why are honda autos so trouble prone?

[doitmyself]

Originally Posted By: ram_man
I hope everyone knows that I actually really like honda and am not bashing them. I do know they have some trouble with the slush boxes I was just wondering why since the design seems pretty intelligent. Also all if their transmissions are built like manuals right? Something most companies do not do.


It would be nice if someone that REALLY knows about automatic transmission design could answer your good question.

Sometimes theory does not always work out in the real world. Take CVT transmissions for example. The companies that build them put out information that makes a lot of sense. But observe real world results, and you get a different perspective.

One thing I learned while shopping for a new vehicle the past 6 months is that it is hard to make a general statement that brand x or y is great or bad. For instance, many people claim that Subaru brand reliability is rock solid. The facts can prove otherwise.

Individual anecdotal stories are worth what they are (about 2 cents).

I hope someone answers your question.

 

[SOHCman]

Yes, they are auto manipulated manual transmissions. The reason the v6 cars fail more often is the extra strain they put on the trans. Also, you would think you could use MTF for more durability but it must require the ATF fore some reason.

My 240k accord is 5 speed thankfully, but if it was auto of any year I would add a big trans cooler for peace if mind.

 

[rjundi]

Originally Posted By: doitmyself


I hope someone answers your question.


The only person who actually knows the reason is a design engineer at Honda or a powertrain engineer who studied Honda's design. I doubt that person is on this board.

 

[doitmyself]

Originally Posted By: rjundi
Originally Posted By: doitmyself


I hope someone answers your question.


The only person who actually knows the reason is a design engineer at Honda or a powertrain engineer who studied Honda's design. I doubt that person is on this board.


True. I guess that I was thinking/hoping that a professional mechanic at an independent transmission rebuild shop would know about the design flaws of various transmissions and might catch this thread and chime in.

We do have a few pro mechanics here. Do you guys receive any feedback from your peers when you send units out for rebuild?

 

[mechanicx]

Yeah but a poor rating for something like transmissions, in the case meaning total transmission failure, should mean the car is unreliable and not recommended, not to mention most everything else was rated no better than very good or lower. Yet CR always rated the Hondas more reliable than most everything else and highly recommended them.

So you still have a pro-Asian car bias with CR or at the very least, meaningless info. What does poor, good and very good really mean? What is the real significance of it? It sure seems Honda got a pass on problem areas and extra maintenance items like timing belts and valve adjustments, ignition system etc then say a GM model didn't have. A person could easily bought a 2003 Grand Am and even with intake gasket repair(which doesn't always have to be done) ended up with a more reliable, and what I think was a better riding and driving car for less money even over 10-150k miles. You would never thought that was possible according to CR.

 

[mechanicx]

I think Honda didn't design the lubrication system properly and the gears would overheat. But there were probably a few other design issues. Maybe a Honda dealer tech like Eric the car guy might be more familiar with their issues, but I'm not sure if he was a transmission tech.

 

[mechanicx]

Also because of the manual transmission style gearshafts instead of planetary gears the drive clutches are smaller and higher stressed.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

All of them are automated manual transmissions?

 

[cathy]

Originally Posted By: ram_man
I am not really talking about the cars or when they were good ect..... I just want to know why honda transaxles are trouble prone? And which honda transaxles aren't trouble prone? Like my 05 civic how are those?


1) So current Odysseys share this design?
2) does honda fit have this problem?

 

[Hokiefyd]

I like how this thread has gone on for 5 pages and nobody has actually answered the question.

Honda's transmissions are automatically manipulated manual transmissions. There are pros and cons to this type of set up. There are no planetary gears in the transmission as with most other automatics. Saturn used a "similar" design in a Saturn-designed transmission back in the 1990s as well. Each gear has an associated clutch pack. Various electronic shift solenoids orchestrate a critically-timed dance of releasing one clutch pack while another clutch pack engages. If you take the time to learn how it works, it's actually kind of neat.

It's widely understood that the prevailing problem with Honda automatics back in the early 2000s (especially with the V-6 ones) is a lack of fluid flow to certain critical areas (especially bearings). A band-aid fix from Honda was a fluid jet "kit" that was installed to improve fluid flow to certain areas. In the 2004 timeframe, improvements to the transmission design were made which alleviated these problems. Honda has experienced other issues that are transmission-related, but are really caused by aggressive programming in attempt to increase fuel economy. The torque converter shudder is one of those; our 2005 Acura had that problem as well. The ECU reflash fixed that issue.

In addition to the aforementioned, Honda has also increased the number of shafts internal to the transmission, on which all of these gears operate. Our MDX, for example, has the newer 4-shaft transmission design. Some of the earlier V-6 models used a 3-shaft design, which was more stressed in that environment.

Most of the 4-cylinder models were not afflicted by the issues the V-6 models were. Of course there have still been failures. Everyone's got issues. Ford Fusions puke transmissions, Chrysler vans' transmissions have long been problematic, GM 4T40 and 4T60 models are known to be weak. It's simply the nature of the beast. Consumer Reports accurately notes that Honda transmission durability in the early 2000s period is pretty poor. In fact, most are rated as "Poor". Nothing is hidden; there is no conspiracy. Consumer Reports also accurately notes that Honda transmission durability since then is at least as good as industry average. Of course you'll still have vehicles that have early failures. Anyone with an axe to grind will use that as some sort of evidence. Most people see through that stuff quite easily, though.

After all, if any brand that has experienced early transmission failures is to be avoided, you wouldn't have a single choice in vehicle out there.

Both of ours are on the original transmissions. The Honda has 75,000 miles and the Acura has close to 95,000 miles. We look forward to another 100,000 miles on each.

 

[mechanicx]

I kind of did say that, poor lubrication, weak and overstressed clutches but you did explain it better. GM 4T40/45 is not weak or issue prone at all really. The 4T60s had some issues but not to the level or as much as Honda ATs. I don't think it's fair to draw comparisons especially to the 4T40 which I think is one of the better AT available. I still say Honda was given a pass by CR and others for transmission issues and other issues. High transmission failure rates and rating the car highly reliable does not fly.

 

[Hokiefyd]

The point is, you can Google "______ transmission problems" and get pages and pages of information. Unless anyone has information about the true number of failures, it's all internet conjecture anyway. It's not fair to draw comparisons on one transmission vs. another, simply because nobody has any real quantitative data (but the manufacturers). I simply noted that every manufacturer suffers transmission problems and if you aim to avoid any manufacturer with a problem transmission model in its history, you will have an extremely short list of potential choices.

The important part is that each of these manufacturers has learned from their mistakes in the past and has dramatically improved automatic transmission durability. Honda transmission problems are relatively uncommon anymore. Like any other manufacturer, it will take them a long time to live down the reputation.

Many people feel that GM gets the short end of the stick over cars they made 10 years ago. I feel the same here. I think Honda gets the short end of the stick over transmissions they made 10 years ago. Unfortunately for both camps, internet discussion keeps the flames fanned...and the fans flamed...I guess it works both ways!

 

[1999nick]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
All of them are automated manual transmissions?


This is the first time I have ever heard that Honda automatic transmissions are actually automated manual transmissions. I would like for someone to present evidence of this. It is very hard for me to believe this. No auto magazine has ever mentioned this.

 

[mechanicx]

Originally Posted By: 1999nick
Originally Posted By: Miller88
All of them are automated manual transmissions?


This is the first time I have ever heard that Honda automatic transmissions are actually automated manual transmissions. I would like for someone to present evidence of this. It is very hard for me to believe this. No auto magazine has ever mentioned this.


Magazine are a poor source of detailed information. I think they long been covering for any of Honda's shortcomings but I'll put that aside. GM, Ford etc basically developed and invented automatic transmissions. Honda didn't want to pay the cost to use others' ATs or pay for licensing of others patented designs, so they came up with their own design that uses gearshafts as a manual transmission does instead of planetary gears.

There's various sources for this information http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Honda_transmissions

Quote:
Honda has long built nearly all of its own automobile transmissions, unlike many other manufacturers which often source transmissions from other makers. Honda's automatic transmissions are unusual in that they do not use planetary gears like nearly all other makers. Instead, the Hondamatic and its successors use traditional, individual gears on parallel axes like a manual transmission, with each gear ratio engaged by a separate hydraulic clutch pack. This design is also noteworthy because it preserves engine braking by eliminating a sprag between first and second gears

Honda was forced to invent their new system due to the vast array of patents on automatic transmission technology held by BorgWarner and others.

Honda initially chose to integrate the transmission and engine block for its first application (in the N360) as in the Mini. The Hondamatic incorporated a lockup function, which Honda called a third ratio, and had manual gear selection. The company's early transmissions also used a patented torque converter which used stator force rather than hydraulic controls for shifting.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Honda's transmission type has been noted in numerous automotive media tests. Here's one. (Oh wait, this one speaks badly of Honda; it must be a fake, as all the media does is coverup for Honda's shortcomings!)

Honda's peculiar non-planetary five-speed automatic has the smallest ratio spread in the test, contributing to its back-of-the-pack performance ratings and worst-in-class EPA economy rankings of 21/31 mpg city/highway (despite which it topped its rivals, returning 23.4 mpg in our driving loops). And not only is the transmission shy a gear, "the 1-2-D3-D straight gear lever is useless for manual changes at a playful gait," noted St. Antoine.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/seda...l#ixzz2RnrbSFhI

 

[mechanicx]

The media rarely mentioned Honda's AT design over the many years it's been used or anything negative. 1 negative (or honest) comment for every 10 positive ones doesn't make a balanced trend.

 

[cchase]

I think part of the problem is again internet amplification.

There's an assumption in this thread that ALL Honda auto transmissions have already died and all the owners are on their third or fourth transmission.

So I'll be one to speak out that our 2003 V6 Accord is still on it's original, "black circle" troublesome transmission with 10 years and 80,000 miles of around town (and occasional long trip) driving. One of the standard long trips it goes on involves it shifting between 4th and 5th incessantly, fully loaded with 4 passengers and a full trunk.

I can't stand the transmission (for the shifting between 4th and 5th on long grinds and a plethora of other annoying habits) but it's still working the same as it was new.

 

[MarkM66]

Originally Posted By: Doog
Originally Posted By: grampi

I know for a lot of the newer vehicles fluid changes aren't recommended...ever, which I think is just begging for a transmission failure....I wonder how many of these so called bad transmissions are failing due to fluid/filter change neglect...


+1 Exactly. I have had 3 Hondas and did complete ATF exchanges with all of them every 50,000 miles. Never an issue. But that doesn't matter since this is a Honda bash thread.


Since you left out the information that might actually be beneficial; what 3 Honda's, and how many miles are on them?

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
1 negative (or honest) comment for every 10 positive ones doesn't make a balanced trend.


I never said it did. I simply stated that a magazine HAS mentioned it (the contrary was stated prior).

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
I like how this thread has gone on for 5 pages and nobody has actually answered the question.

Honda's transmissions are automatically manipulated manual transmissions. There are pros and cons to this type of set up. There are no planetary gears in the transmission as with most other automatics. Saturn used a "similar" design in a Saturn-designed transmission back in the 1990s as well. Each gear has an associated clutch pack. Various electronic shift solenoids orchestrate a critically-timed dance of releasing one clutch pack while another clutch pack engages. If you take the time to learn how it works, it's actually kind of neat.

It's widely understood that the prevailing problem with Honda automatics back in the early 2000s (especially with the V-6 ones) is a lack of fluid flow to certain critical areas (especially bearings). A band-aid fix from Honda was a fluid jet "kit" that was installed to improve fluid flow to certain areas. In the 2004 timeframe, improvements to the transmission design were made which alleviated these problems. Honda has experienced other issues that are transmission-related, but are really caused by aggressive programming in attempt to increase fuel economy. The torque converter shudder is one of those; our 2005 Acura had that problem as well. The ECU reflash fixed that issue.

In addition to the aforementioned, Honda has also increased the number of shafts internal to the transmission, on which all of these gears operate. Our MDX, for example, has the newer 4-shaft transmission design. Some of the earlier V-6 models used a 3-shaft design, which was more stressed in that environment.

Most of the 4-cylinder models were not afflicted by the issues the V-6 models were. Of course there have still been failures. Everyone's got issues. Ford Fusions puke transmissions, Chrysler vans' transmissions have long been problematic, GM 4T40 and 4T60 models are known to be weak. It's simply the nature of the beast. Consumer Reports accurately notes that Honda transmission durability in the early 2000s period is pretty poor. In fact, most are rated as "Poor". Nothing is hidden; there is no conspiracy. Consumer Reports also accurately notes that Honda transmission durability since then is at least as good as industry average. Of course you'll still have vehicles that have early failures. Anyone with an axe to grind will use that as some sort of evidence. Most people see through that stuff quite easily, though.

After all, if any brand that has experienced early transmission failures is to be avoided, you wouldn't have a single choice in vehicle out there.

Both of ours are on the original transmissions. The Honda has 75,000 miles and the Acura has close to 95,000 miles. We look forward to another 100,000 miles on each.


So kind of like a DCT or DSG transmission, but with a torque converter instead of a dry clutch? Explains why it shift so quick!

I'll have to read up.

Seems that the general consensus on the honda forums is that the transmissions got better for 2005.