Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
Can YOU explain why the reports of Honda transmission failures were so extreme in the early 2000's, yet by 2005 practically parallel the other makes? After all, by 2004 the number of complaints by make are practically identical.
Was it, perhaps, that Honda owners love their vans so much that they refuse to post complaints, not wanting to give the brand a bad name?
I'd love to see your reasoning on that.
The reality is, you're hung up on a friend's bad experience, tied to a general dislike of foreign brands.
As for the forum here, really, there couldn't be a less accurate reporting mechanism of problem reporting than a public forum.
That's why when I'm researching a product before purchasing, either automobile or toaster, I take forum postings with a grain of salt. As the saying goes... "misery loves company", and a forum is a great place to have a "b---h session" among folks with similar experiences and, even more, similar opinions.
When there are over 2,000 posts about Odyssey transmissions, that should be more than 'grain of salt' thinking. I think it's logical to assume (and think many would agree) that someone with a trans problem would be more likely to post here than to the NHTSA. And incidentally, if it's only a 'b*tch session' to post on an Edmunds forum, are people also posting good things on a NHTSA website? Yeah, I didn't think so.
I can remember when 78 posts on a Buick forum about air conditioning resulted in posts here about Buick quality.
I genuinely don't get your reasoning sometimes...although compared to three others here that are well-known and remain nameless, I actually tend to agree with you sometimes.
I tell my kids, it's OK to admit things. I have admitted publicly that GM isn't perfect, has had problems, and isn't out of the water totally yet. However, people here are unwilling to admit that someone may actually enjoy their current or late-model GM. This opinion, of course, without their owning one for a number of years.
Not admitting things would be like listing ten makes with high owner satisfaction ratings, two of which are GM, none of them HyunKia which the poster roots for, but mentioning absolutely nothing about the lack of those on the list. I mean really, WTF? (and I know that wasn't you posting). Or, saying things like, "yeah, right, and when Studebaker shut down nobody got a new job", when it was the most-studied plant closing in history up to that time and resulting in the government creating ERISA. I'll chalk that up to you not generally being an old-car buff, and that's OK, but I at least try to post things here that are my opinion, identified as opinion, but I sure wish some other folks would.
I have no problem with some people enjoying their GM. I think the more competition the better. I'm glad some people like GM. Afterall, they'd of gone bankrupt in 1998 instead of 2008 if not for die-hards like you and Lemko :P
What I don't like is the diehard fanboys expecting other Americans to subsidize their purchases with tax dollars. That's GM's problem, they are not sustainable because not enough people enjoyed their GM ownership experience. You are too far and few between to keep GM sustainable.
You are correct and I was messed up in my thinking...somehow was putting the Impala in the Buick division. I guess I was jet lagged.
I agree it's a good big-car value. Not *as* bad for the sea of black plastic as a Chevy rather than a Buick. But they could still do a bit better.
Well I'll step in and say that busiris's post made complete sense to me and I agree with him. So it's ok to admit things both ways. There are others that agree with him.
ANY anecdotal stories in forums are just that - stories. Whether it's UA or bad trannys or some poster always claiming a brand is perfect (
The information I referred to was not "made up", but officially posted and recognized data. I didn't draw the graph the way I may have wanted it to appear, either. That's just the way the data distribution exhibited itself.
Now, if someone has some real, bona-fide, certified data that disagrees with what EDMUNDS posted in its article (again, not me), by all means, bring it forward.
I personally don't have a dog in the hunt. I've never owned a Honda vehicle in my life, nor is one on my horizon, so I don't care if EVERY Odyssey transmission fell out of its respective van.
I do take exception to those that like to paint a picture using only the data that supports their position, and discarding or attempting to discredit the data (or presenter) that disagrees in any way with their position.
The term for that is "junk science".
Yep, it's all about whose ox is being gored.
You might also want to tell your children that just because some people mis-state facts that it's not ok for them to do so as well.
And, I wasn't aware that there was a NHTSA website where owners could post "good things" about their vehicles. Seems a bit redundant to me.
In the end, GM either stands or fails by its own actions, not by the failure rate of Honda transmissions nor by what anyone/everyone posts on Edmunds car forums, or any/all forums.
You were the one that brought up the Odyssey transmission failure rate. You were the one wanting to make the "well, others do it, too!" claim.
You might try giving those little "details" a bit of reflection yourself.
2005 Odysseys typically didn't have the problems of the earlier models.
Stuff happens. Any make or model can have a transmission problem.
I have no idea how your friends Odyssey may have been treated or loaded down. In any case, Honda didn't have to do ANYTHING since it was well out of warranty. Instead, they offered to pay 1800.00 of the repair.
Go's to show, sometimes a company is better off offering nothing if the
"goodwill" gesture isn't going to be appreciated.
I have to wonder what GM would have done for you under the same circumstances.
Misery does love company and forums are a great place for some people to wring their hands and have a pity party.
As an example, a few years ago, I had a customer who was fearful of buying a CRV because..." Don't you know...all of the A/C compressors are bad"
So, I went to the forums and sure enough the boards were alive with heart wrenching tales of compressor failures.
Since we own two CRV's even I was a bit concerned.
So, I went to our Service Manager and I asked him. he had no idea what I was talking about. Same with the technicians I asked.
I checked with our Parts Dept and they looked up the numbers in the computer and it showed that we had replaced ***two*** CRV compressors in the past year. One had 137,000 miles and the other one had even more than that.
Of course, when I shared that news on the complaint board, I was ridiculed and blown off. The gripers didn't want to hear my "lies".
I guess if one looks back over many posts here, those who like their GM's can say that there have been issues. I have yet to hear busiris speak a negative about BMW, or circlew, about HyunKia. That's the real difference.
And to spend so much energy posting repeatedly, months on end, on a board about a brand they hate--there's a psychology book in the making I'm afraid (you know who I'm talking about).
I think the rear seat is way too small for a car that size, too. In fact, that's my friend with the '08 Impala's, main complaint about the car--that, plus the beige seat/black trim interior situation in the current Impala and soon-to-be-no-bench-seat situation in the '14 Impala (he's 66 and a hands-on car guy, BTW).
Other than seeing a zillion of them, there seems to be a number of color and wheel and trim level choices to separate them. I think the current car looks nice--cars that size seem rare nowadays--if equipped without the spoiler, and with the razor-edged-looking wheels that were the LTZ wheels several years ago. I notice that the chrome band below the decklid is now body color, which I don't think looks as good.
I walked past a few-year-old Impala on my way into Chick-Fil-A this afternoon that made me remember, that you used to be able to choose woodgrain or brushed metal instrument panel trim for the Impala, regardless of trim level. That was a nice, small thing that went away. All have woodgrain trim now.
A couple years ago, I'd have said the new Taurus looked better than an old Impala. I can't honestly say that today.
Man, I hope it was jet lag!
Since words can't show tone, that is a good-natured ribbing.
And do you, honestly, yourself, believe that data more than a forum with thousands of posts?
I ask this sincerely, because I most-assuredly cannot...regardless of what make of vehicle we're talking about.
You know, they would be if GM would just right-size itself. It's a much smaller market, but a perfectly valid one. The problem is, GM wants to rule the automotive world, but without actually catering to the parts that aren't buying them.
If GM had a sporty brand that made sporty cars (let's call it, for the sake of argument, Pontiac), then people buying Mazdas might buy them.
If GM had a youth oriented brand (let's just call it Saturn) then maybe Scion buyers would consider it.
If GM had a viable quasi-luxury brand, say maybe Buick, then Audi buyers might seriously cross-shop it.
People shopping for Mazdas won't cross-shop an unmodified Cruze. Same with buyers looking at a Scion tC. And people shopping for a hatchback just won't shop GM until they carry hatchbacks. :shades:
Maybe GM just needs to contract and settle for a smaller chunk of the market, and fulfill that market chunk's needs, instead of wishing more people liked their cars, and insisting on building enough to fulfill those wishes.
As much as I enjoy driving our BMW 328i 'vert, there are a lot of negatives associated with BMW's and the people who own them are well aware of the quirks.
Having owned two before buying this one last year, I knew what I was gettin in to.
It's due for new tabs and I'm required to have the emissions tested before they will sell me tabs.
So (of course) the damm Check Engine light came on yesterday.
No telling what it's going to take to fix this!
I burned BMW for the decade-long battery cable recall a few months back on this very forum, and I believe I stated the folks that suppressed the info that ultimately led to that very recall should lose their jobs, if the hadn't already (#23128, I believe...).
I've also blistered BMW many times on the HPFP issues, the very ones that were highlighted, I believe, on 60 Minutes around a year ago.
You know, that "persecution complex" you sport so often here really gets old sometimes...
But, that's as good of an example as you'll ever see of a "straw man question", simply because you wish to imply that those that DO report problems do so in some sort of random manner, by year and make, but you don't show any shred of supporting evidence. Unless you have some sort of proof, I can't see why a Honda owner would be any more likely, or less likely, to file a report than a Toyota owner or a Chrysler owner.
Can excessive forum postings be indicative of a problem?
Absolutely. Where we differ is that, for you, that translates automatically into a problem, and for me, it only indicates a problem MAY exist. There's absolutely ZERO scientific and causational meaning to random postings.
Here's an excellent example...
Childhood autism related to vaccinations.
Multiple, peer reviewed medical studies, all from very prestigious institutions, worldwide, have repeatedly debunked the link, yet many still believe the relationship is real. The one study that did find a relationship has since been widely debunked, and the "doctor" leading the research team no longer has a license to practice medicine. In short, his study was biased and flunked on multiple levels.
Why do some insist on believing the link is there?
Because 1-2 year olds get vaccinated at the same time autism generally appears in kids, and it's an easy jump to the conclusion that there's a causal relationship.
Every "bang" doesn't mean somebody just got shot. In itself, it only means something went "bang".
But, I'd imagine that more average-height drivers wouldn't have this problem?
Anyway, after fighting with the dealer, he got them to upgrade him to a brand new 2013 to keep him satisfied. I call that horrible service because they did not want to eat the cost difference from the 2012. He was lucky he had a Hyundai loan so all he did was refuse to pay and stated he would sue. They finally came around and the problem is resolved.
No excuses, this is a black mark afaic.
Regards,
OW
????
>"persecution complex"
I'd like to hear clarification on that, but I suspect that would require becoming too personal as covered in the Rules of the Road in the Membership Agreement!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I always related GM to a truck company that abandoned cars long ago but somehow is getting religion as fast as an aged battleship with 3 torpedo holes in the bow can take on water!
Have to say I prefer the look of the last gen 'Bu over the new one.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Nahh, I love when they throw stones at me!
Regards,
OW
Last time, it failed emissions because of a bad gas cap.
so, I went to NAPA and bought a replacement that looked exactly like the one that came off. I had to drive back to the smog place and show them the receipt. That got me passed.
Two days later, the Check Engine light came on. I had the code read and it said Bad Gas Cap!!
It was then that I learned that ONLY a factory gas cap is good enough!
Of course, I had thrown the receipt and box away from NAPA so I got to spend another 15.00 (I know, I was lucky) at BMW for one that suited my fussy little car!
I also found out that if I used (gasp!) aftermarket tailight bulbs, they work fine but give me a message that I have a tailight out.
Persecution complex... "they're always picking on GM".
You know, every observation isn't a complaint or an attack. often, it's a mere statement of fact.
As Freud was once quoted... "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
The most obvious one is, "GM didn't honor warranties after the bankruptcy". That is so completely laughable in my experience (and yes, I have experience in this)...but it still gets trotted out here.
Trouble is, I'm an auditor by occupation. That means I have to word things with work, very precisely or they get misconstrued...sometimes on purpose. And I hate when people at work, outside the company, will 'quote' me by leaving out very relevant information or words that will either seriously, or even slightly, change the meaning of what I said. So I'm stuck with the mindset that B.S. is B.S., but hard facts remain hard facts. It has also, unfortunately, made me realize that at least with a good chunk of people I have to deal with in my job, honesty and even-handedness are not very highly prized.
Busiris, I do remember you talking about the BMW issue you mentioned and I stand here corrected...for all to see. And circle, thanks for mentioning that HyunKia problem, at least under duress
That should never have to happen. This is a black mark in Hyundai.
I believe this is why many, including myself, are loyal to companies they can trust. Companies they have trusted in the past, and who stood by the product if there was an issue. (Even if they get boring like Honda and Toyota are guilty of).
There is no reason to go back to a company you can't trust "Chrysler/GM" no matter how good their cars get. Without trust, you are putting a lot of money on the line with a major purchase such as a vehicle.
But you seem to have covered that.
Regards,
OW
HunKia has issues as well...just not as many as GM!
Regards,
OW
"goodwill" gesture isn't going to be appreciated.
I think the company has to gauge the goodwill on a case by case basis. Is the customer happy with the "partial" offer to help, or unhappy? Are they accepting it only because they have to (thinking it's the best they are going to do without the hassle of courts and arbitration)?
I'm of the opinion that goodwill should be ALL or nothing. Honda covered every penny of my Accord's transmission at 42K, Audi covered every penny of the lame AC compressor that died by 53K. Honda didn't even ask any questions or hint they wanted me to help them out with payment. Audi actually had the service guy call me and ask how much I thought Audi should cover of the repair (of course I said all of it, 100%). They didn't give me any grief but they asked the question. :P
Geez, I'd hope so. Their powertrain warranty was the same as the bumper-to-bumper? I guess GM's was before 2006, as well, now that I think about it.
And I'll step in again and add to this. It's NOT a winning strategy for a company to win by talking about how bad the competitor is. People buy on what they perceive is EXCELLENT. And that's why I hammer GM for not trying hard enough to be excellent. That's why I bemoan the significant percentage of dogs in the product lineup. It really just doesn't matter whether brand X has fuel pumps that blow up - it still matters whether a company's (in this case, GM's) products are EXCELLENT. And to what degree the market, the reviewers, and yes, even Consumer Reports feel that way. Because those are the things that are going to SELL the products.
Some cadre of holdout loyalists is NOT ENOUGH to save a declining company. It needs to be an appeal to the new customers if any brand is to grow and flourish.
Exactly. I guess they can afford to cover goodwill repairs with the money they make from suckers that bought Honda and Toyota extended warranties they will never ever use (and if you ever do need to use it) they'll cover it anyway under goodwill.
GM needed gov't support to be able to afford paying for those "extended" powertrain warranties, an important distinction.
At least, that was the case with me.
Another question of "fact": They started offering the longest powertrain warranty of an American manufacturer, in the 2007 model year. Do you think they thought they'd be in bankruptcy at that time?
Not to mention: They've done goodwill things for me, out of warranty, after the bankruptcy. Just an important "FYI" IMHO.
Maybe it's just because the original meaning of the GM divisions got so muddled that it's hard to differentiate them any more. Another thing I think GM should have done after BK - real strong branding and differentiation. But it hasn't happened very much. I think that would in the long run be a good thing for GM.
I personally do. I suppose some of them were in denial. Some of them stuck their heads in the sand. Perhaps some of them thought the gov't bailout would save them BEFORE and PREVENT bankruptcy?
I think several people here in these forums besides me were predicting bankruptcy even well before 2007 for GM. Mainly, I remember the arguments from PRo-GM people at the time as to why they'd never go bankrupt to center around "they are TOO big to fail.
The long warranties at that time reeked of desperation to me. Remember Chrysler's desperate "Lifetime Powertrain" warranty in the 11th hour prior to their 2nd bailout?
Too bad that lifetime warranty was riddled with at least 1,000,000 ways to be excluded from ever being used or claimed upon.
I don't like GM having half the length of warranty time-wise as the Korean brands, but at least they've been consistent pre- and post bankruptcy with it.
Depends on how they are presented and used in a "discussion," doesn't it?
>it's a mere statement of fact.
Those are sometimes distorted, aren't they.
While the intentions of some are to have a dialogue in a discussion that should be about the resurrection of the GM business, and while those some occasionally do engage in a beneficial dialogue, others just post garbage comments as if they think their posting is going to affect someone else's opinion of GM--at least I guess they still do as I describe 'cause I don't even read some posts because they are filtered by my twit filter.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
And, there's no denying that some posters, either ignorant or with ill intent, will fabricate stories/misrepresent facts/outright lie to push their agenda. Some even want to argue about the next bailout, as if it's some assured thing that will ultimately happen. I can't say one way or the other.
Evidently, I need to upgrade my crystal ball to version 2.0.
As an auditor, you understand the value of "truth and proof" better than many, so I would simply suggest that when you are suspicious about someone's comment/statement, call them out on it and ask for proof.
For the serious posters here, we can figure out who the crank is pretty quickly in the conversation.
Personally, 1 of the main reasons I visit here is that it forces me to constantly re-evaluate my thoughts on GM and the auto industry in general. Quite often, I'll see a claim and think "is that right? I don't believe that..." and it entices me to do a little research on the topic. And, quite often, I end up learning a little bit more than I knew before. Sometimes the claim really holds water, other times it leaks like a sieve.
I also try personally to void the opinionated arguments, like car A is trouncing car B. I may look up and post the sales of both, but what exactly does "trouncing" mean? It's a user-defined variable... Meaningless at the end of the day.
If a "truthiness requirement" was needed before one could hit the "Post my message" field, there'd be a lot less postings on all forums...
At least, that's how I see things...
The Impala I rented had this color combo. While light colors are hard to keep clean, I actually thought the seat color was the better part of the interior experience - much better than the sea of black plastic and the not-at-all convincing plastic woodgrain, which IMHO just looked cheap.
What are those? :confuse:
Only in Oregon.....
Nope, I always make sure they get put on tight but thanks for the tip anyway!
Well, then how about sales = reality, market share change = reality, and profits = reality?
Those are ultimately the important metrics - with the profits one more important than the other two. It doesn't do any good to be #1 in sales if you aren't making any money.
When I spotted it in ther driveway, I honestly thought it was an Impala, and a very good looking one at that.
I looked it over and was shocked to see it was a Malibu. I have to say it was a VERY nice looking car!
Take the ATS, specifically. All the advertising and hooplah, saying its a BMW 3-series "beater"... Claiming its "every bit as good as a BMW"... On and on.
I'm not marketing whiz, but even I can see the folly in that maneuver.
GM has set the standard as the BMW, and every single reviewer is going to do that very comparison. Little mention will be given to the areas the ATS really shines, but major emphasis will be given to any area that doesn't compare favorably to the BMW 3-series. I've already seen that in the few initial comparison reviews I've read about the 2.
Much better, I think, to state you have a new car that can compete with any other manufacturer on the same stage, and when the inevitable comparison demonstrates a shortfall, GM doesn't have to play "catch-up".
After all, have you seen a cellphone commercial touting "phone X" by saying "It's just as good as an iPhone?"... Or a PC, saying "It's just as good as an iMac?".
That's a recipe for marketing failure if I ever saw one...
I and many others agree. And most car companies, while a new model might be a disappointment compared to the competition, how many do WORSE than their OWN previous model?
I can only think of this new Malibu, and the current-gen Civic.
Yes, and GM has been extremely good to me for over 30 years. They have most definitely earned my undying trust and loyalty. I have no need to look elsewhere for all my automotive wants and needs.