Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Midsize Sedans 2.0

1239240242244245897

Comments

  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    If your car has OnStar, though, the car's location can be tracked via satellite. I'm under the impression (by OnStar's advertising) that it is not that easy to disable this tracking feature.

    I believe this is also the case with vehicles equipped with Navigation systems. Rental car companies also install GPS systems in their vehicles so if you cross a state line they can charge you an arm and a leg.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,062
    While it's true the navigation system knows where you are, unless the vehicle has the ability to transmit it's location then it can't be tracked. A nav system alone won't give you this feature.
  • I just checked on the College Hill Honda's ( a dealer in Ohio) accessory website and it seems that Honda now has a "gen-u-wine" Honda remote starter for use with 2006-08 Civics and 2008 Accords. These vehicles all have an engine immobilizer but the text states that an engine module (possibly the immobilizer module) requires a dealer reflash... so never say never because I doubt Honda would recommend defusing one anti-theft feature (the immobilizer) to install this. It is, by the way, $388.80 and additional transmitters are $108.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Professional thieves obviously go after popular makes of older cars so they can sell parts.

    Is it really professional thieves that are stealing things like 14 year old accords and 16 year old camrys? How much can parts off of these old beaters be worth? I was speculating that maybe old cars are stolen more often just because they can be more easily stolen and taken on a "joy ride" than newer ones???

    Of course the raw statistics on the number stolen is going to be greater for those cars that have bigger sales, in general. That list tells you nothing about the theft rate. They do have another list of 5 vehicles with the highest theft claims per 1,000 insured vehicles among 2003 - 2005 models...the only midsize on that list is the 2004-05 Sebring.

    Linked below is an IIHS document that also shows Sebring #1 for theft losses among midsize. Saturn LS had lowest losses, BTW:

    http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/ictl_pdf/ictl_0906.pdf
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Theft for parts largely happens if the older car still promises to have parts that is in good condition, commands a value and will not have trouble finding a place in its new “home”
  • drwilscdrwilsc Posts: 140
    As was pointed out, I was mistaken and the Saturn SL DID make the list, so goes your argument.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    What was your argument?
  • drwilscdrwilsc Posts: 140
    My point was that, statistically, having or adding a remote start to a late model car probably is not going to make it any more likely to be stolen. Most stolen cars are older cars that are stolen for parts. I imagine there is a high demand for parts of 10-15 year old cars, since they tend to break down more and their parts may not be as readily available. Thieves who know what cars they want are not even going to be able to tell that your car has a remote start by looking at it.
  • Well I checked. With the alarm activated, I started my Aura XR remotely, then I opened the door and the alarm (horns) started blasting immediately. I disarmed the alarm entered the car, inserted the key which activated the systems.

    I doubt most after market remote start systems would have any effect on the alarm unless they are activated by electrical system load sensors.
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,870
    Don't think I will worry about it since after I start the engine I am in the car within a minute or less

    Saving one minute of time warming up the engine is the value of remote start.
    Awesome. I think I'm feeling giddy.
  • andres3andres3 Southern CAPosts: 10,756
    I think not being on the top ten most stolen list is also a reflection of having a car that doesn't last, and therefore, stolen parts will not be needed for cars that no longer run or function.
    '16 Audi TTS quattro 2.0T, '17 VW Golf Alltrack SE 4-Motion 1.8T, '16 Kia Optima LX 1.6T
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    I rather have a really good keyless system than the remote start.

    But again, I live in LA so there goes the cold/hot weather argument...
  • I am looking forward to a passive entry key on my next vehicle. Keys are so 90s. I want to walk up to the car, have it sense my key, move my seat, wheel and mirrors to my favorite spots, update my radio presets, and maybe turn on the lights if its dark.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    ... drive and brake itself. :D

    Much of it sounds like something one would do for a new date. :P
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    A lot of (if not all) what you've said can be done with today's keyless entry/start systems.
  • ... drive and brake itself.

    Nah, if I wanted to feel like I wasn't driving, I'd keep my Honda :P

    Much of it sounds like something one would do for a new date

    And if you do it on every date, love will stay fresh...yada yada yada :P
  • A lot of (if not all) what you've said can be done with today's keyless entry/start systems.

    I know, its not expensive technology, I was a little surprised my car didn't have it. I also don't see a lot of domestics with that feature. My MIL has it on her Prius and my boss has it on his MS6 and they both really like it.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    But your Honda never treated you like you were its date, right? After all, the only thing you missed was the car laying down a red carpet for you. :shades:
  • Rubbish......older cars that sold well in their time are targets simply and only because they were sold in volume and statistically more are left. The rear wheel drive Olds Cutlass from the 80's was always on the most stolen list. I don't believe it was a paragon for reliability. Is this comment some new way of telling us, yet again, that the Accord being on the list (previous lists anyhow) is there because it is so reliable??? It is there because it sold well and there are lots to be stolen. If it was a reliability issue NO Honda's would be stolen...ever... because, as we know, they never break down and therefore need no parts.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    I just knew a certain someone would chime in turning theft statistics into a reliability measure :D .

    Funny thing, though...one can get a state specific list from cars.com. For my state (WI), the top 10 most stolen, with their rankings, include:

    1. 1992 Oldsmobile Cutlass
    2. 1990 Buick LeSabre
    5. 1990 Buick Century
    7. 1990 Oldsmobile Delta 88
    8. 1995 Ford Taurus
    9. 1994 Dodge Caravan
    10. 1988 Chevrolet Cavalier

    I'm thinking the '88 cavalier is on the list because they are left unlocked with keys in the ignition...the owner thinking "who would bother to steal a 17 year old cavalier" ;) .
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    The stat isn't based on volume, but based on per 100 cars (I think). That said, not all thefts may be for parts, but that can be assumed for most cases. In case of Hondas, you have to couple longevity and compatibility.

    It was with 1998 Accord that Honda got very serious about it. An example is the audio system. It was beginning of a new era that has led to more integrated (and unique) systems since then, and virtually no compatibility going from one generation to another. You could take stereo out of a 1991 Accord and put it in 1997 Accord, or even a 2000 Civic. You can't take 1998 Accord's stereo out (first of all, it is anti-theft coded, but even if you get past it), you can't simply put it in a 2003 or 2008. That has limited the appeal.

    Similar case can be made for engine, and most other parts.
  • My dealer is telling me I need new rear brakes, pads, etc. after only 25000 miles. I was expecting them to last at least 40k miles. It is going to cost me over $300 for just the rear brakes. When questioned he said they are worn down and rusted. Is this common for these cars?
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    Aren't you covered by the car warranty?
  • jlindhjlindh Posts: 282
    What is rusted? If the dealer is talking about a rusted rotor, it sounds like one of your calipers is not working. On the other hand, all your brake rotors will rust when exposed to water. The brake pads will remove the rust when the brakes are applied. The overall wear would depend mostly on your driving style.

    If you're hard on brakes, you might try a different pad.
  • Rear brakes should out last the fronts 2 or 3 to 1. ABS is one thing that can make rear brake pads wear out faster than normal. I would suspect that there is a PROBLEM with the ABS system which should be a warranty covered system. If the calipers are rusted, that would be a factory material defect and should be a warranty covered part. The only thing not covered by most new car warranties would be the pads (and labor).
    I would immediately take my car to a brake shop and get a second opinion from an expert. No way should pad replacement cost $300.

    Good luck
    Oh! Happy Thanks-giving too
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    25K is way too early, more so for rear brake pads. How much life are they estimating is left on the front pads? If you can believe it, my 1998 Accord's pads lasted 90K miles (front) and 132K miles (rear). At 184K miles, those are the only times they have been replaced but they both seem due for replacement soon.

    But, did they say you needed more than brake pads? Then, you might be able to ask for warranty coverage. I can see pads being a wear and tear item and not covered, but if it involves rotors or something else, ask them.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,932
    But not the Malibu--the CTS. GM's first MT COTY in a decade. The 2008 Accord and Malibu were finalists, however. What was interesting that in MT's scoring system, the Malibu out-pointed the Accord. The link below takes you to the reports on the Accord and Malibu.

    http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/car/112_0801_2008_car_of_the_year_finalists
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Shouldn't there have been a spoiler alert in that subject line? I subscribe to MT.

    :cry:

    I'll be sure and check out the article when it gets to my house.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,932
    Maybe you should talk to MT about publishing the COTY results on the Web for all to see before paying customers like you hear about it. :(
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    Perhaps I read the article too quickly. Where does it indicate where the vehicles finished in Motor Trend's scoring system? I noticed the vehicles were listed in alphabetical order but that's not an indication of the order they finished.

    The A5 got robbed.
Sign In or Register to comment.