You'll get no argument here...their web site does make that statement- whether intentionally approved or not. It is there as big and bright as day on an official Honda web site.

Now its up to you to use your own judgement whether you consider this creative marketing blurb to be an officially approved representation of Honda tested fact. Generally statistical facts are quoted with sources and disclaimers...this one is not. Guess the legal department isn't doing their job, huh? I prefer to believe it was missed than believe that their legal department doesn't have the presence of mind to post disclaimers. Have a look at the Corvette web site: http://www.corvette.com/ and look at the official stats page where they quote 0-60 times and braking distances....you'll find below that several disclaimers about the stats and how they were attained. Pretty standard stuff... but either Honda lawyers don't understand the finer points of disclaimers or they missed the quote altogether. I believe it was the latter.

Byron

 

RicePimp- thanks for the link. Now you have some proof...2 sources. Can't say as I saw either of them before now, but I'm on your side now. That 5.8 claim implies you can achieve 5.8 seconds with no disclaimer whatsoever. Was there any fine print in that brocure?

If anyone had the time and money to pursue it, Honda may have set themselves up for a class action law suit.

Byron

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bguernsey
[B]
If anyone had the time and money to pursue it, Honda may have set themselves up for a class action law suit.

 

bguernsey and RandyP, thanks for the enlightenment!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bguernsey
[B]
If anyone had the time and money to pursue it, Honda may have set themselves up for a class action law suit.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bguernsey
[B]RicePimp- thanks for the link.

 

I wasn't suggesting people should sue if they can't accomplish it, but indeed it appears in these statements that Honda is saying your typical driver can go 0-60 in 6 seconds or under- so they are in effect condoning dropping the clutch.

Now there are a number of people who have been denied any kind of warranty service on the differential because Honda has claimed that dropping the clutch is abusive driving. Some have not had SuperChargers installed- there was a long thread about the differential problems a while back. Honda seems to be saying that you too can achieve 0-60 and obviously they are aware of what it takes to do it. So are they condoning abusive driving in their advertisements that we've seen referenced here?

Clutch damage of course is not covered under warranty- but if you have differential problems and they claim you're abusing the car, this does make a good argument that they should cover the cost of replacement. Before I saw these claims, I wouldn't have said this, but how can they say this in official literature without disclaimers and then not cover related problems? I suppose there is some language in the warranty somewhere which overrides anything implied by 0-60 in 5.8 seconds, but shame on Honda for implying that the car easily achieves this in its literature and then describing their own claims as abusive driving not covered under warranty.

I can now see some argument for them replacing problem differentials under Warranty (as long as its a non supercharged car, which voids the warranty anyway).

-B

 

There is a full-page repeating ad in Money magazine that says "under six seconds."

 

Oh, and Jason K. drives a stock-class car (no S/C or weird mods) and he busted a half-shaft at a Pro-Solo. You could say it was stickier-than-stock race tires but that would be stretching it.

No doubt in my mind that Honda should warranty claims of rear-end damage from fast 0-60 runs. Otherwise they damn well better advertise a 7 second 0-60! Clutch wear is more subjective and I'd understand denying a burnt clutch claim.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by s2ktaxi
[B]


Hmmm, there are people out there who don't like to rev past 4000 rpm because they think there is too much stress on the engine.