Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 22:12:50 -0400 From: Curtis Leeds <cleedsnopsamnet> Subject: Re: 2000 9-3 disappointment
MBeest <MBeestnopsamathome16.freeserve.co.uk wrote: > > Yeah, two thoughts - if I'm being charitable, it could be simply that > you've > > got a dud > > car. happens to all of 'em (includng Audi's BMW's and any other German > stuff > > you > > care to mention) Andrew Brennan answers: > I hate to mention this, but how about Hondas? I've owned a couple of > Accords, a pair of Preludes, and now a CR-V. And you know what? Nothing's > ever gone wrong with any of them. Seriously... just change the oil, do > about $130 of service every 30K miles, and that's it. My current '95 Accord > has 140K+ miles on it, zero faults. The CR-V is a '99, now over 45K, and > it's also had absolutely 100% perfect performance, not even a squeak or > rattle. An earlier Accord of mine, a '91, is now in my Dad's hands, has > over 250K miles on the clock, and looks nearly new, inside and out. The > damn thing just won't wear out. > > I know, Hondas don't inspire much passion, but if you want a car that will > probably never break down, requires minimal maintenance, and simply goes no > matter whether you're in the far north or the baking deserts of the > southwest, go for a Honda. The original poster was correct: every manufacturer makes the occasional lemon, and most have had a model that was a loser by virtue of bad engineering. Honda is not immune. My wife had a dreadful one (purchased new) that was bad out-of-the box. I wouldn't hold that alone against the company, but the shoddy dealer service and poor manufacturer support mean "never another Honda" for us. IMO, the quality of a manufacturer is largely reflected in how it deals with problem products. Honda didn't pass that test.