And yet even more on the legendary Honda failing transmissions--Honda won't let you buy a new one on your own
Elmo P. Shagnasty
transmission, and American Honda's "generous" offer to pay 50% toward
the cost of replacing it.
And, of course, you know my feelings on the subject.
Anyway, I dropped the van off yesterday. In talking with the service
writer, he indicated that as of about six months ago, if you need to
replace the transmission in your 02 or 03 V6 Honda, and you come in to
ask that the dealership do this, American Honda will not sell you a
replacement unit of any kind under any circumstances.
Please allow me to repeat this: American Honda will not sell you a
working transmission to replace the self-destructing one they sold you 8
or 9 years ago when you bought the car new.
The ONLY way to get an American Honda transmission, he said, is if you
are under some sort of warranty or goodwill accommodation with American
Honda.
????
So the natural question is, how do you handle customers who for whatever
reason are not under such an arrangement?
This particular dealership has an arrangement with a junkyard to get
units from them. The junkyard "warrants" them for life (or, as we all
know, just keeps throwing units at the customer as the old ones die--but
no doubt the customer ends up paying labor, right?).
I didn't pursue this with the service writer. I'll talk with the
service manager this week to clarify. I mean, this sounds low rent
sleazy.
Interesting side note: The transmission I'm getting as part of my
goodwill arrangement is sufficiently different from the grenaded factory
unit that it needs a different control program. Since my control module
can't be flashed, Honda requires that I get a new computer with this new
transmission--hence the high cost of the overall job. Honda's TSBs
flesh this out; this is so important to Honda that years ago, after they
had already replaced a bunch of transmissions and later discovered the
need for the new control program, they went back and GAVE the
already-repaired customers brand new computers for free.
Of course, now I have to PAY for the computer...
Anyway, this puts the idea of taking it to AAMCO into a whole new light.
I don't know the TRUE importance of the new control program; would a
third-party-rebuilt unit similarly self-destruct a few years down the
road because neither the inherent design nor the control computer was
taken care of?
Inquiring minds and all that.
For reference, Honda's 50% accommodation leaves me holding the bag for
$2218 plus tax.
In my mind, that's just retroactively raising the price of the van
$2218. And to think that when I bought it, it was the most expensive
car this dealership had ever sold. Apparently, that wasn't good enough.
Dddudley
> Some of you know about my 2002 Odyssey with 73K miles and its failed
> transmission, and American Honda's "generous" offer to pay 50% toward
> the cost of replacing it.
>
> And, of course, you know my feelings on the subject.
>
> Anyway, I dropped the van off yesterday. In talking with the service
> writer, he indicated that as of about six months ago, if you need to
> replace the transmission in your 02 or 03 V6 Honda, and you come in to
> ask that the dealership do this, American Honda will not sell you a
> replacement unit of any kind under any circumstances.
[snip]
> This particular dealership has an arrangement with a junkyard to get
> units from them. The junkyard "warrants" them for life (or, as we all
> know, just keeps throwing units at the customer as the old ones die--but
> no doubt the customer ends up paying labor, right?).
>
> I didn't pursue this with the service writer. I'll talk with the
> service manager this week to clarify. I mean, this sounds low rent
> sleazy.
If true, it's more than "sounds sleazy" it is beneath sleazy. In fact
you'd have to dig a hole in order to stand on top of that policy.
Let us know what comes from your "chat" (oh, to be a fly on THAT wall)
with the service manager.
FWIW, I gotta think that there is some federal trade regulation that
requires the automakers to produce and maintain a supply of component
parts for their vehicles and that the time frame for that would be more
than 7 - 8 years. I thought about Magnuson Moss Act but didn't see
anything relevant to it there.
jim beam
at this stage elmo, this might be a local decision rather than
corporate. i know i will dump problem customers once they reach a
certain "pita" point. and you're almost certainly pressing their
buttons big time.
moving forward, i think your best bet is corporate - have you called
honda usa's customer care?
on the subject of dumped pita customers, one of my exes bullied lexus
corporate so hard and so long, they gave him a full refund on a vehicle
he'd had "problems" with [basically, he just decided he didn't like it].
that was three years of free driving for the price of a bunch of
emails and hollow threats he couldn't possibly execute.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
C. E. White
"Dddudley" <puzz...@ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:4c6d45d1$0$14557$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
> FWIW, I gotta think that there is some federal trade regulation that
> requires the automakers to produce and maintain a supply of component
> parts for their vehicles and that the time frame for that would be more
> than 7 - 8 years. I thought about Magnuson Moss Act but didn't see
> anything relevant to it there.
I cannot find anything that suggest there is a US Federal law that requires
manufacturers to provide spare parts for a specified period. I would love to
hear of one. Where I work we try to maintian spares for the marketing life
of a new product plus 7 years, but in many cases this is impossible because
we depend on componets from other suppliers that are discontinued.
Ed
Grumpy AuContraire
Maybe you should search the junkyards for a unit. I'll betcha you could
get a warranted used unit installed for less than $1K.
It's gotta be a bitch to be in this situation. Have you thought about
complaining to the media?
JT
Grumpy AuContraire
The old saying, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease," sure rings true.
In EVERY circumstance where I had a beef and could not get a
satisfactory resolution, I did not hesitate to escalate.
One thing for sure, Elmo's situation is another nail in the coffin of me
ever upgrading to more modern transportation...
JT
Paul
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-6ADC06....@reserved-multicast-range-not-delegated.example.com...
> Some of you know about my 2002 Odyssey with 73K miles and its failed
> transmission, and American Honda's "generous" offer to pay 50% toward
> the cost of replacing it.
>
> And, of course, you know my feelings on the subject.
>
> Anyway, I dropped the van off yesterday. In talking with the service
> writer, he indicated that as of about six months ago, if you need to
> replace the transmission in your 02 or 03 V6 Honda, and you come in to
> ask that the dealership do this, American Honda will not sell you a
> replacement unit of any kind under any circumstances.
>
> Please allow me to repeat this: American Honda will not sell you a
> working transmission to replace the self-destructing one they sold you 8
> or 9 years ago when you bought the car new.
>
> The ONLY way to get an American Honda transmission, he said, is if you
> are under some sort of warranty or goodwill accommodation with American
> Honda.
>
> ????
>
> So the natural question is, how do you handle customers who for whatever
> reason are not under such an arrangement?
>
For what this is worth, an independent mechanic who had done some good work
for me previously offered to rebuild the transmission in my 2000 Accord when
it quit last year. He quoted me $1,600 with a one-year warranty. I thought
hard about it, but ended up going with the dealership's offer of a
Honda-rebuilt unit with a three-year warranty for about $1,900. My mechanic
later told me he would have given me a three-year warranty if I'd paid
$1,900. Maybe I'll take him up on that if (when?) my '01 Odyssey suffers the
same fate.
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Tegger
$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com:
>
> FWIW, I gotta think that there is some federal trade regulation that
> requires the automakers to produce and maintain a supply of component
> parts for their vehicles and that the time frame for that would be more
> than 7 - 8 years.
There isn't one anymore. There WAS one at one time, which was repealed
around the late-60s or so.
--
Tegger
Tegger
news:F72dnUvAtqPP8PDR...@giganews.com:
.
>
> One thing for sure, Elmo's situation is another nail in the coffin of
> me ever upgrading to more modern transportation...
>
Here's another one:
I'm a moderator on a Yahoo Toyota group. Right now we've got a lady who's
being told her 2003 RAV4 needs a new cat and FOUR new oxygen sensors (two
of which are actually pricey A/F sensors).
It seems that emissions regulations force Toyota to split the cat into two,
one for each pair of the four cylinders. The cats are built into the
exhaust manifold in order to keep them as hot as the EPA requires.
The total price for the fix? $2,000 plus tax.
My 'Teg may be burning oil now, but I might just drop in another engine
rather than submit to such nonsense.
--
Tegger
ACAR
>
> > One thing for sure, Elmo's situation is another nail in the coffin of
> > me ever upgrading to more modern transportation...
>
> Here's another one:
>
>snip
How many RAV4s require the same repair as your example?
I just had my '89 Legend towed away. Don't even try to tell me that
systems on that generation vehicle are anywhere near as reliable as
the current crop. You need to go back to 1960s cars for mechanically
simple.
Elmo probably knew about the weak Honda trans when he bought the
Odyssey. He should have brought the car into the dealership for an
annual routine trans service so when it failed Honda would have a
service history.
Flatlander
wrote:
You might want to contact your local states attourney general office
and see what they say about it.
Tegger
news:jq0u66ddsu89ntp3k...@4ax.com:
Uh, why? The orignal law was federal, not state.
--
Tegger
Tegger
a6df12...@q22g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:
> On Aug 20, 6:56 am, Tegger <inva...@example.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> > One thing for sure, Elmo's situation is another nail in the coffin of
>> > me ever upgrading to more modern transportation...
>>
>> Here's another one:
>>
>>snip
>
> How many RAV4s require the same repair as your example?
Pretty much all of them past about 150K miles, give or take. That's about
as long as any of them go now, before the dreaded P0420 DTC, Hondas
included.
>
> I just had my '89 Legend towed away. Don't even try to tell me that
> systems on that generation vehicle are anywhere near as reliable as
> the current crop.
Oh, they were. Given proper maintenance, they were just about bullet-proof.
The problem was, many were not given proper maintenance. That's why the
feds eventually imposed OBD-II.
Imagine how simple and reliable the 1991 system could be now, if automakers
had had 19 years to perfect it, and if EPA engineers weren't so hell-bent
on giving reasons why they should continue to suck from that juicy federal
teat.
> You need to go back to 1960s cars for mechanically
> simple.
But quite a lot less durable and reliable. By 1991, they'd hit the
motherlode for reliability, durability, and low emissions. But the federal
meddlers couldn't leave well-enough alone.
--
Tegger
Elmo P. Shagnasty
<44aba925-d619-4fce...@q22g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
ACAR <dimndson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Elmo probably knew about the weak Honda trans when he bought the
> Odyssey. He should have brought the car into the dealership for an
> annual routine trans service so when it failed Honda would have a
> service history.
Elmo knew the 4 speeds were weak. This was a new model transmission,
the 5 speed.
Every bit of service done to the van was done at this one dealership.
There was no dearth of service history. And the transmission was
maintained ACCORDING TO HONDA'S SPECIFICATIONS. This much was
acknowledged by the dealership.
According to Honda in their Service News, in an article where they warn
against transmission flushes:
> In Honda vehicles, the transmission, as well as the systems that handle
> lubrication, cooling, fuel, and power steering, are designed to give
> thousands of miles of trouble-free service if you follow the maintenance
> schedule to the letter.
ServiceNews, Feb 2006, p. 4.
Looks like Honda lied, then chose to make the customer pay for it.
I used to tell great stories about how Honda took care of their
customers when Honda screwed up. While I will continue to tell those
stories, I will also tell THIS story for the rest of my life--and frame
it as how Honda screwed up big time and lost a customer.
I should have paid, at the most, the 12 hours of labor that this took,
and Honda should have AT LEAST picked up the entire cost of the
transmission itself. Instead, I paid $2218--and Honda considers that a
GENEROUS goodwill gesture.
This is a perfect example of penny wise, pound foolish.
Will I ever own a Honda anymore? Who knows. But American Honda Motor
Manufacturing did a superb job of taking my automatic response to
spending $30K--"shoot, that's a LOT of money, better buy a Honda"--and
turning it into, "shoot, that's a LOT of money, why risk it on a Honda?".
jim beam
> In article<Xns9DDAD404...@208.90.168.18>,
> Tegger<inv...@example.com> wrote:
>
>>> You need to go back to 1960s cars for mechanically
>>> simple.
>>
>>
>> But quite a lot less durable and reliable. By 1991, they'd hit the
>> motherlode for reliability, durability, and low emissions. But the federal
>> meddlers couldn't leave well-enough alone.
>
> out yet how to screw that one up.
i don't know - the input shaft bearing [nearest the flywheel] on the
cable operated ef civic manual transmission's isn't a paragon of
reliability. they seem to have fixed it on later models though.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Tegger
xample.com:
>
> ServiceNews, Feb 2006, p. 4.
>
> Looks like Honda lied, then chose to make the customer pay for it.
I'm not sure how this is a lie. That's the no-flush mention. It does NOT
prohibit drain-and-fill, which all any AT needs.
>
> Will I ever own a Honda anymore? Who knows. But American Honda Motor
> Manufacturing did a superb job of taking my automatic response to
> spending $30K--"shoot, that's a LOT of money, better buy a Honda"--and
> turning it into, "shoot, that's a LOT of money, why risk it on a
> Honda?".
>
You won't have a lot better luck with any other make, frankly. Federal
government regulations now impose such horrendous costs on automakers that
they're all dumbing-down their cars and their after-sales service. Honda
remains one of the better ones.
--
Tegger
PE
watching for in a few years when the mileage on my 09 Civic EX (4cyl/4-door
sedan/5-speed auto trans) gets into the high five figures?
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-6ADC06....@reserved-multicast-range-not-delegated.example.com...
jim beam
> ACAR<dimndson...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:44aba925-d619-4fce-aecb-
> a6df12...@q22g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Aug 20, 6:56�am, Tegger<inva...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> One thing for sure, Elmo's situation is another nail in the coffin of
>>>> me ever upgrading to more modern transportation...
>>>
>>> Here's another one:
>>>
>>> snip
>>
>> How many RAV4s require the same repair as your example?
>
>
>
> Pretty much all of them past about 150K miles, give or take. That's about
> as long as any of them go now, before the dreaded P0420 DTC, Hondas
> included.
>
>
>
>>
>> I just had my '89 Legend towed away. Don't even try to tell me that
>> systems on that generation vehicle are anywhere near as reliable as
>> the current crop.
>
>
>
> Oh, they were. Given proper maintenance, they were just about bullet-proof.
honda's of that generation are great - later 80's/early 90's was their
finest hour. great mechanicals, great ergonomics, they really were at
the top of their game.
> The problem was, many were not given proper maintenance. That's why the
> feds eventually imposed OBD-II.
>
> Imagine how simple and reliable the 1991 system could be now, if automakers
> had had 19 years to perfect it,
in terms of achieving goals, the technical challenge since the period
above is that of life limitation, not getting it to work well or
"improvement". with bean counters setting the engineering agendas, it's
all about getting stuff to last for a design period, but then having it
fail. light bulb manufacturers figured this out decades ago - that's
why things like domestic tungsten filament bulbs only last 800 or 1000
hours - it's what they're designed for. apply the same principles to
cars, and you have a more predictable revenue stream. or so they think.
truth is though, designing in failure costs a lot more and takes a
heck of a lot more in r&d and lead time for testing than just making it
to work reliably. when the bean counters do their math, they'll model
increased sales decreased lifespans create, but it seems they don't
factor in reputation damage or losing customer loyalty.
> and if EPA engineers weren't so hell-bent
> on giving reasons why they should continue to suck from that juicy federal
> teat.
>
>
>
>> You need to go back to 1960s cars for mechanically
>> simple.
>
>
> But quite a lot less durable and reliable. By 1991, they'd hit the
> motherlode for reliability, durability, and low emissions. But the federal
> meddlers couldn't leave well-enough alone.
mechanically, that's pretty much correct, some engine improvements
aside. but i'm not sure that emissions regs are as you say. fact is,
manufacturers like honda have always been way ahead of any regs on
economy and emissions, and will probably continue to be so.
fromt he political perspective though, when we have regulators who
mandate emissions and economy targets for manufacturers, but then waive
those requirements if a honking great gas guzzler has a few different
o-rings in it so that it qualifies as "flex fuel" and is thus exempt
from c.a.f.e., you /know/ that the regs are a secondary concern.
>
>
>
>
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
PE
the factory warranty, would the "legendary transmission problem" make it
advisable to purchase an extended warranty?
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-E552A1....@reserved-multicast-range-not-delegated.example.com...
> In article <TsCdnZnn0MlMjO3R...@earthlink.com>,
> "PE" <p...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> Is this "legendary transmission problem" something that I should start
>> watching for in a few years when the mileage on my 09 Civic EX
>> (4cyl/4-door
>> sedan/5-speed auto trans) gets into the high five figures?
>
> Not the same one, but yes--the auto transmission in a modern car is by
> far the weakest link in the whole chain.
>
> And let's face it: Honda is just like GM now, where they plan the car
> to become obsolete so that you come back and buy a new one.
>
> From what I've seen, it's cheap insurance to change the trans fluid at
> least twice as often as what Honda says. No guarantees, though. But if
> you're religious about having your maintenance and repairs done at the
> dealer, that kind of diligence shows Honda that you're serious--and when
> the transmission fails at 75K miles (not saying it will), you have a leg
> to stand on when demanding accommodation for the repair.
>
Al
> In article<OoSdnZjWeuO_1PDR...@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam<m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> at this stage elmo, this might be a local decision rather than
>> corporate. i know i will dump problem customers once they reach a
>> certain "pita" point. and you're almost certainly pressing their
>> buttons big time.
>
> failing on a gently used original owner 2002 Honda that went out the
> door for $30K.
>
> If this is the best they can do...
>
> I didn't call the Honda customer service line, on advice of many people
> who should be knowledgeable who all advised that 50% was the limit.
> Plus, I just wanted to move on.
>
> I'm sure glad I didn't settle for the 25%, though. It's all about
> knowing where that line is. I *think* 50% is the line today, without a
> HUGE amount of hassle.
Dec 02 I bought a new 03 Accord EX-L V6 from dealer A.
Jul 07 I bought new 07 Accord EX-L V6, this time from dealer B.
May 08 the 03 Accord transmission went out at 85,300 miles. I brought
it to dealer B. Next day they called and said the trans was shot, did I
want them to fix it and did I want them to call Honda and see if they
could do anything for me, since I was an established Honda customer. I
said sure. Next call was that they could put in a factory rebuilt,
36,000 3 year warranty, and split the cost 50-50 (about 1550. to me). I
said go. Two days later he called and said it was done. Total out the
door cost to me was $1492.14 (less than the estimate - and they gave me
a free oil change since it was due - note dealer B had never seen or
serviced this car before)
I don't know if an 02 Odyssey is a much more expensive trans than an 03
Accord, or if the time/difficulty to change it is so much greater to
account for the difference between my 50% (1492.14 including tax) and
your 50% ($2218 plus tax)
I bought the vehicle knowing it had a 36,000 mile, 36 month warranty. I
was quite pleased with the adjustment I got, realizing I was 49,300
miles and 41 months over the warranty. (More than double both time and
miles).
In your case you are 37,000 miles and 60 months past the warranty. For
how many miles and how many months should/can any manufacturer stand
ready to do multi-thousand dollar repairs on every unit it has ever built?
Elmo P. Shagnasty
wrote:
> May 08 the 03 Accord transmission went out at 85,300 miles. I brought
> it to dealer B. Next day they called and said the trans was shot, did I
> want them to fix it and did I want them to call Honda and see if they
> could do anything for me, since I was an established Honda customer. I
> said sure. Next call was that they could put in a factory rebuilt,
> 36,000 3 year warranty, and split the cost 50-50 (about 1550. to me). I
> said go. Two days later he called and said it was done. Total out the
> door cost to me was $1492.14 (less than the estimate - and they gave me
> a free oil change since it was due - note dealer B had never seen or
> serviced this car before)
>
> I don't know if an 02 Odyssey is a much more expensive trans than an 03
> Accord, or if the time/difficulty to change it is so much greater to
> account for the difference between my 50% (1492.14 including tax) and
> your 50% ($2218 plus tax)
No doubt there's some extra labor involved, but I think most of the
additional cost was the transmission control computer that Honda also
replaces as part of these particular repairs.
I have to say, overall my total bill (including a couple other things I
had them do while it was in) came in a bit under what I expected.
> For
> how many miles and how many months should/can any manufacturer stand
> ready to do multi-thousand dollar repairs on every unit it has ever built?
That's not the point. This isn't just "one of those things;" this
transmission was known by Honda to be pure junk from the get-go. They
let the accountants design this, cutting costs so far as to guarantee
that every unit will self-destruct at around 80K miles or so.
When Honda discovered this, it was on the heels of the pure junk 4 speed
automatic they hooked to their V6 engines, the unit they put onto
Accords from 98 through 02 and on Odysseys from 99 through 01 (and
various Acuras, naturally). That unit was the center of the largest
recall and service campaign Honda had ever been pushed into. When they
discovered that its replacement, my 5 speed auto that they introduced
with the 02 Odyssey, was also junk, they were quite sensitive to the
cost situation. They quickly fixed the design of the 5 speed auto, such
that mid-04 and up models got good units. But instead of taking care of
the customers that got the initial design of that unit, they stuck their
heads in the sand.
Keep in mind, this transmission was in a family van, which is
traditionally filled with children and mothers. And when the
transmission goes out, the car just STOPS accelerating forward. This is
NOT good when driving in the city, going through intersections and
trying to squeeze into various traffic.
I would go so far as to consider this dangerous to drive from the first
moment it starts failing.
Now, allow me to frame the above with a bit of context. In 1984 or so,
I bought a 79 Civic. Loved it. But at one point the front end started
swaying around. I took it to my dealer--this very dealer that I've
dealt with ever since, and which handled my Odyssey this go round.
The dealer called me to say they wouldn't be giving my car back that
day. Why? Because the FRONT BEAM was rusted out, and the car was--get
this--dangerous to drive. The good news, though, was that Honda was
picking up the repair COMPLETELY and I'd have the car back the next day,
after they got a new front beam installed. It was a safety issue, they
said, and Honda was simply taking care of it to the point of shipping a
new front beam across country for next day installation.
Great. (Just like they should have with my transmission--read on.)
Fast forward a few months, and my gas tank is leaking. ????? Back to
this dealer. Hey, guess what? Honda admitted to a bad design with the
gas tank straps trapping moisture and causing the tank to rust. They'll
buy me a new tank if I'll pay the labor to install it ($50 at the time).
Absolutely!!
I didn't even have to ASK for any of these things to be taken care of.
Honda and this dealer did this for me AUTOMATICALLY. No stonewalling,
no "we've never heard of anything like this, don't know what to tell
you," nothing like that at all.
Man, I am loving this Honda thing. They really know how to engender
loyalty. This is the mid-80s, and THEY ADMIT TO THEIR MISTAKES. Not
only that, THEY CORRECT THEIR MISTAKES and they don't force their
customers to pay for their mistakes. Wow.
Late 86 or early 87, my girlfriend (now wife) needs a car. I love my
shitbox Civic (we're college students), and that's all she really needs,
so we find one. A 79, copper, 1200 4 speed, just what the doctor
ordered. Fast forward a few months, and guess what? The gas tank is
leaking.
Oh HO, say I. No problem; take it to the dealer, and explain how
there's a campaign on that, and that Honda will buy the part. She's
much closer to a different dealer, but I don't care. She takes it in on
a Thursday. Friday they call, the car is ready--but they want full
price for the repair. She asks them: didn't you check with Honda like
I said about this being covered by a service campaign? Well, no, they
didn't. If she wants the car now, she'll have to pay full ticket and
they'll check with Honda later (fat chance). Otherwise, she'd have to
leave the car there while they check with Honda on Monday.
She calls me, upset. She doesn't have the cash, and she needs the car
that weekend.
Hmmmm. It's 4:15 on a Friday afternoon. Hmmmm. I dig up the number
for the Honda zone office in my area, and I call them. I briefly
explain what's going on, and my history with this same situation. The
guy listens politely, I finish my piece, he says "that's crap, hang on"
and puts me on hold. A few minutes later he comes back and says, "It's
all taken care of, all you pay is labor. Go get your car."
WHEEEE! Sure enough, we roll into this other dealership right before
5pm on Friday. The service manager is there at the service desk, hears
my wife give her name to pick up her car, and addresses us with, "So,
you went over our heads, eh?" Sure as hell did, lady. Thanks for
nothing. Have a good life, we're out of here.
That was 1987 or so. That series of events nailed it shut. When I went
to spend my money on a car, it was "of course I'm buying a Honda. This
is a huge expense; why would I risk it with anything else?" This led to
my family buying Hondas, and finally to me buying the most expensive car
that dealership had sold to date--on Sept. 12, 2001, when I rolled out
of there in a $30,500 van (and then last year, when my brothers and I
went to buy our father a luxury SUV and ended up with a $50K Acura MDX
on the very same basis--"it's a Honda, why are we even looking at Volvo
or Lexus?").
Fast forward to this situation. Honda has radically changed, and really
doesn't give a rat's ass about their customers anymore. Honda is just
GM of the 70s and 80s--seeking the almighty immediate profit at the
expense of long term business and profits.
In one fell swoop, Honda has changed my tune into, "I'm spending a huge
amount of money to acquire a car; why would I risk that by buying a
Honda?"
That's a full 180, Honda. A full 180. Now you're no better than any
other crappy manufacturer out there, and in addition I have incentive
NOT to reward you for your recent behavior toward me.
How many others have you done this to, Honda?
I just read an editorial where someone has studied and claims that true
profit, long term profit, cannot be sustained when you're focusing so
hard on the short term. Honda *used* to understand that, but they no
longer do.
I will still tell the original stories, partly because they're true but
mostly because they put a good framework to the final story showing just
how far Honda has fallen and what a sucker bet it is to buy that 06 90K
mile Odyssey for anywhere near the $20K asking price (just as an
example). I *want* the Honda legend to die, because it deserves to. I
*want* people to stop thinking that a used Honda is worth insane amounts
of money simply because it's a Honda.
jim beam
there are two possible scenarios for this. read on...
company is run by u.s.-educated mba's.
>
> In one fell swoop, Honda has changed my tune into, "I'm spending a huge
> amount of money to acquire a car; why would I risk that by buying a
> Honda?"
>
> That's a full 180, Honda. A full 180. Now you're no better than any
> other crappy manufacturer out there, and in addition I have incentive
> NOT to reward you for your recent behavior toward me.
>
> How many others have you done this to, Honda?
>
> I just read an editorial where someone has studied and claims that true
> profit, long term profit, cannot be sustained when you're focusing so
> hard on the short term. Honda *used* to understand that, but they no
> longer do.
would be interested to read that if you have the link.
>
> I will still tell the original stories, partly because they're true but
> mostly because they put a good framework to the final story showing just
> how far Honda has fallen and what a sucker bet it is to buy that 06 90K
> mile Odyssey for anywhere near the $20K asking price (just as an
> example). I *want* the Honda legend to die, because it deserves to. I
> *want* people to stop thinking that a used Honda is worth insane amounts
> of money simply because it's a Honda.
in the mid 80's when i was an undergrad, one of my materials profs gave
us a series of lectures on design life limitation. it was an
interesting topic in that there are a number of significant technical
challenges in making stuff fail - because things have to fail in a
certain way to be invisible to the consumer prior to it happening. for
cars, it has to be catastrophic enough to prevent shade-tree repair.
this was presented as having the benefit of significant repair revenue
generation when the vehicle is still valuable, and to get them off the
road when they get older. my prof's specialty was metal fatigue, and he
outlined the consulting work he'd done for a certain european
manufacturer [has the words "machine", "driving", and "ultimate" in
their tag line]. it was a fascinating case-study. for that
manufacturer, the transmissions were chosen because visually, the car
still looks great, it's invisible until it happens, it is [arguably]
non-fatal to the driver, and best of all, really freakin' expensive to
fix, . young [but higher mileage] car failures can be explained with
"never seen this before, but 100k miles in three years - you must be a
hard driver sir/madam", and older cars "it's to be expected from a
performance vehicle"...
unlike frod or chevy whose transmission clutch packs are worn out in
100-120k, but whose transmissions get rebuilt by specialists outside the
manufacturer's control because the guts are salvageable, and clutches
are cheap, fatigue failure is the uneconomic/unsalvageable way to go -
and not single cog failure either since that might be economic to repair
in quantity by a specialist. so it was decided that they wanted to
design a transmission that fatigue-failed all five ratios. in the world
of fatigue, this is a technical lunar landing mission because the usage
of each is radically different. first gear might see a total operation
life of only 10 hours. top gear might see 3000. there are different
fatigue mechanisms at each end of the range, and the intermediates,
well, let's just say it's challenging.
but it can be done. the perverse thing though is that the quality
control necessary to achieve this is much tighter than that to just make
a component that works and /doesn't/ break - it adds 20%-30% to the
production cost!!! needless to say, the mba's driving this technical
agenda had done their math based on the sales arguments above, and
decided that they could carry it off. and if you look at the vehicles
that manufacturer sells, there are still a number of their old [pre late
80's] vehicles on the road, a bunch of their new [sub 7-10 years], but
almost nothing in between - it works! but they have gotten away with it
because they target a certain niche market that wants new cars every few
years anyway, [used vehicle owners have no say in the
warranty/reliability chain] and who are prepared to pay a 20+% price
premium for the advertising costs on a vehicle they believe
differentiates them.
honda are not in that space, and never will be in that space - so if
they think it's something they should pursue, they're seriously
miscalculating. i think the bottom line is that honda either fucked up
mechanically and made a genuine design error, [and then compounded the
problem with management snafus] or they've jumped on the life limitation
bandwagon [with virtually everybody else who has seen this work but who
doesn't understand the element of it only working for a niche market!!!]
and the johnny-come-lately mba's don't understand what built the
fundamentals of the business whose profitability they're trying to
"improve". they missed the part about "niche market". for
manufacturers playing in the commodity market, like honda, life
limitation hurts goodwill, the element that advertising does NOT buy.
goodwill/brand loyalty is buying a honda and being able to drive it
until we're sick of it. and perversely, the fact that there's a bunch
of crappy old honda's on the road, is the greatest advertisement and
brand loyalty generator they have - people see and believe these cars
can be trusted. if the old hondas go away, there will be no more brand
loyalty. just like volvo and saab.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
jim beam
> In article<hOWdnXZucMMk-uzR...@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam<m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> but they have gotten away with it
>> because they target a certain niche market that wants new cars every few
>> years anyway, [used vehicle owners have no say in the
>> warranty/reliability chain]
>
read the fine print - they're only "certified" for the "window" that's
left over from the warranty - it doesn't extend beyond the original.
dealers taking up the slack on what /is/ built in to the design life.
and if you get a sucker in to buy that brand of used vehicle, maybe you
can get them to buy new when that one craps out. "free maintenance"?
same thing - suck the suckers in.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Grumpy AuContraire
>
sni[
For
> how many miles and how many months should/can any manufacturer stand
> ready to do multi-thousand dollar repairs on every unit it has ever built?
If a manufacturer cannot produce an automatic good for at least 150K
miles, his product is not worth looking at.
JT
Clive
AuContraire <Grum...@GrumpyvilleNOT.com> writes
good having a good forth gear, if the rest of the box can't cope. (In
those days manufacturers used rubbish metal for all the gears except top
as a cost saving.)
--
Clive
ACAR
>
> > I just had my '89 Legend towed away. Don't even try to tell me that
> > systems on that generation vehicle are anywhere near as reliable as
> > the current crop.
>
> Oh, they were. Given proper maintenance, they were just about bullet-proof.
Can't agree. I've got a LONG list of repairs the car needed not to
mention the inadequate cooling system when the A/C was working in very
hot temps. The car was far from bullet proof; although the engine/
manual trans. required no work over 20+ years. I replaced/repaired CV
joints, brake calipers (which seized), brake master cylinder, EGR,
alternator, O2 sensors, radio, headlight switch, master/slave clutch
cylinders and a whole bunch more. I owned a Toyota Sienna for 12
years, 250K miles, all overlapping the Legend. The Sienna needed O2
sensors and a sliding door latch other than routine maintenance items.
None of the crap that failed on the Legend. Not to mention A/C that
blew frosty air even on the hottest day.
> The problem was, many were not given proper maintenance. That's why the
> feds eventually imposed OBD-II.
Horseshit
>
> Imagine how simple and reliable the 1991 system could be now, if automakers
> had had 19 years to perfect it, and if EPA engineers weren't so hell-bent
> on giving reasons why they should continue to suck from that juicy federal
> teat.
Honda brakes still suck.
True, Honda shitboxes of that era got good mpg but they were flimsy
and torqueless. My '87 Integra crushed like a soda can when it was
rear ended on the Washington beltway.
> > You need to go back to 1960s cars for mechanically
> > simple.
>
> But quite a lot less durable
But so easy and cheap to fix.
>and reliable.
Nope. I had a '66 Chevy that was nearly as reliable as my '98 Sienna.
It need more repair work but was very reliable over 180K miles.
> By 1991, they'd hit the
> motherlode for reliability, durability, and low emissions. But the federal
> meddlers couldn't leave well-enough alone.
So I think you need to look beyond Honda 'cause Honda peaked in the
early '90s and that has nothing to do with the EPA.
>