By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
And I have to ask, when someone makes a statement like "the infamous transmission", why would they even consider a Honda if they feel that way?
Ask any transmission rebuilder which transmissions REALLY cause trouble!
As for the readers on these boards who think that all they see posted are problems - think about it! When do 99% of the people on any subject, be it cars, electronics, computers, etc., come out of the woodwork and seek out a site/forum/newgroup for info....when they have a problem! If all the Accord owners who have never had a tranny problem where to post on this site rbruehl & hondaaccordguy's tranny problem would be a drop in the ocean. So please, take this "infamous" problem with a grain of salt: people tend to only speak of when there is a problem, thousands of others without one are never heard, unless you look at the total sales of Hondas as a positive indicator....I know I do!
Frank W.
02 Accord EXV6
00 Odyssey EX
......and 3 other trouble-free Hondas now long gone.
hondaaccordguy...I'll add your name to the short list of posters I'll no longer converse with. I would suggest though that you sell your Honda and buy something different if you feel as bad as you say you do everytime you drive it.
Hopefully, it's replacement will never cause you a problem.
rbruehl...yeah, it is getting a bit old. Toyota builds great cars and hopefully it'll never act up in any way for you too.
No car will ever please everybody all of the time.
The ironic thing is that not one person has brought up is that Honda purchases transmissions from outside sources. They do not manufacture their own transmissions for example such as Toyota. Out-sourcing of parts is probably the main problem regarding V-6 transmission failures. Honda has done a poor job in policing their suppliers.
This attitude of denial seems to be the standard around this forum. When someone posts a legitimate problem such as hondaaccordguy or rbruehl, the usual "shills" go on the attack and dispute claims and provide bogus information. Gentlemen, lets discuss facts and not personal feelings.
In conclusion, I thought this forum was to discuss quality assurance issues regarding Honda Accords? It is starting to sound like "spin mongers" are trying to dispute any posts that bring up problems!
Outsourcing of parts - so? Fact: EVERY car manufacturer outsources parts. Is quality control an issue that Honda worries about? Of course it is, you don't continously sell 2 of the top sellers in the US (Accord and Civic) for all those years as well as other vehicles that have month long waiting lists (Odyssey, CRV, S2000) without producing a quality car. Continual high new car sales as well as resale values are the number one indicator of a quality product, and most other auto manufacturers wish they had Honda's numbers.
Look, I (and most other readers of this forum) have NO problem with anyone posting about Honda quality issue. Am I in denial? No, I will have a problem or two with my Honda just as anyone else will, and will ask for advice just as anyone else will. It's a car, it's man-made device, things will go wrong. However, there are a couple of guys out there who have had a bad experience and made this a vendetta, i.e. they are the ones letting "personal feelings" cloud their judgments.
LOL Yeah right!
And you are Captain America!! LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL!!!
Or rather continually post the truth about the declining Honda quality trend of the past few years?
Funny, how a car with a "declining Honda quality trend" like the Accord at the end of it's product cycle can still gain 10000 in new sales compared to the previous year to take over the number 1 car spot. I'm sure that Chevrolet would love to have that number 1 spot for the Impala, but apparently the buyers aren't going there for a reason......
I seem to remember in a post by isellhondas that he stated there was a supplier problem in the early V-6 transmissions with a supplier. Unfortunately, according to the NHSTA that problem has persisted in all model years since 1998.
Lay off rbruehl, the poor guy had two transmissions replaced and you guys call him a lirker. I would be pissed off also!
I suggest everyone take a trip over to the NHSTA board and read about the quality assurance issues facing Honda Accords. It is a problem that needs Honda's undivided attention.
Next?
I never really understood this attitude. If he wants to talk about his defective transmission, let him. After all, this forum is for complaints ONLY. You are also at liberty to repeat how wonderful your Honda is as many times as you wish. Why does it bother you if someone repeats his dissatisfaction with Honda? Why the gag order?
The Accord is economical, much roomier than I expected, and has plenty of power for a 4 banger. Hell, I guess the thing may last longer than me. The original Michelins still have 7/32 of tread and the brake pads look great. No clunks or transmission problems. Interior is tight. If these Accords have gone downhill in quality it is a damn shame I did not buy one years ago.
I had new car fever a few months ago but could not justify the price of anything over my Accord. Call me a convert.
Sorry to read about the one person who replaced 2 trannys. You got a lemon. I'd call the regional office and threaten the lemon law if you have problems again.
My own experiences: 99 CRV 54K miles, nothing but maint. and 1 set of front brake pads. 01 Accord LX 4 cyl 7K miles, no problems.
You are right, of course. But it seems redundant for those of us who have good Hondas to keep posting about our lack of problems and yet read the same complaints over and over. And by the same complaints, I don't mean the same problem by more and more people, I mean the SAME complaints by the SAME people, ad nauseum.
But her goes, again: I have a good Accord with a good transmission, good brakes and I am happy with it. Just doesn't generate the interest that complaining does, does it?
That doesn't sound very fair to me. Does the government know about this?
Dealerships are reinbursed by the manufacturer for warranty work.
Now, I am very careful with my car and apply 6 coats of Zaino per calendar year. My car is hand washed and I still developed the problem. I always make sure they spray the under carriage of my car during each wash.
My question is, "does Honda at the factory galvanize their cars before painting? It sounds like a silly question but it seems that once Accords for those model years go over 5 years, the rust starts in the area's I mentioned.
Now, I will have to get the area fixed/painted and have them do a thorough inspection of both paneled area.
In any event, when a transaxle fails the replacement is usually a factory remanufactured unit with all the latest updates. Several posters in various forums here have had very low mileage transaxle failures. It's not limited to a single manufacturer either. Two that I've had dialogue with include a Nissan Sentra and a Malibu. Both are satisfied with the results. So, good luck with yours and happy motoring.
It is really expensive to have a "Pro" do the work.
Which brings up the new 2003 Honda Accord design by Honda's engineers--will it have the same reliability as the first year re designed Honda Civic? The reason I bring this up is that the Honda Civic prior to the redesign had outstanding reliability. The April 2002 Consumer Reports Auto issue now ranks it as only "average" reliability since the redesign. This is quite a drop! Is Honda making short cuts in the manufacturing process?
I keep thinking about the out-sourcing by Honda for starters, axles, transmissions etc. Is Honda keeping on top of their suppliers? It doesn't seem so. Comments please!
Also received the Consumer Reports April Annual Auto issue and I noticed the same thing about the new Honda Civic! Average reliability from outstanding reliability is a nose dive in my estimation.
Lugwrench has a good point regarding the 2003 Accord. Ironically, maybe they will also drop the wishbone suspension on the 2003 Accord like they did on the new Civic. Cost cutting measures resulting in a reliability nose dive?
Hope Honda doesn't cheapen up the new Accord to much. That out sourcing of Honda suppliers seems to be the problem.
That said, I have to hold onto it for awhile longer before I can dump it. Since all of the warranties have expired on it, are there any other problem areas I should be aware of in V-6 Accords? If so, is there anything besides regular maintenance I can do to address those problem areas before they become major (i. e. expensive) repair problems?
Any help/advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Honda's parts distributors look like they do not have a proven track record. I don't care what anyone says, HONDA HAS A TRANSMISSION PROBLEM IN V-6'S IN THE 6TH GENERATION ACCORDS!
Honda America needs to address these problems right away or the new 2003 Accord will have average reliability like the re designed 2002 Civic.
With all the problems bullit71 with your Accord, I bet you can't wait to get rid of your it. Unfortunately, you are probably still paying on the car I assume? This makes it even more difficult to dump it. My advice is just hang in there until it is the right time for you to unload your problem.
80000 miles on a four year old car is well above average. That's not to say that is the reason for your troubles. But you drive a car that many miles and things will happen.
Funny, someone just screamed to the world that Honda has a transmission problem. Of the roughly 1.6 million Accords sold in the last four years, what is the % of V6 models with transmission problems? Based on posts here quite high, but I suspect it is really quite low.
I subscribe to CR and people seem to be making so much of the Civics average reliability. I guess the ~350000 people buying them every year are just stupid. For January, the Accord was second and the Civic was third in total sedan sales behind the Camry.
The average reliability of the new Civic says something. The new model is not as reliable as previous years which is alarming. It is the consumers that are lodging the complaints.
Honda cheapened up the new Civic by dropping the wishbone suspension to save money at the consumers expense. A lot of corners were cut on the new Civic to save money. Now Honda is suffering the consequences of a drop in reliability.
The 2003 Accord could follow the same Honda methods of cutting costs. Let's hope not!
A lot has been said about the lower reliability rating that Consumer Reports has given the new Civic. But how do they define "reliability"? My Civic has suffered only from defective bushings in the driver's seat, and I don't consider this as impacting the "reliability" of my car, meaning the defective seat isn't going to keep me from getting to work in the morning 9it merely rocks back and forth a bit, which is annoying but not alarming). Does CR factor defects such as these into their "reliability" rating? If so, I think it's not a true indication of a car's mechanical integrity in the long-run - which is really what Honda is known for.
In regards to the V6 transmissions, it has been debated ad nauseum. The Internet brings out people who have troubles. You aren't going to find too many people coming here to say "My Accord V6 runs just fine and has no transmission problems", but you are going to get people talking about their problems. Again, I have no doubts these people have problems, Honda cars will have plenty of problems. It needs to be put in to perspective. Unfortunately people come here to scream about problems, "cheapened" designs, etc. with not a lot of hard evidence. TSBs are well and good, but they aren't the end all be all.
~350K purchasers of Civics last year must have felt confident about the vehicle to buy it. If it was the "lemon" people are assuming it is because of CR's "average raliability" rating wouldn't there be something happening to sales, or something else to show people don't feel this vehicle is meeting expectations? I would thinks so, but I don't see it happening.
I mentioned this on one of the SUV topics. IMO Honda and Toyota (and a few others) are held to higher standards because of their past reputation. When the average person buys one of these makes they expect a bullet proof vehicle. When they have a problem they think this car was supposed to be reliable why am I having a problem. And then things just flow downhill from there. Many people agreed with that theory, but many did not.
Say what you will about quality but I'll take my chances with a Honda, a Toyota, a Subaru, a Nissan. Yep I may have problems but I think they are still light years ahead of many others.
They had a dumb problem with some of the radios that were frustrating until it got figured out.
There were some suspension squeaks etc and a couple of other minot things that I'm sure some poster will be happy to remind me of.
Still, the minor problems are enough to drop a car's ratings.
These were addressed and corrected in the 2002's.
The sky is not, and never was, falling!
The dropping of the double wishbone suspension was not to save money, for crying out loud.
This happened in order to increase interior room and give the car FIVE STAR front crash results.
Handling was not affected by this either. I've driven a 2001 Civic on a professional track through a pylon course and can tell you this first hand.
I noticed a bunch of spelling errors in my previous post----sorry.
Honda better not dump the double wishbone suspension on the new 2003 Accord. If they do, it will once again be a cost cutting measure.
I am starting to agree with others that Honda is trying to save money by out-sourcing parts for their Accords and Civics. This has to effect the reliability of a stellar performer such as the Civic or Accord.