[3 Men & a Boat]

Thought I'd add my experience with Honda. After my daughter was born the wife and I realized we needed a more family oriented vehicle than our '01 Toyota Tundra(loved this truck). So we looked at mini vans and settled on a new '12 Honda Odessey, we'll at 34,000 miles it started acting up. So I hauled it to the dealership and to my amazement the put new pistons and rings in it. Google Honda VCM, they had a class action suit that they just settled. Traded it in on a '14 forester and couldn't be happier. Mine wasn't just a lemon as their were 5 others at the same dealership with the same repairs taking place.

 

[dboz]

There are plenty of issues with Honda. They are NOT the cars they were 20 years ago. They sell a lot of them on reputation to non informed car buyers. They burn oil, have bad transmissions and engines blow, just like all makes.

I don't put much faith in JD Power as they often have American brands highly rated. I don't care about INITIAL quality, that's what a warranty is for. I care about long term when its on my dime.

 

[_karu_]

The same goes with consumer report. It's helpful in a sense to guide us trough making an informed decision, but, it doesn't necessarily reflect the actual car that you own and drive.

For example, I owned both 2003 Honda Accord and 2005 Subaru Legacy. Both cars were the first year of new generation (7th and 4th respectively). If you read the report, both cars probably have solid black dot as overall grade.

However, having been driven both cars, I can tell you that both turned out to be perfectly fine cars. I didn't have any significant issues with either of them.

 

[EddieJoe]

The same goes with consumer report. It's helpful in a sense to guide us trough making an informed decision, but, it doesn't necessarily reflect the actual car that you own and drive.

For example, I owned both 2003 Honda Accord and 2005 Subaru Legacy. Both cars were the first year of new generation (7th and 4th respectively). If you read the report, both cars probably have solid black dot as overall grade.

However, having been driven both cars, I can tell you that both turned out to be perfectly fine cars. I didn't have any significant issues with either of them.

Of course an overall assessment of a model will only identify what owners have reported, and you may not have the identical experience with your particular car. That being said, I find CU to be the best indicator of what I should expect with a vehicle but nothing is fool proof.

I have owned 4 Accords, 3 CRVs, a Pilot, and a Civic. Still own a CRV and an Accord. Overall, they have been very good to excellent vehicles. However, when shopping for a new CUV last year I could not get comfortable with the current CRV design, since it has very compromised visibility. The Subaru Forester had great visibility, excellent utility, and a favorable forecast from CU, so I purchased it. My only complaint so far has been the CVT in the 2.5 Premium, which is the first CVT for me, and probably my last. Just don't like the way it drives, although I have come to highly appreciate the excellent fuel economy it provides. Overall I like the Forester very much, and am hoping it holds up as long as my Hondas have. I would not give it up for a new CRV, and will not ever buy a CRV again if I can't see out the back.

To me, that is stupid marketing design by Honda, essentially kissing off the practical or senior driver.

EJ

 

[cjecpa]

I find it unusual for people who have owned a vehicle for a long term which was highly reliable to switch to another manufacturer unless they subsequently brought a new one and had problems or the manufacturer discontinues that particular vehicle.

I owned two Honda vehicles but both for a short term had no problems just was not what I needed. This is my first Subaru I got the extended warranty, first time I ever brought one. Based on looking at used Forester's on the internet I would say that properly maintained you could easily get 200k or more.

 

[rdclark]

I find it unusual for people who have owned a vehicle for a long term which was highly reliable to switch to another manufacturer unless they subsequently brought a new one and had problems or the manufacturer discontinues that particular vehicle.

That's true, I think. We owned two Mazda MPVs ('91 that we handed down to our son who took it over 200k, and an '02 that was recently stolen, leading to the Forester purchase) and two Toyotas ('81 Tercel that lasted 15 years, and '05 Scion xB that's still my daily driver).

We looked at the Mazda5 but it was just too cheap-feeling. We would have bought a CX-5 but didn't like the handling and the interior felt cramped. The RAV-4 had visibility issues and my wife hated the seats.

The CR-V was tempting. Our son has a 2012 that has been solid for them, and everyone I know with Hondas speaks well of them. But then, so do Subaru owners of my acquaintance, of whom there are many.

I'll confess it was Consumer Reports that got us to look seriously at the Forester. It (2014) topped the small SUV category in reliability, MPG, outward visibility, access, seating position, and safety, and these are the things we too were most concerned with. And after driving all the candidates, particularly the CR-V, the Forester was the clear choice.

We've never owned a Honda. We tried to buy a Civic wagon in 1980, but the waiting list was months (bought a Datsun 210SL wagon instead). In 1981 the Civic was too expensive (we bought a Tercel 2dr sedan, no air, manual everything). In 1991 there was no Honda minivan yet, and by 2002 the Odyssey had gotten too bloated and overpriced for our taste. Two years ago I would have bought the CR-V despite the outward visibility issues, but by 2014 the new Forester has trumped it in all the ways that are important to us.

 

[winc06]

Reliability

Consumer Reports picked the 2014 Forester as the most reliable of any car, period. I have owned a couple of Hondas and a previous WRX with some miles on it. No problems with any of them.

 

[sinbad]

I bought 4 new Honda's over the years. The first one I melted a piston, my fault. The second, the engine seized 7 times under warranty, Honda finally sent a guy from California, he found a partial blockage in the oil line feeding one end of the cam. I immediately traded it on another new Honda. That Honda was perfect, 4th had a radio issue, replaced under warranty, the ex still has it, almost 12 years now. The one used Civic my wife had was trouble free for 170000 miles until the engine was killed by operator negligence.

I'd definitely consider another Accord when my wife's Camry comes up for replacement in another two or three years. The current generation Camry is a great car with a good balance of comfort, back road handling, excellent fuel economy and good power. I like driving it better than my Forester, except in snow or on slippery boat ramps. Mazda is another choice I'd consider, owned two good ones so far. Had a pre-Renault Nisson that blew a head gasket, but an otherwise good car. I don't think I'd buy another under the current ownership, I feel they have slipped to Mitsubishi level lackluster quality level. Until recently the new wife's daily driver was the most recent previous generation Sonata, they depreciate quickly and are good used values, provided someone short drives it, and is Ok with the mushy suspension, which has less control than a 1950's Buick.

Really, the only unreliable cars I have owned were Fiats, their sports models had a lot of soul, enough that it took two of 'em to reach my threshold for roadside breakdowns.

High European ownership costs and lack of cloth seats kept me from considering a BMW 3 series wagon, must admit the Volvo V60 T6 sports wagon is eye catching, I somewhat wish I had known of it before I put an order in for my Forester. Don't think I would have spent 50% more, but you never know.

 

[markfenlon]

The Subaru Forester had great visibility, excellent utility, and a favorable forecast from CU, so I purchased it. My only complaint so far has been the CVT in the 2.5 Premium, which is the first CVT for me, and probably my last. Just don't like the way it drives, although I have come to highly appreciate the excellent fuel economy it provides. Overall I like the Forester very much, and am hoping it holds up as long as my Hondas have. I would not give it up for a new CRV, and will not ever buy a CRV again if I can't see out the back.

To me, that is stupid marketing design by Honda, essentially kissing off the practical or senior driver.

EJ

Hi Ed,
My pre-purhcasing experience was similar to yours. I took a serious look at the Honda CRV, test drove it a good distance but couldn't see out the back. Even with mirrors, blind spots too large for my comfort. Reversing (even with a camera) wasn't easy, especially into a tight parking space. So gave up on this model. To the CRV's credit, I found it comfortable and the car I drove looked and felt well built. But overall practicality, performance and value for money were my priorities, CRV's, RAV 4, Audi and others couldn't deliver compared to the new Forester.

Interestingly, I also wasn't convinced by Suub's CVT during my pre-purhase test drives. To be fair, we can only get the 2 litre engine in Hong Kong, these non-turbo Foresters are slow. Although I found their CVT's better than the other makes. All changed when I drove the Suub's XT demo car. As day is to night, the CVT on the turbo car operates really well. Great low down pull, smooth and seamless, effortless acceleration. Soon as you play with it in Sports modes, 6 or 8 ratios, its good. Almost as good as the sequential boxes in the formula saloons I used to race in my younger days. My guess is that the XT's development had some input from Suub's competition side of their business.

All the same, I wish the 2.5 litre engine was available here with CVT, as I'd much liked to have given it a try. It might have better suited my purposes as the XT's going to deliver me some speeding tickets sooner or later!

Cheers
Mark.

 

[Claw]

But, Honda's specialty is front wheel drive.

Not hijacking, but they also made a sweet RWD - my other car is a sweet 06 S2000. I'd buy more of their RWD offerings if I could afford it and they made more.

 

[stan_t]

So would I, but there was the NSX and S2000.. that was it. But, their FWD cars actually work and handle very well.

Stan

 

[mgsj15]

However, when shopping for a new CUV last year I could not get comfortable with the current CRV design, since it has very compromised visibility.

Out of interest, which part was so problematic? I was sitting in a stationary 2014 CRV today, and visibility didn't seem as bad as I'd expected.

Was it the triangular corner windows near the back? I could imagine them creating a blind spot for a car whose hood is alongside the rear quarter, but it's hard to tell without driving one on the road.

 

[mgsj15]

Really, the only unreliable cars I have owned were Fiats, their sports models had a lot of soul, enough that it took two of 'em to reach my threshold for roadside breakdowns.

Without wanting to go too far off-topic, I bought Fiats and Lancias when I lived in the UK because I knew the bodies would rust but the mechanical parts were rock-solid unless they had a turbo or supercharger attached. I don't think my second X1/9 ever broke down in the eight years I owned it (and it was ten years old when I bought it), but it required a lot more routine maintenance than just changing the oil every year. Skimping on that maintenance was why the first X1/9 broke down several times.

The Rover, on the other hand, was a disaster.

 

[Sc13nc3]

My 14 premium is my first subaru and I think that its not too far off of 2006 and newer honda build quality. While I intended to actually keep this fozzy for as long as possible, that won't be happening. I will probably give the forester and subaru one more shot in 2016 though. Mostly because the foz is incredibly capable for its price point, and the only vehicle in class with real AWD & available manual transmission.

Previously owned hondas:
1986 civic sedan
2000 civic coupe
2004 accord sedan
2009 civic coupe
All of them were i4 with 5spd manual drivetrain.

Warranty / build quality issues:
04 accord and 09 civic each needed at least one engine / tranny mount under warranty. (Probably from extremely rough use)
Right after I traded the 09 on the forester, I got a paint-related recall letter for shoddy clear coat, but mine didn't seem to need it.
All of them had rattles after 30-40k, with the 86 & 09 being the worst offenders. (86 was mostly subwoofer-induced)
The 09 had warranty interior rear trim replacement under warranty for rattles in headliner / rear deck.

Despite being constantly red-lined and basically driven like they were stolen on nearly every key turn, only the 86 ever needed a real repair. It needed a clutch at about 140k. None of them ever used enough oil to measure / notice on 3-4k oci, but the mobil1 oil was always very, very dark. (Not quite black though)

With roughly 15k on my forester, I don't think it would withstand the kind of continuous abuse that the 1986-2004 hondas did. I think that because it's burned at least a quart of oil every 3k and rattled from day one, and subtle signs of ridiculous cost cutting are peppered throughout the whole vehicle. Another thing that concerns me is that the oil looks as dark as my old hondas did after 4k, but it looks this way in less than 1k miles with the fb25. Together, all these things do not inspire confidence for the foz's long term durability.

As others say on here quite frequently, ymmv.


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

[EddieJoe]

Out of interest, which part was so problematic? I was sitting in a stationary 2014 CRV today, and visibility didn't seem as bad as I'd expected.



Was it the triangular corner windows near the back? I could imagine them creating a blind spot for a car whose hood is alongside the rear quarter, but it's hard to tell without driving one on the road.

The rear pillars are very wide and the rear window much smaller than in previous versions, including the 2006 that I now own. The Forester has the best visibility of any CUV I tested. I consider the rear visibility of the current CRV to be a deal killer, at least for me. Rear cameras are nice to see things below the bumper line or for parallel parking but functional windows are for me. Otherwise I would be seeing a 2014 CRV in the driveway rather than a Forester.

EJ


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

[cjecpa]

Honda was at one time the darling of car manufacturers fun, great styling, innovated with new products and high reliability. Seems recently they started to be like VW building specifically for the US market bigger and bland. With me I always like the Accords and Civics until recently as they gotten bigger and styling nothing exciting. They seem to be following Toyota which is not bad they sell great. For me it was not a reliability issue when it came to replacing my Honda with the Forester it was styling. I really liked the first two generation CR-Vs the current one look large and something about the shape of the front it looks like an Amphibious vehicle to me.

But you could not really go wrong with it.

 

[twi]

I don't put much faith in JD Power as they often have American brands highly rated.

And that makes sense why? American car makers cannot increase their long term reliability?

I don't care about INITIAL quality, that's what a warranty is for. I care about long term when its on my dime.

The references were long term reliability and NOT initial quality. Read the articles, 3 years old. That at least provides an indication of potential future problems.

Anecdotal stories as provided in this thread mean nothing. At least JD Power attempts to provide a scientific and statistically meaning sample size.

Not liking it because American brands are in there sounds ... What does that mean? Do you have a statistically sound and large enough sample size to refute their findings? If so, please provide the link. If its just an opinion because you talked to whoever or your personal experience, then it doesn't stand up to a reasonable study.

I am open to reading any kind of reasonable study done by a professional institution.

 

[mgsj15]

I really liked the first two generation CR-Vs the current one look large and something about the shape of the front it looks like an Amphibious vehicle to me.

The front does look a bit weird, but I was watching an interesting CR-V vs Forester video on Youtube yesterday by some Ukrainian guy, and he said the angled front of the CR-V helped it get over obstacles with lower ground clearance than the Forester. It gives more clearance over a ramp before the wheels reach it and start to lift the car, though it still won't help with big rocks.