who caused these fires, Honda would spend millions on these little shields, then because they tried to prevent a problem, liability would be assumed and they'd go broke from all the lawsuits set up by people "making" their CRVs catch fire...
"The real truth is both parties play a part in the incidents."
"The real truth" according to who? You? While this may be your opinion, it certainly isn't mine. It's about time we got away from the "pass the buck" and "it's not my fault" idea.
If you double gasket a filter on my Turbo PT, I guarantee there'd be a fire - first, the filter is only about a foot from the turbo, and secondly, it's only about 15" from the first cat...
"it's our fault" and open themselves up to millions of dollars in damages because people can't change oil correctly?"
They're taking the blame for the transmission issues and are getting positive reactions. Sometimes the cynical viewpoint is bad for business. Thinking and acting like lawyers is going to do immeasurable damage to their reputation.
And if you honestly think that Honda's blaming the mechanics along with the NHTSA ruling is going to stop lawsuits if someone gets seriously injured or killed, you're expecting way too much of the court system. In the meantime, they're throwing away all of the damage control that they could do by taking a proactive stance.
Actually, the Pinto is a good comparison. Ford shold not have been sued because the Pinto met all federal standards, so it wasn't their fault that some cars blew up, and they were justified saving a few bucks on a gas tank shield, right?
As to the PT (and other cars) I think that hits the crux of the matter: Why aren't Turbo PTs bursting into flames after an oil change (or any other car with an oil filter near hot components), and CR-Vs are?
It wasn't a dumb mistake that caused the Pinto fires. As I recall, it's been a long time...Ford knew there could be a problem but decided to save a few bucks by not installing a part that could have lessened the problem.
Nothing to do with a careless technician not doing his job right!
So why are these particular oil fires making the news? Why were they so unusual that both Honda and the NHTSA agreed that an investigation was warranted? People interpret this as meaning that something is rotten in Denmark, and the ruling from the NHTSA does little to allay people's fears about this rash of fires. Even if the number is statistically small, it was enough to warrant an investigation, and it's still enough to cause lots of concern.
Mark my words, the questions raised by the news stories and the investigation are what people will remember. Nobody but Honda and the hardcore Honda diehards will care that the NHTSA said it was the mechanic's fault. The fact that the fires have been called into question is enough for many people to write Honda off, especially given their seemingly apathetic and apparently "legal department driven" position.
"Funny. these guys serve as a protective watchdog and that's a good thing unless they make a rational decision based on the evidence they have.
If it's against the car manufacturer people applaud the decision but when it go's the other way, their decisions get questioned.
I don't understand that mentality."
When you have a major consumer advocate like Consumer Reports questioning these findings, espressing dismay that the NHTSA failed to take a stronger stance, saying that the fires are unusual, a dire and dangerous situation, it leads one to be skeptical about the NHTSA results. Not everyone considers their decision to be a rational one.
"Remember only 9 of 27 were the result of double filters."
And another 5 were found to have pinched gaskets.
And for the record, there were 32 cars investigated for oil leaks. 22 resulted in fires. About 230,000 were sold during the time frame.
"Why aren't Turbo PTs bursting into flames after an oil change (or any other car with an oil filter near hot components), and CR-Vs are?"
All it would take is one PT turbo fire to equal the same rate of fires as the CR-V. Have you actually checked to see if a PT has been torched? Last week you had no idea there was a problem with the CR-V, what makes you so sure this isn't a problem with other cars?
Why hasn't this happened to the 2002 models" [or Accords, or Elements, or the TSX]
Maybe it has. Have you checked?
The investigation included 2003 and 2004 models. I figure if it happened to 2002 cars, those have long since been sent to the crusher. What's left to investigate?
I think what amazes me most about the discussion (not just here) is how willing people are to speculate and jump to negative conclusions without much information. "Guilty until proven innocent!"
Yet, when the NHTSA finds no fault for the manufacturer, these same folks refuse to accept it.
You are basing your opinion on the lemon law cases you have looked at. That is a good criteria to base opinion. I have based mine on actual vehicles I have owned. Out of nine Japanese vehicles all purchased new, only one was a trouble free vehicle. That was a 1970 Datsun PU truck. I had it for 6 years living in Anchorage, AK with no trouble. Every time I bring these problem vehicles up people make excuses for the problems I personally had. That was a long time ago or they are much better now. My buying experience spans 45 years and many vehicles. I have had less trouble with the Domestics and they lasted longer than the Japanese vehicles. My daughter bought a new 1999 Civic. When it started having transmission problems the dealer talked her into a CR-V. She kept it less than a year and sold it. She bought a Saturn and is much happier with it. I would be surprised if she ever bought another Honda. I stand by my statement "Japanese superior quality is a MYTH" spread by the media. All the flowery statistics in the world does not bring back the time I wasted at the Honda, Toyota & Subaru Dealerships.
"I think what amazes me most about the discussion (not just here) is how willing people are to speculate and jump to negative conclusions without much information. "Guilty until proven innocent!"
Yet, when the NHTSA finds no fault for the manufacturer, these same folks refuse to accept it."
As I said uptopic, Consumer Reports considers this whole situation to be unusual, dire and dangerous enough to call the NHTSA findings into question.
Sorry, but the statements from Honda and the NHTSA do nothing to explain the unusual circumstances of these fires, and why they were significant enough to require an investigation in the first place.
Sorry again, but I don't just put my brain into suspended animation just because a government agency sends an edict down from the mountain. Government agencies have been wrong before, and they'll be wrong again.
And frankly, I'm rather offended at being dismissed as a naysayer and reactionary. I've been one of Honda's most vocal promoters and defenders in many forums, and I've gotten myself in lots of trouble for getting too emotional in my posts in Honda's defense.
But the bottom line is that, as a Honda fan, I think that Honda is making a major mistake here, and I'm not looking forward to the consequences.
I've tried to make this point without becoming personal, and I'm sad to see that personal remarks are beginning to surface from the other "camp". Just because I don't agree with other posters doesn't mean that my voice has any less reason than theirs. And I'm doing this because I really and truly feel this way, NOT BECAUSE I'M A HONDA HATER! In reality, I'm anything but!
"And Consumer Reports is never wrong? They love this stuff too! It makes for increased magazine sales!"
Nobody said they weren't. But by the same token, is the NHTSA never wrong? Highly doubtful... and the fact that CR has stepped up with a comment about this at least makes one take a long hard look at the NHTSA ruling.
It's funny that whenever someone disagrees with Consumer Reports, it's always because they're doing some stunt to boost circulation. But somehow I'm sure when they're top rating Accords, Civics, Odysseys, etc., it's because they're unbiased, highly discriminating and they never make a wrong recommendation.
"It wasn't a dumb mistake that caused the Pinto fires."
It wasn't? Did the Pintos start on fire by themselves, or did someone have to crash into the Pinto?
"Sure, and for the 27 morons who caused these fires"
As someone already pointed out, not all 27 were caused by double gaskets. Filters can leak on their own. There is such a thing as a defective oil filter. You can also overtighten or undertighten a filter. When was the last time you saw someone using a torque wrench to install an oil filter?
I would not feel comfortable driving a new CR-V after reading about the fire issue. Changing oil used to be my job, and I don't even know if I'd trust myself to change oil on a CR-V given the consequences of even the slightest leak.
It is not the same issue as lug nuts or brakes, or whatever else you want to compare it to. You can leave the lug nuts off of any car and the result will be the same. You can screw up the brakes on any car. You can screw up the oil change on any car....but on the CR-V, the result is disastrous. THAT is the difference. There have been plenty, PLENTY, of screwed up oil changes. It's been happening hundreds of times every single day for as long as people have been changing oil. Honda KNOWS this, heck, they make money off of this fact.
And to the people who suggest checking the oil filter after an oil change:
Get real!!!!
You can't even see the oil filter from under the hood and even if you were to crawl underneath the car, you're probably not going to be able to spot a double gasket, a pinched gasket, or a piece of sand between the gasket and baseplate. Changing oil used to be my job, and even I would have a tough time looking at the filter while laying on the ground in some parking lot. And people expect Jane Doe to check the oil filter (and know what she's looking for) after an oil change? That's ridiculous.
said they hated Honda? I don't think holding a company accountable for their short falls is a matter of hate. The Pinto and this vehicle share common ground. A person makes a mistake and hits one in the rear and due to poor design you run a higher than normal risk of fire. CR-V a person makes a mistake installing or producing an oil filter and you run a higher risk of fire. Any moron knows you keep safe sure distance just as any moron knows you are careful installing an oil filter. Furthermore Honda is denying as Ford was in the beginning.
Apparently, saying anything negative about Honda makes one a Honda hater. Not to mention unreasonable and reactionary. And there's apparently no greater sin than negative comments coming from a member of the ranks of Honda supporters, even if, rather than bashing, they reflect true concerns. (I'm assuming that the paperwork to revoke my "Honda supporters" membership is already in the works...)
Funny... I've seen others make this exact same claim and I never thought it had any merit... until now.
I've had 2, my brother has had 3, and I'd buy another one if it was what I wanted. Not that I've ever wanted a CR-V, but I think that's one Honda I know I'd never buy considering the recent news.
I'll make one more comparison/statement, then I'm going to sit back and watch this ridiculous debate -- driftracer
Seems like you couldn't hold back
when I was 4, my mom was making me some toast in our kitchen, using a GE toaster. She left the room for a moment, and I was an impatient little kid, so I thought I'd get the toast out of the toaster sooner. I pulled a chair over to the counter, took a table knife, and inserted it in the toaster to attempt in prying the toast out. It shocked the heck out of me and actually knocked me out of the chair and onto the floor.
Whose fault is that? GE? Nope. My mom's, for leaving a dumb little kid alone with an active electrical device, a chair, and a knife, and mine, to doing the act. No one got sued, and I wasn't spanked since she figured I'd had enough trouble already. --driftracer
Drift, I don't agree with this analogy. YOUR accident was preventable by YOU or your mom.
With CR-V oil changes OTOH, as Newcar has pointed out, the average person has NO WAY of telling whether the oil change was properly done.
Think of your average housewife dragging kids around in her CR-V. She could stop her kid from poking his finger into a toaster, but there's no way she's going to double check her last oil change.
Mistakes happen. Honda knows (a) oil changes are going to be screwed up every now and then and (b) 99.9% of people will never double check. So Honda has a responsibility to put in a system so that a faulty oil change won't torch the car.
It may be a pet phrase of yours, but please stop using the inflammatory (no pun intended) term of "blowing up" when describing this issue. I don't believe that explosions are part of the problem here. While catching fire is undeniably a serious issue, actually "blowing up" is clearly even worse. --talon95
Have you seen that picture of the burning CR-V? If you prefer, I'll use the word "torched" or "burnt to a crisp".
on all products. I have posted reviews on many things I have bought and used and I have yet to give one a perfect score. But when issues arise it's the producers of the goods that need to correct them. Telling us to be careful is not a fix, and it would be a sin to lose a loved one due to denial or maintaining the bottom line.
While skating on a frozen pond, a boy falls through a thin patch of ice. A man who sees this event jumps into the freezing water and manages to pull the boy to safety.
The man is a hero.
While skating on a frozen pond, a boy falls through a thin patch of ice. A man who sees this event jumps into the freezing water, goes into shock, and drowns himself.
The man is an idiot.
This analogy doesn't make any sense to me either.
The man VOLUNTARILY chose to risk his life to save the boy.
Honda CR-V owners have NO CHOICE but to change their oil, and since most of them don't know how, they have to pay someone else to do it, and they have no way of knowing whether it's done right.
Let's not use the end results of this case with the CR-V to distort the issue. Any oil leak can result in a fire. An oil leak is among the most common reason for automotive fires.
You're shrugging off a pretty nasty end result, the possibility of being burnt to a crisp. And where's the distortion in the case of the CR-V?
Apparently, saying anything negative about Honda makes one a Honda hater. Not to mention unreasonable and reactionary. And there's apparently no greater sin than negative comments coming from a member of the ranks of Honda supporters, even if, rather than bashing, they reflect true concerns. (I'm assuming that the paperwork to revoke my "Honda supporters" membership is already in the works...)
Funny... I've seen others make this exact same claim and I never thought it had any merit... until now.
It's amazing how sitting in someone else's shoes helps you understand their prespective
I can't believe talon95 is being accused of being a Honda hater. I've read and enjoyed many of his posts on many different forums and it's obvious that he is a big fan of Honda.
Criticizing Honda for designing a car that can turn itself into a $20,000 candle does not make the critic a Honda hater.
And for the record, there were 32 cars investigated for oil leaks. 22 resulted in fires. About 230,000 were sold during the time frame.
And what time frame are you referring to? PT Cruiser peaked out at 140,000 in 2000 and sold 107,000 last year. That would be over 300,000 PT Cruisers in the same approximate time period. Still have not heard of one fire caused by sloppy oil change. I understand someone that sells Honda's for a living defending their problems. What is your reason for defending Honda? Would you buy a CR-V and take it to a $10 an hour mechanic to change the oil? Knowing what you know now.
My comments weren't directed specifically toward you but I apologize for my Honda Hater handle.
There are, however, people that just seem to squeal with glee when something negative applies to a Honda product. I'm not including you in that catagory and I'm sure you've seen the postings from those people.
Hopefully this can somehow get resolved to everyone's satisfaction and faith in a great product can be restored.
If I were the least bit concerned I would not let my wife of 35 years drive her much loved CRV.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/wheels/177114_tw111.html Clearly the fault of the automaker when the car torches itself. Also there are regulations that state a car should not leak fuel after a crash. Which is also called an accident, which is usually unavoidable. That's why the Pinto was recalled. Also the PT Cruiser. http://www.ptcruizer.com/repairs-pt-cruiser.html 2001 and 2002 PT Cruisers were recalled to install a secondary seal to the top of the fuel pump module. A fuel leak was detected during an inspection following a government crash test. There are no known incidents or complaints related to this issue. Notice that there were NO incidences of this happening in real world conditions. Which leads me to believe if NHTSA thought Hnda was responsible, they would issue a recall. Didn't happen.
Additionally. The oil isn't spilled during the oil change. It spills from the incorrectly installed filter. Again, that absolves Honda from liability. If the filter is not installed correctly, there shall be a fire. It doesn't really matter that other cars don't catch on fire, the fact is that the CR-V doesn't either unless the technician causes it.
Additionally, since the filter is under the manifold, if the oil were simply leaking after the oil change, it should fall harmlessly to the ground. That leads the mechanically minded thinker to come to the conclusion that the oil is squirting on the manifold or the cat. In that case it is even more the fault of the person who applied the double or pinched gasket. It maybe a Honda dealer's fault but not the American Honda design.
Thanks for the message... sorry for taking your comments personally. And yes, I have seen people like those you describe.
Clearly we both want the same outcome... we just have differing opinions regarding the best route to that outcome. Hopefully Honda's people will be wise enough to choose that best route, whatever it is.
And the transmission recall hasn't changed my opinion of my Accord one bit... I still love it. So hopefully that paperwork can be intercepted...
the company and the consumer be better off if a fix was initiated by the company? Yes the company stands to loose money, but I don't think it will be a devastating blow. Later down the line it would pay dividends. As for the consumer they would not have worry about possibly paying the ultimate price from an accidental oil change mistake or a faulty filter.
It's just that I hate mob mentality and this is starting to look like a dogpile.
I jumped in during the Toyota sludge fiasco back when the same thing happened. I defended my biggest competitor because I thought it was horribly overblown. My opinion still hasn't changed on that one either.
Neither has mine - I reviewed 188 Toyota cases as part of a class-action advisory panel - not ONE owner in the 188 could prove continuous and accurate maintenance.
I tend to scoff when folks jump on a bandwagon like this - same with the GM truck engine tapping (piston slap) issue...same thing is happening.
Why aren't Turbo PTs bursting into flames after an oil change (or any other car with an oil filter near hot components), and CR-Vs are?
PT Cruisers are (apparently) bursting into flames without an oil change. Here we go.
In case of PT Cruiser, the cause of fire is consistent and tied to a manufacturing issue. In case of CR-V it is not (unless you can prove NHTSA wrong, somehow).
It's interesting that the infamous Ford Pinto has been dragged into this discussion.
After all of the hysteria surrounding the Pinto controversy had faded, someone researched the actual number of fire-related fatalities for the Pinto (there's a novel concept!). The figure was in line with other small cars of the period. Many of the "facts" surrounding the case - including the infamous internal Ford memo - were misrepresented by Mother Jones, which led the charge against the Pinto. Turns out the car was no more dangerous than its contemporaries.
That might serve as a warning before once again jumping to conclusions...
Your reply to my post got lost in the shuffle...lol. I hardly remember what I said until you mentined the Focus. I think I'm going to just watch this one, this has become one hot thread. I love reading the lame excuses from Honda fanatics. Denial!
Sounds like Chrysler is more cognizant of possible failures that could be harmful, than Honda. There is NO possible excuse for Honda's arrogance in defending an obvious flaw in their design. I would warn anyone I know that Honda is not interested in anything but protecting their fat profit margin.
Clearly this situation is completely different. Honda has admitted to the fires, and both Honda and the NHTSA felt that the circumstances behind them were unusual enough to warrant an investigation.
There doesn't seem to be any question that the reports of the fires are legitimate... the debate is over whether or not the response proposed by Honda and apparently endorsed by the NHTSA is adequate.
Unless somebody wants to propose that this whole situation is some kind of media-driven hoax... I wasn't able to find any references to the CR-V story on the Mother Jones website, so it doesn't appear that they're involved this time.
Re your comments on Pinto, what got Ford into hot water was not that the Pinto had a design flaw. Engineers are not perfect and design flaws happen.
It's that their executives made a business decision to callously ignore the problem, which led to more people turning into toast, when the problem could have been prevented with a recall.
Let's see how Honda responds and see if they deserve similar castigation.
Comments
"The real truth" according to who? You? While this may be your opinion, it certainly isn't mine. It's about time we got away from the "pass the buck" and "it's not my fault" idea.
If you double gasket a filter on my Turbo PT, I guarantee there'd be a fire - first, the filter is only about a foot from the turbo, and secondly, it's only about 15" from the first cat...
And then you wonder why they rush and make mistakes.
-juice
They're taking the blame for the transmission issues and are getting positive reactions. Sometimes the cynical viewpoint is bad for business. Thinking and acting like lawyers is going to do immeasurable damage to their reputation.
And if you honestly think that Honda's blaming the mechanics along with the NHTSA ruling is going to stop lawsuits if someone gets seriously injured or killed, you're expecting way too much of the court system. In the meantime, they're throwing away all of the damage control that they could do by taking a proactive stance.
As to the PT (and other cars) I think that hits the crux of the matter: Why aren't Turbo PTs bursting into flames after an oil change (or any other car with an oil filter near hot components), and CR-Vs are?
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
It wasn't a dumb mistake that caused the Pinto fires. As I recall, it's been a long time...Ford knew there could be a problem but decided to save a few bucks by not installing a part that could have lessened the problem.
Nothing to do with a careless technician not doing his job right!
Mark my words, the questions raised by the news stories and the investigation are what people will remember. Nobody but Honda and the hardcore Honda diehards will care that the NHTSA said it was the mechanic's fault. The fact that the fires have been called into question is enough for many people to write Honda off, especially given their seemingly apathetic and apparently "legal department driven" position.
If it's against the car manufacturer people applaud the decision but when it go's the other way, their decisions get questioned.
I don't understand that mentality."
When you have a major consumer advocate like Consumer Reports questioning these findings, espressing dismay that the NHTSA failed to take a stronger stance, saying that the fires are unusual, a dire and dangerous situation, it leads one to be skeptical about the NHTSA results. Not everyone considers their decision to be a rational one.
And another 5 were found to have pinched gaskets.
And for the record, there were 32 cars investigated for oil leaks. 22 resulted in fires. About 230,000 were sold during the time frame.
"Why aren't Turbo PTs bursting into flames after an oil change (or any other car with an oil filter near hot components), and CR-Vs are?"
All it would take is one PT turbo fire to equal the same rate of fires as the CR-V. Have you actually checked to see if a PT has been torched? Last week you had no idea there was a problem with the CR-V, what makes you so sure this isn't a problem with other cars?
Why hasn't this happened to the 2002 models" [or Accords, or Elements, or the TSX]
Maybe it has. Have you checked?
The investigation included 2003 and 2004 models. I figure if it happened to 2002 cars, those have long since been sent to the crusher. What's left to investigate?
I think what amazes me most about the discussion (not just here) is how willing people are to speculate and jump to negative conclusions without much information. "Guilty until proven innocent!"
Yet, when the NHTSA finds no fault for the manufacturer, these same folks refuse to accept it.
Consumer's Reports isn't an ultimate authority.
I stand by my statement "Japanese superior quality is a MYTH" spread by the media. All the flowery statistics in the world does not bring back the time I wasted at the Honda, Toyota & Subaru Dealerships.
Since I sell Hondas, my ideas and opinions are dismissed my many. I know this.
I love the way people embellish things.
Yet, when the NHTSA finds no fault for the manufacturer, these same folks refuse to accept it."
As I said uptopic, Consumer Reports considers this whole situation to be unusual, dire and dangerous enough to call the NHTSA findings into question.
Sorry, but the statements from Honda and the NHTSA do nothing to explain the unusual circumstances of these fires, and why they were significant enough to require an investigation in the first place.
Sorry again, but I don't just put my brain into suspended animation just because a government agency sends an edict down from the mountain. Government agencies have been wrong before, and they'll be wrong again.
But the bottom line is that, as a Honda fan, I think that Honda is making a major mistake here, and I'm not looking forward to the consequences.
I've tried to make this point without becoming personal, and I'm sad to see that personal remarks are beginning to surface from the other "camp". Just because I don't agree with other posters doesn't mean that my voice has any less reason than theirs. And I'm doing this because I really and truly feel this way, NOT BECAUSE I'M A HONDA HATER! In reality, I'm anything but!
Nobody said they weren't. But by the same token, is the NHTSA never wrong? Highly doubtful... and the fact that CR has stepped up with a comment about this at least makes one take a long hard look at the NHTSA ruling.
It's funny that whenever someone disagrees with Consumer Reports, it's always because they're doing some stunt to boost circulation. But somehow I'm sure when they're top rating Accords, Civics, Odysseys, etc., it's because they're unbiased, highly discriminating and they never make a wrong recommendation.
It wasn't? Did the Pintos start on fire by themselves, or did someone have to crash into the Pinto?
"Sure, and for the 27 morons who caused these fires"
As someone already pointed out, not all 27 were caused by double gaskets. Filters can leak on their own. There is such a thing as a defective oil filter. You can also overtighten or undertighten a filter. When was the last time you saw someone using a torque wrench to install an oil filter?
I would not feel comfortable driving a new CR-V after reading about the fire issue. Changing oil used to be my job, and I don't even know if I'd trust myself to change oil on a CR-V given the consequences of even the slightest leak.
It is not the same issue as lug nuts or brakes, or whatever else you want to compare it to. You can leave the lug nuts off of any car and the result will be the same. You can screw up the brakes on any car. You can screw up the oil change on any car....but on the CR-V, the result is disastrous. THAT is the difference. There have been plenty, PLENTY, of screwed up oil changes. It's been happening hundreds of times every single day for as long as people have been changing oil. Honda KNOWS this, heck, they make money off of this fact.
And to the people who suggest checking the oil filter after an oil change:
Get real!!!!
You can't even see the oil filter from under the hood and even if you were to crawl underneath the car, you're probably not going to be able to spot a double gasket, a pinched gasket, or a piece of sand between the gasket and baseplate. Changing oil used to be my job, and even I would have a tough time looking at the filter while laying on the ground in some parking lot. And people expect Jane Doe to check the oil filter (and know what she's looking for) after an oil change? That's ridiculous.
There's 13 incidents in the wind without advertised causes - what does this mean? Who knows? I don't, and neither do any of you.
Funny... I've seen others make this exact same claim and I never thought it had any merit... until now.
Seems like you couldn't hold back
when I was 4, my mom was making me some toast in our kitchen, using a GE toaster. She left the room for a moment, and I was an impatient little kid, so I thought I'd get the toast out of the toaster sooner. I pulled a chair over to the counter, took a table knife, and inserted it in the toaster to attempt in prying the toast out. It shocked the heck out of me and actually knocked me out of the chair and onto the floor.
Whose fault is that? GE? Nope. My mom's, for leaving a dumb little kid alone with an active electrical device, a chair, and a knife, and mine, to doing the act. No one got sued, and I wasn't spanked since she figured I'd had enough trouble already. --driftracer
Drift, I don't agree with this analogy. YOUR accident was preventable by YOU or your mom.
With CR-V oil changes OTOH, as Newcar has pointed out, the average person has NO WAY of telling whether the oil change was properly done.
Think of your average housewife dragging kids around in her CR-V. She could stop her kid from poking his finger into a toaster, but there's no way she's going to double check her last oil change.
Mistakes happen. Honda knows (a) oil changes are going to be screwed up every now and then and (b) 99.9% of people will never double check. So Honda has a responsibility to put in a system so that a faulty oil change won't torch the car.
It may be a pet phrase of yours, but please stop using the inflammatory (no pun intended) term of "blowing up" when describing this issue. I don't believe that explosions are part of the problem here. While catching fire is undeniably a serious issue, actually "blowing up" is clearly even worse. --talon95
Have you seen that picture of the burning CR-V? If you prefer, I'll use the word "torched" or "burnt to a crisp".
BTW, I agree with most of your points.
The man is a hero.
While skating on a frozen pond, a boy falls through a thin patch of ice. A man who sees this event jumps into the freezing water, goes into shock, and drowns himself.
The man is an idiot.
This analogy doesn't make any sense to me either.
The man VOLUNTARILY chose to risk his life to save the boy.
Honda CR-V owners have NO CHOICE but to change their oil, and since most of them don't know how, they have to pay someone else to do it, and they have no way of knowing whether it's done right.
Let's not use the end results of this case with the CR-V to distort the issue. Any oil leak can result in a fire. An oil leak is among the most common reason for automotive fires.
You're shrugging off a pretty nasty end result, the possibility of being burnt to a crisp. And where's the distortion in the case of the CR-V?
Funny... I've seen others make this exact same claim and I never thought it had any merit... until now.
It's amazing how sitting in someone else's shoes helps you understand their prespective
I can't believe talon95 is being accused of being a Honda hater. I've read and enjoyed many of his posts on many different forums and it's obvious that he is a big fan of Honda.
Criticizing Honda for designing a car that can turn itself into a $20,000 candle does not make the critic a Honda hater.
And what time frame are you referring to? PT Cruiser peaked out at 140,000 in 2000 and sold 107,000 last year. That would be over 300,000 PT Cruisers in the same approximate time period. Still have not heard of one fire caused by sloppy oil change. I understand someone that sells Honda's for a living defending their problems. What is your reason for defending Honda? Would you buy a CR-V and take it to a $10 an hour mechanic to change the oil? Knowing what you know now.
There are, however, people that just seem to squeal with glee when something negative applies to a Honda product. I'm not including you in that catagory and I'm sure you've seen the postings from those people.
Hopefully this can somehow get resolved to everyone's satisfaction and faith in a great product can be restored.
If I were the least bit concerned I would not let my wife of 35 years drive her much loved CRV.
Clearly the fault of the automaker when the car torches itself.
Also there are regulations that state a car should not leak fuel after a crash. Which is also called an accident, which is usually unavoidable. That's why the Pinto was recalled. Also the PT Cruiser.
http://www.ptcruizer.com/repairs-pt-cruiser.html
2001 and 2002 PT Cruisers were recalled to install a secondary seal to the top of the fuel pump module. A fuel leak was detected during an inspection following a government crash test. There are no known incidents or complaints related to this issue.
Notice that there were NO incidences of this happening in real world conditions. Which leads me to believe if NHTSA thought Hnda was responsible, they would issue a recall. Didn't happen.
Additionally. The oil isn't spilled during the oil change. It spills from the incorrectly installed filter. Again, that absolves Honda from liability. If the filter is not installed correctly, there shall be a fire. It doesn't really matter that other cars don't catch on fire, the fact is that the CR-V doesn't either unless the technician causes it.
Additionally, since the filter is under the manifold, if the oil were simply leaking after the oil change, it should fall harmlessly to the ground. That leads the mechanically minded thinker to come to the conclusion that the oil is squirting on the manifold or the cat. In that case it is even more the fault of the person who applied the double or pinched gasket. It maybe a Honda dealer's fault but not the American Honda design.
Clearly we both want the same outcome... we just have differing opinions regarding the best route to that outcome. Hopefully Honda's people will be wise enough to choose that best route, whatever it is.
And the transmission recall hasn't changed my opinion of my Accord one bit... I still love it. So hopefully that paperwork can be intercepted...
I jumped in during the Toyota sludge fiasco back when the same thing happened. I defended my biggest competitor because I thought it was horribly overblown. My opinion still hasn't changed on that one either.
Is the exhaust manifold igniting the oil, or is it the catalytic converter?
I tend to scoff when folks jump on a bandwagon like this - same with the GM truck engine tapping (piston slap) issue...same thing is happening.
PT Cruisers are (apparently) bursting into flames without an oil change. Here we go.
In case of PT Cruiser, the cause of fire is consistent and tied to a manufacturing issue. In case of CR-V it is not (unless you can prove NHTSA wrong, somehow).
If it were Focus and NHTSA arrived at the same decision, would it still be different?
I would like to see your analysis on this "poor design". Have you figured out something NHTSA couldn't?
After all of the hysteria surrounding the Pinto controversy had faded, someone researched the actual number of fire-related fatalities for the Pinto (there's a novel concept!). The figure was in line with other small cars of the period. Many of the "facts" surrounding the case - including the infamous internal Ford memo - were misrepresented by Mother Jones, which led the charge against the Pinto. Turns out the car was no more dangerous than its contemporaries.
That might serve as a warning before once again jumping to conclusions...
M
There doesn't seem to be any question that the reports of the fires are legitimate... the debate is over whether or not the response proposed by Honda and apparently endorsed by the NHTSA is adequate.
Unless somebody wants to propose that this whole situation is some kind of media-driven hoax... I wasn't able to find any references to the CR-V story on the Mother Jones website, so it doesn't appear that they're involved this time.
It's that their executives made a business decision to callously ignore the problem, which led to more people turning into toast, when the problem could have been prevented with a recall.
Let's see how Honda responds and see if they deserve similar castigation.