Rick - I had the transmission TSB done on my '00 and was very happy with the outcome. No more 1-2 grind and the shift action was a little smoother. On both cars (the '00 and '03) I've experienced a little "click" when engaging third.

Bill - I think that Honda build quality is light years ahead of the old British group's quality. We certainly hear about issues with our car, but I imagine that if there had been an Internet in the 60s and 70s, there would have been floods of complaints about MGs, Austin Healey's, Triumphs and Jaguars. My high school friend's father had a Jag consumed by fire in his driveway (it was several months old) and my same friends sister watched the entire electrical system in her MGB burn up one month after her one year warrantee expired.

 

Some will read the thread and understand my point. I don't think you are fairly responding to my statement. Those on this forum that have debated the quality issue with me in the past will hopefully remember the discussions that I am referring to, and why the two posts just on this thread alone, about enigne and tranny defects in brand new cars illustrate my arguement.

 

To cut Honda some slack, the transmission was a totally new design, optimtized for short, quick shifts. It obviously had some teething problems.

My experience with the S2000 and every other Honda and Japanese car I've owned has been far superior to my experience with American (Fords and GM cars) and British-built iron (2-E-types and a TR-3). The Hondas have been far more trouble free.

 

I calculated the miles and on the 8 Hondas my family has owned, we have put on 1 million miles and only 1 needed engine work (head gasket at 200K, and it now has another 50k on it).

I have had normal maint, and repairs (ie. clutch replacement, tranny work (over 100K miles), leaking master cylinder, etc.......).

I have also owned an AMC Javelin, several chevrolets and a ford. Can't say the same for them.

 

PAS2K-yes I had TSB 054 done and it was great for about 5000 miles. Two dealers urged me to relax and live with it (of course they did) as it causes no harm. The squeaking in the actuation is puzzling though and I am not giving up even though I am "out of warranty". My local dealer pledges to stay with it for another 12 months on this latest clutch repair.

Having personallty owned 5 Honda cars and 3 motorcycles I think I can fairly evaluate the reliability in comparison to my Mustangs, my 850 Volvo and a couple of Rabbits (please do not make me even think about my '79 built in PA Rabbit). And that is that there simply is no comparison. Experiences in my immediate family support this. On a non-scientific basis only substantiated by this personal experience I feel there is no question. Yes I am a bit disappointed but not really surprised by my S2000 clutch issues. I do agree with Rick that it represents such a huge departure for Honda that there were bound to be a glitch or two.

 

I'm sorry to hear you had bad experiences with your Fords Jim. I have owned 6 or 7 Mustangs in my life. None of them were purchased new. The last three were all 5.0 GTs and none of them gave me any trouble at all. The only maintenance I did was oil changes, one serpentine belt, two batteries, two sets of tires, a couple of blown bulbs and a clutch cable that I replaced before it actually broke. We did have a Contour automatic that had to have the tranny replaced under warranty...Just like Rick's S2000. Except we had 50,000 miles on it and my teenage son driving it.

I'll leave this alone now. I start to feel bad when the suffering owners like Rick come to Honda's defense. I guess this is what Red Sox fans look like to the rest of the world

 

I would not characterize my experiences with Mustangs as "bad" but certainly not up to Honda standards. How can anything compare with, for example, my '84 Civic S that went 104000 miles with only a blown instrument panel light fuse replaced? I am talking original everything including tires. I am not making that up...and I still see my '89 Accord here in town that I sold with 288000 miles on it.

I had an '82 and an '89 5.0 Mustang and I loved both. But I did have carb (TBI) troubles on the first one and both clutch and electrical issues on the other. And the '89 also had the famous "unexpected stalling" problem that cost Ford millions to remedy. Please do not ever mention "Taurus", "Sable" or "Fairmont" at any gathering of my family. All my Fords beat the crap outta my horrible '79 Rabbit, but we are comparing everything to Honda/Acura here.......

 

Bill - I am not aware of your other posts on this topic, could you provide a link? Part of the rationale behind my support for Rick, isn't so much as a "Honda defender" as it is comisseration with a fellow enthusiast.

The issue of vehicle reliability is a very passionate one, especially among enthusiasts. I have direct experience with products from Ford, Honda and Volkswagen. The most reliable vehicle that I have owned is the '99 F150 that my wife drives daily, with my '89 Civic running a close second. Interestingly, my wife's former vehicle (a '96 Mustang GT convertible) and my former '00 S2000 had one similar issue - both needed transmission work (replaced in the Ford and rebuilt in the Honda). The Ford also needed a replacement convertible top and the differential was rebuilt twice.

These are personal anecdotes, as are the experiences my friend's family had, and don't mean much in the broader picture of reliability of many vehicles over longer periods of time. For that, we have research companies like J.D. Power, but even their data is flawed because it relies on self-reporting by owners.

 

I'm not trying to dodge the request, I just can't remember the name of the threads. One might have started on another subject. Jerry and I and several others got into it, with me being the lone "doubter" of the claim that reliability/quality is a reason to praise the S2000 above other cars in its class. Another thread asked "what should I get for a daily commuter" and most everyone here told the author to get a Civic. some made some second or third choice recommendations too and again I offered some non-japanese brands and from there it went off to Honda being the best manufacturer of econo cars... My real point is about S2000 reliability problems, not Honda problems.

I'm not slamming Rick at all. I hope he doesn't feel that way. He doesn't have to defend Honda quality. The defect isn't his fault. The problem is quite common and I have seen many threads about poor trannies and the first to second grind. I'm not even knocking Honda. I think these problems can be expected in a sports car of such high performance. I guess I'm just trying to tell people that "Civic" reliability doesn't really translate over to the S, in my opinion. Anyone who says they are getting the S so they can have a bullet proof high performance car like their Civic or Accord was a bullet proof commuter car is fooling themselves. Just go to Under the Hood once or twice a week.

I admit that the S is my first Honda car. I also know they do well in things like JD Power. My response to those arguements has been to ask if the difference in the number of warranty claims per new car is so significant that it really becomes an important reason not to look at many other cars that are out there. In those other threads, some said they wouldn't even consider other sports cars that weren't from a manufacturer with very high reliability ratings like Honda. And how does Honda report the blown engine claims that they deny? I have seen several threads that sounded like a defect rather than an overrev.

In the end it comes down to how much weight a person puts on reliability. For me, a difference of one or two warranty claims per vehicle on average for a manufacturer is not going to stop me from considering a new Mustang or a Miata or a Boxster or a Vette etc and it won't even be an important factor when I am narrowing the list. I suppose it could be a tie breaker.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rick Hesel
I'm suffering major withdrawal pains