What years Honda Accord w/ transmission issues...?

[ryanschillinger]

My cousin is getting ready to buy her first car. Her parents are looking at a Honda Accord sedan with the 4 cylinder automatic combo. I think it's about a 2003-05 but I'm not sure. Only saw a picture of the nose so far. What years had the trouble prone tranny? And was it only with v6, or 4cyl as well?

 

[Nick1994]

I'm not sure of the exact years, I believe up to 2006 was the biggest issues.

4 cylinder and V6 both affected.

 

[JHZR2]

My inlaws are averaging 28k/ AT on their 2002 4 cyl. It IS severe terrain, but their 01 Camry v6 is on its original AT at over 100k miles.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: Nick1994
I'm not sure of the exact years, I believe up to 2006 was the biggest issues.

4 cylinder and V6 both affected.


Pretty much this. It showed up more often in V6s and minivans that taxed the tranny more.

 

[benjamming]

'98-02 Accords had the issue (6th generation) as well as '03-05 before they finally got it resolved on the Accord. Of course, not nearly all had problems. The 6th generation had the warranty extended to 109k miles or 93 months for V6 & L4 for years '00-'01 Accord (also applied to 1999-2001 Odyssey & '00-01 Prelude). TSB 02-062 issued in Jan-2007.

There was also a safety recall on the '03-04 V6 due to insufficient oil flow to transmission 2nd gear. TSB 04-037 with PCM update per TSB 03-070.

TSB 04-020 was for '04 L4 Japan-built transmission cases out of spec.

Safety recall TSB 11-050 for 2005-2010 L4 for A/T software update to prevent transmission damage when stuck in snow.

 

[columnshift]

I heard they were exceptionally bad in 2003-4 specifically, had some other problems still thru at least 2005. I don't think everything was resolved until 2007 or so.

Roommate had a 2003 v6 accord, drove it super gently, transmission died at 103k. Cost $3500 out of pocket to replace - dealership insisted everything was of course past warranty despite honda's supposed willingness to help those slightly past normal warranties in other cases. If you don't have evidence it's the better tranny assume it's the bad one.

 

[crazyoildude]

Honda automatic transmissions put my brothers two kids through college and Law school he owned a very busy commercial transmission shop for around 20 or so years. He always said Honda was very good to him because they never learned how to build a reliable transmission, Chrysler was another one but they were not as bad as Honda.

 

[NO2]

The 4 cyl had fewer problems because the engine developed less torque. Honda fixed the major problems in 2005, but the transmissions are still pretty weak compared to other manufacturers. Best combo is the 4 cyl with MT. The 2006 V6 AT and later has stability control, the 4 cyl got ESC in 2008.

Even with the transmission fix it is a good idea to follow the severe service schedule with those transmissions.

The V6 engines require a major service around 100K : timing belt, water pump, tensioner, etc.. plus the usual drive belt and iridium plugs. Depending on where you live that would cost $700-$1000 above and beyond the 4 cyl which use a permanent timing chain.

In addition, the V6 cars have more suspension issues. This may not be an issue for you on smooth roads.

 

[ryanschillinger]

They're looking at a 2005 4 cyl. I'll tell them to take an extra look at the fluid and pay attention to how it shifts.

 

[Gasbuggy]

They'll be fine with an 05. 98-04 were the problematic years. 05 is first year the problems causing failures were rectified. Too bad Honda ruined their excellent rep with those issues. They did know how to make a reliable transmission prior. Mine is original. I beat the [censored] out of it.


Some decent info in here http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2811810

 

[ryanschillinger]

Very nice.

 

[Olas]

All years with auto are trouble. The answer is to buy a manual

 

[ryanschillinger]

Haha... Yeah I read your response in the other thread. I prefer a manual, but this car isn't for me. It's for a girl just leaving for college. Her first car aside from borrowing her parents Camry. Automatics aren't all bad by the way.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: Olas
All years with auto are trouble. The answer is to buy a manual

Or not a Honda.

 

[Hokiefyd]

My brother in law has a 2005 Accord 4-cylinder coupe and lives in Pittsburgh. He doesn't do much of anything to the car unless something breaks, and he really hasn't had to touch it except for tires and brakes. If his '05 Accord survives in Pittsburgh, where everything is on a hill, then the transmission is probably a good one.

 

[IndyIan]

I think its a bit overblown, atleast my Dad's 99 4cyl went over 200k miles with minimum maintenance. His was mostly highway miles but with a little more abuse than average I'd assume.

 

[MarkM66]

'01 Civics are said to be bad.

The A/T in my '01 went out at about 210k miles. Had it rebuilt, and it's at almost 300k now. Hardly any other problems with the car.

 

[PandaBear]

They were better after 05, but to be truly good enough I think it is when they switch to 3 axles at around 07/08.

If you are concerned already, I'd avoid 98-08 before even started looking.

 

[CELICA_XX]

Our family's first Honda was an 85 Accord and the troubles began there.

It continued with a 92 Accord on it's 3rd transmission. Then a 02 Accord failure.

Other friends and relatives with Odyessy's, MDX's, Accords, etc... all with transmission failure.

Perhaps they have corrected the issues, but I wont be buying one to find out!

Toyota / Lexus are just better cars in my opinion.

 

[joel95ex]

98-02 were the worst. my 95 auto is still all original and has over 500k miles.