Honda CR-V Maintenance and Repair

theracoon · September 2004

Like Racoon, I have not had a problem with my 1999 CR-V EX. But mine is faster than his and the dust may just be blowing off.

Varmint, my friend, I give up. I think you've driven over 30,000 miles more than I have, so that makes your '99 CR-V 'faster' than my '99 CR-V.

But mine looks faster.

varmint · September 2004

"Varmint, my friend, I give up."

Strong is my kung fu!

edunnett · September 2004

Brake dust is a result of the type of pads used. I hear ceramic brake pads, while they cost more, don't leave as much dust.
elissa

theracoon · September 2004

Strong is my kung fu!

The flexible palm tree bends before the (hot air) of the hurricane.

varmint · September 2004

Here's an update on the fires. This article includes a few new tidbits.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5926843/

kyfdx · September 2004

Well balanced and without any obvious errors.. pretty amazing, actually.

ljt · September 2004

I am looking into buying a CR-V EX with AWD and wanted to know how they drive in the snow. Any posted replies are greatly appreciated.

varmint · September 2004

Yeah, I thought it covered the main points quite well.

1. Fires are still happening.
2. When Honda got the word out to dealers.
3. Why Honda hasn't been able to contact retailers (through the usual channels).
4. The fact that the NHTSA is monitoring Honda's actions.
5. The fact that no mechanical error has been found (so far).
6. The fact that independent agencies (CR) have also investigated for defects.
7. The "he said / she said" debate between the dealers and manufacturer.
8. And, lastly, the emotional appeal from concerned customers.

So, yeah, the article hit all the major points. Some of it was new to me (like the CR opinion). But it also included enough to give those unfamiliar with the subject a better understanding.

I give it an A minus.

varmint · September 2004

Deep or fresh snow? Pretty good.

Ice and packed snow? Nobody does well on that, but other systems can do better.

ateixeira · September 2004

I guess you could say some people judge Honda guilty by a process of elimination.

The same techs change the oil on other cars and no problem. The one thing the pattern of fires has in common is the CR-V from certain model years.

So until something specific is found to blame, many people will point to what is unique here, and that is the vehicle.

Also, people will naturally put the burden on the company that accepeted their $22,000, not the $20 paid to the grease monkey. As the article states:

What Honda hasn't been able to explain is why the 2003 and 2004 model CRVs would be especially prone to the problem

I can't accept the "blame the tech" argument because then it would apply evenly to all cars and trucks, not just one. It's the same person with the same skills doing the same job. Something about the CR-V makes the oil change process more difficult and error-prone than normal.

I've made suggestions (even gave links to an oil filter relocator kit and drain plug valves) but honestly they seem to be ignored, so I can sympathize with the frustration some are feeling.

-juice

varmint · September 2004

"The one thing the pattern of fires has in common is the CR-V from certain model years."

How do you know this never happened to a 2002 model? Are you assuming that because the NHTSA and Honda did not include 2002 vehicles in their investigation?

By the time the problem was noted and the investigation began, 2002 vehicles with an oil leak would have been fixed (a burned one would have been junked). Thus, they couldn't have been part of the investigation.

I think the "one thing" that fits a pattern is the fact that these seem to be happening with the very first oil change.

"Something about the CR-V makes the oil change process more difficult and error-prone than normal."

Yeah, I can understand that. But, on the other hand, the Tech is responsible for checking to see if there is a doubled gasket. If the gasket is stacked or pinched, the Tech has failed.

ateixeira · September 2004

Wouldn't there be cases registered with NHTSA for any 2002s that would have burned? Even now, in hindsight, I imagine someone that read about the current issue might have sent them the information.

Of couse not everyone is as much in touch with the auto industry as folks here on Edmunds.

I disagree with that last sentence. If the gasket is stacked, yes, it's the tech's mistake, though it's more likely to occur (error prone) with a CR-V's first oil filter.

However, if the gasket is pinched, we'd have to know what torque specs Honda specifies for the filter and how much torque the tech applied.

Basically what I'm saying is perhaps the gasket itself is defective, pinching more easily than it should, even with the spec'd amount of torque.

I'll guess here that eventually we will find some type of irregularity on the surface where the oil filter gasket mates up, perhaps one that a low quality filter didn't seal with properly.

-juice

varmint · September 2004

"Wouldn't there be cases registered with NHTSA for any 2002s that would have burned?"

Burned? Yes. Though I doubt the owners would have bought a new CR-V, and thus would not be looking for news on the vehicle.

Leaked? Doubt it. I had the Jiffy Lube guys leave my oil filler cap on the engine block (not sealing the hole). I didn't report it to the NHTSA.

In either case, the car could not possibly be included in the investigation.

"However, if the gasket is pinched, we'd have to know what torque specs Honda specifies for the filter and how much torque the tech applied."

That's possible. But the fact that (so far) this only seems to be happening with the very first oil change sorta makes that very unlikely.

ateixeira · September 2004

Dunno, there were 2 people in the CR-V threads that had such fires and both are driving a new CR-V.

100% owner loyalty. LOL

The first oil filter might be leaving some sort of residue, who knows?

-juice

varmint · September 2004

"The first oil filter might be leaving some sort of residue, who knows?"

Yup, that's kinda the point. It could be a lot of things. We just don't know. We have lots of speculation. Some of it is reasonable stuff. But nobody knows for sure.

julia · September 2004

Just some information regards to complaints I searched at NTHSA web page:

Number of cases for CR-V:
4 complaints for 2001;
33 complaints for 2002;
Total 101 (37 under CR-V and 74 under CRV) for 2003;
71 complaints so far for 2004 (as many 2004 have not come to the mileage which needs 1st oil change yet).

For 2003 and 2004, there are lots of complaint related to engine fires. I did not see the engine fire complaints for 2001 and 2002 model.

I guess that explained why some are very happy about their CR-V. As there are much fewer complaint for model before 2003. Although, I agree, not everyone file a complaint or even know this web page (just like I did not know it before I bought my car), the number still suggest strongly that something wrong for 2003 and 2004 model associated with engine fire.

Number DO mean.

ateixeira · September 2004

Honda may make this worse by dragging it out. I'd still like to see a simple heat shield or oil filter relocator kit as a proactive solution.

I realize they may not due to financial considerations, i.e. such a "fix" could be interpreted as an admission of fault.

-juice

stevedebi · September 2004

Just had my 3rd oil change, no sign of smoke.

However, the seat track was broken on the drivers seat, replaced under warranty. But now I am having trouble finding a comfortable driving position. I guess I got used to the broken position ... LOL!

julia · September 2004

Julia, you are VERY unlucky person. I certainly sorry for you, but I never heard of a case, when Honda owner had had so many problems with two cars (OLD and NEW) a the same time. Statistically it's a very rare case (like winning a lottery and being strike by lightning at the same time). We all know, that lawyers love cases like that - they always trying to present atypical, rare cases like typical (American news media - too).

Kizhe
Whether you are lucky or I am not lucky. The CR-V speaks for itself for its quality of performance.

So what if I am building a case? Legal solution will be the good one if eventually my car got fire. IT IS HONDA/DEALERS hide the engine fire fact to consumers. IT IS THEIR OBLIGATION TO INFORM CONSUMER ABOUT THE RISK OF UNUSUAL ENGINE FIRE. I do believe Honda may involved many legal cases if consumer sue them for the engine fire.

julia · September 2004

Nationwide Class Action Filed on Behalf of Purchasers of Honda CR-V Sports Utility Vehicles Model Years 2003 and 2004 as a Result of Automotive Fires

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2004/07/16/204277.html

j2thomas · September 2004

It's an excellent car in the snow. We live inthe snow belt and previous to the CRV my wife would often be forced to park the van at the end of our driveway and leave it there until I got home to snow blow. Last year I never found the CRV at the end of the drive, it always made it to the garage. I expect it to be even better this year, I already have my snows purchased and mounted on spare wheels. Let it snow!

stevedebi · September 2004

Yeah, that was last month, lawyers fishing for clients.

Unfortunately, from the press reports I've seen Honda itself isn't sure what is causing the fires. One can believe or dis-believe them, of course.

Not sure what country you are from, but here in the US the accusers are going to have to prove their case, unlike some countries that start with presumption of guilt. Just showing that fires started won't cut the mustard unless they can prove design fault. Co-incidence does not prove causality under US law.

autosaurus · September 2004

Snow - My CRv wikth the standard tires has been quite bad..slipped around alot especially in breaking. I've read awhile back that the tires do need to be changed and the snow performance improves. I personally like the fact that it has pretty good ground clearance.

Julia Posts - I dont know who Julia is or Varment for that mnatter but from what i've been reading on here Julia has been posting problems and it seems that certain people have been pretty rough on her for her views. You all are right, scroll if you dont like what you read but dont attack a poster for her views! If there were more like her posting her honest views I'd bought another car!

isellhondas · September 2004

You will find a "Julia" in every forum with their personal tales of woe on every make and model.

Some of the problems are real and some are overblown.

Until a perfect car is built these stories will always be told.

ateixeira · September 2004

40+ fires are more than just a coincidence, but I agree, the plaintiffs have the burden of proof.

-juice

stevedebi · September 2004

"Thank you very much for your post. You seems the few real Honda owner on this board who speaks the truth. Not like other Honda Sales/Defenders who tried to hide/cover something for Honda."

Hmmm, guess I'm one of the "unreal CR-V owners"... however, I do speak the truth... wow. maybe we need a new category of owners here...

But let me categorically say that I have never received any compensation from Honda for my forum posts. Just clearing things up ...

hkjcrv · September 2004

Is brake dust black? If so, I definitely have brake dust residue on my front rims (a little on the back, too, but never as much as on the front). When I wash the car, I get out an old rag and wipe it out of all of the crevices of the rims... it's annoying! I had a 1991 civic before, and I never really paid much attention to the rims since they were old anyway... but I'm pretty sure it had this black residue, too. I could be completely off and this could just be road dirt.

julia · September 2004

Whether your 2003 or 2004 CR-V get engine fire or not, Honda did and does violate the consumer protection act by failing disclose the potential risk of engine fire after oil change for CR-V 2003 and 2004 model when sell them. Here is US, consumer has every right to know the fact/truth before we buy.

Maybe CR-V has some good designs and good value which many of us took into the consideration when we purchased it. But the safety is the number one to you and your family. Honda put CR-V 2003/2004 owner on the potential risk of engine fire without REAL actions. Honda does not care our safety, we should care ourselves.

As owner of 2003/2004 CR-V, I suggest you read this article "Nationwide Class Action Filed on Behalf of Purchasers of Honda CR-V Sports Utility Vehicles Model Years 2003 and 2004 as a Result of Automotive Fires" at http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040716/nyf057_1.html.

Thanks those opponentss challenge, otherwise I won't be motivated to search and found this one.

hkjcrv · September 2004

...is hearing about the fires when there is not any new information.

So what do I do? I use that fancy little scroll wheel.

And I've stopped reading Julia's posts completely because it's quite clear that she hates her CR-V and will never be objective about it. Again... scroll wheel.

I don't understand how people can say that if they read Julia's posts before they purchased their vehicle, they wouldn't have purchased it. Why? Because ONE person has had such bad luck with the car? There are several more people in this forum who are happy with their CRVs... but unfortunately it looks like the negative always overshadows the positive.

Julia, you accuse everyone of being Honda defenders... but we could just as easily call you a "Honda basher." You claim that everyone else's opinions are biased, but so is yours. It is jaded by your experience and opinion of the car that you bought. Seriously, you should get rid of it if it makes you that unhappy. You are upset about the fires as if you have had one... and you haven't.

I would say that I'm completely happy with my CRV, but I'd probably be called a biased Honda defender. So I guess I'll pick out a problem with it... I think the gas tank is too small. I wish it were a little bit bigger. Maybe I'll post about a hundred times regarding how the gas tank should be bigger, and I'll bring in a bunch of statistics about gas mileage.........

theracoon · September 2004

Whether your 2003 or 2004 CR-V get engine fire or not, Honda did and does violate the consumer protection act by failing disclose the potential risk of engine fire after oil change for CR-V 2003 and 2004 model when sell them. Here is US, consumer has every right to know the fact/truth before we buy

Whether or not Honda violated the law is something for the courts to decide. Are you a lawyer or have your received a judgment against Honda for failure to disclose the fire possibility? Then it's your personal opinion, not a fact of law.

I'm having trouble finding references to a US "consumer protection act" that would apply to disclosure of risk. Can you provide some references to online or printed resources? I've found references to laws by that name in Canada and the UK, but none in the US. I did find references to US Consumer Credit Protection Act, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, and a Telephone Consumer Protection Act; but none of those apply directly to disclosure of risk.

I'm sorry that you've had problems with your CR-V. I'm very concerned about the fire possibility, because I had been thinking about trading in my 1999 CR-V for a 2005 CR-V. I'm going to wait for awhile before doing that to see if there are problems with the 2005 models.

isellhondas · September 2004

And, of course, I sell them. I would never let my wonderful wife drive her 2003 EX CRV if I were in the slightest bit worried about a fire.

the chances of her getting in a bad accident I'm sure are a lot greater.

And, they do just fine in the snow too!

ateixeira · September 2004

Sabrina went to court to sue Honda and won. Honda is appealing, but in the view of that courtroom Honda was found guilty and ordered to pay double her damages.

It's just one case, but it has happened.

-juice

kyfdx · September 2004

That was interesting.. but, it was for $2K in small claims court.. Hardly precedent setting, and as you say.. under appeal. A small claims court listens to her, then listens to Honda, then decides by a preponderance of the evidence. 51% is all it takes, and then, it is just one person's opinion. Hardly relevant, I don't think.

regards,
kyfdx

kyfdx · September 2004

I guess that makes me an opponent, and you an ally.... En garde!!

ateixeira · September 2004

Oh I disagree, I think it's very relevant. It's the only case for an Edmunds member so far, and Honda lost, plain and simple.

Hee hee, call me a skeptic, I'm just not convinced it's a coicidence, 40+ coincidences when they sell more Accords with that engine and no fires there?

Sure.

You want to buy the Brooklyn Bridge? I'm selling it. Cheap.

I'm open minded, but I don't buy the "tech's fault" theory because common sense would say the same tech would screw up far more Accords.

-juice

stevedebi · September 2004

"Oh I disagree, I think it's very relevant. It's the only case for an Edmunds member so far, and Honda lost, plain and simple."

The case was to account for the $2000 that was lost when the vehicle was replaced. It was not determining Fault in a legal sense - it was determining justice as to the $2000 out of pocket costs.

stevedebi · September 2004

"Hee hee, call me a skeptic, I'm just not convinced it's a coicidence, 40+ coincidences when they sell more Accords with that engine and no fires there?"

Let's see, I own a 2003, so I suppose I can speak here...

No, I don't think it is a coincidence. However, the fact that the oil could drip onto a hot surface is moot, since the oil is never supposed to hit hot surfaces anyway. And it would appear that when properly changed, oil will not hit the hot surfaces. One could just as easily say that if an accident occurred and oil was spilled, a fire could result.

I suppose that is what some forum members are suggesting that Honda salespeople say: "Oh by the way, if the oil is changed improperly and oil hits the hot engine, it could cause a fire. This won't happen if the oil is changed correctly." It doesn't make sense to say this at all when oil is always supposed to be changed properly...

Still, I would like to know why it is mostly England built models that seem to have this problem.

And I hope they take this stuff into consideration when they redesign for 2006.

ateixeira · September 2004

There was more to it than that, I believe they concluded Honda was even negligent.

-juice

stevedebi · September 2004

Are you sure? I thought the only question was if someone owed sabrina9 the out of pocket costs? Also, was Honda negligent, or was the dealer who changed the oil negligent? And as I recall from posts, I'm not even sure oil was the culprit in this case.

sabrina9, are you out there, and can you comment?

ateixeira · September 2004

when properly changed

OK, let's examine this closely.

I say it is impossible to guarantee that all CR-V oil changes occur properly, as you suggest.

It's the same tech doing the Accords perfectly, the only change here is the vehicle, the CR-V. They are (in theory) using Honda service guidelines and procedures, training, supposedly re-training if you believe what Honda says it has done so far. They use an OE Honda specified oil filter and an oil with viscosity again recommended by Honda.

Why does the original OE filter stick to the engine, and not come off with the filter itself, as is normal? Why are gaskets pinching on the CR-V but not the Accord, or other Hondas that use the same exact filter?

One article mentioned it could be an engine coating that the gaskets stick to; Honda denied it, though.

That theory sounds more believable to me than the "techs fail only on CR-Vs from certain model years by repeated coincidence" theory.

If you believe the latter theory, well, that's why I was mentioning that bridge that I have for sale...

-juice

edunnett · September 2004

I've been quietly reading everyone's very strong opinions for a while now, not contributing much but hoping there'd be something new soon...

I actually have to agree with Varmint that until there is a real analysis done here and news to report, we are all just stating opinions and speculation.

HOWEVER, I disagree with him about how Honda should deal with it. To the extent that the axiom "perception is reality" holds true, Honda's PR team would be wise to err on the side of conservatism here. I think that they may not be found guilty of anything in a court room or by any industry boards, but a good number of us consumers seem to be convicting them in the court of public opinion. That alone I believe is reason for action. It's the reason companies HAVE PR departments.

Furthermore, as an otherwise naive consumer, I perceive "Honda" (wether we're talking dealers OR factory) to represent a single marketing entity. Honda, the manufacturer, should realize that. If they blame the Honda dealer trained techs for the fires, to consumers (ok, to ME), they are accepting blame themselves. My opinion is that they should recognize that dealers are using the Honda name and it is one in the same as far as perception goes. While the dealer and the manufacturer may consider themselves to be very separate companies, they are not to me. Dealers are authorized to sell and service Honda products ON BEHALF OF THE FACTORY. So I find it difficult to separate the responsibility.

I knew about the fires when I bought my '04 CR-V. I bought it anyway because of Honda's reputation and because it met our needs in a vehicle. I hoped and still do that Honda resolves this issue by being pro-active and allaying fears that Honda is not concerned about its customers. It would just make me more proud about the product and more likely to entrust them in my next vehicle purchase - whatever the cause of the fires turns out to be.

Tell you what though - because I associate the big blue "H" on my dealership with the manufacturer, that's exactly where I'm taking the CR-V for it's first oil change. No way I'm risking my own liability or that of a third party with my property and life here. I don't think I'm being alarmist there either - just very cautious. Not to mention I want to get in to the dealership and ask questions. :-)

In the end, everyone has a very strong opinion. The fact that we are bashing each other on this forum is evidence of the heightened emotions, fear and confusion being generated. I don't understand why Honda's Public Relations and/or engineering departments aren't addressing this more proactively though and giving us some reason to 'settle down'. *shrug* I'm still hopeful they may do as juice suggested and issue some relatively cheap little fix for diverting spilled oil. Hell, I'd even pay for it.

Elissa

ateixeira · September 2004

FYI - Sabrina hasn't posted in a while, but she's been following the CR-V thread, not this one.

-juice

stevedebi · September 2004

"If you believe the latter theory, well, that's why I was mentioning that bridge that I have for sale..."

Nope, I just believe the facts. Truth is we don't know what is causing these events.

My own (unsupported) pet theory is that they changed the assemply procedures at Swinden, causing the equipment to tighten the factory filters too tight. That is an assembly problem, not a design error. I base this on the fact that the 2002 models haven't reported any problems. Something changed, and it wasn't the car design.

kyfdx · September 2004

I liked CU's theory from that article that was posted.. That starting in '03, they changed the paint or coating on the engine block, causing a greater likelihood of the gasket sticking and coming off in pieces.. It pretty much answers all the questions and why there are more fires starting in '03.

Of course, that doesn't mean it is correct, but at least it made sense, logically... Also, of course, Honda said that isn't the reason..

Oops... forgot.. I have an '02.. I'll be quiet now..

ateixeira · September 2004

We do know a lot, however:

* the same "incompetent" mechanics change the oil on Accords
* Accords don't have this problem
* there are far more Accords on the road
* what is unique here? The CR-V
* blame rolls down hill - blame the techs!

Very effective so far.

Honda has such a solid rep that they might even pull it off, and get away with just ignoring the issue.

In response to those saying "show proof", sure, pull the engine out and hire a team of chemists to analyse your oil filter gasket at your own expense.

It's an empty, cowardly dare. Noone has those kinds of resources.

I agree something changed, and probably more than just the location of assembly. I'm sure there are dozens of suppliers for the CR-V and surely a few change each year. There are two part numbers for the oil filters, for instance, though I'm not sure we know exactly when that change occured.

Something different about those specific CR-Vs is causing the observed difference in engine fires.

-juice

isellhondas · September 2004

I can tell you from painful experience that a jury will rule against a big company every time!

A company doesn't have to be guilty of anything to lose in court.

I know I would make a lousy juror!

ateixeira · September 2004

Don't blame Sabrina, at least she took some intiative, did something about it...

Hers caught fire after the first oil change at her Honda dealer.

-juice

varmint · September 2004

"Why are gaskets pinching on the CR-V but not the Accord, or other Hondas that use the same exact filter?"

Actually, there is one report of an oil leak and fire with an Element (June 4th). Give that there are far fewer Elements on the road, it doesn't surprise me that they would have a much lower ROF.

"One article mentioned it could be an engine coating that the gaskets stick to; Honda denied it, though."

Depends on how you read it. When I first read that article, I took Boyd's response to mean that Honda did not change the paint. I've gone back to it and there's no clear answer to what part of that "theory" his comments addressed.

"Why does the original OE filter stick to the engine, and not come off with the filter itself, as is normal?"

That is not normal in my experience. I no longer do my own oil changes, but I frequently had to strip the old gasket from the block when I did my own maintenance. That's part of the job.

As for "blame rolling down hill"... The simple fact of the matter is that Techs are supposed to check for stacked gaskets. That is their job.

If a gasket is stacked, they obviously didn't check very well. Techs are supposed to lube the new gasket to avoid pinched seals. If the gasket is pinched, it was installed poorly.

So I understand that something may be making the gaskets more sticky than other cars, but that is no excuse for them to do sloppy work. If it's harder to get the gasket off, you'd don't leave it there!!!

varmint · September 2004

No one is blaming Sabrina for anything. I think we all owe her some gratitude for bringing the issue to our attention.

All that was said is that a single court case does not mean the issue is resolved.

varmint · September 2004

Well said, Elissa.

I agree that we don't have enough information.

I agree that Honda's PR department could be more aggressive in contacting owners and trying to put fears at rest.

I certainly think that the oil-changers should be stepping up and accepting responsibility for fires caused by stacked or pinched gaskets.

However, I don't see what Honda's engineering department can do about this (other than keep investigating). They could install some wonder gismo and tell everyone, "Problem solved!". But unless they are really sure they have solved it, this would only make matters worse.

Honda CR-V Maintenance and Repair

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles