Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
As for the engine problem reported against Toyota 3.0L V6 engines, it's because those owners didn't even change oil for 20k-30k miles. I have owned 3 cars equipted with them engine and none of them has any engine issues.
My 01 Civic LX (auto) is consistently getting 38-40mpg on the freeway (70-80mph). It would drop to 35-36mpg if I cruise at 90-95mph. When I cruised at 55-60mph, I alway got 42-43mpg.
The trend for longer oil change intervals will increase in the future. Oil sensors can allow some cars to go to 15k miles without a change. This is progress for the consumer and the environment, but damaging for the oil change industry. I wonder why people aren't as passionate about changing the brake fluid.
The only cars that get better fuel econ these days are the Corolla and Echo. Both are quite a bit smaller inside and are not as fun to drive IMHO (I own a Corolla).
As far as other maintenance intervals go, their is nothing to really contend. Brake fluid isn't under the same conditions as oil so it's fine to change it every 30k. Same goes for the tranny.
Lastly, do you never see temperatures that exceed 90 or go below freezing? You never encounter stop and go traffic? You never exceed 60 mph on the highway? If you do encounter these things, than how can you consider yourself under "normal" circumstances? These all fall under severe circumstances. Ultimately, it is your car so if you don't care how it lasts past 100k than don't worry about it.
I had read in a car price book that Hondas don't have any roadside assistance, one of the only carmakers out there who don't. I find that kind of disappointing actually.
My experince with Honda engines is that they last a really long time. Even well maintained Civics from the 1980s routinely have more than 300,000 km/180,000 miles on them.
Basically if you are only going to have one car, the Civics are better - more middle of the road - but a little plain vanilla - and the xA is a lot of fun to play with.
I'll let you know if the fun wears off, and what the gas mileage is.
So I don't think Honda would want the potential disaster of being known as makers of engines only lasting 50k miles just to gain the image of needing less maintenance. Therefore I believe their decision to recommend a long oil change interval was studied very well and it's a decision that meant they truly believe their engines will perform just as well with the longer oil change intervals.
Of course they care! They have built their reputation on building bulletproof engines that go 250,000 miles and more.
Why would they want to risk ruining that by suggesting oil change intervals that are too long?
Ask anyone with a really high mileage engine, Honda or otherwise, and most will have done more oil changes than fewer. Most engines will last a long time today, even the cheap little Alpha 1.5 in the Hyundai Accent will last 240,000 km/ 150,000 miles if properly looked after.
Civics do run forever anyway. I would guess it's because when they get to a higher mileage, owners become more careful with them and treat them better.
Honda KNOWS where their market is or they wouldn't advertise their reliability in commercials. They are not going to risk that for $20 oil changes.
Yes the metallurgy in the newer motors is excellent and hard wearing. Yes today's oils are vastly superior and formulated to withstand far more abuse. And yes today's cars have more technology on board to optimise combustion and overall engine performance. But at the end of the day, oil will decide if that engines lasts or not. And statistically a small portion will fail, even if 10,000 miles is the new interval based on all this technology. Statistically, the number of failures would diminish as the suggested service interval decreased.
So why take a chance at all? Look at the engine sludging over at Toyota (other engines also sludge we just have not heard about them as much). It shows they goofed and now some people think twice about buying a used late model Camry.
Honda already has serious problems with failed trannies on its V6 powered cars (and I am also hearing of premature failure on a number of I4 trannies as well). And keep in mind these are failing well past the warrantee period in many cases. But people buy Hondas to last and 100,000 miles is not good enough.
- Engines are built to higher (closer) tolerances, so fewer contaminants get into the oil.
- Engines are running cleaner, due to advances in engine control electronics, therefore reducing oil contamination.
Also, I'm sure they have done extensive testing (much like CR did with their oil test) and found that the oil maintains the vast majority of its lubricating qualities well past the 10k mark.
One engine go's 300,000 and the other 275,000?
Who really knows?
Transmissions on the other had are another story. I do not like any of Hyundai's trannies. Autos are jerky and not very robust while IMHO the manuals are just about the least precise on the market. Meanwhile the 5 speed in the Civic is as good as it gets anywhere south of a BMW 3 series and the Civic auto is also respectable.
I do agree with you on one point. The new Civic front end and alloy wheels is much nicer. I haven't seen it in person yet though.
I have been to Holland (Amsterdam and The Hague)during the mid to late 1990s, but most of the cars there were quite different from here. Lots of Fords, Volvos an VWs. The only Toyota's I would see were Carina and Corollas. It was very rare to see a Honda other than the old style Civc liftback.
And we live in GA. I just liked the Netherlands flag. Wanted to be different. But I LOVE the USA.
Congrats on your news, by the way.
Thanks.
I just noticed this on my wife's car the other night & it seems odd that it does not light up. I checked the fuse box & owner's manual & no mention of a floor gear shift light or replacement bulb in mentioned.
Thanks in advance-
I looked at the Protege but I went with the Civic for the following reasons:
1. 2004 Civic vs. a 2003 Protege is gonna be worth more. I'm fickle when it comes to cars so that is a consideration.
2. Better mpg.
3. Better Dealer. The #1 reason by far. Both of the local Mazda dealers are unsatisfactory to say the least. The local Honda dealer is a very good establishment, even if they do tend to beat you up on trades. This will be the 3rd new Honda I've bought there in the last 3 years (told you I was fickle). I've always used the same salesman. Not that he's a great salesman (ie a MAckabee or a Cliffy) but he's a nice guy that I feel comfortable with.
I'll probably drop by from time to time with other impressions...as long as the boring oil change interval discussions are the exception rather than the rule.
Which Toyota engines have you seen sludged? I undertand that it's mostly the Camry engines that have the sludge problem. I drive a '98 Corolla, should I be concerned about engine sludge?
p.s. thanks for the reply to the timing chain/belt question.
The Civic is a great car. I have a 2003 with the 115 hp motor. It now has 17000 km on it. It has been excellent. Great fuel econ, fun to drive and very comfortable - and with the flat floor the only true five passenger vehicle in its class.
Honda's are truly impressive. They all have that nice feel to them that American brands could never hope to replicate and a certain crispness that is missing in Toyota's and Nissans (although those are great cars too). The Mazda Protege drives really well and is very well built but is thirsty and resale is dismal My family has owned Hondas since the early 1990s and they have all been good cars.
Enjoy.
I have a 98 Civic LX and my floor-mounted shifter does illuminate at night (although it doesn't really show what gear you're in down there, the PRNDL indicators in the dash cluster do that). It sounds like you have a burnt-out lightbulb.