Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

2 New Transmissions for my 2001 Acura TL - Help

shirley17shirley17 Posts: 4
edited March 24 in Acura
Has anyone out there had transmission problems for new TLs? At 20,000 miles my transmission started to slip and just rev. when it was switching gears. Took to dealer and they said it was a bad transmission. They ordered new one from Honda and replaced it. Very poor service at dealer, would not call to inform me of when to expect car. A week went by and I called and they said it was ready. Drove car one mile and check engine and TCS light went on. Drove back to dealer and they tested it on computer and said bad clutch in transmission. Car has been there 6 days still again no call. They called today to see how service was last week and they got an ear full. Service Manager called and acted like no big deal and said they just ordered me another "new" transmission. I don't think I have any recourse regarding this problem do I? I'm extremely frustrated and want to sell the car immediately. I don't believe they are putting a "new" transmission into car. Any advice on what to do or how to sell car after it has had these problems? Thanks, Shirley


  • arkainzeyearkainzeye pittsburgh paPosts: 473
    make sur eyou get a copy of everything they do, each and every single time. cause 3 stikes and their out! if you have one more problem and you have record of it, you could declare use the lemon law. espeically with something that big. i would ask to see the invoice on the "new" transmission, AND talk to the regional person in charge of acuras' in your area. cause who knows maybe they are just Rebuilding it, and rebuilt it wrong last time.
  • MrShift@EdmundsMrShift@Edmunds Posts: 43,641
    Good advice but keep in mind that Lemon Laws vary from state to state. So get a copy for your state and study what it actually takes for you to qualify as the owner of a car that can be bought back under the Lemon Laws.
  • 8u6hfd8u6hfd Posts: 1,391
    As they vary from state to state, there is a limit on the age of the car, which the lemon law applies
  • bodydoublebodydouble Posts: 801
    Actually I don't think Honda is obligated to give you a new tranny. In fact I think the general policy is to replace with a remanufactured tranny.
    Some will argue that once they've rebuilt it from scratch, it's as good as new. Well, I suppose it has to be better than the one that just failed! We had a '90 Civic that needed a tranny transplant, and the "new" one had problems too, just different problems! So I certain know how you feel about wanting to sell the car.
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    here is an excerpt from my lemon law/breach of warranty case reports relating to transmissions. This is my opinion, as entered in court proceedings:

    I confirmed through comparison of the part number used in the transmission replacement that, in fact, a “new” transmission was not used in the replacement operation, even though the vehicle had only xx miles at the initial failure. A “remanufactured” transmission was used and several points come to light on this issue:
    - A remanufactured transmission uses a transmission housing from unknown origin, application of vehicle and mileage on the “donor” vehicle.
    - A remanufactured transmission’s internal components are usually only replaced if they are “out of specs” with a certain requirements - obviously not the same wear and tolerance specifications as a new transmission.
    - A vehicle with a remanufactured transmission, especially a newer vehicle such as this, bears the burden of “not being in original condition” and subsequently assumes a loss in value of at least 40% - considering there are no other contributing factors as is not the case on this vehicle.
    An educated consumer or used car manager, upon having the ability to compare this vehicle to one that is similar but is equipped with the original transmission, would choose the original vehicle. Even if the mileage on the vehicle with the original transmission was more than on the remanufactured unit, a buyer can be certain the original transmission is built to tighter tolerances and constructed by the vehicle’s manufacturer – not an “aftermarket” transmission-rebuilding factory.
  • bodydoublebodydouble Posts: 801
    That's interesting.

    IMO though, that 40% loss in value seems high for a car with only a rebuilt tranny. Also, on resale, I don't think you have to disclose to a buyer that the car has had a "new" tranny, unless he asks specifically.
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    but my appraisal of the value loss comes from (especially dealing with an Acura/Honda product) having 100 to choose from at auction with no history of substantial defects and that one with three rebuilt or reman transmissions. Why buy it?

    As a dealer, I would fear someone check ing the warranty history (easily done) and walking around the car. Looks bad from a reputation standpoint, too. (That dealer is selling junk/lemon cars!)
  • shirley17shirley17 Posts: 4
    Thanks for all the information. Well, it's been 9 days since the last failure and still do not have my car back. 2nd trans. came into dealer on Monday and they have not completed it yet. After reading the above messages, I more than ever want to sell it, but not sure to whom, i.e., private or dealer. The disclosing of the 2 trans. makes me uncomfortable selling to private. I feel I've got the total screw either way. Not sure what I'll do IF I ever get the car back. Beware of Acura service in West Covina, CA.
  • MrShift@EdmundsMrShift@Edmunds Posts: 43,641
    I agree with bodydouble on this one...a 40% diminution of value for a factory reman transmission is really a stretch. I feel that if you had two identical cars, and one advertised with a Honda reman transmission, that you wouldn't have to reduce the price anywhere near that much before someone chose it over a similar vehicle with original transmission. In fact, you probably wouldn't have to reduce it at all, because you wouldn't have to tell anyone about it if you didn't wish to.

    Now if the car was advertised as a "lemon buy back" and had THAT stigma on it, you would be required to divulge that, and even if you explained that it was only for a reman transmission, that might hurt the value more.

    Similar situation is a car that is "totalled" because someone stole the interior out of it. So interior is replaced, car is good as new, but it's still branded as "salvage" and that hurts value.
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    I won't argue with your perceptions. I consult for a living and express opinions during testimony in court. It is my opinion, and only my opinion, as an appraiser.

    It's not up for argument since it's only my opinion. My opinion is the only one that counts when I'm on the witness stand. If I choose to devalue an Acura 40% because most other Acuras are perfect, then that's just the way I think.

    From the consumer's perspective, try selling a car at anywhere near book value after disclosing the true history of the car in question.
  • MrShift@EdmundsMrShift@Edmunds Posts: 43,641
    well of course I understand. In court it's all about who "buys it or doesn't" Been there, done that.
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    and I certainly did not mean to appear snippy towards you. I get torn apart by defense attorneys who want me to concoct some rocket science formula for devaluation. Not going to happen - it's not a science, it's an art. A simple art. With lemon lawed and warranty breached vehicles, and of course shady vehicles sold through dealer fraud, it's very simple. Why would anyone give a fair value for a vehicle with problems when the person could get 100 more, just like it, with a substantial warranty history? They wouldn't.

    It seems defense attorneys are under the impression that a dealer HAS to give you book value for your vehicle (they don't as we all know) and that all vehicles at an auction sell for the same price. Were that the case, they'd sell vehicles as a lot purchase instead of individually.
  • MrShift@EdmundsMrShift@Edmunds Posts: 43,641
    no I didn't think you were snippy at all, but thanks.

    But that's true, every used car needs to be looked at individually.

    Personally, by my own ethical standards, if it takes the dealer ten tries to find a good transmission, and the trans. finally works perfectly for a reasonable amount of time, I would feel under no obligation to reveal this to the new buyer, as they are receiving a good car and are thus not an aggrieved party.

    The way the story here has been revealed makes me suspect that the dealer is not putting his full attention and resources into solving the problem.
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    but consider this -

    Another opinion of mine:

    "Based on the intent and purpose, (manufacturer's) factory warranty has been proven ineffective given that some of the conditions and complaints raised by (the owner) still persist today. The fact that these complaints and service visits are now registered on the vehicle’s warranty history, which is available to any consumer, detracts strongly from the vehicle’s value.

    The complaint and repair history of this vehicle is considerable. Recurrent failures are documented as well as the manufacturer-authorized repair facility’s inability to correct the issues. Attempted repairs have not been long lasting or successful.

    The future performance of a vehicle is usually a direct reflection of its past. Based on my experience as a service manager, and given the substantial history of malfunctions, this vehicle will continue to fail."
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    I'm working on case reports at home today and I'm taking frequent Edmunds breaks - I'll check back with you.
  • MrShift@EdmundsMrShift@Edmunds Posts: 43,641
    Well if the complaints were:




    this could certainly deter a potential buyer; however, you would have to presume the above before considering a diminution of value.

    If the complaints are about rattles and a "thumpedly thump" and the left rear speaker, well, I don't think that constitutes anything serious enough to affect value. And if the dealer successfully completed the repair,then I don't see any loss of value either.
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    consider this - if you are a consumer on a Honda lot and you're looking at a used/certified Accord and you have two to choose from. One is perfect - maintenance only, not even a power mirror replacement. The other one has had three transmissions installed in 25,000 miles - 4 total. Which one do you want, and who takes the hit for the car sitting on the lot and not being sold? The dealer? Nope - they wouldn't have bought it at auction. The auction? Nope - they get a flat fee, they don't care. The original owner - you bet.

    Again, my opinion, and the only one that counts to me, considering I get paid for my opinions.
  • MrShift@EdmundsMrShift@Edmunds Posts: 43,641
    Well I still don't get the logic of that one. If the two cars are identical, who is to say the "good" Accord won't burp up its transmission, since the identical Accord already gave up two? If anything, viewing these two cars would make me not want an Accord period.

    See what I'm getting at? What I see as a consumer is "Accord transmission problems" that affect the entire line of cars--at least from my limited perspective on that used car lot.

    the only time I see diminution of value is when the car has been literally diminished in some way, in safety, performance or cosmetics.

    This Accord finally got a good trans installed, so it's just as good as the other one. What's the difference now? Maybe the car with the new trans with fewer miles is the BETTER buy!
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    Honda Accords don't puke their transmissions - why would you buy an Accord with a history of transmission problems when you could get 200 of them with clean records? Additionally, based on my experience, which is a point that cannot be argued, remanufactured transmissions are inferior to original equipment, for the previously-stated reasons. I'd rather have a car with 60,000 miles and the original trans than a 40,000 mile car with a reman.

    In my line of work, I do not even consider damage and other cosmetic factors. I deal with vehicles with gross, massively negative warranty histories - cosmetics are not a factor.

    It's very simple - I don't look at a vehicle (or its history) in order to do a used car eval - the normal, carpets, seats, paint, tires, windshield - none of that matters - I deal with the difference in value between what the consumer paid and what the consumer got. If you wish to continue this discussion, we can do so off line - I prefer not to argue the very basis for my job in a national forum - I don't evaluate used cars for trade in - it's different!
  • shirley17shirley17 Posts: 4
    Wow, I've enjoyed your messages back and forth. But wanted to briefly update. Yesterday, day 20, I called dealer for update and they advised had to now order a "speed sensor" that controls speedometer. Apparently, dealer cracked it putting in and out transmissions. They thought it should be in today. Dealer called me and said part wouldn't be in until 2nd week of July!!!! I've already registered a complaint with the Acura Rep. on-line and am awaiting return call. If you read this tonight, please give me any advice on my conversation with Acura. I have read about the lemon laws and might approach it that way. But basically I would like them to restore my faith in Acura and replace the car (which I doubt will happen). Because I don't have faith in my vehicle any more. I frequently drive across the AZ desert to visit family with my two young children and now am afraid to do that in my Acura....Thanks as always, Shirley
This discussion has been closed.