CR-V Fires and Explosions

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 01:26:15 GMT, "fish" >
wrote:

>E Meyer respectfully sez...
>
>>> Did Honda ever redesign the CR-V to prevent
>>> that type of disaster from ever happening again?
>
>
>> The fact that you had to dig back to 2004 to find
>> a write up of this should indicate to you that its
>> not a current problem.
>
>
>A major part of researching motor vehicles involves investigating it's
>recent past to see what issues have occurred and how it could relate to my
>confidence in their (highly rated) products.
>
>I am thankful for all the responses to my postings here.
>
>I am not going to choose a vehicle based on one single finding, but on a
>combination of things that together will help me decide which vehicle I feel
>confident that would provide a pleasant driving experience for a great many
>years.
>
>My current vehicle, a 1997 Saturn (10½ years old, bought it in Summer '96) =
>reliable and I am hoping with proper research to find the same in my next
>motor vehicle.
>
>An educated customer = the best customer because I walk in with my printout,
>like I did 10½ years ago saying, this is what I want.

LOL, you chose a Saturn after extensive research? Did the hundreds of
first person reports in the Saturn newsgroup of oil burning, failed
timing chains, transmission failures, cracked heads, blown head
gaskets, high temp readings, failed motor mounts and inoperative tail
lights factor into your decision?

Is it the single cam or the double cam engine?

Gordon McGrew sez...

> LOL, you chose a Saturn after extensive research?

Internet research, yes.

> Did the hundreds of first person reports in the
> Saturn newsgroup of oil burning, failed timing
> chains, transmission failures, cracked heads,
> blown head gaskets, high temp readings, failed
> motor mounts and inoperative tail lights factor
> into your decision?

I recall reading about that!

I have been fortunate to have the pleasure of a worry-free experience.

Yes, I am planning on test driving the CR-V.

I am just researching and looking for answers.

On the positive side, I like the design of the CR-V.

The instrumentation cluster looks very attractive and well thought out.

Of course, in a few months, the 2008 Saturn Vue Hybrid V6 is coming.

Gordon, you do have a valid point and I understand what it is you are
saying.

For the CR-V to maintain their position at the top of the Consumer Reports
list is an achievement, as well as the Toyota RAV-4.

This will be a test of what I like about each and what I decide will be
ultimately based on those decisions.

I'm sure the test drive will help highlight what I need to know.

fish wrote:
> Gordon McGrew sez...
>
>
>>If the CRV meets your needs, you can buy it with confidence.
>
>
> Not when there are reports of fires and explosions!!
>
> You take your own advice - for my hard earned money, my research has yielded
> shocking results.

Yes: of incompetent or lazy service techs. That shouldn't deter you from buying
the vehicle, it should only deter you from having it serviced anywhere but a
shop that you fully trust.

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 05:58:03 GMT, "fish" >
wrote:

>Gordon McGrew sez...
>
>> LOL, you chose a Saturn after extensive research?
>
>Internet research, yes.
>
>> Did the hundreds of first person reports in the
>> Saturn newsgroup of oil burning, failed timing
>> chains, transmission failures, cracked heads,
>> blown head gaskets, high temp readings, failed
>> motor mounts and inoperative tail lights factor
>> into your decision?
>
>I recall reading about that!
>
>I have been fortunate to have the pleasure of a worry-free experience.
>
>Yes, I am planning on test driving the CR-V.
>
>I am just researching and looking for answers.
>
>On the positive side, I like the design of the CR-V.
>
>The instrumentation cluster looks very attractive and well thought out.
>
>Of course, in a few months, the 2008 Saturn Vue Hybrid V6 is coming.
>
>Gordon, you do have a valid point and I understand what it is you are
>saying.
>
>For the CR-V to maintain their position at the top of the Consumer Reports
>list is an achievement, as well as the Toyota RAV-4.
>
>This will be a test of what I like about each and what I decide will be
>ultimately based on those decisions.
>
>I'm sure the test drive will help highlight what I need to know.

I don't think you can go wrong with either the Toyota or the Honda.
Choose whichever fits your needs best. There is no guaranty that
either will be reliable and defect-free for you, but you have to go
with the odds. Subaru would also be worthy of consideration. The
differences in reliability and durability between these cars would be
small and it really isn't predictable which might turn out to be best
over the course of the next ten years. The bet strategy IMO is to
consider only cars from the manufacturers with the best reliability
histories and then pick the one that is best suited to your wants and
needs.

Good luck and please do give us a report on what you find and how you
decide.

fish wrote:
<snip troll>

didn't you pop up this time last year? how much do you get paid to do
this stuff?

fish wrote:
<snip tossing suckie out of stroller>

> Yes, Honda redesigned the CR-V

how do you know this?

> - but I want answers. I want to know
> specifics of this redesign.

you know that contradicts your first statement, right?

here's how it is kiddo; time you did some homework. details are all
available on the net if you know where to look. they're even available
in dead tree format if you want to pay for it. so, go away, find out
what the hell you're talking about, then get back to us. if you don't
know what you're talking about, you're just being an ass.

jim beam
<-entire worthless crap snipped->

If you can't offer any constructive dialog, then you are trolling for a
flame war.
<-snip->

fish wrote:
> jim beam
> <-entire worthless crap snipped->
>
> If you can't offer any constructive dialog, then you are trolling for a
> flame war.
> <-snip->
>
>
what's constructive about a post titled "CR-V Fires and Explosions"?

jim beam typed:

> fish wrote:
>> jim beam
>> <-entire worthless crap snipped->
>>
>> If you can't offer any constructive dialog, then you are trolling for a
>> flame war.
>> <-snip->
> what's constructive about a post titled "CR-V Fires and Explosions"?

It was an article from the Washington Post.

Geesh! I post a newpaper article and suddenly the trolls start coming out
like roaches!

fish wrote:
> jim beam typed:
>
>> fish wrote:
>>> jim beam
>>> <-entire worthless crap snipped->
>>>
>>> If you can't offer any constructive dialog, then you are trolling for a
>>> flame war.
>>> <-snip->
>> what's constructive about a post titled "CR-V Fires and Explosions"?
>
> It was an article from the Washington Post.
>
> Geesh! I post a newpaper article and suddenly the trolls start coming out
> like roaches!
>
correction: you post a scare story with the title "CR-V Fires and
Explosions". which is "based" on an article 2 years old and proven to
be sensationalist nonsense. on top of that, you have the temerity to
dress this up as a request for easily accessible information that you're
too damned lazy [or stupid] to find for yourself. i say you're a
trolling dumb-ass.