Honda Accord Quality Control Issues

isellhondas

I'll probably go with the X-Ones. I'll probably d this fairly soon too. Even though I have plenty of tread left, I've learned that tires wear kinda like a tank of gas gos.

The last half tank go's a lot faster than the first half. Once tires start showing wear it seems like they wear faster.

Besides, 47,000 miles is a lot of miles.

mike1qaz

I'm sure you know this, but you would be going to a "T" rated tire with the X-1. Your V6 Accord probably has "V" rated tires currently. You may or may not notice handling differences, depending on how sporting you drive.

isellhondas

find out what that means I guess.

To listen to some of the posters here, the MX4's I have are junk. Aren't the X-Ones better?

I don't drive like an old lady but I'm not an idiot either. I'll push 80MPH once in awhile but that's about it. I slow down when it rains which is pretty often.

This morning I took a 35MPH off ramp at 50 MPH. The car handled well. There was no tire squeal and I sure didn't go int a four wheel slide.

I just want something that handles well and is good in the rain and once in awhile snow.

I sometimes have to wonder exactly how some of the posters who come here drive?

Maybe like I did when I was eighteen?

storm11

There is a significant difference in going to a T rated tire from a V, primarily attributable to sidewall strength and how it responds when forces are placed on it. You will notice a significant deterioration in the handling of the car. I went from H's to T's once before and was amazed at the difference, and that was on my previous car, an '86 Maxima....not exactly a sporty vehicle. The spread to a T from a V is more than what I changed to, so expect a notable change.

Keep in mind, suspension components are calibrated with OEM speed rated tires. The car is designed this way, so going with a different rating will definitely result in a deterioration in handling. This will be all the more noticable on a car like the Accord, as its suspension and steering are unsurpassed for a car in this class and price.

Stick with the V's. You won't regret it.

mike1qaz

The above is the progression in speed rated tires. Left to right "S" is lowest and "Z" is highest. Spend some time on tirerack before choosing your new set of tires. They have some very informative stuff.

Also, the "tires, tires, tires" forum on this site has some very knowledgeable people.

Storm11's post is a good summary of what you need to come to grips with. There is always a trade-off. Just be sure you know what you will be trading off.

Heck, you're in the business, go talk to your service mgr/master techs.

mike1qaz

I'd give you a few bucks apiece for your "old" tires and probably get another 30k out of them. LOL

Good luck in your search for your next set of tires.

BTW, if you can buy through your dealership at discount, the skys the limit.

mdames

I purchased a 2003 EX V6 sedan on November 1. Since I've had the car the CD door has an annoying rattle. I can stop it by stuffing some soft cotton cloth between the top of the door and the radio. Obviously, this is not a lasting fix. I've had it to the dealer twice. They have even replaced the entire CD door unit (had to remove the radio to get the old one out and the new one in) - it still rattles!. Has anyone had this problem? Have you had a satisfactory resolution? Other than this, I really love this car. I appreciate your feedback.

Thanks

aming

Just a quick check. There isn't anything in the CD compartment is there?....

Does it rattle with the door open?

isellhondas

Since there is a handy link here, I took a look.

Funny...the two tires most reccommended here aren't available. no X-Ones or Turanzas ?

And...Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!

stantont

stantont

Tire rack does indeed sell the Bridgestone Turanza; I just ordered a set of Turanza LS-V's in 205/65-15 from them for my '01 EX V6. They are scheduled to be delivered Monday to a local installer. The LS-H and LS-V have gotten rave reviews from testers, but there are not many owner comments in the Tire Rack website yet because this model is so new. The Bridgestone Turanza LS is the successor to the Turanza Revo, a really great tire (I put a set on my '90 SHO which my son now drives, and after 30,000 miles they still have lots of wear left). Their ride, handling, and wet grip are superb compared to all of the previous tires used on that car, which were: OEM Goodyear GT+4's (V rated), Michelin XGT V4, Dunlop D60A2, and Pirelli something-or-other (also V rated). The Goodyears were good in the dry, pretty good in the wet until the tread wore down about half, then only so-so. The Michelins were silent on smooth surfaces but whined very loudly on the coarse concrete so beloved by the Texas DOT. They were also treacherous in the rain. The transition from grip to slip was so sudden as to be scary. The Dunlops did everything pretty well, but rode a bit harshly. The Pirellis were silent when new, but after a very short while they roared like mud tires on a Jeep; and they rode so hard they shook rattles into the car. The Turanza Revo's were a revelation, and just like their advertising says, they still grip wet just like they did 3 years ago when they were new. As appropriate for a touring tire, their transient response is a bit slower than some of the all-out performance tires, but that is a very small tradeoff for the ride, absence of noise, and superb wet grip.

isellhondas, your logo looks like Canada; I don't know how good the LSH's or LSV's would be in snow. I live in Austin and have family and friends in Houston and New Orleans, so handling on curves, interstate silence, and safety in the wet rate highly for me.

BTW, my OEM Michelin Energy MXV4+ on the Accord were pretty good wet or dry, but now, after 27,000 miles, they are getting a bit slippery in the rain. Still losts of tread left (about 7/32's), so I can only surmise the tread rubber must be getting harder with age.

My exteme example of that was a set of Michelin X's many years ago on my '63 Volvo 122 which still had half tread left at 80,000 miles (!). But the tread was so hard it was like driving on plastic tires. In the dry they were fine; but one day I went around a wet turn a bit too fast and slid backwards through a curbside service station. Missed the pumps, thank God. I bought new tires that day, despite my wife's protestations about junking a "perfectly good set of tires" (she wasn't in the car during the gas station episode, and just figured I was driving too fast - again). Besides, she was from South Texas desert country, and really didn't believe in rain - sort of like Santa Claus for her...

stantont

Sorry, guys, but I picked up on this note and had to respond. I started reading this thread a few days ago, and had to wade through something like 1900 entries - finally skipped down to the end to get current. In all the scanning I did, a few things became obvious to me:
1) most of the participants on this list must have WAY too much free time on their hands
2) many of the participants tend to make broad generalizations with no documentation (the notorious V6 "troublesome automatic transmission", which I would have to call one of the great Urban Legends of our day)
3) many of the group have a hangup about whether Japanese Accords were/are better than American-made ones. Note that ALL accords from 1994 to 2001 (the latest rated) get "much better then average" marks for reliability across the board in the April 2002 Consumer Reports, based on real-world experience of their subscribers. This DESPITE the fact that the competition (and hence the definition of average) is getting better all the time! Note also that the number of solid red circles for the Accord has climbed steadily over the years despite more Accord production moving to the USA over the same time span.
4) finally, isellhondas, I'm glad you are here, and I'm glad you seem to have a rather thick skin. Yours seems to be one of the few voices of reason among all the Chicken Little "sky is falling" shouting. The insults and slurs sent your way because of your occupation are unwarranted, in my opinion. I judge people by their ideas and ability to communicate those ideas, not by their job. On that scale, you rank well indeed.

BTW, I am not a Honda dealer and am in no way associated with Honda other than to drive and enjoy my '01 Accord V6 (my first Honda)with its TROUBLEFREE automatic transmission. The Accord is, in a nutshell, the best-built car I have ever owned, and I've been driving for almost 50 years.

Also BTW, I just received a notice of extended warranty on the automatic in my car from Honda. I guess they couldn't ignore the paranoia any longer; it was easier to quell the fears this way. I filed it in the glovebox, but will be amazed if I ever have to use this warranty. Consumer Reports rates all Accord transmissions as much better than average reliability across the board, both stick and auto. That is their highest rating. Note that this is not anecdotal; it is statistical.

rbruehl

I respect your opinions but let me inform you of my plight. If you studied the 1900 plus posts, you must have read about the two transmissions replaced in my Accord. There was no generalizations regarding my statements since they were all true. You must have also skipped over the other posts where others had similar problems to report.

The first time I posted my story, I received a less than enthusiastic reception from isellhondas. His holier than thou cavalier attitude and rudeness were deplorable.

Since that time, Honda has acknowledged that there was a problem with their V-6 transmission in print. As you are aware, they even offered an extended warranty to stem the tide of consumers demanding a product recall. As far as your Consumer Reports documentation, remember, the latest consumer survey to its readers is just not be calculated for the year 2002. It will be interesting how the transmission in the V-6 Accord will stack up in the next automotive issue that will be on sale in April, 2003.

Being thicked skin is one thing, but being indignant and outright rude is another story. In conclusion, isellhondas now has an ally and first friend in this forum. In addition, I suggest you read the posts in this forum in a more thorough manner as obviously you skipped over a lot of detailed material.

isellhondas

Well, thank you for your kind words.

And I'm glad I have a "first" friend!:)

mikegold_1966

The one thing that RBruehl left out about our "resident gadfly" (known as isellhondas in this forum) is his complete bias attitude. He tries to dispel any posters problems by using terms as "isolated" or "never heard of this problem until I saw it here at this forum"! He works at a Honda dealership and you think that he could offer help to some of the posters or steer the poster to the proper Honda area. Instead, 9 out of 10 times he leaves some sort of smug remark as a reply.

I am also confused when you state many participants use broad terms. From what I read here, the poster actually posts of a specific problem and how it actually have caused problems for the poster.

I also own a Honda Accord but I don't look at it through "rose colored glasses" when a problem develops. The shared experiences by the posts in this forum have created a new awareness regarding any problem or potential problem regarding our Accords.

stantont

Yes, I did skip over many of the prior posts after it became clear that many people were in "rant" mode. I didn't have the time or inclination to filter through all of that. I have no quarrel with your Accord transmission problems (both of them!), and I really sympathize. Trying to get something like that fixed can be a frustrating experience. But one cannot extrapolate from your or even several people's experience to conclude that Honda has a "problem" with the Accord automatic. A problem area to me is something that affects more of a particular brand than average, documented by statistics, not by anecdotal data. Does Honda's warranty extension on the automatic become an admission of a problem? Well, it is admission that there is a PERCEPTION of a problem, and that is important enough that it must be responded to, hence the warranty extension.

A warranty, of any kind, on any product, is not designed to cover the product for as long as the engineers think it will last. It is a sales tool, wherein the company decides to risk some money (the potential cost of any repairs) in the hope of potential benefit (more sales due to customer faith). Hyundai did not suddenly design and build more-reliable cars for their 100,000 mile warranty. Rather, they were concerned with the perception of poor reliability and decided to invest some money in an "insurance policy" with the hope that it would change public perception about their product. It seems to be working, BTW. Honda has had a 36,000 mile warranty for many years, yet I know many Honda owners whose vehicles are almost like new at 160,000 or 200,000 miles. Honda chose not to offer a longer warranty because they didn't need to. The cost of the warranty was better spent on actually designing and building a better product.

The Accord automatic is, by CR's owner survey (the only statistical data I can access, BTW) much more reliable than everage. It has been in use since when, perhaps 1996? It gets solid red circles across the board for all years up through the latest data available. Will that change for the 2003 issue? Maybe, but I'd be willing to bet not. "The past is the best predictor of the future."

This brings up the point of my note: before you buy a car, you can only use statistics and probability to decide likely reliability. That is the best data that exists. However, once you buy a vehicle, you now have ONE sample from the population. It is YOURS. Anything that happens is now not a 0.0001% CHANCE of a problem; it either IS a problem or it ISN'T. (Caps used for emphasis - sorry if it seems like I'm shouting.) And just as you can't go forward from probability to certainty, likewise you can't go backward from a problem with one car to conclude that Honda has a problem with their automatics. The logic just doesn't hold. The analogy is to tossing a penny: before you throw it, you have a 50% chance of heads. But on any given toss it either comes up heads or it doesn't. That is certitude. If you throw the penny three times and get three heads in a row, can you conclude that you have a bad penny? Nope.

Back to the car: The only accurate statement you can make is that YOU have a problem with YOUR Honda automatic. Given that, what you need from this group is information and suggestions on how to proceed to get it repaired to your satisfaction. Rants about Honda's "problem transmission" from would-be sympathizers just raise the general noise and paranoia level, they don't help you get on with your life.

That said, I'm afraid I don't have any words of wisdom to offer regarding your car. Do you have access to more than one dealer in your area? Is there a chance that one of them might have a cleverer mechanic (better diagnostician) than the one you are now using? My own Accord automatic has been trouble-free for its 27,000 mile life, as has the automatic in my Aerostar (now at 126,000 miles), and the last problem automatic I had was in a 1983 Suburban diesel. After this long epistle, I'll refrain from launching into THAT saga.

irish24

I agree with some of each of the opposing viewpoints about what is a problem w the accord transmission and what is an isolated incident. That being said, last week I looked at the possibility of adding an economical car (civic)to our household and I was back at a honda lot. Talking to the new manager, I asked him if there was a problem w the accord tranmissions...he said it's only the 6 cylinders. So I think there is an awareness that this is not an isolated incident. Since I have a new 02 V-6 with no problems presently, I can say that unless or until they at least extend the transmission warranty, I prob. won't rest easy. No car dealer wants to freely advertise problems w their cars, but if cars are sold based in large part on their long reliability from the past, then smart companies will extend the warranty on "problem" areas if they want to keep those customers. If the warranty had also been extended to the 02's more for peace of mind then I'd prob still consider the civic...since it hasn't I'm more likely to switch to the corolla where the powertrain in 60,000 and solid.

BTW I think you can see a partial TSB listing...thru the Edmund's or NTSB site.

dc_sports_rule

To bad you didn't read that rbruehl had two transmissions replaced. He also mentioned in numerous posts about "the clunk". By the way, I think he bought a Solara after having two transmissions replaced. I can't blame him!

By the way, have you read the numerous complaints on the Federal complaint board about V-6 transmission problems or the article written in the LA Times? Here is another link of interest:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2002-09-20-honda-warranty_x.htm

By the way stantont-rbruehl goes into detail in post #1611 about his transmission woes. I kept it on file.

Here are the issues he noted in detail:

"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!"

mikegold_1966

I think it would be appropriate to read the posts concerning transmission problems before you comment on them. I know that you are new here but I have personally read numerous instances where each post was quite detailed.

It makes me wonder how you can make out posts to be generalized when in actuality they are quite detailed.

You are not isellhondas brother-in-law are you?
(That is a joke by the way and is not intended to offend anyone including isellhondas).

lugwrench

What is the best snow tire for the Accord during the winter? I would like to hear recommendations.

tblazer503

From what I have heard it primarily deals with the 5AT's and most of it stemmed from the third gear clutch pack disintegrating. The majority of the failures were on TL-s/CL-s models. They stiffened up the 2nd gear clutch pack for more holding power, and left out the third. Apparently, the type-s owners push their tranny's harder than Honda expected, and the third gear would eventually wear out prematurely spreading clutch material throughout all of the AT.

The problem with repairs is that Honda of america doesn't allow their service shops to disassemble the transmissions in the shop, and the dealsership is forced to order a new one. We all know how honda has lots of parts lying around for repair.

Hope this helps some people.

stantont

As a matter of fact, I did read several of rbruehl's posts (all that I found). Note my reference to BOTH transmissions. And I have no argument with any of his points that you list until you (or he) make the great leap: "Most likely it is a design flaw by Honda that cannot be corrected." From a sample of two transmissions you cannot tell whether or not there is a design flaw or simply two (or even one)bad parts. My analogy holds exactly: if you toss a penny twice and get heads both times, can you conclude the penny is rigged? Nope. If you get 300 heads in 500 tries, then you have a statistically valid sample.

Given the interconnection between all the systems in a modern automobile, it is possible (and I would suggest likely) that the failure is caused by some part not even in the transmission. For example, a flaw in the engine computer, which controls shift characteristics in the trans, could cause an abnormal stress on every shift (perhaps into reverse, since that seemed to be abnormally harsh) which would eventually cause transmission failure. Yet replacing the failed transmission part or parts would effect only a temporary cure, as the computer would then overstress the new part in exactly the same way. That is why I suggested trying another dealer in hopes of getting a better diagnostician. Better yet, if Honda can be persuaded to send in a regional or national diagnostics team that might help. Barring that, if the trouble cannot be found, I think Honda should buy back the car for teardown and diagnosis until the cause is found.

Two transmission failures is maddening for the owner, especially since automatic transmissions are usually very trouble-free, but that does not support the conclusion in quotes above.
I would suggest that if there were really a design flaw, then out of 400,000 Accords sold each year, with automatics in all of the V6's and some of the 4's (maybe 100,000 automatics each year?), there would have to be SOME effect in the CR statistics. But there isn't any. Still full red dots for the transmission. Again, anecdotal data cannot support any generalization to design flaws.

Factory help can be invaluable in a difficult diagnostic problem. Many years ago I had a Yamaha outboard motor. One day, I was out in the boat alone with the kill switch lanyard clipped to my life jacket, and walked away from the wheel with the engine idling in neutral. The lanyard pulled out of the kill switch, but the engine kept running! This was a major safety-related item, so I brought the boat/motor to the dealer to have it fixed. They changed the kill switch, to no avail. Then they changed the ignition switch, and then the wiring harness from the engine to the steering and control console and even the ignition module. Still wouldn't kill the engine. Finally they called Yamaha USA. Three weeks later my boat had an appointment with a team of guys from Japan. When I went back to pick it up, the dealer said it was fixed. When I asked what they did, he said he didn't know; none of them seemed to speak English. But they came in with a suitcase full of electrical parts, and went back to Japan with all the old parts from my engine. None of the parts were discarded. And the motor WAS fixed. That is my model of superior customer support, BTW.

maxhonda99

stanton, If Honda decided to up warranties to 100K miles on transmission for V6 Accords, I would say the transmission design was flawed and their IS a problem with it. If there is no flaw, Honda would have no reason to give owners extended warranties on just the transmission.

And I believe Honda has traced the problem back to one or a couple of parts in the V6 transmissions.

mike1qaz

extended warranty on auto trans for the 4cyl Accords and Preludes also, not just the v6 ones.
I have a 4cyl and received my extension recently.

paulo3

I agree with you maxhonda99, Honda wouldn't extend the warranty if there wasn't a problem.

dc_sports_rule--I agree with you also regarding the Consumer Reports yearly survey. The transmission issue would definitely come up on the 2002 survey. You will notice a difference in the circles this time around stantont.

Here is the American Honda directive for everyones records:

http://world.honda.com/news/2002/4020920.html

stantont

An extended warranty is hardly an admission that there is a design flaw. More likely it is response to the perception that there is a problem. That perception would be far more damaging to Honda America than the reality of a few (or even a lot!) of transmission failures.

Remember the "mysterious acceleration" problem in Audis of a decade or so ago? It nearly bankrupted Audi, but it was eventually proven that the owners had their foot on the gas when they thought it was on the brake. Proof occured when videos of the cars actually accelerating into walls, etc., showed THE BRAKE LIGHTS WERE NOT ON. No foot on the brake, but the owners swore they were stomping on the brake as hard as they could. The public's willingness to believe this even though there is no car made, other than a few slingshot dragsters, whose engine can overpower the brakes (physical impossibility) nearly killed Audi.

In a situation like this, the perception IS the reality that must be dealt with.

And I stand by my original hypothesis: the cause of the problem is probably not in the transmission but in the computer. If that is so, and if Honda does not find the flaw, then soon after all these warranties run out, the second (or third or fourth) transmission in the cars will begin to fail. Would I be happy to have a 100,000 mile warranty on my V6 but then have the transmission fail at 120,000 miles? No way!!

One reason for my suspicion of the computer is a bit of knowledge of how computer chips are made. There are millions of semiconductor devices on each chip, each one submicroscopically small. In the manufacturing process, there are bound to be a certain number of these tiny transistors that don't work. The chips are designed to tolerate a certain amount of these failures, and each chip is tested to ensure that it "works". If there happens to be a failure that is not tested in the postproduction trails, then a bad chip might set a signal under certain engine operating conditions that would cause the overstress during shifts that I mentioned in my previous post. Such a flaw in a computer ship would be statistically likely to affect many manufacturers. It would be interesting to see actual stats on transmission failures in Accords versus, say, Camry V6's.

fritz1224

You're new here so you should be somewhat cautious about what you have to say on this tranny thing. The problems are with the tranny itself and a Honda spokesman said this "...the culprit is a bearing inside the transmission that could break apart or premature wear of a third-gear clutch part that could scatter metal bits inside the transmission case." This is from an article in the USA TODAY paper dated September 20, 2002. As for the statistics on the failure rate, the Honda spokesman (Kurt Antonius) said the extended warranty affects about 1 million vehicles and that 1.6% of those vehicles have had to have transmissions replaced.
Now you have the facts. How you interpret them is entirely up to you.

navigator3740

until stantont's transmission fails, leaving him with his "perception of anecdotal evidence" to comfort him as the newest "statistic".

stantont

Maybe you can't wait. Meanwhile, I'm not worrying about it.

You guys are too quick to launch into personal comments instead of sticking to facts. I'm outta here. Have fun!

lancerfixer

...a rational poster, and you clowns run him off with personal attacks. Way to go, guys. Jolly good show.

I'm outta here, too. Stantont, You were a voice of reason in what had become the Salem Witch Trials of Town Hell. Sad to see you go, man.

BTW, one last shot across the bow: I really, really like my Bridgestone Turanzas, and if treadlife holds up as advertised, I'll see no reason to go back to Michelins, which after three different sets on three different cars (Integra, Accord, Volvo) I found to be an OK tire at best (though none were X-Ones, I'll grant.)

Isell, all the best and Godspeed, my friend. You'll need it in here.

mikegold_1966

Needless to say, stantont was not rational at all. He never read in detail previous posts and made conclusions. on what he saw in the little red circles in Consumer Reports.

Links have been provided about the transmission problem and he failed to believe what Honda determined. Just like isellhondas, he was a second ostrich that would bury his head in the sand and wouldn't admit to the details of the transmission problem. He even determined on his own, that it was a transmission computer problem when Honda flat out right said it was a part problem.

Denial is one thing, but dreaming up conclusions. without any support or documentation is another thing. At least isellhondas hasn't gone that far.

I have a strange suspicion that Stantont is really isellhondas twin brother. (Once again, this is a joke and it isn't meant to offend anyone). I suggest stantont read a little more about the problem before coming up with eronious conclusions.

lugwrench

Here is the latest survey regarding reliability regarding vehicles:

http://www.jdpa.com/presspass/pressrelease.asp?ID=2002141

jason777

I have a Ford Exploder. They called the Firestone tires with Good Year tires and the firestones were better than the goodyears they replaced!!

I now have squeaky good years.

fritz1224

Gee, I gave him facts not personal attacks and now he's leaving. Guess he didn't really want the facts. Like they say If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. Adios.

paulo3

You are absolutely right--the guy didn't like the facts when they were presented.

rbruehl

I couldn't believe all the facts that I presented in my posts that were ignored by stantont. Sounds as if he is one of those people that believes Honda can't do any wrong.

The one positive thing he did say was that he sympathized with me regarding my transmission woes. That did show a lot of class on his part.

bodydouble

was pretty civilized throughout. However, his statement that Honda's offer of the extended warranty was NOT an indication that the transmission was flawed really floored me.

fritz1224

I can sympathize with you as well. I just hope I'm never in the position to empathize with you.

yrmac

FACT:
1. American Honda extends Warranties on Select automatic transmission due to problems that may result in premature wear or failure.

NOT A FACT:
1. From Stantont's post#1972:"Given the interconnection between all the systems in a modern automobile, it is possible (and I would suggest likely) that the failure is caused by some part not even in the transmission. For example, a flaw in the engine computer, which controls shift characteristics in the trans, could cause an abnormal stress on every shift (perhaps into reverse, since that seemed to be abnormally harsh) which would eventually cause transmission failure".
For a person that believes so much in statistics and facts, how can Stantont speculate/theorize a preposterous and illogical posting such as this? Amazing! Suspicion is one thing but posting an irrelevant theory such as that is pointless.
Only Honda can answer why their tranny fails at such a rate however, they will not provide the consumers the answer. This is just like asking the Pope if he is still a virgin (No offense to all those Catholics out there). Our best indication that there is a problem with the Accord tranny is that extended warranty.

mikegold_1966

Stantont's post #1972 was the craziest thing I have read in this forum. Even more so than anything that isellhondas has ever posted or denied. We should have all known something was up with him when he started complimenting isellhondas as a voice of reason!

Well, the positive thing about all of this is that he won't be returning to post other theories that defy logic and the presentation of facts.

isellhondas

And the hand wringers can continue their crusades!

bodydouble

Same person?! Hmmmm...

isellhondas

You've found me (us) out !!

timadams

Geeezus. Give it a rest already. Isn't there something else to talk about on here rather than hash and rehash and rehash (ad nauseam) the transmission tales of woe? You get one new guy who politely discusses things and offers his opinions and he is practically called a liar, a crackpot and has pins stuck in his voodoo doll (wishing him a bad tranny). If there are no new topic threads, I've about had it, as well.

isellhondas

Heck, it was worse than that! They even accused him of being me!

mikegold_1966

I was worried that stantont would replace isellhondas as our "resident gadfly"! Sorry to say but stantont wasn't playing with a full deck.
At least we all know isellhondas plays with a half a deck and he is tolerable.

Well folks, it is time to move on and discuss other Honda quality control topics.

isellhondas

From responding in the manner I would like to. the rules around here forbid this.

It is pretty sad when insulting someone and calling names is allowed, however.

I know a couple of you just can't stand it when another poster actually loves their Honda and comes into this chamber of doom and gloom to present another opinion.

anonymousposts

For some reason it seems that people label you a fanatic (which I am admittedly) just because you are loyal to a brand and have had good experiences with it.

bodydouble

so you do have to expect people to dwell on problems.

Perhaps someone should start a thread called "Praise your Accord".

paulo3

Overall, has the new 2003 Honda Accord been selling well on a national level? In my area, I haven't seen that many on the road but the dealership lots seem to be filled now.

The reason I am bring this up is the negative publicity regarding the 6th generation V-6 Accord hurting sales?