good thing you did'nt explode while dealing w/ the issue....sounds like they would have turned the other cheek.....1/3 sounds a lot better.......one question....would'nt the revlimeter have prevented the carnage........or is that only present prior to 3 bar heat......cuz I have forgotten to shift and went past 9k and it shutdown for a sec from 9k to 2k.....all is still good....that was months ago....now I watch my ass(not literally...that would be weird j/k)....aneeeyways glad to see it taken care of....I would hate to pay for something lifeless in the garage until I come up w/ the cash to fix it.

 

If you are going through the gears, upshifting like normal, and you take it past 9,000 rpm's then yes the rev limiter will kick in cutting the fuel and preventing you from OVERREVING. However, if you are going through the gears aggressively and you mistakenly shift from 3rd to 2nd instead of 3rd to 4th then you will experience OVERREVING. Your rev limiter/fuel cutoff will still kick in but the physics involved will not stop your engine from reving past the point of no return.

Did you not get an owner's manual with your car when you purchased it? It details all of this in it.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by honda606

 

.

 

I wonder what would have happened if you didn't mention the part about you overreviing...

 

About the whole insurance thing, I understand that it is not covered, but it is my beleif that it should be added to full coverage insurance. I pay $3200 a year with a clean record, and have never had the insurance pay a dime. It is such an expensive, non waranteed repair, and in my opinion not all that different that having a driver error and running into a tree, rather than running into the wrong gear. It is a little scary that you can do $9000 worth of damage by misshifting, which would be a pretty significant car accident. Thing about it: $9000 is about as much as a new cavalier, and most people do not have that kind of cash to spend on a repair. If overrev protection were a $500 a year add on my insurance, I probably would swing it.

 

well, no insurance covers mechanical problems. you could call Lloyd's of London, they'll insure for anything.

 

i am pleased that your outcome was a compromise, that you fessed up to your share of it and so did the dealer and honda.

this can happen, easily in a car of this power and speed potential. i consider myself a good driver and i have over reved when cold (engine cuts out at 4,000) nad hit rev limiter a few times myself. the downshift thing is constantly watch for and mention to anyone driving my car to be careful of...it can happen to most anyone. glad you have a new car once again.

thanks for telling you story so well

 

I have a few comments:

1) Nothing is free. AHM rolls these kind of "complimentary deals" into our costs for warranty, driving up everyone's costs for individual mistakes.* I do not expect that, and do not expect to have to pay it. So the $3000 Honda paid is amortized across the rest of us. You are welcome. Personally, had it been me, I would have expected nothing, and asked for nothing. The newness of the car, your financial wherewithal, etc. are no one's concern but the owner/operator.

2) So does the dealer. They treated you very, very well, but the money will come out of other things, perhaps like denying more valid warranty claims. "Oh, I see you have a K&N - that indicates racing - so we will not cover your broken CD player". Uh-huh. There are many "denial of service" posts on this Forum for claims that sounded much more ligitimate and fair than yours.

3) Insurance should cover this? Puh-leez - can you imagine where this would ever end? People could argue that failing to maintain oil level "could happen to anyone" - new engine please. "I was trying to avoid a dog and forgot what gear I was in" - new engine please. Many people have absolutely no ethics about this sort of thing - I could see them at mile 35,998 downshifting from 5th in 2nd to get a new engine. It is the reason Circuit City had to give up "no questions asked" returns on big TV's - people would buy them for the Super Bowl, then demand refunds. And there is a class-action against Sears, who made people sign "return waivers" on power generators before the Millenium scare blew over - people had no issue at all expecting Sears to bear the cost of their wanting electrical power "convenience" for free. It kills me. If you want a rider for that, have at it - but keep me out of it - I want no part of it.

I am not trying to be cold, but this constant reduction in personal accountability is getting out of hand. The idea that money is sitting aroud waiting to be dispersed, and that no one else is harmed when personal liability is waived is simply not true - and the social welfare suystems of Europe and Scandinavia are laboring under that fact. You would not like to live in sweden, where the marguinal income tax rates for succesful people are over 90%, and the cost of a speeding ticket is indexed on your ability to pay.

*Did you know that people living in, say, Nebraska help pay for those multi-million dollar homes routinely wasted by hurricanes in Florida? It is true. After Hurricane Andrew, there was a lot of stir because some people were on their 3rd house, each time they got more money, and built a bigger house. Turns out that hi-risk areas are amortized across the country to keep rates "reasonable". Well, how do you feel about that? Should you and I have to amortize a millionarie's homeowner's insurance in Boca Raton or Duck, NC, when someone builds a house ina dangerous location?

 

that is an excellent point. if i were an insurance company, i would assume that these beachfront homes would be destroyed every 5 years, and build that into the cost of the insurance.

they would do that, but the government won't let them. too bad. these people can afford million dollar homes. if they KNOW that they are in a high risk area, they should foot the cost of insurance. auto insurance companies are allowed to rate based on risk, so should home insurance.