CR-V safety recall
Observer
with the auto transmission control module software. I called one
dealer and they said to allow 1/2 day but realistically if anyone
knows, how long does the actual repair take? And do they just plug
into the electronics to make the change or have to change out the
module itself?
starrin
p.m. and that included oil change and state inspection. Their work
estimate for the 4 hours, for what I understand is simply a software
reprogramming . Was ready @ noon.
tww1491
"Observer" wrote in message
news:ug2397tirgmg673fm...@4ax.com...
My wife's CRV was done together with an A1 service -- total time was a
little over an hour.
Tegger
4ax.com:
This one is just a software flash. Probably takes less than a half-hour,
all told. The "1/2 day" thing would have more to do with the service
department's workflow than anything else. It basically means they're not
quite sure exactly when they're going to get to your car, depending on what
happens with the ones that come before it.
--
Tegger
Elmo P. Shagnasty
hehehe Yeah, just like I had to get a new control module, complete with
new software, when Honda replaced my 02 Odyssey transmission last year.
And just like Honda reflashed the ECUs on all those Civic hybrids that
were going through batteries.
The SOLE purpose of this and all other Honda "software flashes" is to
benefit Honda by making the car perform in such a way as to get it
through the warranty period--never mind how the car performs for the
customer afterward.
Tegger
53A122.183...@news.eternal-september.org:
Actually, most software flashes are designed to eliminate or ameliorate
undesirable or destructive behavior. ALL automakers perform such flashes
all the time, and not just to the transmission's control module. Spend a
bit of time on various automakers' Techinfo sites, and you'll see.
Everything these days is computer-controlled, and there is a very heavy
legislative emphasis on gas-mileage and emissions. The necessary level of
control required to achieve the results desired by your lawmakers means
that just about every aspect of engine/transmission behavior is subject to
some sort of computer adjustment.
Unfortunately -- especially after the legal lynching of innocent Toyota a
couple of years ago -- automakers have become extremely skittish and gun-
shy, issuing recalls and TSBs for just about anything, even if only a
handful of complaints have been received and no harm has resulted. This has
the effect of making the product /look/ defective even when it's actually
better than ever before. Plus the new regime muddies the waters: It's much
less clear now when a recall or TSB covers something actually harmful.
The '99-'04 Honda automatics had terrible problems, most of them due to bad
design (yours being one of them, unfortunately). This cost Honda very
dearly, something they cannot afford, with Hyundai breathing down their
necks. The '05-and-up automatics have a stellar reputation for reliability.
--
Tegger
Elmo P. Shagnasty
Tegger <inv...@example.com> wrote:
> Actually, most software flashes are designed to eliminate or ameliorate
> undesirable or destructive behavior.
Like the hybrid flash?
Which was designed to do exactly what you describe.
BUT: the customer pays in lower gas mileage.
In days past, Honda would have apologized for designing/building a bad
traction battery, and would have replaced the battery with one that
actually works to make the car what the car is supposed to be. IOW,
Honda would have eliminated the undesirable behavior--the battery going
bad early--while simultaneously delivering on their promise of what the
car is supposed to be.
Instead, the new Honda simply flashes the software to basically limp the
battery along until Honda's obligations with respect to warranty claims
are over. That the flash takes the gas mileage down to what a Civic LX
gets every day without effort, is the customer's problem.
Honda has spent quite a bit of time figuring out how to solve THEIR
problems ($$$$$) in software. Whether it FIXES the problem, whether or
not the car the customer gets back is the car the customer bought or
THOUGHT he bought, doesn't matter to the new Honda.
jim beam
to be fair to honda, they don't actually make the battery cells, and a
lot of those are well below par of late. all kinds of manufacturers
[users] have been hit all across the board, not just honda.
now, many have worked with their supplier and will replace the defects
free of charge, makita for instance. so really, your criticism is
really directed to honda for /not/ doing the right thing with their
supplier, and not replacing sub-par battery packs.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
GrumpyOne
> In article<Xns9F79C4E5...@208.90.168.18>,
> Tegger<inv...@example.com> wrote:
>
>> Actually, most software flashes are designed to eliminate or ameliorate
>> undesirable or destructive behavior.
>
> Like the hybrid flash?
>
> Which was designed to do exactly what you describe.
>
> BUT: the customer pays in lower gas mileage.
>
This has been well described in multiplle sources. Shameful to say the
least. If I were a Honda hybrid owner, I would be thoroughly pissed and
waging a war.
Once a car company has a tainted record, it takes years to recover IF it
recovers at all.
I'll just stick with my old turd boxes.. . Thank you!
JT
jim beam
> In article<j6vnp0$dnt$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, jim beam<m...@privacy.net>
> wrote:
>
>>> Instead, the new Honda simply flashes the software to basically limp the
>>> battery along until Honda's obligations with respect to warranty claims
>>> are over. That the flash takes the gas mileage down to what a Civic LX
>>> gets every day without effort, is the customer's problem.
>>>
>>> Honda has spent quite a bit of time figuring out how to solve THEIR
>>> problems ($$$$$) in software. Whether it FIXES the problem, whether or
>>> not the car the customer gets back is the car the customer bought or
>>> THOUGHT he bought, doesn't matter to the new Honda.
>>
>> to be fair to honda, they don't actually make the battery cells, and a
>> lot of those are well below par of late. all kinds of manufacturers
>> [users] have been hit all across the board, not just honda.
>
> deliver--and we're supposed to be "fair to Honda"?
>
> The battery problem is Honda's problem, but instead the new Honda makes
> the customer pay the price. The REAL solution would be to give the
> customer what the customer actually paid for--but no, that would cost
> Honda money. No, it's better for HONDA that they spend as little as
> possible to fix the problem--and that means developing a one-time
> software fix instead of paying for parts to fix it.
>
> The Honda I knew would have been falling over themselves to apologize
> while they fitted a different battery that allowed the car to meet ALL
> performance specs as advertised, not just a "lasts the length of the
> federally mandated 8 year warranty (but doesn't do diddly to increase
> your gas mileage)" spec.
>
> Look: if Honda wants to play with the big boys, then they have to step
> up to the plate and play. They can't have it both ways. They can't
> commit to something, sell the hell out of it to hundreds of thousands of
> customers, then step back and point at their suppliers and shrug their
> shoulders.
>
>
>
>> now, many have worked with their supplier and will replace the defects
>> free of charge, makita for instance. so really, your criticism is
>> really directed to honda for /not/ doing the right thing with their
>> supplier, and not replacing sub-par battery packs.
>
we're on the same page re solution dude. i was only pointing out that
this is a problem across the board with rechargables, and not just honda
have been affected.
we also agree honda should step up to the plate and do the right thing
on replacement, but that's not what they've done, and it's not what
they're going to do going forward either based on what i can see. the
way they fucked their customer base over on transmissions [we know it's
deliberate because this crosses product lines, and is compounded by
their not supplying the after-market] is what killed it for me. that's
why i won't buy a new honda.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Michael
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-53A122....@news.eternal-september.org...
a highway properly. Once the battery gets toasted the system is constantly
charging a battery it never uses. My 1998 Taurus gets better gas mileage
than the 2006 Hybrid. Disgusting and I will NEVER own another Honda.
Period.
Al
>
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-53A122....@news.eternal-september.org...
>> In article <Xns9F79BA98...@208.90.168.18>,
>> Tegger <inv...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This one is just a software flash.
>>
>>
the transmission software update discussed in this thread it also
informs me of a "Product Update: Software to Improve Fuel Injector and
VTC Timing"
I'm not too concerned about the transmission thing because in 50 years I
have never "rapidly shifted between D-N-R at high RPM" If all they are
doing is changing the software so that I can't do what I wouldn't do
then I'll not ever be aware that they did it and it doesn't matter to
me. With Honda's transmission track record I'm afraid to not let them do
this to protect my warranty.
I am more concerned about the "product update" which wasn't mentioned by
the other posters. This one scares me because the CR-V does not have
any power to spare and this seems like it may involve a de-tuning. Here
is what the notice says:
What is the problem? On some 2010 CR-Vs, the fuel injector timing and
VTC timing at cold start may create deposits on the oil control rings
that could contribute to increased oil consumption.
The dealer will update the powertrain control module (PCM) software.
Does anyone have any further info on this, or has anyone let them do it?
Until I get convinced they are not going to cost me power or
responsiveness I'm not going to let them do it. On the other hand if if
somehow increases power I'll get to my friendly dealer tomorrow.
(BTW my "power" gripe is only from dead stop to 10 mph)