Many of you know that Honda has been know as a reliable company. emphasis on "been". Recently, there have been recalls that have been hurting this image. i have not heard any from Toyota/Lexus.
anywayz, everytime anyone compares a Honda agaisnt a (lets just say) Nissan, the pro for Honda would always be Reliablity. it questions me " how do u know that this Honda is relable?" it could have a list of tsb or recalls that haven't been issued yet.
i know the current president of Honda wants to improve the quality control of futur vehicals. i hope he comes through with it.

so do you think Honda's image of reliability is slipping which other makers are improving?

i am in no way bashing Honda. just want opinions.

 

Take a look at the latest reliability data from Consumer Reports. Acura has the lowest problem rate in the industry.

Every make has recalls, even Lexus and Toyota.

 

Not just Acura but Honda as a whole.

i know every company has problems but damn, i didn't expect recalls in such a short period of time.

 

I think you should dump your Honda product right now and get something more reliable!

 

Cars came out the first year usually have more recall than others.

Mazda, Nissan are both having a huge recall for their cars this year.

 

I think he should do the opposite! CR listed the Oldsmobile Bravada's reliability as -191% of average, the Jaguar X-Type as -135% and the Cadillac Seville as -117%. Buy one of those!

The same charts rank the Acura RL in first place for reliability in "Luxury cars".

I only appreciated my wife's Honda's reliability when it occurred to me that all it had needed was fluid and filter changes while the stack of service receipts for my Volvo wouldn't fit in the glove compartment.

 

You did'nt hear about Toyota recalling all the 04 Sienna's last month?

 

Did someone forget to tell me about a recall on the TSX? Oh, wait, he said "recallS", how many recalls are there than nobody told me about?

 

"Toyota recalling 2004 Sienna minivans

By Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- Toyota Motor Co. is recalling 34,437 Sienna minivans because the fuel tank is prone to damage and could cause a fire, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said Friday.

The recall covers minivans from the 2004 model year that were sold to the public starting in January...."

Dunno, domn.....

Are minivans exploding into a ball of flame a reliability issue?

 

ok ok....i see the point now. i guess Honda is reliable. i guess the people at car and driver got to me. they always pin point the negatives in Hondas. i wonder why??

 

OK, I guess he was talking about reliability but its a recall none the less. And it was caused by poor design/quality control.

And try telling someone who van just went up in flames that its still reliable.

 

C&D pick on Honda because it takes the heat off of their precious BMW's and Mercedes. Maybe it's just me, but it seems that C&D seem to swoon over anything that comes from those two. Maybe it's all the kick-backs...

 

I've always had my fantacy about exactly what happens on BMW's charter flights for automotive journalists to Munich to introduce a new model. I wonder if they have video cameras on the aircraft like the Michael Jackson charter. ("Would you like us to send copies to your editor and wife, Herr Robinson? No?")

But C&D always seems to rate the Accord the best popular sedan around. Have they said something else recently?

I thought the hierarchy of automotive reliability was Toyota/Lexus followed closely by Acura/Honda, then a gap and the other Japanese companies like Subaru. Special mention to Mercedes and Volvo for reputations greatly exceeding factual information.

Honda is Sears Roebuck, not Saks Fifth Avenue but so is the price. There are things that I like better in my Volvo but reliability isn't one of them.

 

When has C & D picked on Honda? They gave the TSX a glowing review and never once even hinted at any problems with QC.

 

If C&D has a bias, its for BMW AND Honda. There is no way that C&D picks on Honda. I've actually heard quite a few complaints about the bias C&D has for Honda/Acura.

Just look at how many spots both BMW and honda eat up on their annual 10 best ranking

 

I completely agree. In fact, I thought that C & D's review of the TSX was fairly biased. C & D always ignores obvious flaws in Honda vehicles (like the so-so brakes on the TSX).
I actually thought that Motor Trends fairly critical review was more even handed.

 

Agree. But C&D also give out very bad review on '03 CIVIC.
I still remember their word on CIVIC... "New to HONDA, a loser"
I think that's first time I see a bad review for Honda from C&D

 

Hey, got a link to that article and/or can you tell me what they didnt like about it? I'm just curious.

You know I have never met a person who owns a civic and doesnt like it.

 

I think the thing that gets overlooked with reliability ratings is that a high rating isn't a guarantee that any particular vehicle will be problem-free. When you buy any car, even one with a high reliability rating, you're rolling the dice. No mechanical device as complicated as a modern auto can be manufactured and operated without some problems in some units. Maybe you'll be problem-free, maybe not. So I look at good reliability ratings as improving the odds of having a problem-free vehicle based on the experiences of many owners, but the reality is that my vehicle is a sample size of one and there's a chance it could be a dud, even if the vehicle as a class has the best rating.

To answer the question though, I don't perceive that Acura (Honda's) reputation for reliability is slipping. I think the fact that there is a lot of common parts re-use across Honda models helps out a lot, especially with a new vehicle like the TSX. When it comes right down to it, there aren't a lot of parts that are completely unique to the TSX and those are mostly body/trim type things. So a lot of the "new" vehicle is made up of parts that have already had some real-world testing.

Re: C&D, I don't think they are hard on Honda. In fact, in general they are too easy on everyone when it comes to reliability. This is especially noticeable on the 10Best list which often contains cars that don't do so well on long term reliability studies or can be expensive to maintain. They don't really make it clear that the list is the 10Best cars to buy and drive right now, but not necessarily the 10Best cars to own for a longer period of time. And why should they? They'll have a whole new crop of cars to drive next year anyway...

 

http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=1

It's on page 5. "Highs: Great-fitting cockpit, slick shifter, good control layout, adept in the twisties.

Lows: Way too many rattles, way too many shades of metallic in the paint, harsh ride, numb path control on the interstate.

The Verdict: Something new from Honda — a loser."

Quite a shocker when I first read it. Makes you wonder if Honda has faltered or the rest of the industry has caught up.

 

weapon of mass ..........

 

Is it possible that as an Acura/Honda owner you (and we) are just more sensitive about any perceived differences in reliability than we would be for other brands??

 

Good point. People who buy a car based on a reputation of high reliablity and/or quality would definitely have higher expectations in that area than those who bought a GM, Chrysler, or Ford product because of pricing or discounts and were pleasantly surprised that it wasn't a total POS.

My previous ownership experiences with Hondas and Acuras have made me a loyal fan and return customer; different experiences with domestic products have also made me a loyal fan of Honda/Acura... :P

Santa Rosa Steve