| mik28 |
| I AM NEW TO THE FORUM I AM BUYING A 2001 OR 2002 MDX, BUT I AM CONCERN ABOUT THE RECALLS REGARDING THE TRANSMISSION ISSUE ON ACURAS PLEASE ADVICE ME WHAT TO DO I LOVE THE MDX AND HAVE A BABY ON THE WAY BUT THE TRANSMISSION SITUATION IS SCARY UNLESS I SPEND MORE MONEY AND GET AN 03 MODEL. |
|
|
| JimH |
| If I were to purchase a 2001 or 2002 now, I would make sure that I could get an extended warranty. Otherwise, I would buy a used 2003 if at all possible. |
|
|
| mik28 |
| THANKS, YOU THINK THAT THE 2003 MODEL TRANS IS FINE? |
|
|
| JimH |
| I really have no idea-- I just believe the 2001/2002 models have already demonstrted their inherent transmission problems at a level that is not conducive to lasting 100,000 miles. |
|
|
| Maik |
The vast majority of 2001 and 2002 tranny's are also fine.
As long as the recall work was done, I would not hesitate to buy a well maintained 2001 or 2002 MDX. |
|
|
| Maik |
quote:
Originally posted by JimH
I really have no idea-- I just believe the 2001/2002 models have already demonstrted their inherent transmission problems at a level that is not conducive to lasting 100,000 miles.
Opinion? Any facts to back up such a claim? |
|
|
| shootist |
If you're worried about teh transmission, or anything else in a used vehicle, consider the 7 year 100,000 mile extended warranty to be part of the purchase price. In other words, if the seller wants $25,000, tell yourself that the the price will be $27,000 after you buy the extended warranty.
It's not statistics, it's peace of mind. Why worry about a car? |
|
|
| manus1980 |
| There are plenty of members complaining about a transmission problem on the 2003 MDX as well. |
|
|
| JimH |
Maik; No facts to back up my viewpoint---only my opinion. The poll showing major repairs after 50,000 miles supports other folk's point of view that the transmission (and other major repairs) are not needed for the 01/02/03 MDX models. However, the poll is based on a very small number (< 100 total for all 3 model years).
http://www.acuramdx.org/forums/show...ission+problems
My view is that Honda did not do a good job in making a bullet proof automatic transmission for the 2001 and 2002 MDX. |
|
|
| Maik |
quote:
Originally posted by JimH
Maik; No facts to back up my viewpoint---only my opinion. The poll showing major repairs after 50,000 miles supports other folk's point of view that the transmission (and other major repairs) are not needed for the 01/02/03 MDX models. However, the poll is based on a very small number (< 100 total for all 3 model years).
http://www.acuramdx.org/forums/show...ission+problems
My view is that Honda did not do a good job in making a bullet proof automatic transmission for the 2001 and 2002 MDX.
Problem with using this forum for any such benchmark is that it is not representative of the whole population of MDX's. The vast majority of MDX owners dont frequent this forum.
Additionally, there is not enough data available yet to assess the 2003's. It will be awhile before that class has driven enough miles to make any real assessment. |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by JimH
My view is that Honda did not do a good job in making a bullet proof automatic transmission for the 2001 and 2002 MDX.
That's true, it is not bulletproof. But as stated, a fair number of 2003's also had problems.
As Maik said, MOST of us with early model years had no problems. But this forum represents a very small number of MDX owners. If the transmissions were undergoing some kind of epidemic, you would read about it in the paper and see reliablity polls with black marks in Consumer's Reports. Granted, the TL had a very specific problem and many were replaced under a recall. But it is not the same drivetrain.
An extended warranty is about the only protection you would have if you are about to experience a serious problem either due to a manufacturer's defect, or as a result of a previous owner not following maintenance requirements or abusing the vehicle in other ways.
Whether to pay for warranty coverage on a used vehicle is a bigger question than just the reliability of the transmission.
And a bad transmission might be due to an inherent defect, but it might also be the result of a neglectful owner. |
|
|
| HARDROCK |
| Just had the transmission replaced on my '02 Tour/Nav with only 39K miles. They said it was NOT related to the recall - different problem. Otherwise a great vehicle but what if it failed at 51K miles and it was out of warranty? I can not recommend an '01 or '02 - transmission failures are too expensive to fix and almost impossible to prevent. |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by HARDROCK
...transmission failures are too expensive to fix and almost impossible to prevent.
But that's true for any vehicle. Unless you buy a car that is known for NOT having transmission problems. Even better if it is a car you want to own. Otherwise, get one with a warranty to be safe against all problems including faulty transmissions. |
|
|
| mik28 |
| THANKS GUYS BUT THIS MEANS THAT I AM GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT ANOTHER SUV OR MAYBE I JUST PURCHASE THE MDX WITH THE WARRANTY BUT WHO WILL WANT A TRANSMISSION PROBLEM ON A 2 O3 YEAR OLD CAR WITH LOW MILES. |
|
|
| HARDROCK |
quote:
Originally posted by DaleB
But that's true for any vehicle. Unless you buy a car that is known for NOT having transmission problems. Even better if it is a car you want to own. Otherwise, get one with a warranty to be safe against all problems including faulty transmissions.
And that's my point. I brought the Acura because of it's reported reliability - I never heard of them having transmission problems. But that reputation was based on their earlier models and I did buy the X in only the second year of production. I had the choice of buying an extended warranty at the time of purchase and I still remember thinking to myself at the time, "But it's an Acura - why spend an extra 2K to fix a car that never fails...".
Now I realize I was very naive but my last new car had been a 1990 Mercury/Ford Sable wagon (2 engine and 2 transmission replacements) and everyone I knew who had an Acura's loved them for their reliability. |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by HARDROCK
And that's my point. I brought the Acura because of it's reported reliability - I never heard of them having transmission problems. But that reputation was based on their earlier models and I did buy the X in only the second year of production. I had the choice of buying an extended warranty at the time of purchase and I still remember thinking to myself at the time, "But it's an Acura - why spend an extra 2K to fix a car that never fails...".
Now I realize I was very naive but my last new car had been a 1990 Mercury/Ford Sable wagon (2 engine and 2 transmission replacements) and everyone I knew who had an Acura's loved them for their reliability.
Put 'em there, Pal! I had a '91 Ford Tortoise....the first time they replaced the transmission it was legitimate. The 2nd time they mis-diagnosed a faulty throttle sensor. I will take the Acura anyday, even with a somewhat less than bulletproof transmission design.
I plan to keep the MDX quite a while, so will likely opt for the extended warranty at some point. My luck the transm. will hold up and the nav will have a meltdown. "Murphy" has my number.
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| HARDROCK |
quote:
Originally posted by DaleB
I plan to keep the MDX quite a while, so will likely opt for the extended warranty at some point. My luck the transm. will hold up and the nav will have a meltdown. "Murphy" has my number.
:rolleyes:
And that's my plan too! I've just installed Sam's unit and upgraded the stereo system and I love my X and plan to keep it forever. But those new '05's have me thinking...:5: |
|
|
|
