Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Honda Accord Quality Control Issues
This discussion has been closed.
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
(Sorry, the link was too long to post. But the article is on the front page under the Car News section)
Vehicles covered by the extended warranty include:
2000 - 2001 Honda Accord, Odyssey and Prelude
2000 - 2002 and some 2003 Acura 3.2 TL
2001 - 2002 and some 2003 Acura 3.2 CL
While only two percent of these vehicles have experienced these transmission problems, American Honda will provide extended transmission warranties on all potentially affected vehicles. "Our priorities are making sure our customers are taken care of and reassured they can continue to depend on their Honda or Acura automobile for a long time to come," said Tom Elliott, executive vice president for American Honda."
Still no word on if this means only V6 transmissions, though. Both of the articles quoted Honda as saying any 2000 - 2001 automatic transmission Accord, Odyssey, and Prelude owner. I imagine that details about whether it transfers or is limited to original buyers, etc. will come out in the letter.
It is interesting that AutoWeek's version stated that "There is usually plenty of warning to the driver that the transmission is not operating properly, such as slow or erratic shifting, giving them ample time to take the vehicle in for service."
They finally addressed the relative safety question in my mind - hurray!!!!
You, on the other hand seem intent in slamming Hondas...that's fine. It is easy to spread fear and panic in a public forum and if that is your intension, you are doing a good job.
I still maintain...the VAST MAJORITY of the owners of these cars won't have problems. That is my only point.
It does now appear that Honda has recognized these isolated problems and is taking responsibility. I am very happy to see this happen.
vrmac...I agree...sharing my personal observations is, indeed, non emperical fact and is based strictly on what I see. I have never denied that there have been transmissions with problems. All transmissions will have an ocassional glitch. I do see now that perhaps these problems were greater than I thought.
rbruehl, even though your troubled Honda is long gone and has been replaced with a Toyota, you continue to lurk in these forums and take every opportunity to tell and retell your tired story of woe over and over and over. I don't understand your crusade..that's all.
As far as Honda bashing goes, I don't think anyone is here to bash just for the sake of doing it. I suppose I could be wrong, but the vast majority of us are here looking for answers. Personally, I love my Accord - I've stated it several times over. It's halfway paid off and I want to keep it for a good long time. The reason I bought it was for the bulletproof Honda reliability. Aside from a few annoying rattles, it's served me well for 32K miles. My '99 went just over 50K miles before I traded it. They really are fantastic vehicles. But this tranny issue concerned me greatly, and many others as well, whom I'm sure would've loved to have nothing but praise for an otherwise praiseworthy vehicle.
Once watched a guy on an auto production line line up doors-he had a 2x4 with some carpet on it and he just jammed it into the door hinge area and sprung the door against the 2x4 until the fit was right. Now that took some kind of skill-probably would not work on today's value engineered vehicles.
But I see your point - how will you know if you are left off the list? If you want my opinion, well then...
I don't think you need a letter like you would with a recall, because Honda isn't scheduling vehicles for repair and isn't loading up on parts. I assume you will be covered like your regular warranty, except longer if the transmission is involved.
The wording "all potentially affected vehicles" suggests all you have to do drive in with a 2000 - 01 Accord, and if you have a tranny problem before 7 years and 100K on the odometer, you're covered. Now if your dealer service rep can't tell if it's an '00 - '01 Accord, well, head elsewhere!
In the meantime, let's keep an eye on these boards. I'm betting someone will post the contents of their letter soon after it arrives.
Sorry I couldn't be of more help. But I don't think you have anything to worry about. Good luck!
To conclude, if I can help anyone with their transmission problems regarding what I experienced first hand, THAT IS WHY I POST IN THIS FORUM!
Now to answer the other posters problems regarding what I encountered with my first transmission:
1. I starting to hear a loud "clunk sound" when I would put the car in reverse. This never happened before which I at first though was something else.
2. When accelerating from 1st to 2nd gear, I noticed hesitation. This hesitation became more pronounced and coincided with the "clunk sound" within days of each other.
3. About a month later, I noticed hesitation in all gears. I immediately had the transmission fluid changed to see if that would remedy the situation. By the way, I followed the maintenance schedule as indicated in the owners manual regarding transmission fluid changes. This was an extra change I thought would help. Honda transmission fluid was utilized in all changes.
4.Total failure occurred while I was driving out of my driveway. I put the car in reverse and heard the "clunk sound" which was loud. I shifted to drive and nothing---the engine just raced as if I was in neutral.
I conclude that there is some part in the transmission that wears out over time which causes failure. Most likely it is a design flaw by Honda that cannot be corrected.
I suggest that if anyone experiences these problems, to take your car to Honda immediately and have it documented. Honda service does know about the transmission problem from day one!
Just a guess...maybe they aren't including the 2002's yet bkz they are covered for now under warranty...if there's a problem in the next 2 or 3 years..perhaps they will order a TSB or recall or fix the problem before it becomes one.
On another note...tho I have mixed feelings about having a brand new car and wondering if I have to worry about the big ticket items..I think we might see how Honda will handles this problem.
I think that some of these boards are becoming too personal and critical when many of us just want a forum to exchange ideas or see where the problems lie. That's not to say problems don't exist, but seems like it would be more effective if there is a real problem for those people to write or email the NHTSA board.
By Earle Eldridge, USA TODAY
Honda said Thursday that it will extend the warranty on vehicles with a problem transmission to seven years/100,000 miles.
The company also said it will reimburse those owners who paid to have transmissions replaced.
The moves came after angry owners swamped online forums and appealed to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for a safety recall because of a transmission that could slip out of gear, not go into gear, abruptly downshift or refuse to shift.
The extended warranty applies to 2000-01 Honda Odyssey minivans; 2000-01 Honda Accord cars with automatic transmissions; 2000-01 Prelude; and 2000-03 Acura CL and TL cars.
Kudos go to Honda! I think this is only fair and shows they have faith in their cars. I am glad they did this because I have one of the afforementioned V6 trannys that IS giving me problems, but they insist nothing is wrong.
Don't worry about it. Just hit the pavement and move on with the sales of the 03 Accords. Take a deep breath, and be thankful that your credibility isn't like a fart in a wind storm.
So long. I peruse this site for entertainment purposes only.
Instead they are giving a warranty that is less than Hyundai or Kia's standard warranty and hoping people will accept it.
People are still going to be playing Russian roulette driving around in a Honda with these defective parts in the transmission, which by Honda's own admission are failing due to a defect.
Warranties don't solve defects.
Good customer service would.
Right from the beginning, Honda knew it had a problem with the design of the V-6 transmission. It could have taken the appropriate steeps at that time to correct the problem. Today, each driver is sitting on a time bomb waiting for it to explode. Sort of Russian roulette on wheels. This should not be and Honda has to reassure the customers even more. A good steep would be a free rental car if the transmission needs to be repaired for the customer as a "goodwill gesture".
As far as the personal assaults in this forum, some of them are merited but I do not condone this type of interaction. I believe we should discuss issues in an intelligent manner. Everyone and I mean everyone has the right to post in this forum.
I believe that the transmission issue in the V-6 is trying to be corrected by Honda. Honda just needs to reassure its customers that they back their automobiles 100% and the customer should not worry.
I have to compliment rbruehl for really bringing this topic to light before the L.A. Times article. Unfortunately, the poor soul had to have two transmissions replaced and suffer the various indignities bestowed on him. Thanks for sticking in there with us.
With reckless, misleading and over-dramatized statements like that, is it any wonder that some Honda fans react as they do? That sort of statement is highly provocative and totally unwarranted.
Look at the description of the symptoms above... when it happens, for most people it's hardly like a time bomb, and more like a slow leak in a tire. Yes, it's not a pleasant experience, but it's hardly the life-changing experience that you imply.
I agree that it's not productive to try to minimize the severity of the transmission problem, but it's equally non-productive to make it sound like every V-6 Accord is likely to self-destruct in an instant.
You say that we should discuss issues in an intelligent manner... well, over-the-top statements like the one I quoted do not contribute to such an effort. Rather, they contribute to FUD among those who have limited understanding of the details of this issue.
Finally, in case anyone has the impression that I'm just some kind of mindlessly devoted Honda fan with no basis for my statements, let me reassure you. I have a 2000 Accord EX V-6 and I *have* had the transmission replaced. My dealer was terrific... they provided me with a free rental car for 2 days, and the inconvenience was minimal. It wasn't even close to a life-altering experience, and I'm certain that the vast majority of owners of the cars affected, assuming they even experience a failure in the first place, will find their experience to be the same.
I was considering replacing my 96 I-30 with a 2003/2004 accord EX-V6 next year. But, now I have doubt.
The issue that bothers me is when the new re manufactured transmission fails as in rbruehl's
discussion. He had his replaced twice so you have to ask yourself, "How good is the replacement"?
Maybe its me but I have lost a lot of faith in Honda since this transmission issue came to light especially in this forum.
Although I don't own a 2002 myself, I also hope that Honda provides details on their reasoning about excluding 2002's from the extended warranty. IMO, they'd be crazy to "wait for more reports of failures in 2002's" if the faulty components are shared, so I really doubt that this is the case.
Somehow if there was a rash of such dramatic failures, I can't help but expect that the NHTSA site would include them... yet there are no such reports there. There ARE reports of transmission failures, but all such reports there describe gradual failures as well. So I still maintain that all of this hysteria about sudden dramatic failures at 70 mph is just not justified by the available facts, including facts from reliable sources OUTSIDE of Honda, such as NHTSA.
I don't know about his second transmission... I've had mine for well over a year and it's working just fine.
Again, I'm not trying to minimize the problem. I know it exists... I'm a "victim". My only point is that these "ohmigod, my car is going to kill me" reactions are just totally irrational.
Every single day 33 more transmissions fail on practically new Hondas. I can't see how anyone can defend those numbers.
As long as Honda "errs on the side of caution" when it comes time to administer the warranty terms to replace a questionable transmission, I agree there shouldn't be a problem. But if a Honda customer rep sticks to the approach where the transmission has to fail (as in some incidents reported here), then there is a definite safety issue still associated.
I don't necessarily agree that just because there haven't been any accidents reported to NHTSA, the press, etc., there haven't been any safety issues or accidents associated with all of this. For example, had RBruehl been pulling onto a busy road rather than backing out of the driveway when his transmission failed, there would have been a serious risk of injury. And this was a customer who was much more diligent and conscientious about the condition of his vehicle than the average consumer. If his story wasn't in the NHTSA database, it easily could have been. The only thing keeping it from being a reported accident was where it happened. In my mind, that's not much different than the admittedly extreme situations reported in the LA Times - in all 3 instances, an accident did not occur, but easily could have.
Let's hope Honda service everywhere uses the standard established by Talon95's dealer.
Every single day 33 more transmissions fail on practically brand new Hondas. I rememer when Honda used to stand for quality.
As for bruehl's situation, remember that the symptoms of this failure are much better known now, so there's no reason for anyone to get to the point of complete failure after experiencing symptoms for some weeks prior. My dealer replaced my transmission when the first symptoms appeared.
There are 2 reports of accidents and 1 report of injury for Acura 3.2 TLs. That would be potentially consistent with the LA Times report.
With the dramatically larger number of Accords sold vs. Acura TLs, I can't imagine that if such failures were common or even likely with Accords, that you wouldn't see some reference to them, and that they wouldn't somehow end up in the consumer complaints as did the Acura incidents. Did you find something referencing Accords that I missed?
It doesn't follow that because no accidents have been reported to NHTSA or LA Times, they haven't occurred or guarantee the possibility they won't happen should a transmission fail. In fact, as you have noted, what has fueled everyone's concern recently was not actually an accident, but frightening situations reported that COULD have resulted in an accident. And some folks here have experienced difficulty getting their transmissions replaced under warranty before they failed, so I can understand why they don't share your confidence in their Honda dealer's service.
I don't want to drag this out and belabor this, but Honda extended the warranty in an effort to regain customer confidence and quell concerns (or speculations as you referred to them earlier) expressed such as these, not because of accidents reported. However, as long as Honda replaces the questionable transmissions before they fail, I agree with you that there should be no problem.
Respectfully yours - no attempt to flame, disrespect, insult, invalidate or be difficult intended . Thanks.
Perhaps dealer reports of 16,000 transmissions led Honda to decide to do the right thing, as they historically have.
I know that someone will quote that single reporter that said that complaints were the reason it was done, but you now have my quote to counter that. My speculation is as good as the reporters.
I still can't understand the hyperbole that we see from some people there.
"Too bad Honda didn't choose to fix the defect in the transmission. "
Didn't they?
"Instead they are giving a warranty that is less than Hyundai or Kia's standard warranty and hoping people will accept it."
Who else gives that kind of warranty? Know why Hyundai and Kia give that warranty?
"People are still going to be playing Russian roulette driving around in a Honda with these defective parts in the transmission, which by Honda's own admission are failing due to a defect."
Russian roulette? I like that. So dramatic. 4 gears in the transmission.. which one will be the one that kills me?
I applaud those who are handling this rationally.
Good luck to those who still aren't satisfied with Honda's response.
Perhaps you'll be more comfortable in your Hyundais and Kia's - at least they have that long warranty.
Two years ago we went to look at and test drive a new 2000 outback. Ironically enough, on the drive home, we were on Rte. 2 East.(CT)..a somewhat remote road on an april evening w no street lights and probably about 10 miles from the test tracks that Consumer Reports uses to test all the cars. Ahead of us was the very car we had just looked at. It was dusk. The car is equipped w daytime running lights. And the driver mustn't have realized that he had no taillights on. We were right on him before we saw the minor glow from the dash...but if there were people sitting in the back seat we could have easily not seen him at all. So I wrote to CR and told them what I thought was a potential hazard and they promptly wrote back advising to make a post to the NHSTA. We still bought the car, but I have never forgotten that night. And as our kids have gotten behind the wheel I have stared them in the face and told them...this is something you have to remember to do.....
That being said...potential problems probably are better addressed to Honda customer service as a first line of action. If transmission problems aren't handled very well and customers aren't happy, competing vehicles will win on the next round of car hunting. It's a lot easier to keep the customer base you have than trying to win them back. Transmission problems w Chrysler didn't hurt them THAT much when the competition wasn't really there. Now that's changed and many of those people..(including me) not only aren't going to buy another of their vans...I prob. wouldn't even buy one of their CARS.
I'm not knocking Honda for the actions they took, but I believe that they realized they had disgruntled customers on their hands and wanted to avoid a PR nightmare. They may have stepped up in time, but I think there will be much bitterness on the behalf of some customers who have been fighting and complaining for a couple of years now.
Goodwill can be a fragile thing, and only time will tell if Honda managed to succeed.
When the second transmission failed, I had to question what Honda was trying to accomplish. Replace my first transmission with another one that also failed? That is when I decided to trade the car in!
Honda's were synomous with the word reliability at one time but that is no more. I personally will never buy another Honda product again after getting stung twice with a bad transmission. I was a loyal Honda customer but no more.
I just hope for everyone's sake, you do not have to go through the same problems that I encountered. The only advice I can give you is, "when you hear the loud clunk, you know your transmission isn't working the way it should". Yes, it is like Russian roulette when driving because you never know when the tranny will fail.
I'm assuming nothing about other dealers, but do you think it's unreasonable to expect that dealers would cooperate with replacing a transmission that's exhibiting the early symptoms of this problem, now that the problem has been highly publicized as it has? Things have certainly changed since my transmission failure... I was just lucky to have a cooperative dealer then, but it shouldn't take an act of God to get a replacement now. If it does, I'd be on the horn to Honda Regional Service or a lawyer in a heartbeat.
Anyway, I'm not trying to tell anyone else what to think. I'm simply expressing my opinion, and I feel that this whole issue has been fraught with conjecture and overreaction. I just don't understand where anybody's benefitting from these unwarranted predictions of doom and gloom. Yes, we should be concerned, but concern doesn't and shouldn't equate to panic. However, if people want to whip themselves into a frenzy by obsessing over a worst case scenario, be my guest. However, I will continue to try to keep some perspective about this thing when people come up with these dire predictions... my viewpoint is every bit as valid as theirs, and at least is far more defensible at this point based on available information.
No flaming intended, either.
So what should Honda do to relieve these concerns?
#1. if it was something that has previously been a problem and now been fixed...then send a letter to
02 (03 w different trans.)owners saying this issue
has been corrected....putting this under the rug won't solve anything...better to address it upfront
#2. if the problem hasn't been solved..immediately extend the powertrain warranty to 7 yr 100K miles.
And work toward finding an acceptable solution. If they think that is going to be a problem or public relations nightmare...I'd think about what all the present honda owners are going to say when asked if they like their car.....they are the real salesman.
You also say "I'm not trying to cause flames here either, but how can anyone possibly say that it will never happen, or even probably won't happen (not trying to put words in people's mouths)? I'm sensing that same old "don't worry about it" theme again. "
There's a distinct difference between saying "don't worry about it" and "don't panic about it". I'm simply trying to make the case that the latter makes more sense.
The problem exists. I know that from personal experience. I've never tried to claim otherwise. However, at this point, there are no reports of sudden dramatic failure of Accords in the fashion as described in the LA Times article. So this whole "Russian roulette" stance makes no sense to me, since the reports of transmission failure (my own included, and many, many more) are nearly unanimous in that there were symptoms of failure for quite some time before total failure. The Russian roulette analogy only makes sense if sudden dramatic failure without ANY warning is likely to happen, and the reported incidences of failures with Accords just don't show that happening.
You also say "I suppose if/when someone is either killed or seriously injured as a direct result of a transmission failure, some of you may change your line of thinking. What is so implausible about this possibility?" Well, anything can happen, but I guess the answer depends on your perspective. I've looked at lots of available information, and there's nothing that suggests this will happen with Accords. I'm satisfied with this available information, and as a result, I've decided that there's no need to panic. If you feel compelled to expect the worst even though the available information suggests otherwise, that's your call.
But just to be perfectly clear:
- I am NOT apologizing for Honda
- I am NOT suggesting the transmission problem does not exist
- I am NOT suggesting that the transmission problem is "no big deal"
- I am NOT suggesting that Honda has anything less than full responsibility in the matter
- I AGREE that Honda should replace any transmission that shows any signs of such failure, even the earliest signs
- I AGREE that Accord owners SHOULD be concerned about this issue and vigilant for any signs of transmission failure
- I maintain that losing sleep over the likelihood of this issue resulting in injury or death makes no sense at this time.