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
Point out to your Honda dealer who installed your security system that they degraded stock features of your Ody and you want them restored. Dealer installed options shouldn't degrade this or any other feature. They may have miswired as I can't imagine Honda selling something like this. If they tell you it was beyond their control I'd rave about them not telling you about this in advance as it might have impacted your installation decision. There should be a way otherwise insist on something that might make you happier... like cash-back.
Are you saying that your 2006 Odyssey Touring pings with regular?
Pinging is pre-detonation when the pressure and temperature in the cylinder is so high that the gas explodes before the spark from the spark plug detonates it. Pinginging or pre- detonation occurs when the piston is still moving up towards TDC and causes a push (detonation) against the direction of piston travel.
In the old engines where you could adjust the timing, the best performance is achieved just before pre-detonation. Newer engines without timing adjustments must by definition eliminate pinging because you cannot adjust the timing to eliminate it. Pinging or pre-detonation is very bad for an engine period. It is going BOOM when it should not.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------
The deal:
Price: C$4,000 off as a year end clearance. MSRP is C$49,055. No run flat tires and TPMS otherwise exactly the same as US model.
Color: Midnight Blue Pearl.
Options: Protection Package - black. No other options.
Financing: 1.9% for 36 months or 2.9% for 60 months.
Money down: zero down. Trade-in car worth about C$4,175.
Car inspection plan:
1. Check for pinging - but what should I do??
2. Check for shudder when switching to / from ECO mode - a test drive?
3. Check for paint defects and fittings of all doors and hood.
4. Check and confirm no outstanding recalls - ask dealer to provide documentation.
5. Any other recommendations by the audience of this forum?
Thanks.
As it is, I can take seven 185-pounders to lunch in my Touring providing they skip dessert (buuurp!). Guess I better skip lunch to make it to 185.
All other areas for the 05 are "better than average" or "much better than average" (except Hardware, which rates "average").
2005 models were generally less than six months old at the time of the survey, and had been driven an average of 3000 miles.
Any idea what these problems might be? What is different about the 2005 model that could have caused these problems?
Typically any first year vehicle after a major redesign has more problems than the years prior or after.
Many people complained that the Ody's upper glovebox that has an excessive gap and considered it poor craftsmanship, fit finish, indicative of low quality. The problem was the design, not the implementation or consistency. Multiply that alone as it obvious, times the number or whiners that would consider this a defect and you have a much higher than average rating. Honda owners, me being typical, have much higher than average expectations of quality standards based on past experience therefore scrutinize a vehicle more than your typical Kia Rio owner who is happy with basic dependable transportation. The other part of this is that some power equipment is tricky to understand how to operate. It is intimidating to have all these bells an whistles and decrypt how to use them to your advantage and not knowing how could result in the untied shoe syndrome, I can't figure it out so it must be broken and I'll rate lower. Is that above or below average?
For more accurate feedback, every time you're near an occupied Ody at the pumps, shopping, etc. ask them how they like their vehicle and somewhere in there ask about the model year, features, defect, MPG. Most folks, CR and Edmunds readers included, are above average happy with their Odyssey's, especially after factoring in that 80 percent don't even worry about vehicle forums.
Bottom line is like any forum or magazine, folks don't tune in primarily to voice how thrilled they are with the subject item.
These survey results were published in the April 2006 Auto issue (the most recent auto issue, and not an "old" article). Hence the survey covers (and can cover) only 2005 and earlier models.
These results come from over a million CR readers, and thus statistically more relevant than talking to a few people at the gas pump (and yes, the satisfaction rating for the Odyssey is extremely high).
Now maybe the CR readers who reply to surveys are whinier and/or more uneducated than those who don't, but if they were, there'd be a lot more negative ratings across the board than there are. As I mentioned, all other areas of the Odyssey rated quite high, so those two areas were anomalous, especially compared with the pre-2005 models.
Your info on the glovebox and the power equipment is appreciated, really. Starting your post with a snarky sentence--especially an uninformed one--is not.
If you're interested in the most typical types of problems reported by 2005 Odyssey owners to Consumer Reports, you might try posting on the automotive forums at their website. The moderators there sometimes share this kind of information in response to questions, though you have to be an online version subscriber to post.
But how many of those million CR readers provided information about the Ody?
http://www.odyclub.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21586
Well, sure. That's exactly what I'm considering. Whatever the reported numbers are, for those two problem areas, they're much worse than average.
Where did you get those numbers? I'm curious.
CR doesn't tell us at all how many survey responses any particular model year of any specific vehicle received. They don't give us margins of error, standard deviations or any other statistical data to draw any sound conclusions.
True enough, but with a million responses (which works out to around 1300-1500 per year and model), the MOE is pretty low. Also, if they don't have enough data for a particular model year, they don't post results. These guys are no dummies when it comes to statistics.
If you're interested in the most typical types of problems reported by 2005 Odyssey owners to Consumer Reports, you might try posting on the automotive forums at their website.
Didn't know that was available. Thanks very much!
Well, the average for all cars listed is around 1300-1500 per model year. Given the popularity of the Odyssey, we can assume that number's much higher. Any sample size over 1050 or so (assuming random distribution) is statistically significant, so these are quite reliable data.
Given that they provide no statistical information whatsoever, they normalize everything to a few categories of colored circles and that the judgement of a serious problem is left to the respondent, I would find it hard to believe anyone with a basic knowledge of statistics could claim their reliability data are reliable. They might be, we just don't know.
But if the average chance of a problem each year is quite small, who cares if you are 30% above average?
"Where did you get those numbers? I'm curious. "
I added up problem rates based on charts and data in previous issues. I posted the method and reference page numbers and issues in forums at the OdyClub and SiennaClub organization websites. I'd link them, but Edmunds considers that a violation of TOS.
"These guys are no dummies when it comes to statistics."
Well, I'd agree at least in that they are no dummies when it comes to hiding all their statistical information. It isn't very good for subscriptions if people know that the difference in a model with a "half black" circle reliability projection and a "half red" one may only amount to a few more problems in 8 years of ownership.
Funny thing is a very long thread on the problems in their methodolgy at their forums was closed by the moderators and many very intelligent posts were deleted. They finally said they would look into releasing more information and having their numbers peer reviewed in future years. Another good reference with some comments on Consumer Reports data is the TrueDelta website.
I don't deny the Odyssey has some problem areas. CR probably identifies them quite well. How often they might occur over a vehicle's lifespan and how serious (cost/time) they might be can be difficult or impossible to determine.
True enough. But is there any reason to think their 1,000,000+ sample is skewed? Do CR readers receive different cars than non-CR readers? No.
Now if CR was surveying political views or spending habits or somesuch, the bias of "CR readership only" might figure into the results, but not for what problems cars have. It's not like a car dealer says, "Hey, that guy's a CR reader, make sure he gets one of the good ones."
Given that they provide no statistical information whatsoever,
Not completely true. We do know the total number of responses. And as I said in my post above, a sample of over 1000 cars (all of the same model and year) is quite significant statistically.
they normalize everything to a few categories of colored circles
So what? Presentation of data results in a graphic format. Doesn't automatically make those results less reliable.
Whoa. Where did that come from? "small" compared to what? IIRC, CR considers "average" problem rates to be "average for this class of vehicle", not "average for all years of Odysseys".
If so, "much worse than average" is not "small". Gotta admit though, I'm not entirely sure of CR's def of "average" though--that issue's at home.
How often they might occur over a vehicle's lifespan and how serious (cost/time) they might be can be difficult or impossible to determine.
Exactly. Which is why I posted here to get more info. Thanks for the OdyClub reference, I'll have to check that out!
It isn't very good for subscriptions if people know that the difference in a model with a "half black" circle reliability projection and a "half red" one may only amount to a few more problems in 8 years of ownership.
These in no way apply to a 2005 model less than six months old at the time of the survey.
They sample a subscribership that is influenced by their editorial content, including past survey results. Their subscribers probably do not make a very broad demographic subset compared to domestic vehicle owners as a whole. Is it skewed as far as reliability data is concerned? That's just another of many unknowns about their data.
"Not completely true. We do know the total number of responses."
You know a total of all years and all models, sure. You guess what it might be for a particular vehicle. And as I said in my posts, that still gives nothing about margins of error or standard deviations, types or severity of problems or some sort of oversight or peer review that would be required of any similar data published in any reputable statistics or economics journal.
So what? Presentation of data results in a graphic format. Doesn't automatically make those results less reliable.
It takes data of unknown merit and puts it into a format that is easier to read at the expense of hiding the underlying absolute numbers. You are right that it doesn't make the results any less reliable, because there is no way to determine how reliable they are in the first place. CR may or may not be dummies with their numbers, but they sure do dumb down everything to a very large degree.
Whoa. Where did that come from? "small" compared to what? IIRC, CR considers "average" problem rates to be "average for this class of vehicle", not "average for all years of Odysseys".
If you only care about how it compares to its class, that's fine. I also care about how large the problem rate is in absolute terms. Like I said, if there's only a very small chance of having a problem in the first place, I don't care so much that my relative chance is a bit higher than average. Take the difference between the 2005 Odyssey and Sienna. Are two problems [of unknown severity] over 8 years a big deal to you? Not to me. As they say, YMMV.
"These in no way apply to a 2005 model less than six months old at the time of the survey."
Yet, Consumer Reports did give such a projection for the 2005 models in the April, 2006 issue (page 52). I used that relative projection (the online chart at the time gave it a numerical projection of about 5% below average) with long term data chart of the minivan average in a previous issue and added up the results for each year. Not a perfect result, but no worse than any of their data, in any case. Certainly good enough to get a rough estimate with no less 'reliability' than any of their charts or graphical representations. That isn't necessarily saying much, of course.
It's sad that they bury the necessary baseline numbers and charts you need to get the actual, absolute numbers a buyer would want to adequately compare vehicles. Instead you get vague colored circles that are as easy to read as they are to mislead, in that they have been normalized and give only relative comparisons. Even then, you can say nothing at all about how 'reliable' their reliability data is. It may be good, it may be bad, there's just no telling. A million responses don't necessarily make it so.
Does anyone know the exact specs for wheels for the 2006 Odysseys and what other vehicles they will fit. Also does anyone know if any 15" wheels will work on these Odysseys. I prefer skinnier snow tires and the only real way to do this that I can see is to go to a 15" rim.
http://www.tirerack.com/upgrade_garage/WheelSearch.jsp?autoMake=Honda&autoModel=- - - Odyssey+EX&autoYear=2006&autoModClar=
After you review, if you have any questions, just call their toll free number.
You must be part of the aftermarket wheel hype. I have a 99 Intrepid with 16" wheels from the factory. This car could also be purchased with 15" wheels so if I wanted to I could go from the original for my car 16" to the also original for my car 15". I have been looking at Mazda 3 recently. They come with 15", 16" and 17" wheels standard. They are all interchangeable.
If you go to the web site you listed they want to sell 18" wheels for the Odyssey! Today I was told that wheels from the new Accords also fit Odysseys. Not sure if it is true. It used to be that the wheels were just big enough to clear the brake hardware so that usually you could not go to smaller wheels. Now they make the wheels larger simply for aesthetics (Bling bling) and in many cases you can go smaller if you want.
I also found out today that Costco and Les Schwab do not stock any snow tires for the Odyssey and that even if they did they would not install less than four.
I asked the guy at Les Schwab if that was the law and he stated that it was company policy. He said that it was dangerous to have only two snow tires. So I asked him that I can drive around in the snow with none, but having two was dangerous. What I really found interesting was that after this I went home and did soem research on-line about snow tires and traction. All of the studies that I found had been done with only two snow tires when the vehicles were two wheel drive vehicles. Obviously those tires had not been installed at Costco or Les Schwab. Against company policy to make half money as they could instead of forcing you to buy four. I do know that if you take rims in, you can buy two at a time. This is what I will be doing. I wish that I could mount and balance the tires myself and be completely done with the bums.
If the rims from the Accord will fit, great. But I think those may be 16". Also, take a look at the brakes on your Odyssey - they're pretty big since they have to stop a 4,000 brick.
As for 2 versus 4 snow tires, you really should get 4. The days of running 2 tires was based on RWD cars. Today with so little weight on the rear of FWD vehicles you can and will lose traction very easily with snows only on the front.
Last, could you point me to some of your research that shows the tests were done with just 2 snows?
I realize that 15" wheels may not fit on the Odyssey because of the brake size. The only way to find out is to get a 15" wheel with the correct bolt pattern and offset and put the rim on the car. I was wondering if anyone had already done this?
I knew that the Accord rims were 16", but it should make the rims more readily available so less of the screw factor.
I am still upset that Honda puts out a vehicle with a tire size that neither of the two major tire suppliers in this area, which gets a lot of snow, carry a snow tire for.
I assume with the traction control and VSC that I cannot have different size tires on the front vs the rear so I would have to find two 235/65/R16 snow tires or four of a different size.
For front wheel drive, something like 70% of the traction is from the front tires and having excellent all weather tires on the rear of a front wheel drive car with excellent snow tires on front with traction control and VSC is a far from the old days.
On my 99 Intrepid I have 225/60/R16 Michelin X tires on the back and 205/65/R16 Michelin X-ice tires on the front. There is 120 lbs of sand in the trunk and the car is just great on the snow and ice we have here in Eastern WA.
With the same setup the Odyssey would be better due to the additional weight, ground clearance and traction control.
You can do what you want. Personally I believe that 4 snows are a much better setup than just 2 snows on the drive wheels.
Good Luck.
Not sure how the VSC will impact things, other than giving it a work out, but traditionally running snows on just the front is a good way to watch your back end pass your front on a snowy turn.
I believe in getting dedicated wheels (no mounting/remounting 2x/year, plus it saves abuse on the alloys). But these days, you often have to get alloys for the snows since they don't make steelies the right size for many cars!
You do, however, have to keep the same overall diamater if you do a -1 or +1 swap. So if you do find 15" wheels, you are going to need a really big sidewall (75 series+) to keep the same diam, especially if you go narrower. You might get away with something like a 215/70-16?
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
My question is:
Is it safer to have two snow tires than no snow tires?
If I go to Costco or Les Schwab with $300 in my pocket and they say that they are concerned about my safety so they will not sell me two snow tires, but will send me off with none, they are being hypocritical. It is about the BUCK.
I am sure that 4 snow tires is better that 2 which is better than none. Fully locked differentials on 4x4 with chains is even better yet. Do you need it? No.
Apparently at Costco and Les Schwab I cannot do what I want. I thought that I lived in America!
Well this quote from your intial post and complaining that nobody would install just 2 snows seem to insinuate that:
All of the studies that I found had been done with only two snow tires when the vehicles were two wheel drive vehicles.
Is it safer to have two snow tires than no snow tires?
IMHO, on a front wheel drive vehicle: YES. The problem with running just snows on the front is that although you can get moving in snow, you stand a much greater chance of having the rear swing around you when you brake or turn.
In fact, even when replacing just 2 regular tires it is now recommended that the new tires be installed on the rear to prevent oversteer conditions.
If I go to Costco or Les Schwab with $300 in my pocket and they say that they are concerned about my safety so they will not sell me two snow tires, but will send me off with none, they are being hypocritical. It is about the BUCK.
Yeah, it's about the buck alright. The buck they'll be sued for if someone is injured or killed in an accident if they install tires in an unsafe manner and against recommended practices.
Apparently at Costco and Les Schwab I cannot do what I want. I thought that I lived in America!
You can do what you want. I presume they won't mount 2 snows on your car for you but youhave them freedom to mount them on your car yourself at home.
You do, and so does Costco/LesSchwab. They also have the right to do what THEY want, which is to not sell you two snow tires. Nothing keeps you from grabbing two rims, two tires, throw them in your trunk and ask someone to install. I suppose some shops won't even do that, but I'm sure you can find someone that will. There's probably even a lawyer that can point you in the right direction :P
What about anti lock brakes and vehicle stability control?
You can do what you want. I presume they won't mount 2 snows on your car for you but you have them freedom to mount them on your car yourself at home.
This is exactly what I will do. However, many people do not have the where-with-all or ability to mount their own snow tires.
Funny thing about the safety thing. Last year a very safe person in a Subaru AWD (a safe car) with studs on all four wheels (safe tires) T-boned someone pulling out of my daughter's day-care on ice. The brilliant quote was "she was in front of me and I could not stop". I think that he might have been driving too fast, but because of the AWD and the studs I am sure that he did not think he was. The police report was a little different. I was driving behind him in a much less safe vehicle (intrepid FWD) with only two snow tires (no studs) and by some miracle managed not to crash! I still don't know how it happened. Oh that is right, I am not an idiot!
Yeah, it's about the buck alright. The buck they'll be sued for if someone is injured or killed in an accident if they install tires in an unsafe manner and against recommended practices
There is no requirement for snow tires in Washington State except on mountain passes and then you must carry chains and the onus is on the driver. Here is an idea. I go to Costco and ask for two snow tires. That is all of the money I have. They refuse. Company policy for my "safety" (really their litigation protection and really really to make more money). I leave and crash because they refused to help me with my legitimate safety concerns. Is is better that they did not sell me the two tires I requested? That is one a jury could probably really sink their teeth into.
Once your tail end loses traction, anti-lock brakes won't help you. Stability control will help if you have it. My 2000 Ody doesn't. I decided that spening another $200 was worth it to protect my family.
Funny thing about the safety thing. Last year a very safe person in a Subaru AWD (a safe car) with studs on all four wheels (safe tires) T-boned someone pulling out of my daughter's day-care on ice. The brilliant quote was "she was in front of me and I could not stop". I think that he might have been driving too fast, but because of the AWD and the studs I am sure that he did not think he was.
No amount of safety gear will prevent an accident when the driver is outdriving their equipment. That same driver in your lesser equipped Intrepid would probably have caused even more damage.
Here is an idea. I go to Costco and ask for two snow tires. That is all of the money I have. They refuse. Company policy for my "safety" (really their litigation protection and really really to make more money). I leave and crash because they refused to help me with my legitimate safety concerns. Is is better that they did not sell me the two tires I requested? That is one a jury could probably really sink their teeth into.
I'm not a lawyer but IMHO, if recommended practice is snows on all four corners that would cover them if they refused to sell you two. At that point you would have to prove that by not selling you two, they endangered you. After all, you could've stayed home and not driven in the snow. You sound like the kind that believes in personal responsibility - staying home is part of that.
Driver aids; they don't change the laws of physics.
The main problem with putting snows JUST on the wheels getting power is that, under acceleration, there will be better traction. That 'better traction' doesn't help with braking and turning (yes, steering is accomplished by just the fronts, but TURNING under control requires traction to all 4 tires). The driver then is predisposed into thinking the traction conditions are 'not so bad'......until they brake a little too hard or turn a little to quick and the rear end of the car comes around because they EXCEEDED the physical capacity of the system.
Yes, not driving like an idiot certainly helps. And the fact that you avoided a situation when another individual with AWD and studded tires wrecked is evidence of this. But the store can't tell by looking WHO is an idiot who will overdrive their equipment due to a false feeling of security and who isn't. And, generally speaking, it is better to have the SAME degree of traction on all 4 tires rather than drastically DIFFERENT degrees of traction.
Consider this: would it be safer to place those 2 snow tires just on the driver's side and leave regular tires on the right? At least this way, the vehicle would behave more predictably when TURNING while offering somewhat better traction when accelerating. Yet I'll bet it never occurred to you that THIS might be better than placing more traction JUST on those tires which apply power to the ground.
We have an 05 Honda Odyssey EXL V6 minivan with an Aluminum engine. My spouse had an animal hit that caused some front end damage (bumper etc). It also damaged the radiator to leak and she drove the vehicle (normal town driving 30-50 mphs speeds) for about another 150 miles over 3-4 days.
When I came back from an out of town trip, i found no hot air was being blown into the passenger compartment even with the heat setting being high. I checked the coolant level in the radiator and could not see any coolant on top of the fins inside (although the overflow tank still showed the coolant level between MIN and MAX). Looking through the
front grill, I saw the radiator fins had been damaged.
I started to drive it to the body shop but in about 4-5 miles, the temperature indicator went 75% of the way up. At that point I stopped and called in the tow truck.
Is there a way to tell if the engine suffered any damage, especially since the van has an Aluminum alloy engine? Is there any diagnostic tests that I could get done to figure this out?
Any help is much appreciated
Thanks
Bob
This can also be a problem for wet traction if replacing just 2 regular tires and having significantly worn tires on the rear axle. There is a nice video about this on the michelinman.com web site. http://www.michelinman.com/care/tip6.html#5
When you buy a vehicle that comes with specific sized rims, its factory calibrated for that rim size. I don't think the brakes will be an issue as the brakes are most likely standard on the vehicle regardless of rim size. Remember, we're not talking about a sports car here...it's a mini-van.
Asking $26k. Edmonds says it should be about $21-23. In y'all's experience, what price is closer to reality?
Thanks,
Dirk
For $26k you would be better off with a new one for $3-4k more.