http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda?hl=en
rec.autos.makers.honda@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* CR-V safety recall - 6 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda/t/7f6574cc29577606?hl=en
* Flickering Oil Press MIL at idle only. 1998 Accord V6 265K. Intermittent. -
1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda/t/51f6f8571df4e6c6?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: CR-V safety recall
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda/t/7f6574cc29577606?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Sun, Oct 9 2011 6:14 pm
From: "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
In article <Xns9F79C4E53E398tegger@208.90.168.18>,
Tegger <invalid@example.com> wrote:
> Actually, most software flashes are designed to eliminate or ameliorate
> undesirable or destructive behavior.
Like the hybrid flash?
Which was designed to do exactly what you describe.
BUT: the customer pays in lower gas mileage.
In days past, Honda would have apologized for designing/building a bad
traction battery, and would have replaced the battery with one that
actually works to make the car what the car is supposed to be. IOW,
Honda would have eliminated the undesirable behavior--the battery going
bad early--while simultaneously delivering on their promise of what the
car is supposed to be.
Instead, the new Honda simply flashes the software to basically limp the
battery along until Honda's obligations with respect to warranty claims
are over. That the flash takes the gas mileage down to what a Civic LX
gets every day without effort, is the customer's problem.
Honda has spent quite a bit of time figuring out how to solve THEIR
problems ($$$$$) in software. Whether it FIXES the problem, whether or
not the car the customer gets back is the car the customer bought or
THOUGHT he bought, doesn't matter to the new Honda.
== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 10 2011 2:23 pm
From: jim beam
On 10/09/2011 06:14 PM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article<Xns9F79C4E53E398tegger@208.90.168.18>,
> Tegger<invalid@example.com> wrote:
>
>> Actually, most software flashes are designed to eliminate or ameliorate
>> undesirable or destructive behavior.
>
> Like the hybrid flash?
>
> Which was designed to do exactly what you describe.
>
> BUT: the customer pays in lower gas mileage.
>
> In days past, Honda would have apologized for designing/building a bad
> traction battery, and would have replaced the battery with one that
> actually works to make the car what the car is supposed to be. IOW,
> Honda would have eliminated the undesirable behavior--the battery going
> bad early--while simultaneously delivering on their promise of what the
> car is supposed to be.
>
> Instead, the new Honda simply flashes the software to basically limp the
> battery along until Honda's obligations with respect to warranty claims
> are over. That the flash takes the gas mileage down to what a Civic LX
> gets every day without effort, is the customer's problem.
>
> Honda has spent quite a bit of time figuring out how to solve THEIR
> problems ($$$$$) in software. Whether it FIXES the problem, whether or
> not the car the customer gets back is the car the customer bought or
> THOUGHT he bought, doesn't matter to the new Honda.
to be fair to honda, they don't actually make the battery cells, and a
lot of those are well below par of late. all kinds of manufacturers
[users] have been hit all across the board, not just honda.
now, many have worked with their supplier and will replace the defects
free of charge, makita for instance. so really, your criticism is
really directed to honda for /not/ doing the right thing with their
supplier, and not replacing sub-par battery packs.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 10 2011 3:26 pm
From: GrumpyOne
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article<Xns9F79C4E53E398tegger@208.90.168.18>,
> Tegger<invalid@example.com> wrote:
>
>> Actually, most software flashes are designed to eliminate or ameliorate
>> undesirable or destructive behavior.
>
> Like the hybrid flash?
>
> Which was designed to do exactly what you describe.
>
> BUT: the customer pays in lower gas mileage.
>
This has been well described in multiplle sources. Shameful to say the
least. If I were a Honda hybrid owner, I would be thoroughly pissed and
waging a war.
Once a car company has a tainted record, it takes years to recover IF it
recovers at all.
I'll just stick with my old turd boxes.. . Thank you!
JT
== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 10 2011 4:06 pm
From: "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
In article <j6vnp0$dnt$1@speranza.aioe.org>, jim beam <me@privacy.net>
wrote:
> > Instead, the new Honda simply flashes the software to basically limp the
> > battery along until Honda's obligations with respect to warranty claims
> > are over. That the flash takes the gas mileage down to what a Civic LX
> > gets every day without effort, is the customer's problem.
> >
> > Honda has spent quite a bit of time figuring out how to solve THEIR
> > problems ($$$$$) in software. Whether it FIXES the problem, whether or
> > not the car the customer gets back is the car the customer bought or
> > THOUGHT he bought, doesn't matter to the new Honda.
>
> to be fair to honda, they don't actually make the battery cells, and a
> lot of those are well below par of late. all kinds of manufacturers
> [users] have been hit all across the board, not just honda.
Not the customer's problem. Honda sold them something, then failed to
deliver--and we're supposed to be "fair to Honda"?
The battery problem is Honda's problem, but instead the new Honda makes
the customer pay the price. The REAL solution would be to give the
customer what the customer actually paid for--but no, that would cost
Honda money. No, it's better for HONDA that they spend as little as
possible to fix the problem--and that means developing a one-time
software fix instead of paying for parts to fix it.
The Honda I knew would have been falling over themselves to apologize
while they fitted a different battery that allowed the car to meet ALL
performance specs as advertised, not just a "lasts the length of the
federally mandated 8 year warranty (but doesn't do diddly to increase
your gas mileage)" spec.
Look: if Honda wants to play with the big boys, then they have to step
up to the plate and play. They can't have it both ways. They can't
commit to something, sell the hell out of it to hundreds of thousands of
customers, then step back and point at their suppliers and shrug their
shoulders.
> now, many have worked with their supplier and will replace the defects
> free of charge, makita for instance. so really, your criticism is
> really directed to honda for /not/ doing the right thing with their
> supplier, and not replacing sub-par battery packs.
That's EXACTLY my point.
== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 10 2011 4:25 pm
From: jim beam
On 10/10/2011 04:06 PM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article<j6vnp0$dnt$1@speranza.aioe.org>, jim beam<me@privacy.net>
> wrote:
>
>>> Instead, the new Honda simply flashes the software to basically limp the
>>> battery along until Honda's obligations with respect to warranty claims
>>> are over. That the flash takes the gas mileage down to what a Civic LX
>>> gets every day without effort, is the customer's problem.
>>>
>>> Honda has spent quite a bit of time figuring out how to solve THEIR
>>> problems ($$$$$) in software. Whether it FIXES the problem, whether or
>>> not the car the customer gets back is the car the customer bought or
>>> THOUGHT he bought, doesn't matter to the new Honda.
>>
>> to be fair to honda, they don't actually make the battery cells, and a
>> lot of those are well below par of late. all kinds of manufacturers
>> [users] have been hit all across the board, not just honda.
>
> Not the customer's problem. Honda sold them something, then failed to
> deliver--and we're supposed to be "fair to Honda"?
>
> The battery problem is Honda's problem, but instead the new Honda makes
> the customer pay the price. The REAL solution would be to give the
> customer what the customer actually paid for--but no, that would cost
> Honda money. No, it's better for HONDA that they spend as little as
> possible to fix the problem--and that means developing a one-time
> software fix instead of paying for parts to fix it.
>
> The Honda I knew would have been falling over themselves to apologize
> while they fitted a different battery that allowed the car to meet ALL
> performance specs as advertised, not just a "lasts the length of the
> federally mandated 8 year warranty (but doesn't do diddly to increase
> your gas mileage)" spec.
>
> Look: if Honda wants to play with the big boys, then they have to step
> up to the plate and play. They can't have it both ways. They can't
> commit to something, sell the hell out of it to hundreds of thousands of
> customers, then step back and point at their suppliers and shrug their
> shoulders.
>
>
>
>> now, many have worked with their supplier and will replace the defects
>> free of charge, makita for instance. so really, your criticism is
>> really directed to honda for /not/ doing the right thing with their
>> supplier, and not replacing sub-par battery packs.
>
> That's EXACTLY my point.
we're on the same page re solution dude. i was only pointing out that
this is a problem across the board with rechargables, and not just honda
have been affected.
we also agree honda should step up to the plate and do the right thing
on replacement, but that's not what they've done, and it's not what
they're going to do going forward either based on what i can see. the
way they fucked their customer base over on transmissions [we know it's
deliberate because this crosses product lines, and is compounded by
their not supplying the after-market] is what killed it for me. that's
why i won't buy a new honda.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 10 2011 7:43 pm
From: "Michael"
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-53A122.18370509102011@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <Xns9F79BA98F97F7tegger@208.90.168.18>,
> Tegger <invalid@example.com> wrote:
>
>> This one is just a software flash.
>
> hehehe Yeah, just like I had to get a new control module, complete with
> new software, when Honda replaced my 02 Odyssey transmission last year.
>
> And just like Honda reflashed the ECUs on all those Civic hybrids that
> were going through batteries.
>
> The SOLE purpose of this and all other Honda "software flashes" is to
> benefit Honda by making the car perform in such a way as to get it
> through the warranty period--never mind how the car performs for the
> customer afterward.
>
Not to mention the car is so underpowered afterward it will barely merge on
a highway properly. Once the battery gets toasted the system is constantly
charging a battery it never uses. My 1998 Taurus gets better gas mileage
than the 2006 Hybrid. Disgusting and I will NEVER own another Honda.
Period.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Flickering Oil Press MIL at idle only. 1998 Accord V6 265K.
Intermittent.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda/t/51f6f8571df4e6c6?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 10 2011 3:51 pm
From: jim beam
On 10/05/2011 04:45 AM, Meatman wrote:
> 1998 Honda Accord EX V6 265k miles. No leaks! No smoke on start-up
> or otherwise. Oil changed by me every 3-5k like a crackhead. No
> prior indications. Nothing else wrong or ongoing. Yes, oil level at
> FULL. Engine is still really tight.
> -
> STORY: Flickering oil light showed suddenly...no prior random single
> flickers...just one night, at idle, it started the rapid flicker at
> idle. Came and went. Not always, not every idle. Seemingly just
> when it chooses. It can disappear for a day or two. Or keep it up
> for a day or two.
> -
> HOWEVER, of note, the VERY lightest touch on the accel pedal
> (equivalent of a feather...) makes it disappear always. Never seen it
> at any speed other than idle, randomly.
> -
> Purchased but haven't installed new pressure sender, btw.
> - Thoughts?
i'm not sure if you can fit the outsize oil filter on that motor, but if
you can, try a wix 51344. it's quietened down my i4 accord and my civic
on cold start, and i'm certain it'll help your idle pressure. use a
slightly thicker oil too - 5w-30, not 0w-20 or anything like that.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.autos.makers.honda"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.autos.makers.honda+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
No comments:
Post a Comment