honda again and have informed my family members, cousins,
>friends, and their friends to do the same. (As you can see, I'm upset about
>the whole thing.)

You're saying that, though the car worked fine and showed no signs of
problems, you dumped it because the mfr would not tell you why it was not
part of a warranty extension for other model years? Did it not occur to
you that the *known* flaw had been fixed in the 2002 model year
transmission? It's been mentioned here that this is the case, though I
have no reference for that.

Do you think that Volvo is going to respond better to such letters
questioning *potential* warranty issues? I wouldn't bet on it. Good luck
with your Volvo but from what I hear their failure/repair rate in general
has not been all that great in recent years. If your Accord had actually
failed your complaint would have sounded a bit more reasonable.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

On 8/30/03 11:10 PM, in article birsgg$clt7c$1@ID-194065.news.uni-berlin.de,
"Pete" <pete_nagurski@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Chip,
>
> Another question. What's up with the internal filter on the transmission?
> Does this mean it's never changed?
> This can't be a good thing.
>
> Rick
>
>

I'm not Chip, but I'm looking at the diagram of the 5 speed automatic in the
2000 TL Helms book. It doesn't have a filter in the traditional sense.
There are screens in the fluid passageways at various places in the
transmission. It would have to be disassembled to get to them.

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 10:50:03 GMT, fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com
(George Macdonald) wrote:

>On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 00:21:04 GMT, "Fluffy" <no-spamming-bsavanh@mchsi.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I had a 2002 Honda Accord EX-V6. In a year we only put 10K miles on it.. it
>>was a good car to us. The tranny failure rate I've read in various articles
>>was about 2% but the cost for repair if not under warranty is very high.
>>One of my co-worker's mom who's working in Germany had a tranny failure on a
>>1999 as well and it cost her something crazy like $6,000 to replace.
>>
>>Though I wasn't afraid that my tranny would fail, I wanted to at least know
>>why my 2002 was not part of the warranty extension so I sent letters (four
>>letters) to Honda asking for an explanation why the 2002 model was not part
>>of the extended warranty models. They would not answer my simple question
>>so last month I traded that sucker in for a new Volvo XC90 and VOWED to not
>>buy another Honda again and have informed my family members, cousins,
>>friends, and their friends to do the same. (As you can see, I'm upset about
>>the whole thing.)
>
>You're saying that, though the car worked fine and showed no signs of
>problems, you dumped it because the mfr would not tell you why it was not
>part of a warranty extension for other model years? Did it not occur to
>you that the *known* flaw had been fixed in the 2002 model year
>transmission? It's been mentioned here that this is the case, though I
>have no reference for that.
>
>Do you think that Volvo is going to respond better to such letters
>questioning *potential* warranty issues? I wouldn't bet on it. Good luck
>with your Volvo but from what I hear their failure/repair rate in general
>has not been all that great in recent years. If your Accord had actually
>failed your complaint would have sounded a bit more reasonable.

As a long-time owner of both Volvos and Hondas, I would say that
trading a Honda for a Volvo for reliability reasons because Honda
isn't extending your warranty is like moving from Chicago to Baghdad
for safety reasons because you heard that purse snatching is up in
Chicago.

If Honda or Toyota had a car that was a direct substitute for my Volvo
240 wagon, I would be at the dealership when it opened Tuesday
morning. And I wouldn't be asking about an extended warranty.

Looks like yet another foreign car buyer has awakened in the real
world. Like many buyers, you fell for this myth of superior
Japanese quality. They are good cars but every day more people
are realizing that they too breakdown on occasion just like all
other vehicles on the road. When they do, they cost a lot more
to repair than domestics. They paid a lot more to buy that so
called superior car over a domestic. When it comes time to buy
another new car they are much less likely to pay all that extra
money to buy another Japanese car. Drive
by any domestic new car dealer and see all the foreign cars
sitting on their used car lot if you have any doubt



mike hunt



Pete wrote:
>

>
> Perhaps in your world a $4-5,000 repair bill on a 3 1/2 year old car with
> 48,000 miles isn't a catastrophe. In mine it is.
>
> This is Honda we're talking about. The supposed king of reliability. I just
> sold a 1985 GMC diesel Suburban. It had 250,000 miles. And the original
> transmission. My company vehicle is a 1996 Jeep Cherokee. It has 95,000
> miles. And the original transmission.

Question! Does anyone think a 2% failure rate for ANYTHING, on
20,000 cars out of 1,000,000, is extremely high, average or do
you think it is low? Think about it, there are 18 million new
vehicles sold in the US yearly. Apply a little logic here. That
54 to 72 million cars still in warranty.


mike hunt



Fluffy wrote:
>
> 2% is still 2 cars out of every 100. I don't believe Honda feels that a 2%
> failure is commendable. If it's commendable then they would make it a
> selling point: "We at Honda build quality cars, only 2% of our transmissions
> in some models will fail." I don't think it will catch on too well when you
> consider the cost of a new transmission. Sure the article talks about Acura
> but it's not just Acura models, but Accord, Odyssey, Prelude's as well. If
> the root cause of the premature failures as due to the negligence of the
> vehicle owners I doubt that Honda would roger up and extend the warranty on
> these vehicles. At the same time, I'm sure that there are failures was due
> to negligence i.e. not changing fluid, other factors such as exceeding the
> vehicles' limitation or it's intended use. The latter is not just on a
> Honda but on any vehicle.
>
> "American Honda Motor Co., Inc. announced it will provide extended
> warranties on approximately 1.2 million Honda and Acura models equipped with
> automatic transmissions due to problems that may result in premature wear or
> failure. The extended warranty will cover affected transmissions for seven
> years or 100,000 miles.
>
> The standard bumper-to-bumper warranty for Honda vehicles is three years or
> 36,000 miles, while Acura vehicles are covered for four years or 50,000
> miles.
>
> Vehicles covered by the extended warranty include:
>
> 2000 - 2001 Honda Accord, Odyssey and Prelude
> 2000 - 2002 and some 2003 Acura 3.2 TL
> 2001 - 2002 and some 2003 Acura 3.2 CL
>
> While only two percent of these vehicles have experienced these transmission
> problems, American Honda will provide extended transmission warranties on
> all potentially affected vehicles.
>
> "Our priorities are making sure our customers are taken care of and
> reassured they can continue to depend on their Honda or Acura automobile for
> a long time to come," said Tom Elliott, executive vice president for
> American Honda.
>
> There is usually plenty of warning to the driver that the transmission is
> not operating properly, such as slow or erratic shifting, giving them ample
> time to take the vehicle in for service.
>
> American Honda will notify all owners of eligible vehicles via mail in the
> coming weeks. "
>
> "Chip Stein" <chip@chipanddebby.com> wrote in message
> news:5ddcea74.0308301656.1745a01f@posting.google.c om...
> > >
> > > Honda has issued a "silent" warranty extension on 2000 and 2001 models.
> Why
> > > not the others? As far as I know, these transmissions are all the same,
> and
> > > many owners have experienced similar problems.
> >
> > it's not a silent warranty at all. letters were mailed out to all
> > registered honda owners. and if you have a dealership service your
> > vehicle, they should run a vin stat every time and it will show.
> > they had a limited run of trannys with a problem. look at
> > chrysler... they haven't built a good tranny in 15 years!!. honda's
> > 1.6% fail rate is pretty commendable for over a million vehicles.
> > as for the article about the acura. that's a different animal if
> > you've ever worked on them. that's a five speed auto. honda just got
> > that this year. most of the time acura is the experimaental platform.
> > out of all the trannys i've seen fail in hondas, most of them have
> > never had their fluid changed. and on the oddysey most of them have
> > aftermarket trailer hitches with no tranny cooler...
> > no matter what people will gripe about it..
> >
> >
> > for those that don't know. a honda automatic is essentially a manual
> > gearbox with wet clutch packs. they are built like no domestic tranny
> > on the market. a lot of the common complaints are just normal
> > characteristics of the vehicle.
> > mor often than not engine maintenance and poor running cause a lot of
> > tranny malfunctions due to the ecu being confused.
> > chip

"SoCalMike" <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2Dh4b.312363$YN5.213964@sccrnsc01...
>
> "Pete" <pete_nagurski@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bis4n1$cjjpi$1@ID-194065.news.uni-berlin.de...
> >
> > "Gordon McGrew" <gRmEcMgOrVeEw@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> > news:6mu2lvg63idn808p5ctg492eh6fn962nev@4ax.com...

> > >But I certainly wouldn't spend $2000 on an
> > > extended warranty to guard against it - transmission failure is not a
> > > catastrophe. I would consider changing the fluid more often than
> > > recommended, especially if there is any type of severe service
> > > involved.

> > Perhaps in your world a $4-5,000 repair bill on a 3 1/2 year old car
with
> > 48,000 miles isn't a catastrophe. In mine it is.

> thats like putting $2000 down on one number on a roulette table with 50
> numbers. and if you *do* win, you get back what? $5000?

> would you do that in vegas?

I wasn't the one that said I'd buy an extended warranty. Never have, never
will. I was disputing Gordon's contention that a transmission failure is
"not a catastrophe".

> > This is Honda we're talking about. The supposed king of reliability. I
just
> > sold a 1985 GMC diesel Suburban. It had 250,000 miles. And the original
> > transmission. My company vehicle is a 1996 Jeep Cherokee. It has 95,000
> > miles. And the original transmission.
>
> and you lucked out twice. i doubt youd have that luck with a chrysler
> minivan, or a ford taurus.

Both of these vehicles was and are meticulously maintained. Luck had nothing
to do with it. I also have a 1997 Ford Explorer with 90,000 miles on it.
Another vehicle notorious for tranny problems. None yet. BTW, Ford
recognized that it's service recommendations for the transmission were
inadequate. So they sent a letter out to owners recommending transmission
service at 25,000 mile intervals for ALL use categories.

<IleneDover@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:3F520AD1.3633C553@mailcity.com...
> Looks like yet another foreign car buyer has awakened in the real
> world. Like many buyers, you fell for this myth of superior
> Japanese quality. They are good cars but every day more people
> are realizing that they too breakdown on occasion just like all
> other vehicles on the road. When they do, they cost a lot more
> to repair than domestics. They paid a lot more to buy that so
> called superior car over a domestic. When it comes time to buy
> another new car they are much less likely to pay all that extra
> money to buy another Japanese car. Drive
> by any domestic new car dealer and see all the foreign cars
> sitting on their used car lot if you have any doubt
>
>
>
> mike hunt

Your trolling, right, Mike? And if not, you're exhibiting an astonishing
ignorance of the facts of present day car manufacturing reality.

"E. Meyer" <e.meyer@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:BB776793.F896%e.meyer@ieee.org...
> On 8/30/03 11:10 PM, in article
birsgg$clt7c$1@ID-194065.news.uni-berlin.de,
> "Pete" <pete_nagurski@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Chip,
> >
> > Another question. What's up with the internal filter on the
transmission?
> > Does this mean it's never changed?
> > This can't be a good thing.
> >
> > Rick
> >
> >
>
> I'm not Chip, but I'm looking at the diagram of the 5 speed automatic in
the
> 2000 TL Helms book. It doesn't have a filter in the traditional sense.
> There are screens in the fluid passageways at various places in the
> transmission. It would have to be disassembled to get to them.

Thanks for the info. I've since spoken with an independent transmission
specialist about this. He said the screens are some of the last parts to be
removed when you tear apart a Honda transmission for rebuilding. At that
point you may as well rebuild :-(