Civic Transmission shot at 44K: Good Ending!!!

"Elle" > wrote in message
.net...
> "tww" > wrote
> > Contrast that with my experience with a 71 Corvette some
> > 35 years ago when a
> > rear wheel bearing distintegrated at 12,300 miles. The
> > dealer refused to
> > fix it under the warranty as did GM after I wrote to them.
> > Their
> > explanation was that the car was 300 miles out of
> > warranty, so they were not
> > responsible.
>
> Are you condemning them for this?
>
> Do you not see that when lines are not drawn clearly, it's
> easy to argue that they can keep being redrawn at whim? You
> argue an extension to 12,300 miles. The next guy asks for an
> extension to 12,400 miles, because you got an extension,
> etc.
>
> ISTM warranties are surely based on engineering and
> economics. How long can a part reasonably last? How often
> will a defective part come up that lasts no where near this
> long? What warranty incentive do I need to give customers so
> they buy the car?
>
> 12,000 miles is 12,000 miles. I would never criticize a
> manufacturer for refusing to honor a 12,000 mile warranty
> when the car had 12,001 miles on it. It's illogical to do
> so.
>
>
This was the second Corvette I owned -- which was replete with problems. Of
course, I suppose you are technically right, but I think Honda see's it
otherwise because it execises some commonsense and judgement. Your logic
also says that there are no exceptions or compromises. That makes life easy
for you then to enforce the rules because you don't have to think. Just say
no!

"tww" > wrote
> "Elle" > wrote
>> "tww" > wrote
>> > Contrast that with my experience with a 71 Corvette
>> > some
>> > 35 years ago when a
>> > rear wheel bearing distintegrated at 12,300 miles. The
>> > dealer refused to
>> > fix it under the warranty as did GM after I wrote to
>> > them.
>> > Their
>> > explanation was that the car was 300 miles out of
>> > warranty, so they were not
>> > responsible.
>>
>> Are you condemning them for this?
>>
>> Do you not see that when lines are not drawn clearly,
>> it's
>> easy to argue that they can keep being redrawn at whim?
>> You
>> argue an extension to 12,300 miles. The next guy asks for
>> an
>> extension to 12,400 miles, because you got an extension,
>> etc.
>>
>> ISTM warranties are surely based on engineering and
>> economics. How long can a part reasonably last? How often
>> will a defective part come up that lasts no where near
>> this
>> long? What warranty incentive do I need to give customers
>> so
>> they buy the car?
>>
>> 12,000 miles is 12,000 miles. I would never criticize a
>> manufacturer for refusing to honor a 12,000 mile warranty
>> when the car had 12,001 miles on it. It's illogical to do
>> so.
>>
>>
> This was the second Corvette I owned -- which was replete
> with problems. Of
> course, I suppose you are technically right, but I think
> Honda see's it
> otherwise because it execises some commonsense and
> judgement.

I would not call it common sense. I would call it judgment.
There are a few rational arguments for manufacturers to
extend warranties, having to do with, for example (1) custom
among other car manufacturers; and (2) good PR.

> Your logic
> also says that there are no exceptions or compromises.

Your logic (in misinterpreting my statement) says that, not
mine.

> That makes life easy
> for you then to enforce the rules because you don't have
> to think. Just say
> no!

My point was I condemn the actions of people who make
demands (not mere inquiries) outside the limits of legal
contracts. They won't be my friends yada. By contrast,
merely asking the manufacturer to extend the warranty,
because of xyz, puts the ball in the manufacturer's court. I
don't condemn anyone for merely asking when the line appears
to be close. Certainly on occasion I have asked for such
breaks, too. E.g. a few years ago I was very busy and forgot
to pay a bill. The company charged me a fee for the
lateness. That was allowed by contract. I called and asked
if they might cut me a break because of my long record of
reliably paying on time. They did, and rescinded the fee. I
feel no guilt.

I say this because I think these days there is a whiny-arsed
culture in the U.S. that refuses to take responsibility for
poor judgment.

If one does not like the terms of a warranty contract, then
do not purchase the car, etc.

"Elle" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> "tww" > wrote
> > "Elle" > wrote
> >> "tww" > wrote
> >> > Contrast that with my experience with a 71 Corvette
> >> > some
> >> > 35 years ago when a
> >> > rear wheel bearing distintegrated at 12,300 miles. The
> >> > dealer refused to
> >> > fix it under the warranty as did GM after I wrote to
> >> > them.
> >> > Their
> >> > explanation was that the car was 300 miles out of
> >> > warranty, so they were not
> >> > responsible.
> >>
> >> Are you condemning them for this?
> >>
> >> Do you not see that when lines are not drawn clearly,
> >> it's
> >> easy to argue that they can keep being redrawn at whim?
> >> You
> >> argue an extension to 12,300 miles. The next guy asks for
> >> an
> >> extension to 12,400 miles, because you got an extension,
> >> etc.
> >>
> >> ISTM warranties are surely based on engineering and
> >> economics. How long can a part reasonably last? How often
> >> will a defective part come up that lasts no where near
> >> this
> >> long? What warranty incentive do I need to give customers
> >> so
> >> they buy the car?
> >>
> >> 12,000 miles is 12,000 miles. I would never criticize a
> >> manufacturer for refusing to honor a 12,000 mile warranty
> >> when the car had 12,001 miles on it. It's illogical to do
> >> so.
> >>
> >>
> > This was the second Corvette I owned -- which was replete
> > with problems. Of
> > course, I suppose you are technically right, but I think
> > Honda see's it
> > otherwise because it execises some commonsense and
> > judgement.
>
> I would not call it common sense. I would call it judgment.
> There are a few rational arguments for manufacturers to
> extend warranties, having to do with, for example (1) custom
> among other car manufacturers; and (2) good PR.
>
> > Your logic
> > also says that there are no exceptions or compromises.
>
> Your logic (in misinterpreting my statement) says that, not
> mine.
>
> > That makes life easy
> > for you then to enforce the rules because you don't have
> > to think. Just say
> > no!
>

> My point was I condemn the actions of people who make
> demands (not mere inquiries) outside the limits of legal
> contracts. They won't be my friends yada. By contrast,
> merely asking the manufacturer to extend the warranty,
> because of xyz, puts the ball in the manufacturer's court. I
> don't condemn anyone for merely asking when the line appears
> to be close. Certainly on occasion I have asked for such
> breaks, too. E.g. a few years ago I was very busy and forgot
> to pay a bill. The company charged me a fee for the
> lateness. That was allowed by contract. I called and asked
> if they might cut me a break because of my long record of
> reliably paying on time. They did, and rescinded the fee. I
> feel no guilt.
>
I think there are times when the line is close that it is reasonable to ask
for and expect some sort of accommodation. In the case of the Civic with a
blown transmission at 44k, it was well outside the warranty and I was
surprised Honda replaced it. I certainly would not expect personally for
them to do that, nor would I insist on it as my right. If the transmission
had blown at 36,300 miles, however, I would think that while the
manufacturer has the right to say no, the customer should have some
reasonable expectation that some accommodation would be made -- perhaps a
50/50 split. The difference I see here was the GM culture of the 60s/70s
that ran flat up against the Japanese culture of producing a quality product
that they would stand behind. I recollect Honda recalling in 1970 my CB750
4 because of a problem with the chain breaking. It was a voluntary act on
the part of Honda and completely unheard of in the motorcycle world and
unusual in the automotive world. I had a similar experience with Datsun in
the 70s with my 280z when the dealer replaced my brake pads at 15k without
charge and unasked for when I experienced grabbing on one side. I rememmber
him saying that I should not have experienced the problem and that Datsun
stood behind their cars. As a retired military officer now working in the
higher education I see every day the "don't take responsibility for my
actions" culture and find it distressing. You are right in that respect. In
conclusion, I apologize for any offense -- I wrongly saw you as being too
inflexible.

> I say this because I think these days there is a whiny-arsed
> culture in the U.S. that refuses to take responsibility for
> poor judgment.
>
> If one does not like the terms of a warranty contract, then
> do not purchase the car, etc.
>
>

"tww" > wrote
> I think there are times when the line is close that it is
> reasonable to ask
> for and expect some sort of accommodation. In the case of
> the Civic with a
> blown transmission at 44k, it was well outside the
> warranty and I was
> surprised Honda replaced it. I certainly would not expect
> personally for
> them to do that, nor would I insist on it as my right. If
> the transmission
> had blown at 36,300 miles, however, I would think that
> while the
> manufacturer has the right to say no, the customer should
> have some
> reasonable expectation that some accommodation would be
> made -- perhaps a
> 50/50 split. The difference I see here was the GM culture
> of the 60s/70s
> that ran flat up against the Japanese culture of producing
> a quality product
> that they would stand behind. I recollect Honda recalling
> in 1970 my CB750
> 4 because of a problem with the chain breaking. It was a
> voluntary act on
> the part of Honda and completely unheard of in the
> motorcycle world and
> unusual in the automotive world. I had a similar
> experience with Datsun in
> the 70s with my 280z when the dealer replaced my brake
> pads at 15k without
> charge and unasked for when I experienced grabbing on one
> side. I rememmber
> him saying that I should not have experienced the problem
> and that Datsun
> stood behind their cars. As a retired military officer
> now working in the
> higher education I see every day the "don't take
> responsibility for my
> actions" culture and find it distressing. You are right
> in that respect. In
> conclusion, I apologize for any offense -- I wrongly saw
> you as being too
> inflexible.

With all due respect, no apology is necessary. I was not
entirely clear in my post about my view on these things.
Continuing to talk through an issue is often fruitful.

I think we're about on the same page. Thanks for clarifying
your own view.

As the owner of the Honda with the blown transmission at 44K, I was
very surprised myself that they decided to replace it free of charge.
Once again, in talking with Honda of America, they did not tell me that
'this things happen and you just had bad luck" Wha t they said is that
"it is highly unusual for a Honda with this type of engine to have this
type of problem at this mileage and we stand behind the quality of our
product, whether or not this is within the guarantee time-frame".

Some other factors that might have played into this outcome:

1. The car broke down and left me stranded in the middle of a mountain
road >100 miles from home. I was saddled with a $400 tow truck bill.
2. The car had been meticulously maintained at the Honda dealership
(including a 30K inspection with transmission fluid change), and I had
all the records.
3. This was my 3rd Honda in 5 years.

I agree with the postings that state that Honda had NO OBLIGATION to do
this, and I wouldn't have expected this of them. But how many times we
all do things even when we have no obligation, we just do them out of
GOOD WILL. Honda made this very clear to me, and I accepted this as a
favor. This type of actions do pay back in the long run, and Honda
certainly knows this.

I am sorry for the people who feel that we should stick to the strict
terms of our agreements (i.e., that Honda should not have paid even if
my car broke down 5 miles over the guarantee term limit), in my
experience it is when you go beyond those terms and do things out of
good will and out of the kindness of your heart, that extraordinary
things happen. Why should I deprive Honda of the oportunity to show me
how far they will go to help me out (by kindly asking what they can do
for me, not demanding that they do something), they liked helping me
out and I sure liked to be helped. This was a win-win for both of us.

> "Elle" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> > "tww" > wrote
> > > "Elle" > wrote
> > >> "tww" > wrote
> > >> > Contrast that with my experience with a 71 Corvette
> > >> > some
> > >> > 35 years ago when a
> > >> > rear wheel bearing distintegrated at 12,300 miles. The
> > >> > dealer refused to
> > >> > fix it under the warranty as did GM after I wrote to
> > >> > them.
> > >> > Their
> > >> > explanation was that the car was 300 miles out of
> > >> > warranty, so they were not
> > >> > responsible.
> > >>
> > >> Are you condemning them for this?
> > >>
> > >> Do you not see that when lines are not drawn clearly,
> > >> it's
> > >> easy to argue that they can keep being redrawn at whim?
> > >> You
> > >> argue an extension to 12,300 miles. The next guy asks for
> > >> an
> > >> extension to 12,400 miles, because you got an extension,
> > >> etc.
> > >>
> > >> ISTM warranties are surely based on engineering and
> > >> economics. How long can a part reasonably last? How often
> > >> will a defective part come up that lasts no where near
> > >> this
> > >> long? What warranty incentive do I need to give customers
> > >> so
> > >> they buy the car?
> > >>
> > >> 12,000 miles is 12,000 miles. I would never criticize a
> > >> manufacturer for refusing to honor a 12,000 mile warranty
> > >> when the car had 12,001 miles on it. It's illogical to do
> > >> so.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > This was the second Corvette I owned -- which was replete
> > > with problems. Of
> > > course, I suppose you are technically right, but I think
> > > Honda see's it
> > > otherwise because it execises some commonsense and
> > > judgement.
> >
> > I would not call it common sense. I would call it judgment.
> > There are a few rational arguments for manufacturers to
> > extend warranties, having to do with, for example (1) custom
> > among other car manufacturers; and (2) good PR.
> >
> > > Your logic
> > > also says that there are no exceptions or compromises.
> >
> > Your logic (in misinterpreting my statement) says that, not
> > mine.
> >
> > > That makes life easy
> > > for you then to enforce the rules because you don't have
> > > to think. Just say
> > > no!
> >
>
> > My point was I condemn the actions of people who make
> > demands (not mere inquiries) outside the limits of legal
> > contracts. They won't be my friends yada. By contrast,
> > merely asking the manufacturer to extend the warranty,
> > because of xyz, puts the ball in the manufacturer's court. I
> > don't condemn anyone for merely asking when the line appears
> > to be close. Certainly on occasion I have asked for such
> > breaks, too. E.g. a few years ago I was very busy and forgot
> > to pay a bill. The company charged me a fee for the
> > lateness. That was allowed by contract. I called and asked
> > if they might cut me a break because of my long record of
> > reliably paying on time. They did, and rescinded the fee. I
> > feel no guilt.
> >
> I think there are times when the line is close that it is reasonable to ask
> for and expect some sort of accommodation. In the case of the Civic with a
> blown transmission at 44k, it was well outside the warranty and I was
> surprised Honda replaced it. I certainly would not expect personally for
> them to do that, nor would I insist on it as my right. If the transmission
> had blown at 36,300 miles, however, I would think that while the
> manufacturer has the right to say no, the customer should have some
> reasonable expectation that some accommodation would be made -- perhaps a
> 50/50 split. The difference I see here was the GM culture of the 60s/70s
> that ran flat up against the Japanese culture of producing a quality product
> that they would stand behind. I recollect Honda recalling in 1970 my CB750
> 4 because of a problem with the chain breaking. It was a voluntary act on
> the part of Honda and completely unheard of in the motorcycle world and
> unusual in the automotive world. I had a similar experience with Datsun in
> the 70s with my 280z when the dealer replaced my brake pads at 15k without
> charge and unasked for when I experienced grabbing on one side. I rememmber
> him saying that I should not have experienced the problem and that Datsun
> stood behind their cars. As a retired military officer now working in the
> higher education I see every day the "don't take responsibility for my
> actions" culture and find it distressing. You are right in that respect. In
> conclusion, I apologize for any offense -- I wrongly saw you as being too
> inflexible.
>
> > I say this because I think these days there is a whiny-arsed
> > culture in the U.S. that refuses to take responsibility for
> > poor judgment.
> >
> > If one does not like the terms of a warranty contract, then
> > do not purchase the car, etc.
> >
> >

tww wrote:

> Contrast that with my experience with a 71 Corvette some 35 years ago when a
> rear wheel bearing distintegrated at 12,300 miles. The dealer refused to
> fix it under the warranty as did GM after I wrote to them. Their
> explanation was that the car was 300 miles out of warranty, so they were not
> responsible. Wonder if they are still the same today. I went Japanese in
> 1975 with a 280Z and customer service difference was something to behold for
> someone used to Chevy dealers. Started with Honda in 1967 with their
> motorcycles and went to their cars in the late 80s. Never regretted it.
>
>

You story is typical of GM in my experience. Had an A/C failure less
than 1,000 miles out of warranty. GM said tough ****. Now driving
Honda products!

John

Elle wrote:

>
> Are you condemning them for this?
>

Absolutely. The mfg. has a responsibility to engineer and manufacture a
quality product. 12,000 miles is an absurdly short life for a bearing
and it's failure is the fault of the mfg., not the customer.

But never mind, you will never understand ....

wrote:
> As the owner of the Honda with the blown transmission at 44K, I was
> very surprised myself that they decided to replace it free of charge.
> Once again, in talking with Honda of America, they did not tell me that
> 'this things happen and you just had bad luck" Wha t they said is that
> "it is highly unusual for a Honda with this type of engine to have this
> type of problem at this mileage and we stand behind the quality of our
> product, whether or not this is within the guarantee time-frame".


Honda is being very smart in helping you out. The advertising value of
doing right by a customer even when the legal terms say you don't have
to is worth every dime spent by Honda.

How many people will read your story on the 'net and be favorably impressed?

John

"John Horner" > wrote
> Elle wrote:
>
>>
>> Are you condemning them for this?
>>
>
> Absolutely. The mfg. has a responsibility to engineer and
> manufacture a quality product. 12,000 miles is an
> absurdly short life for a bearing and it's failure is the
> fault of the mfg., not the customer.

You're condemning them for the 12k mile limit. But buyers
know about this limit in advance. The choice to make,
therefore, is either not to buy the car or buy it and plan
for the worst. That's the customer's choice.

Your way seems to be anti-capitalist or even socialist.
That's fine, but I doubt we'd have cars as fine as Honda and
Toyota come out of non-capitalist societies. Five will get
you ten.

IMO condemning a corporation for refusing to honor an out of
warranty request is somewhat different.

"John Horner" > wrote
> Honda is being very smart in helping you out. The
> advertising value of doing right by a customer even when
> the legal terms say you don't have to is worth every dime
> spent by Honda.
>
> How many people will read your story on the 'net and be
> favorably impressed?

How many will read it and figure Honda kowtows to customers
so that it can pass along the losses to other customers via
higher prices?

If Honda is too generous, it can't exist.