01tl4tl

Perhaps its your lack of knowledge regarding the internal workings of the automatic transmission is causing you problems.
When the car is cruising in 5th gear, it has to go down thru the gears looking for torque to accellerate as you requested -hence downshifts thru 3rd into 2nd and launches- or lags if going bad. It then shifts up when torque and rpm limit reached.
In a manual trans in 4th-5th - you would drop down to 2nd- 3rd for big uphill right??
well the auto trans goes thru each set of bands and gears to get there
You cant use solid metal for clutch plates- same as manual trans- friction creates heat and wear- much like brakes. Would you want solid metal brake pads- thats some advanced Flinstonian parts there!
Those with sudden lockup .....simply play radio too loud and dont pay attention to the cars warning signals.
And lastly- by show of hands-who really believes that car makers are building things to last forever?? They want you buying new cars and spending repair money. We got lucky with the court helping us out on the double time amd miles warranty extension

01tl4tl

If the trans fluid smells burnt- thats a sign to the techs of failure.
If it slips or does a number of things....the tech knows

You are making way to much of the warranty process. The car acts up and you take it in.
Certainly not the first time your local dealer has seen the problem. With the holiday season causing a slowdown on $$ spent on basic services not coming in, the dealer wants all the warranty work it can get- some money from acura is better than no money at all

01tl4tl

look in the main thread list for gen2 here on acurazine-not the web,
scroll down and find: Post 2/05 trans failure -check in

Edward'TLS

Bristol Shore, since you're new here, please go to this Acura CL transmission recall Q&A sub-forum

https://acurazine.com/forums/automotive-news-6/

and read all the sticky threads, especially the one that says "Summary (VERY LONG) of what's wrong with auto tranny" which contains lengthy but detailed extracts from the investigation report that Honda submitted to NHTSA back in 2003.

Even though time consuming to go through, but this transmission recall sub-forum will give you more information than you might need or want to know about the 2nd gen tranny failures. However, there is virtually no documentation anywhere on what Honda has done to improve the trannies after 2003.

01tl4tl

documentation or not- why give away their secret fix to other makers.....
As long as they are better now, and they still outlast any ~american~ car, I am happy with my TL. I have a tiny shudder around 15mph coming off the line gently- the dealer is aware of this and says if it gets worse, come right in for another replacement! You will never see a box of donuts generate goodwill like it does with the service Manager

Bristol Shore

Yeah, I'd agree with that. Thanks for the explanation -- I have a better understanding now.

That could be.

This is where you and I diverge a bit. It's not a matter of "things lasting forever." If the TL transmissions were lasting to 150K or so, and then just wearing out due to normal wear and tear (the way that most car transmissions eventually wear out), I'd have no complaints whatsoever. The original transmission in my '78 Toyota Celica went 250K before I had to replace it, and when it went bad, it wasn't a safety hazard the way the TL failures can potentially be. IMHO, Honda/Acura didn't do their "due diligence" in the R&D phase of these cars -- if they had, they would have recognized that these transmissions were not appropriate matches for these cars (and it hasn't just been the 3.2TL, remember). And I also believe the extended warranty on the transmissions should be lifetime, not 7+9/109K -- I mean lifetime for the known, instrinsic flaws (3rd-gear clutch pack failure, for example), not failure due to 'normal' wear & tear or other reasons unrelated to the instrinsic flaws.

Just my $.02 on that.

Bristol Shore

Yeah, I meant I was looking here. Sorry I wasn't clearer. (I mentioned searching the Web because on a lot of online forums, people are lazy and want others to do their searching for them.)

I'll look again.

Bristol Shore

That's exactly what I'll do. Thanks for the link.

Bristol Shore

I can think of one reason right off the top of my head:

Competition/profits should NOT be more important than people's safety. If I worked for Honda/Acura and had a "secret fix" for transmissions that were a potential safety hazard (even remotely), for ethical reasons I would share that knowledge with other mfgrs/companies. Would I charge them $$ for my knowledge? Perhaps, perhaps not, but I wouldn't keep it a secret.

fsttyms1

Bristol. Until you fully realize what the problem is and how to fix it you really cant complain or say statements like you have. They arent keeping secrets. There is no secret to whats wrong with the trans and how to fix it. The problem lies in the design of the trans and how to go about fixing it.

Honda offering a 7 year 100k warranty went far and above what they had to. Show me a manufacturer that wasnt told by the NTHSA to recall something that actually offered an extension in warranty like that. The NTHSA looked into this matter and didnt find evidence to warrant a recall.

Forums also like to show things as worse than they are. I know a few people personally that have never had trans problems and still own the car (one being a 2001 with 177k)

Now am i admitting that there isnt a problem? NO. But i am saying that since they discovered the problem they have tried different things to fix it and it appears they have.

01tl4tl

a 78 toyota and a TL- why are you even comparing!!
Cars are NOW designed to last 100-150k miles and then junked- errr recycled

Like we have all said, Acura stood up and continues to cover those in need on the trans. Its not like you hear about a TL spinning out on the freeway or causing a rear end crash on the news everyday-- like a furd exploder crash and roll do you?
Go ask the audi or VW dealer about the trans in their cars- similar design- craps at 50-60 k and they charge full price to replace it.
Fsttyms has explained all the legal issues as far as the Govt was concerned.
I know another ziner near me with nearly 150k on original trans- no problems, wasnt aware of anything beyond the oil jet recall back in 04. Mine went at 68k right after I bought the car, just like I had wanted it too!!!
New cars are built to be recycled- a bwm has every part coded with the triangle/number system and the whole car is designed to be taken back apart.
The regs in Japan- their motors have to be replaced at 30k miles just to meet smog test- thats where all those used Japanese engines come from~
So makers want you to lease 3-4 years, then car resold-preferably though them-and you get the newest model from them. The next person owns it 3 years and sells or crashes it.
Beyond that- us modders get ahold of them and they become track day cars for the street.
And the cycle of life continues.

Bristol Shore

I understand your position and, based on what I know right now, agree with some of what you're saying. But I need to get more info, so I will respond further to your post after I've read the CL Transmission Recall Q&A thread suggested earlier by EdwardTLS. This is all new to me and I'm trying to put all the pieces together. Gimme a day or two.

One question: Can you point me to an official, in-writing statement by Honda/Acura corporate explaining just what exactly has been done to the post-Feb. 05 transmissions to "fix" them? Based on what others in this thread have said so far, I'm under the impression no such announcement exists or is even available by request. Moreover, when I called Honda corporate a couple days ago, they wouldn't tell me either -- they said, "We don't have that information." When I asked if it would be possible to speak to a designer or engineer or someone like that, they said no. Therefore, I don't think it's unreasonable to refer to it as a "secret fix" (although those were originally 01tl4tl's words, not mine). Based on what I know as of this writing, the specifics of the post-Feb. 05 transmissions have only been deduced, discovered or guessed at by the, er, intrepid members of this forum. And some of it is contradictory, so .... But I could be wrong, so like I said, I need to read that comprehensive Q&A thread and then I'll be more equipped to opine responsibly and confidently. So just bear with me, if you will.

I will say that having this site and forum is extremely valuable. Think of how in the dark we'd all be without it ....

01tl4tl

I AM SORRY
OK? my bad calling it ~secret fixes~. Its nothing every engineer and reader of azine doesnt know. They beefed up the material in the clutch disc/packs
They enlarged the oil passages in the new cases used since 2/05- thats the big change, in the big case that holds all the parts. Since that time, a signifigant improvement in lifespan and ~no prob at all cars~ has been the norm for replacement gen2 and new gen3 cars
If you get your gen2 trans replaced now/today- you get one made in mid to late 07, its not like they stockpile millions of these in a warehouse.
IMO--- and it just my opinion-- based on pure speculation- they did have some units built before 2-05 that got shipped out for the next few months and they failed. By november 05- it was all new cases being used only, and since that time most are good. There will always be a day when the subsitute worker put a seal in backwards or....things happen. These are complex by normal standards.
I bought a toaster- the most reliable device known to man and 2 uses later it failed, bad coil connection- go figure- the odds. Some of us are quality control for life and others just get lemons.
Its best to buy an extended warranty (avail discounted thru some dealers here) if you buy a not covered vin,-just to be safe if prob occurs, and then enjoy one of the nicer cars around. We went from a Maxima- " the 4 door sprots car" to the TL. It was no contest which was the far superior car!! my 2 cents
ps When I went looking at cars and typed a search for TL + problems- I met acurazine! Sure glad I did~

fsttyms1

There is no written statement from honda that i know of. There have been part changes apparent by the part #s changing. Its no surprise that CS and dealers cant tell you what they did. Thats not their job to know, and dealers arent allowed to rebuild the trans so they wouldnt know either. I (having rebuilt 1 trans myself) gone thru 5 know that there were parts upgraded (due to the parts i bought having different part #s from the rebuild the next time. Also we know they have done work to the case due to the oiljet now being an internally designed part (ass opposed to teh recall which places it thru the fill hole). This alone would steer me to the dealer for a trans replacement other than having a shop do it.

What are you expecting to find or do with the info that your looking for?

Edward'TLS

Bristol Shore, all car makers "improve" (or fix in our words) their products in secrecy, because they are dealing with company design secrets and propiatary information which is virtually the asset of the company, and to prevent unnecessary lawsuits launched by the consumers after they know too much. So car makers only tell you what they want you to know, nothing more.

The only people who know the complete tranny story and the fixes are a handful of top brass and the Honda engineers who work on the 2nd gen trannies back in the Honda headquarter. Even dealerships are not allowed to open up the dead trannies. They have to ship the sealed unit back to Honda in order to get factory warranty reimbursement.

If it was not NHTSA who opened up the tranny failure case, we would never ever see the Honda investigation report, and would never have know so much details as of what the problems were. So we already knew more insider information than Honda would have wanted us to.

However, you can still continue to search, but I highly doubt if you can find any more accurate information after NHTSA closed the case in 2003, let alone official documents from Honda.

Bristol Shore

I have looked and looked and still can't find it. I can't find that thread under "Second Generation TL" or its "Problems & Fixes" sub-section either (and I scrolled thru all 7 pages of that one). Either I'm blind or it's disappeared. Anyone wanna help me with a link (he says embarrasingly)?

Bristol Shore

Hi, fsttyms1,

The info I'm seeking would be helpful towards enabling me to make a decision on whether or not to buy one of these cars. It's really that simple.

My specific need/want is for this car (if I buy one) to be good for about 10 years and up to at least 200K miles. Unfortunately, I can't afford to get a new/newer car every 4 or 5 years. The 3.2TL will easily fit that bill, except for the uncertainty of the transmission. Once I'm past the 7-years +9 warranty period, which will come a lot sooner than 10 years from now, I'll have to consider the potential expense of having to replace the trans if it's not going to last.

"Specific info" would give me, and all of us for that matter, a clearer idea of just how effective the post-Feb. '05 "fix" is or is likely to be, long-term. For discussion purposes, let's just say, hypothetically, that the definitive cause for most of the failures is weak material in the clutch packs. Now let's say Honda corporate were to come out and tell us all that the new clutch packs are now made of Titanium or some other virtually-indestructable material, and they've excursion tested them out to 150K miles and 10 years via accelerated aging tests or something. Wouldn't that make you feel better to know that, versus just an ostensibly worthless proclamation that the clutch packs have been "redesigned" with "new material"? "New material" could mean stiff cardboard for all we know (an exaggeration, I know, but you get my point).

In addition, as 01tl4tl has pointed out, the new cases supposedly allow for a higher oil flow rate, but maybe it's still not quite what it should be? Is it or isn't it? How can we know, and don't we have the right to know?

Given my (and most of yours I'd guess as well) suspicion of corporate motives -- GREED, in other words -- I'd feel better knowing the details of the fix rather than just taking some suit's word that everything's fine now. Based on what I've read in this thread, they essentially said "everything's fine now" back in 2003, and that proved to not be true. Hence me wanting more "specific info" so I can decide whether or not the fix is adequate vis-a-vis my needs in a car.

It now appears, based on what folks are saying here, that that info will remain secret; I didn't know that, however, when I started asking.

Heh heh ... I realize some may perceive me as rocking the boat a bit here, but don't we all have the right to know what we're paying for? Besides, as Sean Connery said in The Hunt for Red October, " A little revolution now & again is a good thing ... don't you think?"

I haven't had the time to read the Q&A thread in the CL forum, but I'll tackle that tomorrow or Friday.

Bristol Shore

Sadly, I fear you're probably right.

01tl4tl

Bristol- you are never going to find a car guaranteed to go 200k+ on ALL the original parts.
Fsttyms1 has over 250k miles on his 00, at 200 the engine looked perfect inside- but he had gone thru 5 transmissions! Accept that the trans fix is as good as its going to get- as in - why would honda spend money on older car fix when they have moved on in life to the next gen and its problems.
Either get another toyota- or decide that putting some money aside for a trans is part of the budget.
My tech that is working on a fix still doesnt have it perfect- after years of building them at home.
Have you looked at Lexus forums to see what their problems are? Cars are not made to last forever- not ever much past 100k at which point the repair outweighs the cars value

Bristol Shore

Yeah, you're right of course and I should have worded my earlier post differently. What I meant to say was that I don't want to have to replace the trans several times before 200K. The 7-year warranty window is going to be closing fast in the next couple years -- if I buy a 1999 or 2000 TL, it's already expired. If I buy a 2001 car, it expires next year. A 2002 TL's trans warranty will expire in 2009 and a 2003 TL's will run out in 2010. So even a best-case scenario will mean I'm only gonna be covered on the trans for another 2 years or so. Since my hope would be to drive the car to 200K and 10 years (or beyond), there's a distinct possibility I could have to pay for at least one and maybe even two or three transmissions in that time (depending on how long the "redesigned" model might last).

So I'll have to, like you say, set money aside for a transmission if I decide to go ahead and get one of these cars. It's all part of the info gathering & planning phase ....

Grrrr ... I still can't find the post-Feb. '05 failure thread.

As always, thanks for the feedback.

01tl4tl

Based on current reports of post 2-05, they are for the most part doing very well
Look at ford trans- they go out between 50 and 100k- and you replace or toss the car.

BUY a several year extended warranty with specific trans coverage listed.
A Certified Used Car from acura dealer doesnt mean its perfect- only that the service dept looked it over- may still have things wrong- but they will sell you a multi year-miles warranty with it. Trans full price with labor is 4000, aamco rebuild 2500, which is ok as long as its the new case already - being rebuilt

Privdog

the dealer that bought my '02 from me just called and told me the transmisson had gone out and if I had ever tried to contact Acura about it or knew of the recall.. I did know of the recall, which is kinda why I was wanting to get rid of it.. i didn't tell him that, I didn't think I had to. I never called Acura about it. They test drove it and said everything was ok, and we traded.. this was Nov. 10th.. I traded the '02 with 125k on it for an '04 with 80k on it. I guess I had a pretty close one.. I owe most of it from lurking this thread for so long. Now it's someone elses problem. I'm sure i'll have my share of issues with this '04 after it's all said and done though.

fsttyms1

Bristol. Half the info your looking for isnt available. Most of what you have read about the multiple failures has been all prior to the 05 update. What your looking for DOESNT exist. Sorry to say but its true.

As for the trans, the problem isnt the clutchpack material. Its in getting enough cooling to them. They made different steels to make them less abrasive to the clutchpacks, enlarged passage ways, thats what we know. Honda hasnt done any testing and put out any reports to show what they have done that any of us know of. Its not that they want to keep it secret. Thats just the way things are done. No manufacturer is going to give you details like that.

I do think however that since feb 05 the failure rate is far below a normal no issue trans.

At this point with your concerns and the info you want im going to say look for a different car. You will never be happy wondering and no one can tell you for sure if they are going to fail on you.

Bristol Shore

Where the heck are the "reports"? Aaaack! I can't find that thread ....

Heh heh ... you couldn't pay me enough to drive a Ford.

Yeah, I've already figured that something like that would have to be part of my plan. One dealer quoted me $2k for a 4-yr/48K extended power-train warranty, which seems a bit expensive. I haven't shopped around, though.

01tl4tl

there are several dealers that advertise here and will get you a great deal.
Really though- I think some sort of Toyota for you- brand loyalty- good experience etc.

When I ran a shop for bmw's- I told people to put aside 100$ a month just for NORMAL maitenance and wear out items- and there may be the occassional extreme expense, thats part of owning a sports luxery car.

Bristol Shore

Unfortunately, Toyota doesn't make a vehicle right now (new or used) that appeals to me. Ditto most other mfgrs.

BTW, what, if any, drawbacks would there be to getting a '99 TL? If I should happen to find one with reasonably low mileage and in good condition, would there be any reason not to get it? They had a different (non-Tiptronic) transmission, right?

I know I would be out of the 7+9 trans warranty coverage, but if those transmissions didn't have the same probs and if I could buy a 4-year/48K extended warranty from a dealer, that might do the trick just fine.

fsttyms1

The 99s had a 4 speed, as opposed to the 5 speed the 00-03 had.

Your best bet is to look for a low mileage with warranty. and either hope that it fails in the warranty period so you get teh latest updated trans OR to start looking at the cars and taking the vin and calling acura to see when and if the trans has been replaced and see if you can locate one that has had a trans after feb 05

Bob_F

I have a 1999 TL and I think it's a great car. But even the 1999 transmissions have reliability problems. Consumer Reports subscriber based reliability surveys give the 1999 TL transmission a "half black dot" or "worse than average" reliability rating. The 2000-2003 TL gets a "full black dot" or "much worse than average" rating. (That's the lowest rating they give out.)

When I bought my car last year the original owner had just replaced the transmission and it came with a two year/unlimited mileage warranty. That eased my concerns about the transmission. I would buy this car again without any hesitation.

If you want to minimize your risk try to find a TL that already has a "post Feb 2005" transmission installed and which also has a good amount of the extended warranty left. My impression from reading this forum is that the revised transmissions are holding up well.

Or buy a low mileage 1999 TL along with a warranty, as you mentioned.

Good luck with whatever you buy.

Bristol Shore

Right, but is it the same basic "Tiptronic" transmission, just with 4 speeds instead of 5? I was under the impression it was a different transmission entirely and thus wasn't plagued with the same insufficient coolant flow & clutch pack issues that the 2000-2003 cars are. Am I mistaken?

Yep, that's a plan that's on the drawing board if I decide to go for one of these cars. I will say I like the fact that Acura can look that up and is willing to tell us the history over the phone. I suppose I could be sarcastic and say, "It's the least they could do, considering ...," but hey, it is nice.

Another question: When and if the transmissions exhibit problems, does it tend to be when the car is cold or when it's hot? More likely to act up first thing in the morning when the trans fluid hasn't been circulating in the 3rd gear clutch pack, or more likely to work fine when cold but act up when the car has been running awhile or is being pushed (like on a long drive on the freeway, for example)? Just curious what you guys' experience has been. Heh heh ... be honest and don't just tell me what you know I wanna hear.

fsttyms1

they fail when hot. (like brakes do when used too much, or in a manual when you ride the clutch too much.) same principle. 3rd cant hold and it drops to 2nd. What happens has been described in this thread and in the thread stickied above this one

https://acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=113297

Bristol Shore

Wow ... I just spent a couple hours reading thru a 134-page report submitted by Honda to the NHTSA a few years ago (early 2003?). Although it pre-dates the Feb. 2005 transmissions, the report details Honda corporate's analysis of the "sudden downshift mechanism" (aka "the 5-2 downshift") and what they determined, at the time, to be the causes of the 3rd clutch pack failures. Fascinating stuff. See it here:

http://nhthqnwws112.odi.nhtsa.dot.go...081-19439P.pdf

I won't try to cover everything here, but there were some findings that I found particularly interesting:

1) I referenced, in a previous post, that a senior Acura tech had told me recently that the early transmissions made in Japan seemed to have a lower failure rate than those made here in the U.S. (Ohio, I believe). One of you guys (I don't remember who OTTOMH) responded that the place of final assembly should have nothing to do with the failure rate because the parts themselves were made in "third world countries" or wherever (and, by implication, could wind up in the hands of assemblers in the U.S. or Japan randomly).

That sounded reasonable, of course, but according to the report, it's not accurate. On page 121, you can see the difference in the clutch plate manufacturing processes. In both Japan and the U.S., the plates were ground in 3 separate stages on 2 different machines. However, the U.S. process involved using slightly coarser sandpaper (#400) and a cork abrasive (also #400) in the third stage. But the Japanese used #600 cork in all three stages of their clutch plate mfg process. Ultimately (presumably after their investigation), you'll see Honda decided to go with a combination of the two processes in their "new process" (new at the time).

As you'll also see in the report, they believed that surface roughness of the clutch plates was a key causal factor in the beginning of the transmission failures. As described on Page 94, worn clutch powder would build up on an ATF strainer in the transmission, launching sort of a domino effect of ensuing problems that could eventually lead to the "5-2 shiftdown" event and transmission failure. Since the Japanese clutch plate mfg. process appeared to be superior to the U.S. process, it would logically follow that the transmissions MIJ (made in Japan) would be likely to have failed less often (or at least last longer before they failed). The summary on page 131 seems to echo that.

2) The lubrication rate in the 3rd clutch pack apparently varied depending on which C3 thrust bearing was used in its manufacture. Bearings made by Trinton allowed only 1058cc/minute, while thrust bearings made by NTN allowed a greater lubrication rate of 1215cc/minute. They don't say, in the report, whether the NTN bearings were used exclusively in the Japanese or American mfg. processes (or both), but one would assume that those lucky enough to get a trans made with the NTN bearings would be better off. And presumably it could be one of the many factors behind why some people's TLs worked fine, or lasted longer, while others failed. Luck of the draw, it would appear.

The summary on page 131 also states that "High Q/A (Q/A setting of ECU) is considered to be a fundamental factor in the causation of 3rd clutch wear." Do any of you guys know what "Q/A" stands for, and what the ECU is ? I'd really like to know.

It's also notable that the report gives the impression that Honda had identified the causal factors in the transmission failures and presumably implemented adequate mfg. improvments to correct them at that time. Since problems reportedly continued, it would be really interesting (to me anyway) to see a similarly detailed report showing what they subsequently did to the post-Feb. '05 transmissions to further improve them and address the remaining probs. I've read of enlarged fluid passages in the case to increase fluid flow rate, but not much else that isn't already mentioned in the earlier report. Too bad that info is "secret," 'cuz I find all this kinda fascinating.

That report is a very interesting read for anyone with the time to go thru it. For those with short attention spans, you'll be happy to know there are lots of pics of bikini babes in it too. (Okay, not really -- but there are a lot of charts, drawings, and [blurry] pics of transmission parts. It's not just 134 pages of dry text, in other words.)

Just thought I'd link to that report in case any of you guys haven't seen it. And again, I'd like to know what "ECU" and "Q/A" (not question & answer) stand for if anyone knows.

Later

ChrisQ1980

ECU = Engine control unit. It's the cars computer. They change those when they put the new/revised transmissions in.

Bob_F

Bristol Shore,

Thanks for the link to that report. There are some interesting failure statistics on Page 106:

Total Sales 681,103
Total Warranty Claims 9,234 (1.35%)
Third Clutch Failures: 5,375 (0.79%)
5-2 Downshift Failures: 84 (0.012%)

So at least at the time that data was collected, the 5-2 downshifts were statistically very rare. That might ease your safety concerns about a 5-2 downshift.

It would be interesting to see what the current failure rates are but that's probably data we'll never see.

BTW, I think you may have entered the "Paralysis by Analysis Zone". It's like the Twilight Zone but you may still be able to escape.

Bob

01tl4tl

Chris
They DO NOT change the ECU with the trans- its seperate unit and cost big $$$
If you have under 50k and its trash- they will kick you down one with the trans

fsttyms1

Actually warranty replacement first time trans replacement they do replace the ECU


And The info you quoted is pretty much the same info i stated. That report was also done before the 05 update where they enlarged passageways.

If any one would like i still have the parts if you really want to know what a clutchpack, steel and guide look like

01tl4tl

hmmm, my invoice didnt say anything about an ECU and it was never mentioned, I had 68k miles at trans failure. Better grab a box of donuts and drop by the dealer for a chat with the Service Mananger.
I think that shudder at 15mph on light accell is getting worse, the only question is: do I put a track day on it now or get the replacement soon. Have to break in the new trans before hardcore fun days and that takes time to do right.

fsttyms1

It should have had a PCM (ecu) replacement with the trans. (its even stated in the reports that they replace it)

If your feeling any thing abnormal like that i would make an appt with the dealer

01tl4tl

Could be shoddy invoice or shoddy something.

I went for a test drive with the head tech a month ago (the guy who is working on a real fix at home)- he didnt feel it, but was using heavier foot than I do off the line, I think they just like testing my brakes!
The S.M. said call if it gets worse and bring it in no prob. They know me now as a troublemaker- but brings them treats, so it balances out. Mentioning azine really helped too

Bristol Shore

Thanks.

Bristol Shore

You're welcome. Yeah, I took notice of those failure stats last night, but like you say, that was "at the time the data was collected" and the report submitted (late 2002 / early 2003). I also read in another document (don't remember which one -- I read several) that the majority of the failures seemed to be occurring ~30 or 40K or something like that. Therefore, a large number of 3.2TL owners were probably under that mark or just approaching it around the time the data was collected. So their subsequent failures hadn't occured yet and thus were not represented in the stats. Like you say, it would be interesting to see what the current failure rates are -- or even the rates from, say, 2003-2005 before the "post-Feb. 05" transmissions hit the scene. That's where the real story is/was, and I'll bet you a box of donuts the stats went up significantly.

Re the Paralysis by Analysis zone, that's a possibility. This is just something I'm interested in, and those who wish to participate in the dialogue can and those who don't can sit it out. If I could find the "Post-Feb. 05 transmission failures" thread that's rumoured to exist here, that'd probably fill in the rest of the picture for me.

I just posted that report for anyone who hadn't seen it and was interested in the background behind this sitch.