Yea, that's an issue with many of these so-called reliability rankings. If you look at the link provided by Kurtatx, Honda was ranked 8th by Consumer Reports:
8. Honda - 10 most reliable car brands - Consumer Reports - CNNMoney

When you click on that link and read why it's 8th and why it dropped 4 places, you'd find the following:

Say what? "Problems" with the infotainment system? Are we talking about reliability or user-friendliness here? We know that many journalists and owners are not fond of the infotainment system in Honda models because sometimes the response time is slow, the system can be difficult to navigate, and the system is missing the volume knob. But is that a reliability issue? On that front, unfortunately, I share a different view than Consumer Reports.

As an engineer, when I think about reliability, I think if the engine, the tranny, the drivetrain. Will they break down on me? Will they require repairs often? For the electronics, I think about if the TPMS would fail and need replacement, I think about all the radars, the sensors, the wiring. Will they stop functioning and will it be difficult to diagnose and fix? And also for misc things like will the radio suddenly stops working? Will the wipers act weirdly? So on and so forth.

If the infotainment is working, but it's slow, that's a performance, quality issue. Not exactly a reliability issue. If the infotainment system is missing a volume knob, that's an user-friendliness problem, not a reliability issue.

May be it's just me, to say a brand is not as reliable because the infotainment system is slow, hard to use, or missing a knob, well, that just doesn't make much sense to me....

 

Traditionally, Honda cars are designed to be easy to work on and so usually the labour required is less and so labour cost is lower. Parts are also in general cheaper.

Installing struts and springs (need to be compressed together) + 2 alignments on my TL was CAD$375.

Installing coilovers + 2 alignments for my friend's Q5 at the same shop was $700.

 

I agree with you generally but we know why Acura has struggled the last few years with transmission issues.

I don't like Consumer Reports that much, either, but I can read between the lines. Audi is just a lot higher than Acura right now.

But honestly, I would recommend a Honda as reliable, generally when they're ranked 8 with complaints about MMI. Wife has a CR-V. She loves the car but she hates the MMI

 

I'm in agreement with you. They claim that " a trip to the dealer" is a trip to the dealer regardless of why you need to take the car in. To get help with the infotainment system or to get your transmission fixed - it's still a trip to the dealer.

I think with the complexity of cars they need to break out some new ways to rate them. Yes - my infotainment system needs to work - but it's different than my transmission not working.

All that said - the new reliance on tablets to run everything in your car could be a real issue for people who like to purchase older cars. When that dual screen system blows out in your 10 year old Accord you're pretty much screwed and good luck doing a cheap DIY fix on it!!

 

Don't sell that short as a major hit on satisfaction regardless of the reason for the dealer trip. I only want to see the dealer once a year for the free service. If the car did not have the no cost service package I would not want to see a dealer till its time to trade the car in.

Also very small things that are a daily irritant can build up enough to make people unhappy with their cars & in many cases cause them to change cars.

One trivial thing that pisses me off is the removal of the "both" button push function where I could set the dual zone climate control back to driver side control for both sides.

First world problem but it still makes me unhappy.

I think the German cars have moved to the top of the list from the middle is they got the message & are paying a lot of attention to detail that they let slip by 10 years ago while the Japanese cars have slipped into a good enough mode with some smaller stuff.

99% of cars built today are pretty good at not dumping you at the side of the road so it starts to move down to the smaller stuff that makes owners unhappy.

A number of years ago Bob Lutz made a statement that as electronics become fully integrated across car lines product differentiation from economy to luxury will become more & more blurred feature wise. Its going to be other things like service & brand status that will carry more weight.

 

That's a good counterpoint. Going to the dealer is annoying whether it's the entertainment system, the electronic system, or the transmission. The exception, to me is issues that render the car inoperable which are generally rare.

 

I think as leasing proliferates reliability becomes less of an issue to buyers. I mean most cars should last the 3 years of a lease when they're still under warrant. I think reliability matters to those of us who want to keep a car for 10 years or so. My last 2 cars: 1998 Honda Accord Coupe LX. Loved that car. I had for 11 years minimal issues. Only time I needed a tow was when I burned out the clutch after 100k miles. I got rid of it more for lifestyle issues (no LATCH for car seats, difficult to put 1 carseat in. We had another kid on the way). Wife says, "get whatever you want as long as it holds 2 car seats.".

Bought my 2009 BMW 335xi. I had for 8 years and about 88k miles:
I had some on warranty repairs during the first 4 years. The next 4 years (really the last 2 years) were rough. 4 head light washer covers fell off. The headlight projector (not the bulb but the projector) burned out which required a multi-hundred dollar part and removal of the front bumper for a $1000 repair. This year I had 2 different oil leaks one of them caused the belt to slip off the pulleys, battery didn't charge from the engine and the car died. The water pump died and I needed a two since I couldn't get it to cool down in 95 degree heat. Random issues where the car would go into limp mode. Cylinder coils needed replacement. Finally the turbos started dying. It's a bad sign when your mechanic says it's time for a new car. Ironically the entertainment system and nav were fine the whole time.

Some of it could be me. My commute is either a 30 mile highway drive that often is 1 hour of stop and go or a 20 mile city drive through multiple stoplights stop and go. If that's what killed my BMW we'll see how the Acura fares in 8 years.

To me reliability is a car that gets to 100k miles w/o major issues.

 

Reliability is not a zero sum game that remains static. The E series that included the 2008 & the 2011 mentioned here was a major shift for BMW from N/A to turbo power. Could be hit or miss. My 2011 E90 was a good one & its currently competing in Auto-X with no major problems or expensive repairs.

The fact that they were hit or miss was reflected in their ratings where they were middle of the pack & not recommended buys. Audi was also middle of the pack & the TL was near the top & a recommended buy.

My 2004 BMW had been reliable eventually going 125K miles over 10 years whith no major cash outlays so I figured why not take a shot since I did not like the 4G TL at all.

Everybody here loved the rating system at that time & reminded all of us who left Acura how bad our cars would be.

Its now a full generation later, F series, which has already been out for a number of years, passed through its Mid-Cycle updates, completely new more powerful engines, real time suspensions & will soon be replaced with the next generation G series to be built on the new platform. Over the F generation the reliability has gone from the middle of the pack to number 2 behind Audi which has also gone through its generational upgrades & is now #1 . Both cars are recommended buys.

In the meantime the Acura has slipped back to the middle of the pack & is no longer a recommended buy. Also now the formally loved ratings are meaningless here despite the fact that the RDX/MDX are still recommended buys even though the TLX has fallen on hard times.

 

I know people don't like CS here (I mean, they did in 2014), but their data is better than "I have four friends that have owned an Audi since 1984 and all of them broke".

 

The best research on reliability is found in forums like this. I'm an experienced research geek and go no deeper than a glance at CR and the rest.

 

But you realize we aren't a good cross-section of car owners. By-and-large we overreport issues and get less annoyed by dealer visits. We tend to magnify everything about our car. Consumers on sites like Consumer Reports often don't think about their car and only report issues when they see it fit.

 

On a related note, VW just extended their bumper to bumper warranty on all their cars (including the Golf R) except for the e-Golf to 6 year 72K miles.

 

Agree. In addition its hard to compare the number of complaints one site against an other because of sales volumes vary so much with one car outselling another 3 to 1.

The only thing you can take out of the sires is what problem area comes up the most for that site.

 

Of course I do. I'm the same! I want to know what to look out for.

 

Can we get back to the point here? lol

Or we continue talking about the potato price in Malaysia and Singapore?

 

Haha sorry I was only referring to Honda. I'm well aware the 9AT issue with Acura.

The 9AT issue + infotainment issue IMO are the main reasons Acura ratings dropped.

Yea...so I'm not sure what is a good resource to go with these days lol.

 

My understanding is that Honda/Acura's engineering goal for powerplants is that they produce a service life of 300K miles without the need for major work (e.g, pistons, rings, heads, valves, cams and crankshafts). I think you'll be OK at 100K.

 

Don't know if its still in effect but they used to have a 110K? mile recommended service for the timing belt & water pump etc. Other than that there should be nothing expensive on the engine through 100K miles.

 

Great comparison:
Take a little of the premium off these sport sedans | Driving

New cars: Used cars by 2020:
Acura TLX: $51K $17K
Audi A6: $65K $20K
Jaguar XF: $61K $19K


Thoughts?

 

I was looking at those numbers and they seemed very low for 3 year old cars so when I read the article I picked up it was 2022, which seemed more in line.

With that being said, I would prefer a 5 year old Acura vs a Jag or Audi just based on price of maintenance and repairs.

 

I'm inclined to agree. You may have more problems with the Acura than the Audi but Audis are super expensive.

 

Used A spec



Certified Pre-Owned 2018 Acura TLX 3.5 V-6 9-AT SH-AWD with A-SPEC SH-AWD V6 4dr Sedan w/Technology and A-SPEC Package in Bridgewater #P12331 | Bill Vince?s Bridgewater Acura

 

Whats the price of these new? According to Truecars.com people are able to get these new for around $40-$41k.

 

Nope nope nope.

 

 

if people are paying 40-41

woildnt it make sense to be 37-38 CPO ?

 

If my memory serves me right, people are paying 40-41 for Lease deals which may/may not be SHAWD.

A SHAWD with low mileage for 39k sounds good to me. I live in Miami and it would be a while until I find a SHAWD for <40k.

 

I would, you get the extra year and extra 12k in mileage plus the 7yr, 100k powertrain warranty. Extra warranty for less than the price of a new car.

Win-win imho!

 

agree win win

 

 

Elevation has nothing to do with the slow 0-60 time.

 

I Iive near Bridgewater Acura and while they usually have a nice selection of used cars (Acura and non-Acura alike) their pricing is outrageous. Then new again, they’re located in a fairly affluent area of central NJ.

 

What was the 0-60? I am not going to watch almost 4 minutes of video to find out something I could read in less than a second.

 

NOTE: Test at 5000ft.

 

Yeah, that elevation wreaks havoc on NA cars. Poor Hellcat is nearly a full second behind the 550i on TFL runs.

 

I don't get this list. I might very wrong and please accept my apology in advance but 5 series, E43 AMG and GS are compared to TLX A-Spec? Let's compare the price of a 5 Series or E43 AMG to TLX first. This is like saying that 328 0-60 is 6 second and Q50 Red is 4.5 second (these 0-60s are just examples, I am not sure about the exact numbers). IS it faire to comapre a 328 to a 400HP Q50?

 

It's to give a sampling of a various range of cars that market themselves as "performance". That's why Acura, Audi have entry level models on the list. Interesting to see the performance difference.

 

I expect its just a list of what he has tested. Certainly a 456BHP 550 would not normally be matched against a 707BHP Hellcat either. That said I would expect the 6.1 second 4 cylinder 328/330 to still be a 6.1 second car at 5000ft. The FI cars will always out perform the NA cars at altitude. FI was the main reason the pinnacle of fighter & bomber piston engine performance in WWII was all attained with turbo or mechanically supercharged power plants. Some even had short term N2O or water/alcohol injection systems as short term emergency power booster added to the superchargers. Nothing new here.

 

I seem to remember that turbos lose a little power at altitude too, but at a much gentler curve than normally aspirated engines. The power loss is from the turbo needing to spin faster (more energy in, more heat loss) to achieve the same absolute manifold pressure.

 

InSure, that's why aircraft superchargers are big mothers. In a P47 the blower takes up almost the whole diameter of the fuselage. Very high altitude & very large displacement engines need to suck in a lot more air to get the same boost pressure as they would at low altitudes. Most performance car chargers are not going to see much of a boost degradation at 5000 ft. Would guess based on the 550 tested only about .4 or so lost from a standardized sea level factor used by the magazines.

BMW lists the 330 as 5.5 seconds & C&D 5.4 seconds to 60MPH so 6.1 would be easy to manage with a nice cushion. Using a .4 loss factor the 330 is still a 5 second car. By comparison the TLX using C&D's sea level normalization gets to 60 in 5.7 seconds & looses about 1.5 seconds at altitude according to the chart.

Its interesting that the 330 248BHP 4 cylinder is almost as fast to 60MPH at 5000 ft as the TLX is at sea-level. That is a graphic example as to why ACURA should go turbo with the next generation.