Honda to Recall 561,564 vehicles

[06StangAwesomecar]

hey 05, relax, willya? sorry if i made a remark about your favorite engine. i know lots of people, personally, who've had head gasket issues with the 3.1. so to me, i wouldn't buy one. if it's as bulletproof as you say, consider me corrected. i knew of the intake gasket issues, too, but that is a much easier fix....how about i'll just call them "intake gasket" engines and you can cool off, ok? it's not like i made fun of bec's burning crv or anything!

 

...and lest you still feel slighted, the cars in line AFTER Ford for myself and my family to buy are GM's, so i'm not at all a Ford-Loving GM basher.

 

 

Well great to here you like Gm :happy feet:

The 3.1 really never had to many Intake issues, now the 3100 yes intake issues, not head gskts.

It is just so funny how someone can have a Intake or headgskt leak and the car is automatically junk. The domestics and Imports are all pretty equal to me. And they all have issues, EVERY single one has issues.

And I have yet to see or work on one 3.1 v-6 with headgskts that failed due to the headgskt.

Now the quad 4 yes headgskt failure central, all because a bean counter had to refuse stainless due to a few cents, cost them in the end though.

And I never said YOU were a Gm/Ford basher.

[Roadrunner]

<<any 70's, 80's, or early 90's gm's are also "headliner" cars. buying one of those insures you will be laughed at as your headliner will be blowing in the wind and riding on your scalp until you just pull it all down.>>

 

What causes that, anyway?

 

I've seen a '77 Trans-Am with the whole headliner falling down, but we've also had a Olds that didn't have any of that trouble. Both lived in the Arizona sun.

[marc-o]

blah blah blah :blah:

 

Everyone's got stories that clearly provide "evidence" that what they think the best car really is the best car.

 

Here's mine:

 

Almost 20 years ago my father had a government posting in Belgium, working with the EU. The whole family moved there for 5 years, during which time we naturally bought a car. This car was the most reliable car my parents have ever owned, both before and since. Other than maintenance, nothing ever actually broke on it - until 3 weeks before we were going to leave, at which point the battery needed to be changed (pretty normal thing once a car hits that age ~ 6 yrs old).

 

The car was driven throughout much of Western Europe on frequent trips we'd take to make the most of the time there. It's been from Ireland to Switzerland to Portugal. Like I said - of all the cars my parents have owned (others are Pontiac, Chevy, Chrysler, GM, Mazda) it was the most reliable one - therefore here's what we should all be driving:

 

1987 Peugeot 505

 

Due to their experience (on which I could swear just about anything, since I was there), it's clear that the French have reached engineering perfection, and no other car has since equalled it. I'm not sure if anyone else has had problems with their Peugeots, but ours was just perfect, and we liked it, therefore, it must be a great car. Ours came off the assembly line and didn't let us down, in our eyes it was the best car - therefore, the same must be true for everyone else.

 

True story.

 

Sorry to end this debate folks, it's obvious Peugeots are the best. :closedeyes:

[NickF1011]

Hey Range, got a CR-V, over 60K miles, and still hasn't caught fire. If it needs a recall, then why hasn't mine caught fire yet?

 

Now there's a weak argument if I ever heard one.

 

We owned an Explorer and it never flipped over. Maybe the tires didn't need to be recalled?

 

My brother has an F-150 that hasn't caught on fire. Why did they do a recall on the cruise control?

 

Oh brother.

[bec5150]

Now there's a weak argument if I ever heard one.

 

We owned an Explorer and it never flipped over. Maybe the tires didn't need to be recalled?

 

My brother has an F-150 that hasn't caught on fire. Why did they do a recall on the cruise control?

 

Oh brother.

If you kept the tires inflated to 30+PSI, the Explorer had no issues. I thought the whole tire deal was a byproduct of Ford calling for tire pressures that were too low in the owners manual. I doubt if you ever ran your tires at 25PSI, did ya?

 

As far as the F-150, they did a recall on the cruise control becuase it was a defective part. To date, there has been no proof of a defective part on the Honda. Yes, I admit, if you don't do the oil filter right, it will drip on the exhaust, but I change my filter properly so no worries. There is no need for a recall, except for a recall of techs that can't change an oil filter.

 

As far as the oil filter being in the wrong place, every Honda motorcycle puts the filter on the front of the engine behind the header pipes. No worries there either, again, as long as you change the filter properly.

 

I love the way the CR-V issue comes up everytime you all gotta pick a bone with Honda. Anyone that can read can tell this is a non issue. I can name off a bunch of cars that will suffer catastrophic damage if the maintanance isn't done right. That's not the manufacturers fault.

[NickF1011]

If you kept the tires inflated to 30+PSI, the Explorer had no issues. I thought the whole tire deal was a byproduct of Ford calling for tire pressures that were too low in the owners manual. I doubt if you ever ran your tires at 25PSI, did ya?

 

As far as the F-150, they did a recall on the cruise control becuase it was a defective part. To date, there has been no proof of a defective part on the Honda. Yes, I admit, if you don't do the oil filter right, it will drip on the exhaust, but I change my filter properly so no worries. There is no need for a recall, except for a recall of techs that can't change an oil filter.

 

As far as the oil filter being in the wrong place, every Honda motorcycle puts the filter on the front of the engine behind the header pipes. No worries there either, again, as long as you change the filter properly.

 

I love the way the CR-V issue comes up everytime you all gotta pick a bone with Honda. Anyone that can read can tell this is a non issue. I can name off a bunch of cars that will suffer catastrophic damage if the maintanance isn't done right. That's not the manufacturers fault.

 

My response had nothing to do with you having a Honda. It was your "well, it hasn't happened to me yet, so there must not be a problem" mentality that made me laugh.

Edited June 19, 2006 by NickF1011

[range]

Repeat after me........"THIS IS A NON ISSUE"

 

 

 

Repeat after me...."Honda Transmissions are GREAT!"

 

Repeat after me....."14 recalls on the Odyssey isn't THAT many"

 

Repeat after me....."The Acura CSX looks NOTHING like a Honda Civic"

 

 

Very good.....now drink the rice-flavored Kool Aide....

 

Perfect.....feel reality slowly slipping out of your brain.....

 

Excellent!....you are now qualified to become a member of Team Honda

 

 

 

 

.

[bec5150]

Repeat after me........"THIS IS A NON ISSUE"

 

Repeat after me...."Honda Transmissions are GREAT!"

 

Repeat after me....."14 recalls on the Odyssey isn't THAT many"

 

Repeat after me....."The Acura CSX looks NOTHING like a Honda Civic"

Very good.....now drink the rice-flavored Kool Aide....

 

Perfect.....feel reality slowly slipping out of your brain.....

 

Excellent!....you are now qualified to become a member of Team Honda

.

This is what people post when they have no ammo. You and Cornholio need to go teabag each other.

[range]

KEEP IT MOVING FOLKS......THERE'S NOTHING HERE TO SEE

 

I REPEAT........THIS IS A NON ISSUE

 

 

 

[06StangAwesomecar]

KEEP IT MOVING FOLKS......THERE'S NOTHING HERE TO SEE

 

I REPEAT........THIS IS A NON ISSUE

LMAO

[bec5150]

Um, Range, I'll ask again..

 

What do you drive? How many cars do you have? How old are you?

 

Have you ever been laid? Was it a woman or a sheep?

[NLPRacing]

Bec, you shouldn't take it so personal. I for one find Range's rants against Honda very humorous and appropriate for a FORD web site.

[Bored of Pisteon]

I agree... THIS IS A FORD SITE! That means one thing:

 

TUFF :fan: SHITTY :fan: IN :fan: THE :fan: BIG :fan: CITY!

 

I bet that Honda burned right down to the ground too!

[range]

DROP THE MARSHMALLOWS AND BACK AWAY FROM THE HONDA!!!

 

 

 

 

 

[marc-o]

Um, Range, I'll ask again..

 

What do you drive? How many cars do you have? How old are you?

 

Have you ever been laid? Was it a woman or a sheep?

 

I'll offer some guesses:

 

1- a banana seat bike, the training wheels just came off

 

2- more than he can count, there are 25 red hot wheels, and almost as many blue ones.

 

3- 6 and a half

 

4- "laid"?

[Guest Sixcav]

Gee wiz marc-o, is that a personal attack on someone?

 

I'll offer some guesses:

 

1- a banana seat bike, the training wheels just came off

 

2- more than he can count, there are 25 red hot wheels, and almost as many blue ones.

 

3- 6 and a half

 

4- "laid"?

Surely not marc-o. You didn't do a character attack did you buddy. Because I know you hark on people who do that sort of thing. See.

 

Feel free to disagree all you want, character attacks ("ad hominem", just for you, to be precise) don't do anything to add to your credibility though.

 

I guess it's ok when you make character attacks but it's no ok for other people right. Hypocrite.

Oh wait I forgot one.

 

 

For the record, yes, you were definitely too wordy for this crowd. Be prepared to be unnappreciated.

 

Yeah that's the one where you implied that all the rest of us are stupid or something. But that wasn't character attack either was it marc-o? Because it's ok when you do it right? Hypocrite.

[marc-o]

LOL...i'm stunned

 

seeing as you are unfamiliar with sarcasm, I will explain myself at this point.

 

No one cares about credibility with range, because he doesn't care about credibility. He just pieces together his reality from what he chooses to see amongst his daily readings.

 

Secondly, are you suggesting I'm a hypocrite because I play along with a thread suggesting range is childish (even though it's a widespread belief). I didnt know if I made a joke I had to identify it as such, I thought that was pretty obvious though.

 

Finally - let me explain something - personal attacks don't add to your credibility *when your rebuttal to an argument is the personal attack, without even addressing the actual arguments made*. In other words, criticizing a person as a way of debunking something they said doesn't work - however, criticizing someone with no other purpose than fun is simply being an ass. because range deserves it.

 

(that's a joke again, lighten up)

[old_fairmont_wagon]

My old 85 LTD has a 3.8L V6 in it and it had 220K on the clock when It got rear ended and totaled. My cousin has a windstar with the 3.8L and 232K miles on it last time I talked to him. He's had it the entire time and aside from regular maintenance and some heavy duty brake work, hasn't had to do any major maintenance on it. I guess that means that there are no 3.8L Head Gasket problems by the logic that some of you are using to defend Honda quality.

 

I owned a 92 Honda Accord with the automatic and, after being meticulously cared for, it devoured its transmission at around 90K miles. Dropped the pan and metal confetti greated me. I have a poor opinion about Honda Automatic Transmissions because of my expreience with them. Are they all bad? not hardly. But they do have problems.

 

And I'm definitely not defending Ford here. After dumping far more into the 93 tempo that I used to own than it was worth to keep it running, I have no love for Ford's quality either. That thing had massive wiring problems, the 4 banger needed major work before 100K to keep it from leaking and burning more than a quart of oil every 3000 miles. The air intake tubing and filter box literally disintegrated. The welds that held the part of the frame that the rear suspension hooked to came loose and had to be redone. Every window motor needed to be replaced. It needed major A/C work before 100K. all the black from the exterior door frames peeled and flaked off. The headlights yellowed so much by 60K miles that they had to be replaced so that you could see at night (yes, I now know that apparently you could polish the yellowing off if you had the right equipment and chemicals). The door seals leaked. The automatic seatbelts failed. The blower motor only operated at two speeds, full blast and off. It needed constant front end alignments. It needed new motor mounts. It developed two seperate exhaust leaks.

 

It was an unmitigated peice of crap. I put more miles on the Honda in the time that I had it than I did on the tempo, and only had two significant problems, the tranny and a crack that developed in the radiator that was easy for me to replace in an afternoon. By the time it flooded in Katrina, it was years older than the tempo, had far more mileage on it, and everything in it still worked properly. It probably saw even more vibrational abuse since I had also replaced the stock stero with an aftermarket one and aftermarket speakers. And I REALLY liked my bass.

 

But, I also realize that that is a snapshot of automaking in the early 90s. Its the late 2000s now, and thing are likely much different.

[KWMJ-KTP]

If you kept the tires inflated to 30+PSI, the Explorer had no issues. I thought the whole tire deal was a byproduct of Ford calling for tire pressures that were too low in the owners manual.

 

The tire pressure did not cause the problem, although it did make a bad problem worse! The problem was the tires design and construction, plain and simple. There were GM & Toyota vehicles that had the exact same problem with the exact same tires, bt the media made sure to blame it on the Explorer. The difference is that those tires were optional equipment on GM & Toyota products that sold in low/lower volumes, whereas they were standard equipment on the Explorer which was one of the best selling vehicles in the market.

 

Notice how they replaced the tire instead of just telling people to just add a couple of PSI. If the pressure was the problem, that could have easily been fixed with $0.25 worth of air at any gas station. Take a look around today, and people all over the place have incorrect pressure in their tires and for the most part, there are no ill effects because their tires are made well and do not have a defect.

Edited June 24, 2006 by KWMJ-KTP

[Guest Sixcav]

No one cares about credibility with range, because he doesn't care about credibility. He just pieces together his reality from what he chooses to see amongst his daily readings.

 

 

Right ok I see. Now you also get to decide who's credible and who's not. The world according to marc-o. lol

You have no more and no less credibility than range or anyone else on this board. Given some of the shit that you post one could easily make the same argument about you. Then making statements about how wordy posts are somehow beyond the comprehension of all of us dumb hayseeds or some such thing, that really adds to your credibility doesn't it? But listen, we can post back and forth all day about who has the biggest set of nuts, but it won't change a thing. You say range has no credibility? Alright, that's fine, if that's how you view him. But I bet there's plenty of posters on this website that think the same thing about you.

[06StangAwesomecar]

The tire pressure did not cause the problem, although it did make a bad problem worse! The problem was the tires design and construction, plain and simple. There were GM & Toyota vehicles that had the exact same problem with the exact same tires, bt the media made sure to blame it on the Explorer. The difference is that those tires were optional equipment on GM & Toyota products that sold in low/lower volumes, whereas they were standard equipment on the Explorer which was one of the best selling vehicles in the market.

 

Notice how they replaced the tire instead of just telling people to just add a couple of PSI. If the pressure was the problem, that could have easily been fixed with $0.25 worth of air at any gas station. Take a look around today, and people all over the place have incorrect pressure in their tires and for the most part, there are no ill effects because their tires are made well and do not have a defect.

Yup you are 1000% WRONG TIRE PRESSURE WAS THE CAUSE. the tires were underinflated and overheated, and the tread seperated, and most of the people couldnt drive and overcompensated and rolled it, funny thing is they checked the pressures on the remaing tires and they were all lower then the recommended amounts, face it most people dont check their tire pressure.

Just look at people driveing on the roads and you will see many underinflated tires, and they will have failures too. And it did happen on other vehicle , you just didnt hear about it, and what about the million other people driving explorers. that didnt have issues?

My sister, and 2 guys were I work never had issues, but they got free tires. And it was good timing because their tires were worn out.

The tire thing was just like the Pinto gas tank farse, and the Chevy truck side saddle gas tank farse, all hyped up by the media. Heck the truck on dateline blew before it got hit, thanks to some well places explosives.

It was the drivers fault period.

 

 

Explorers equipped with Goodyears had a higher rate of tire-related accidents than other SUVs in the national fatal accident records, though the 2,000 accidents involved are so few that the difference could be a statistical fluke.

 

The national data showed that in the 187 blown-tire accidents that killed someone in the SUV, the Explorer rolled over 95 percent of the time, compared with 83 percent for other SUVs.

 

Though tire blowouts are rarely the cause of accidents -- and Florida's climate is warmer, so its blowout rate may be higher than other states -- the differences The Post found in Florida between (((Explorers with Firestones or Goodyears and other SUVs))) is statistically "very, very significant," said Hans Joksch, a research scientist from the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute.

:READ THIS:

Bridgstone/Firestone on Aug. 9 recalled 6.5 million 15-inch Firestone ATX and Wilderness AT tires, which were mostly on Explorers.

 

(Ford said 26 psi is safe but recently accepted Firestone's recommendation and increased the suggested tire pressure to 30 psi.)

 

"Tires will fail, and do so for a number or reasons. In most cases, a vehicle that experiences a tire failure can be brought safely under control.

 

Explorers were no more likely than other SUVs to have brake problems, worn tires or most other equipment failures that contributed to an accident in Florida.

 

Testing done by Dr. Dennis Guenther, a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at The Ohio State University, the results of which are now in the possession of Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., shows that certain of the Explorer models will experience an "oversteer" condition in most circumstances following a tread separation on a left rear tire, an event which is clearly foreseeable. In his analysis, Dr. Guenther says: "An oversteer vehicle is not safe at highway speeds in the hands of an average driver.

 

A close-up look at the top of the "pyramid" of Explorer's record of customer use, shows that there have been 11,500 reports of tread separations. These have led to 2,200 claims of property damage or injury, which include 200 claims of rollovers or crashes. This shows that Explorer drivers are able to avoid rollovers or crashes in more than 90 percent of the Firestone tread separation failures they experience, but in 10 percent of cases a loss of control related accident occurs. This is why we are replacing the Firestone tires that show either high levels of tread separations or future potential for tread separations.

Edited June 25, 2006 by 05StangAwsomecar

[range]

Right ok I see. Now you also get to decide who's credible and who's not. The world according to marc-o. lol

You have no more and no less credibility than range or anyone else on this board. Given some of the shit that you post one could easily make the same argument about you. Then making statements about how wordy posts are somehow beyond the comprehension of all of us dumb hayseeds or some such thing, that really adds to your credibility doesn't it? But listen, we can post back and forth all day about who has the biggest set of nuts, but it won't change a thing. You say range has no credibility? Alright, that's fine, if that's how you view him. But I bet there's plenty of posters on this website that think the same thing about you.

 

You hit the nail on the head Sixcav!

 

If anyone dares to point out the shortcomings of Honda, the overly-sensitive Honda zealots (i.e The :cheerleader: squad) attempt to engage either in personal attacks or they offer a hyper-biased defense of Honda where fantasy becomes reality (in their minds).

 

 

Once you understand how they think, it's pretty comical to watch them in action.

 

 

To establish a baseline of how the squad thinks when it comes to Honda problems, consider this quote:

 

 

"THIS IS A NON ISSUE" ========>

 

 

That response pretty much sums up the lack of critical thought on their part when it comes to Honda's problems.

[range]

And so is this================>

 

LINK

 

 

Exactly! Good analogy, it would be absurd to argue that that is a "non issue."

[Bored of Pisteon]

You hit the nail on the head Sixcav!

 

If anyone dares to point out the shortcomings of Honda, the overly-sensitive Honda zealots (i.e The :cheerleader: squad) attempt to engage either in personal attacks or they offer a hyper-biased defense of Honda where fantasy becomes reality (in their minds).

Once you understand how they think, it's pretty comical to watch them in action.

To establish a baseline of how the squad thinks when it comes to Honda problems, consider this quote:

"THIS IS A NON ISSUE" ========>

That response pretty much sums up the lack of critical thought on their part when it comes to Honda's problems.

 

That also sums up the mentality and arrogance of Honda owners period! They think nothing will happen to them because they own a Honda.

 

:fan: :fan: :fan: :fan: :slap: :slap: :slap: :slap: GUESS AGAIN!