| roninottawa |
I have just purchased a 2002 MDX with 82k on the clock. The vehicle was Acura Certified, and I confirmed that the transmission recall was done before I drove it off the lot. This is my wife's driver, and it's quite a step up from her old '94 Caravan.
In the 500k we've driven it, the engine malfunction light has had to be reset (overfilled the tank, apparently), the driver's seatback had to have new clips installed, the passenger-side mirror has stopped tilting down in reverse, and the VTM-4 warning light has come on twice. These are all minor little glitches, but it's got me wondering about the wisdom of getting the Acura extended warranty 'just in case'.
Your thoughts and experiences would be appreciated.
Regards,
Ron |
|
|
| ByeByeChrysler |
quote:
Originally posted by roninottawa
the passenger-side mirror has stopped tilting down in reverse,
this could be caused by the switch on the drivers door, needs to be set to left or right mirror, not in the middle, for the tilting to work.
as for the extended warranty, I got it because I plan on keeping the MDX for a long long time. |
|
|
| eRauL |
quote:
Originally posted by roninottawa
...the engine malfunction light has had to be reset (overfilled the tank, apparently)...
When my 01MDX's check-engine-light kept coming back on, the dealer-service-advisor first thought it was tank overfilled, this sensor, that sensor... it turned out to be the now-recalled EGR Valve.
Check if your 02 had that EGR Valve done or not. |
|
|
| dj-mdx2 |
| Can you even get an extended warranty this late in the game? |
|
|
| roninottawa |
Thanks for the prompt replies.
Thanks also for the tip about the mirror switch. It's one of those D'Oh things...again! :1pat:
I'll check on the EGR change the next time I'm into the dealers.
According to my dealer, I can get up to a 3-year extended warranty at any time up to 100,000K. After that, I'm out of luck. I think I'll see how things unfold over the next 18,000K before I make the decision.
Regards,
Ron |
|
|
| Dr. Ken |
quote:
Originally posted by roninottawa
In the 500k we've driven it,
Ron
500k - thats 500,000 (miles?). I would say that your problems are not significant at all for that much driving. |
|
|
| roninottawa |
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Ken
500k - thats 500,000 (miles?). I would say that your problems are not significant at all for that much driving.
Actually, up here in the frozen North, 'k' means kilometer. 500k = 300 miles.
Regards,
Ron |
|
|
| eRauL |
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Ken
500k - thats 500,000 (miles?). I would say that your problems are not significant at all for that much driving.
I'm guessing he meant 500 kilometres. |
|
|
| Pierre |
quote:
Originally posted by eRauL
I'm guessing he meant 500 kilometres.
He meant 500 km. "K" is the abbreviation for "000's", while "km" is the correct abbreviation for "kilometre" (or "kilometer"). |
|
|
| roninottawa |
quote:
Originally posted by Pierre
He meant 500 km. "K" is the abbreviation for "000's", while "km" is the correct abbreviation for "kilometre" (or "kilometer").
You're right! I've become so accustomed to just saying 'k' for kilometer that I wrote it incorrectly. And don't even ask me to explain the fact that we measure gas consumption by "litres per 100km"! Old dogs learn more slowly, it seems. :)
Regards,
Ron |
|
|
| Pierre |
quote:
Originally posted by roninottawa
I've become so accustomed to just saying 'k' for kilometer that I wrote it incorrectly. And don't even ask me to explain the fact that we measure gas consumption by "litres per 100km"! Old dogs learn more slowly, it seems. :)
Regards,
Ron
I hear ya -- I say "k" all the time. As for the litres/100km thing, I still find myself using the old mpg. Can't get my head around the reverse psychology of the metric measure... |
|
|
|
