Any insight on new Honda reliability?

Status
Not open for further replies.
We have an '00 Civic EX coupe with the manual transmission with 122,000+ miles. It has been stunningly reliable. It's gotten oil changes every 3-4k, and went in to a dealer for the 30k, 60k, and 90k major services. Never a single mechanical problem. The only work we've had done to it was some exhaust parts ~92k, and I put some new front brakes on earlier this year. The 105k service was $450 at a good indy for the timing belt, water pump, and the accessory belts, that wasn't too bad. I think it might have a bad engine mount right now, gonna have it checked out soon.

jeff
 
Gentlemen,
Original owner of a 2000 Honda Prelude, but with a 5 speed manual transmission. Car has ~66,000 miles on the clock and runs just as well as when I got it. Actually, it runs a little better; it feels like it is fully broken in now.

It has been serviced every 7,500 miles with an oil and filter change midway between then on dino 5-30 or 10-30. It has only not started one time...when I had a dead battery. Brake pads have been replaced on front once already, and the rear just last week. The only thing that has gone out on it is the primary oxygen sensor, which also was replaced just last week. With the new sensor, I do detect a little more pep.

It is without a doubt the most reliable car I have ever owned, and will probably never sell it. I never had any luck but bad luck with cars before (GM and VW), which surely influences my perceptions. But I am amazed at this engine and transmission in this car. The interior is pretty spartan without alot of luxuries. And the ride is firm, to put it mildly. But it is a DRIVER'S car, as far as I am concerned. For driving pleasure alone, I am 100% satisfied.

They don't make them anymore, a casualty of the SUV craze, I suppose. To me a safe car is nimble, quick, with outstanding brakes. I have avoided a couple accidents over the years, which I don't know I could have with a lumbering automobile. This Honda Prelude is what suits me. It also get me about 30 mpg, but my driving is mostly highway for my commute.

Do I sound like a commercial for Honda? Perhaps. But after what I went through with my previous cars, I feel like I have died and gone to automotive heaven. Other makes are good, too, besides Honda. I won't denigrate them. But I'm a satisfied Honda driver.

Jett Rink in Bristol
 
Pablo -

pat.gif


Indeed Dave's post was a PRELUDE to mine.
 
Hondas are decent cars, reguardless of whether or not they contribute to the american economy. (which they obviously do not).

So lets talk about build quality. Hondas are well-built vehicles designed to last 300k miles or more.

Domestic cars are cheaply built vehicles meant to last 300k miles or more.

You worry about changing a timing belt on a Honda (60k) before you worry about rebuilding a transmission on a GM (Around 100k for normal use).

You worry more about the rest of the drivetrain falling apart (Honda) before you worry about the interior systems going haywire and causing you to endure full-heat in the middle of summer.

Sure. GM has its fair share of problems, but I'd rather be forced to roll down my windows and enjoy the open air of a highway than be stuck on the side of the road holding a sign and pleading for help from a wrecker.

P.S. I learned to drive on a '97 Accord V6 fully loaded. Green with gray-leather interior. That was a **** nice car. I put it through its paces and it felt fast when I was 15.

Since I've owned a 1991 Grand Prix 3.1L MPFI, a '98 Monte Carlo 3.1L SFI motor and a 2006 Cobalt w/ a 2.2L Ecotec.

The GM motors are practically bulletproof. I never saw or heard of any service records for the Accord... but my parents were very vague and didn't know the first thing about cars. Consumer Reports readers if I ever saw them.

Anyways, GM builds a killer drivetrain. Even if they -do- borrow from Honda (Equinox). Ya'll have a good one.

[ November 29, 2005, 07:18 AM: Message edited by: Malaclypse ]
 
Malaclypse;

I'd say that Hondas contribute about as much to the American economy as GM cars do...my Honda was built in Ohio by Americans using a lot of American, Canadian, and probably Mexican content. My Chevy was built in Canada by Canadians using a lot of American, Canadian, and Mexican parts.

Not sure what the difference is really. Except perhaps which executives pockets are being lined, about which I couldn't care less.

I agree that GM powertrains are good - recent intake manifold problems aside. They definitely don't get the credit they deserve, esp when it comes to fuel mileage.
 
I get the impression that GM automatics will last well beyond 100K if maintained.

I know someone who has a 1998 or 1997 Malibu with 120K on it and he's never even had the (4T40E) transmission serviced.

Automatics are something that GM knows how to do right.
 
I'll have to vouch for that. My '90 Cutlass I just sold last week had 201K on it and the original, never touched, 4 speed automatic. Just drained the pan and filter every 50K or so. Have to go with Matt89 on this one, Honda contributes a LOT to the American economy. I guess all those factory workers aren't getting pay checks from Honda.....then the trickle down economics...suppliers, builders, logistics, etc. etc. Yes they do indeed. If you look back, this was the first argument made by die hard American car owners some 15 to 20 years ago, and it was true, all the money sales went to Japan. Now full score ahead and it's now the profits that go to Japan. I kind of link their success to adapting to the mindset of us Americans....they saw a problem (cars not being made in America) built some plants and started making cars over here and PRESTO....they are selling more than they ever have because they have slowly changed the mindset.
 
"whether or not they contribute to the american economy. (which they obviously do not)."

What? American Honda is the second largest employer in Torrance, Ca, behind, guess who, Toyota Motor Sales. The cars are not just assembled here, but designed here as well.
 
I'll have to give Honda a "plug" for stepping up to the plate on an auto tranny issue I experienced.
Our daughter bought a used (one owner) 2000 Accord LX 4 cylinder/automatic about 16 months ago. It had 75K on it when we purchased it. About 1 month ago, she calls from college to tell me it was "shifting funny". Turns out "funny" means it is slamming into gears. The car now has 96,000 miles, and the engine runs perfectly, uses no oil, etc.

Since we're not the original owner, and until now it had never been to a Honda dealer, we were not notified from Honda that they "extended" the warranty on select 2000-2001 Accord transaxles. I found this info on the internet. They cover them for 7 years or 100,000 miles.

Long story short - I called the local Honda dealer in her college town, explained what was going on, and they asked me to have her bring it in.

She stopped in, a tech drove it a couple of miles, and said, "yep, it's going bad". No other questions asked, they ordered a new transaxle and instatlled it one week later. Total cost - zero. Covered under the special extended transaxle warranty. By the way, the service advisor offered me this info, without me having to say that I had researched & was aware of the extended warranty.

After reading what some VW & Toyota owners go through for their "sludge" problems (manufacturer denial), it is refreshing to see a manufacturer step to the plate, admit a problem, and take care of their customer. When the Accord needs to be replaced, guess what brand of car my daughter will most likely buy? Good job Honda.
 
market

that auto transmission sure did break in time as it was 4k miles from losing that extended warranty. close call
cool.gif
 
I have a bad feeling about Hondas. One friend with an Acura TL had a 5spd auto transmission failure out 2500 miles from home. Covered by warranty. The dealer felt that it was just another of many transmission failures. Another with an Odyssey 5 spd auto had a catastrophic failure on a freeway. No forward. Only reverse. No nothing offered by the dealer. Cost about $4000 to fix the transmission. And now, I hear about the unreliable transmissions only after I bought one.

Recent Consumer Reports online (not print copy) information shows declining transmission reliability.

01-02 MDX: solid black dot the worst
03 MDX: half red circle. not the best

99-03: solid or half black dots, very bad.
04: half red circle, not good for new

Pilot: 03 clear circle, for this new is bad
 
I've noticed several similarities between Ford and Honda. Iffy automatic transmissions that require special fluid is one of them. 5W-20 oil is another.
 
Sounds like they've got a real problem with those trannies. They'd better get that fixed, quick, or their reputation WILL suffer.

Other than that I wouldn't have any problems w/ Honda.

Nissan/Infiniti is another story. They used to be one of the best, now they are much less so - they have traded quality for cost/product cycle/who-knows-what? BMW's also gone downhill.

- Glenn
 
It all depends on the model, just like any manufacturer. IMHO, I think the Pilot is the worst Honda in quality. They seem to continue to have the same problems with them year after year. It's like Honda just doesn't care.
{transmission, front end vibration at 70 mph, etc.)

Go the Ridgeline forum see how many owners have had their floors filled with water.
 
Hey, just out of curiosity. What are you guys' definition of reliable or quality?

I personally demand every car (even a poorly maintainted crap) to last 120k at least, and 200k is my bare minimum for calling something reliable. Not only the powertrain (engine, tranny) should hold up, but also the bushings, spring, power steering, AC, fans, and electrical system. (basically, every non-wear and tear part).

Maybe I am being too demanding, but I think that is a very fair standard today.
 
It depends on how sensitive you are to the inevitable deterioration of those parts, particularly some of the steering and suspension components.

If all you care about is that it goes from "A" to "B", then (for example) you probably won't care if at 170K it's still got the original shocks/struts in it.

I believe I've already told this story here in another post but I will tell it again:

A friend of mine and I were discussing changing the shocks and struts in my 1988 Mustang GT. A friend of his pipes up and says, "I had 150K on my Toyota Camry and it still had the original struts in it. They didn't need to be replaced.".

No, and neither did the struts/shocks in my Mustang NEED to be replaced. After all, it still moved and ran with the original ones in there and it still passed the safety inspection, it just handled like crap and my expectations are such that I'm not happy with that.

Neither, also, did I NEED to replace the steering rack bushings in my Mustang with new ones, but the slight amount of play in the steering was getting on my nerves and I thought replacing them might fix it (it did, much to my relief).
 
I just recently purchased a used accord and it has been amazingly trouble free for the first year. It is not a newer honda but from my research one of the best cars available in 1997. If I where in the market for a newer car I would pick Toyota. Newer I define as 2002-2006. I think Honda engines are great and they are the milage champs. Toyota is the quality champ at this time in my opinion. However Toyota does have some losers in the line up so do your research very carefully.
 
To paraphrase the old racing line: Quality costs money. How much quality do you want to buy?

Any oem has the resources and abilities to create an extremely high quality car, in my opinion. It is a matter of hiring the best people, specifying the highest quality supplier parts, designing the best factory and filling it with the best equipment - and spending a great deal on product testing.

I've always though GM, with the enormous resources it had, should have been one of the world's great companies. Unfortunately it made the tactical error of putting too much money into shareholders' and management's pockets, instead of into product quality (and other product areas, too). Now it seems they may have gotten the message, but also that it might have been too late.

Some smaller manufacturers, to make an exciting product, have to put so much of their resources into design and engineering that there is simply a limited amount to keep the quality at top levels - I'm thinking BMW here, and I think that is also the approach Nissan has taken, with Renault's help. In both cases it has led to lots of exciting products but increasing imperfections in quality.

Some are just too small to compete in a super-competitive market. They become "niche" manufacturers, and some don't survive or get eaten up.

Toyota is in an enviable position. They have built an enormous infrastructure of quality, and are now set to surpass GM as the biggest in the world, too. They will be very difficult to compete with. They also have a relatively concentrated product line, with an efficient approach to the sharing of hardware between lines and brands.

One really interesting exception is Porsche. Very small, but also very high recently in every standard of quality.

As for Honda, I can see that they might be getting squeezed a little. They were very late to the SUV/Truck party, which Toyota certainly was not. They have the disadvantage of the domestic Japanese economic malaise, which the Americans/Euros don't, and at the same time there is almost a revolution underway in the car market in general - in styling, versatility, performance, and variety - which has to pressure R&D costs upwards. I can see how things might be more difficult for Honda, right now, than Toyota - but it looks like they are executing very, very well.

- Glenn
 
From what I read on acurazine, it seems like the "new and redesigned/improved" Honda V6 tranny that fixed the problem is not only the mechanical or electrical, but in the software.

They now retard the heck out of the ignition when shift, and possibliy rev match between shift (learned from Nissan?) to reduce wear on the tranny's clutch pack.

Some complained the lost of kick and performance, but most are happy about the new found (or long lost?) reliability.


BTW: If you consider Integra a Honda - 166k miles with only routine maintanence, a replaced radiator (pre-emptive replacement due to visible crack on the tank), and a busted AC compressor pipe. Never in the dealer for any problems other than rattle and squeak.

UOA from a 12K miles M1 5W30 OCI is almost like a VOA
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top