If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Jason" > wrote in message ... > In article >, SoCalMike > > wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >> > theory but it seems to make sense. What's your opinion on this subject. >> >> generally makes sense, especially after a major platform change like the >> civic just had. > > Hello, > There are exceptions to every rule. For example, my '99 Accord is the > second generation--not the third. Second generation of what? My 91 is _fourth_ generations of Accords... |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
> the platform and drivetrains were pretty much carried over, though. > werent they? I would say, NO! The 1.8 L engine was new. The auto tranny was new. The chassis was also considerably bigger than the first gen Integra. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Jason wrote:
> In article >, SoCalMike > > wrote: > > >>Jason wrote: >> >>>theory but it seems to make sense. What's your opinion on this subject. >> >>generally makes sense, especially after a major platform change like the >>civic just had. > > > Hello, > There are exceptions to every rule. For example, my '99 Accord is the > second generation--not the third. It's an exception to the rule since the > engine and related transmission was first used in the 1996 Acura CL. This > means that the engine and transmission in my 99 Accord was used three > years before it was placed in the 99 Accords. That's why I was not > concerned about it since I knew any defects found in the engine and > transmission were repaired before it was placed in my car. > so the V6 version of the 96 acura and 99 accord didnt have any auto tranny probs? |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
In article >, SoCalMike
> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article >, SoCalMike > > > wrote: > > > > > >>Jason wrote: > >> > >>>theory but it seems to make sense. What's your opinion on this subject. > >> > >>generally makes sense, especially after a major platform change like the > >>civic just had. > > > > > > Hello, > > There are exceptions to every rule. For example, my '99 Accord is the > > second generation--not the third. It's an exception to the rule since the > > engine and related transmission was first used in the 1996 Acura CL. This > > means that the engine and transmission in my 99 Accord was used three > > years before it was placed in the 99 Accords. That's why I was not > > concerned about it since I knew any defects found in the engine and > > transmission were repaired before it was placed in my car. > > > so the V6 version of the 96 acura and 99 accord didnt have any auto > tranny probs? There are exceptions to every rule. I agree--Honda should have solved this problem before they put that same defective transmission in the 99 Honda Accord 6 cyld. cars. Honda dropped the ball. My neighbor has a 99 Honda 6 cyld. Accord. I have not told them about the problem since it would just cause them to worry. Do you know whether or not Honda is replacing those transmissions for free? if so, I will tell them in case their transmission develops problems. I am glad that I have the 4 cyld. version of the same car instead of the 6 cyld. -- NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Jason wrote:
> In article >, SoCalMike > > wrote: > > >>Jason wrote: >> >>>In article >, SoCalMike > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Jason wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>theory but it seems to make sense. What's your opinion on this subject. >>>> >>>>generally makes sense, especially after a major platform change like the >>>>civic just had. >>> >>> >>>Hello, >>>There are exceptions to every rule. For example, my '99 Accord is the >>>second generation--not the third. It's an exception to the rule since the >>>engine and related transmission was first used in the 1996 Acura CL. This >>>means that the engine and transmission in my 99 Accord was used three >>>years before it was placed in the 99 Accords. That's why I was not >>>concerned about it since I knew any defects found in the engine and >>>transmission were repaired before it was placed in my car. >>> >> >>so the V6 version of the 96 acura and 99 accord didnt have any auto >>tranny probs? > > > There are exceptions to every rule. I agree--Honda should have solved this > problem before they put that same defective transmission in the 99 Honda > Accord 6 cyld. cars. Honda dropped the ball. My neighbor has a 99 Honda 6 > cyld. Accord. I have not told them about the problem since it would just > cause them to worry. Do you know whether or not Honda is replacing those > transmissions for free? if so, I will tell them in case their transmission > develops problems. I am glad that I have the 4 cyld. version of the same > car instead of the 6 cyld. > which about the same time honda took the decision to drop all hatchbacks here in the u.s., make the civic macpherson strut and adopt red rear turn signal lenses - one of the DUMBEST things i have ever seen. oh, and make the accord have twin pipes coming out of the rear despite the fact that there's only pipe coming under the car. whatever my pet peeves, honda have come under a lot of criticism from the financial analysts for their civic decison - it basically handed the substantial "enthusiast" market to subaru on a plate with correspondingly disasterous drops in sales. when's the last time you saw an rsx, the macpherson "integra"? and toyota have taken a lot of honda's family sedan market because of the transmission problems you cite. honda used to be run by car enthusiasts. now, it seems to be run by bean counters who think cosmetic garbage and engineering short cuts are the way to make money. wrong honda, wrong. that's ford/g.m.'s game. i used to buy honda because they were well made, well engineered, sporty little cars. if i was in the market for a new car today, i'd buy toyota or nissan. or subaru. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
In article >, "Elmo P.
Shagnasty" > wrote: > In article >, > jim beam > wrote: > > > honda used to be run by car enthusiasts. now, it seems to be run by > > bean counters who think cosmetic garbage and engineering short cuts are > > the way to make money. > > I agree. The last 10 years have seen way too many dumb decisions come > from Honda. > > I love Honda, but I honestly believe--today--that Toyota provides a > better value. > > Honda had better get back on the stick. I think that we can all agree that Honda and Toyota both make cars that are far superior to any of the cars made my GM and Ford. -- NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Jason wrote:
> I think that we can all agree that Honda and Toyota both make cars that > are far superior to any of the cars made my GM and Ford. or chrysler, whos biggest seller is the bloated pimpmobile 300. do they offer a vinyl roof kit and whitewalls for that thing yet? |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
SoCalMike wrote:
> Jason wrote: >> I think that we can all agree that Honda and Toyota both make cars that >> are far superior to any of the cars made my GM and Ford. > > or chrysler, whos biggest seller is the bloated pimpmobile 300. do they > offer a vinyl roof kit and whitewalls for that thing yet? Pimpmobile is an accurate term. It looks like a Cadillac. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
"jim beam" > wrote in message ... > > > > > > There are exceptions to every rule. I agree--Honda should have solved this > > problem before they put that same defective transmission in the 99 Honda > > Accord 6 cyld. cars. Honda dropped the ball. My neighbor has a 99 Honda 6 > > cyld. Accord. I have not told them about the problem since it would just > > cause them to worry. Do you know whether or not Honda is replacing those > > transmissions for free? if so, I will tell them in case their transmission > > develops problems. I am glad that I have the 4 cyld. version of the same > > car instead of the 6 cyld. > > > which about the same time honda took the decision to drop all hatchbacks > here in the u.s., make the civic macpherson strut and adopt red rear > turn signal lenses - one of the DUMBEST things i have ever seen. oh, > and make the accord have twin pipes coming out of the rear despite the > fact that there's only pipe coming under the car. > > whatever my pet peeves, honda have come under a lot of criticism from > the financial analysts for their civic decison - it basically handed the > substantial "enthusiast" market to subaru on a plate with > correspondingly disasterous drops in sales. when's the last time you > saw an rsx, the macpherson "integra"? and toyota have taken a lot of > honda's family sedan market because of the transmission problems you cite. > > honda used to be run by car enthusiasts. now, it seems to be run by > bean counters who think cosmetic garbage and engineering short cuts are > the way to make money. wrong honda, wrong. that's ford/g.m.'s game. i > used to buy honda because they were well made, well engineered, sporty > little cars. if i was in the market for a new car today, i'd buy toyota > or nissan. or subaru. Here's an article I wrote 3 years ago that flowed the same thread. Too bad...what happened to the days when the Civic was all about an automobile that was derived from racing inspired genes. Don't the car company know that the been counters are only about the short term profit?? BMW, Mercedes, GM are the kind of car company that are careful about protecting their roots. New roots are going to have be grown, and since cars are generally alot more reliable when compared to the past, it shouldn't be difficult for a car company like Hyundai to build something sporting and economical that only cost about 12k. All they have to do is copy the CRX. Pars |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Pars wrote:
> "jim beam" > wrote in message > ... > >>> >>>There are exceptions to every rule. I agree--Honda should have solved > > this > >>>problem before they put that same defective transmission in the 99 Honda >>>Accord 6 cyld. cars. Honda dropped the ball. My neighbor has a 99 Honda > > 6 > >>>cyld. Accord. I have not told them about the problem since it would just >>>cause them to worry. Do you know whether or not Honda is replacing those >>>transmissions for free? if so, I will tell them in case their > > transmission > >>>develops problems. I am glad that I have the 4 cyld. version of the same >>>car instead of the 6 cyld. >>> >> >>which about the same time honda took the decision to drop all hatchbacks >>here in the u.s., make the civic macpherson strut and adopt red rear >>turn signal lenses - one of the DUMBEST things i have ever seen. oh, >>and make the accord have twin pipes coming out of the rear despite the >>fact that there's only pipe coming under the car. >> >>whatever my pet peeves, honda have come under a lot of criticism from >>the financial analysts for their civic decison - it basically handed the >>substantial "enthusiast" market to subaru on a plate with >>correspondingly disasterous drops in sales. when's the last time you >>saw an rsx, the macpherson "integra"? and toyota have taken a lot of >>honda's family sedan market because of the transmission problems you cite. >> >>honda used to be run by car enthusiasts. now, it seems to be run by >>bean counters who think cosmetic garbage and engineering short cuts are >>the way to make money. wrong honda, wrong. that's ford/g.m.'s game. i >>used to buy honda because they were well made, well engineered, sporty >>little cars. if i was in the market for a new car today, i'd buy toyota >>or nissan. or subaru. > > > > Here's an article I wrote 3 years ago that flowed the same thread. > > > > Too bad...what happened to the days when the Civic was all about an > automobile > that was derived from racing inspired genes. Don't the car company know that > the been counters are only about the short term profit?? BMW, Mercedes, GM > are > the kind of car company that are > careful about protecting their roots. New roots are going to have be grown, > and > since cars are generally alot more reliable when compared to the past, it > shouldn't be difficult for a car company like Hyundai to build something > sporting and economical that only cost about 12k. All they have to do is > copy > the CRX. > > > Pars > > missing link! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Forza Car List | Rob Berryhill | Simulators | 19 | May 7th 05 11:37 PM |
Honda versus Toyota | HLS | Technology | 13 | April 18th 05 05:14 PM |
Honda OEM Parts Catalogs for Sale | Joe | Honda | 0 | February 12th 05 01:43 PM |
Why Are Honda CR-V's Catching Fire? | Sparky | Honda | 4 | October 19th 04 05:35 PM |
ALERT TO TOYOTA OWNERS | Charlene Blake | General | 0 | January 15th 04 01:50 PM |