Sounds good to me, I've taken two Odysseys from the low 100k to 230k miles. The 07 has the better "Ridgeline" transmission... failures of that transmission are about as common as with any other vehicle.
Last edited:
2007 Honda Odyssey as daily driver?
- Thread starter HawkeyeScott
- Start date
Odysseys are overall, IME, a vehicle that will give you some problem areas that will need work. I have had to reseal roof seams, fix sliding door latch, replace sliding door rollers, replace power steering hoses.
The high mile vcm engines often have wear on the front camshaft. When I found wear on my 2010, I tried to order one but they were out of stock. I looked for a good one at the junkyard... Had to go through FIVE engines that all had cam wear before finding a decent camshaft.
The PCV system isn't great, IMO. Usually, the head with the PCV will be covered by brown varnish. I'd recommend replacing the PCV valve immediately... Maybe it would help?
The high mile vcm engines often have wear on the front camshaft. When I found wear on my 2010, I tried to order one but they were out of stock. I looked for a good one at the junkyard... Had to go through FIVE engines that all had cam wear before finding a decent camshaft.
The PCV system isn't great, IMO. Usually, the head with the PCV will be covered by brown varnish. I'd recommend replacing the PCV valve immediately... Maybe it would help?
I may have argued about this on here before. I don't agree with the "automated manual" characterization.
You’re free to disagree, but MolaKule even posted an exploded image of the Honda transmission IIRC and showed where it has shift forks and pads like a manual transmission. They do not have planetaries like standard automatics made in the US.
Yes, automated manual, to me, is a dual clutch. Torque converter = slush box auto regardless. I had this vehicle/trans, it does have a different feel.
It has a shift fork, for reverse gear. But it's not using shift forks and synchros to shift through the forward gears.
I don't agree that the defining feature of an automatic vs. "automated manual" is the use of planetary gears. I suppose it's a semantic argument, but my point is, I don't agree with the semantics. There are unique design features in the Honda transmission, but it makes more sense just to explain what they are than to say it's "more like an automated manual".
I think MolaKule was called out for his terminology ("Step-Shift" ?) in some of these threads, but I don't know where one with an exploded view of a Honda transmission is.
No he didn't. (I was part of the argument you're talking about) Back in the early Accords that may have been the case, but we're talking 1990-1993 (Don't quote me on that). All the newer 5 speeds just use a separate clutch pack per gear and there is a separate gear for every speed. The biggest difference between the Honda boxes and a 'normal' automatic box is that there are no planetaries in them and they use one set of gears per speed much like a manual box.
FWIW, I don't agree with the 'automated manual' designation either. It is just an autobox in a different configuration.
Last edited:
