Anco wiper blades called a CR best buy
in [Technical]
|
Prev: 1983 Dodge van battery cables and ignition switch.
Next: Looking for stand alone OBD2 software with bidirectionalcapability
From: Retired VIP on 13 Oct 2008 11:06 On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:53:26 -0400, "L Alpert" <alpertl(a)xxgmail.com> wrote: > >"Bob Jones" <email(a)me.not> wrote in message >news:pwpIk.3148$as4.2210(a)nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com... >>> I have had Honda vehicles for 30+ years, and never used any Honda >>> branded fluids, and never had an issue, though my personal >>> experiences are a small sample size as well, even if they differ >>> from yours. >>> >> >> What year is your Honda? Maybe older models are not subject to this >> kind of requirements. >> >> On my 2005 service manual, it clearly say that non-Honda antifreeze >> could lead to corrossion. I am not sure if Prestone will do that but >> why take the chance. Antifreeze is much cheaper than a water pump or >> a radiator. >> > >'79 Accord, '82 Accord, '01 Accord, '02 Civic, '04 Accord (the '01 and >'04 Accords are current). Non silicate DAT type antifreeze is all >that is required for newer Honda vehicles, a type that every major >manufacturer makes. > >Why would Honda require a coolant different than Audi, Nissan, Toyota, >Subaru, Jaguar, Porsche or (place your brand of vehicle here)? Would >all of these auto manufacturers as well as all of the others specify >something different? > I have already given up, these folks in the newsgroups don't understand the economics of manufacturing. Off the shelf is always cheaper than custom and, if care is used in selecting a supplier, just as good. The older style iron block / aluminum head engines as well as the aluminum block / iron head did require a special coolant because the stuff for all-iron engines would promote electrolysis. But new all aluminum engines need something that won't attack aluminum and that includes almost every coolant manufactured today. Read the label on the jug of coolant. Do you really think any of the coolant manufactures are going to claim to be compatible with all types of antifreezes if they aren't? Just imagine all the lawsuits that would set up and the billions of dollars in judgments. Jack
From: cuhulin on 13 Oct 2008 12:07 Anything you can buy in the stores that meets Honda specs is just as good.The only Honda vehicle I have ever owed before was a second hand Honda Moped, back in the 1970s. cuhulin
From: L Alpert on 13 Oct 2008 18:24 "Retired VIP" <jackj.extradots.180(a)windstream.net> wrote in message news:t0o6f4tldcf1g5akhge8fakbv39sddjodc(a)4ax.com... > On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:53:26 -0400, "L Alpert" <alpertl(a)xxgmail.com> > wrote: > >> >>"Bob Jones" <email(a)me.not> wrote in message >>news:pwpIk.3148$as4.2210(a)nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com... >>>> I have had Honda vehicles for 30+ years, and never used any Honda >>>> branded fluids, and never had an issue, though my personal >>>> experiences are a small sample size as well, even if they differ >>>> from yours. >>>> >>> >>> What year is your Honda? Maybe older models are not subject to this >>> kind of requirements. >>> >>> On my 2005 service manual, it clearly say that non-Honda antifreeze >>> could lead to corrossion. I am not sure if Prestone will do that but >>> why take the chance. Antifreeze is much cheaper than a water pump or >>> a radiator. >>> >> >>'79 Accord, '82 Accord, '01 Accord, '02 Civic, '04 Accord (the '01 and >>'04 Accords are current). Non silicate DAT type antifreeze is all >>that is required for newer Honda vehicles, a type that every major >>manufacturer makes. >> >>Why would Honda require a coolant different than Audi, Nissan, Toyota, >>Subaru, Jaguar, Porsche or (place your brand of vehicle here)? Would >>all of these auto manufacturers as well as all of the others specify >>something different? >> > > I have already given up, these folks in the newsgroups don't > understand the economics of manufacturing. Off the shelf is always > cheaper than custom and, if care is used in selecting a supplier, just > as good. The older style iron block / aluminum head engines as well > as the aluminum block / iron head did require a special coolant > because the stuff for all-iron engines would promote electrolysis. But > new all aluminum engines need something that won't attack aluminum and > that includes almost every coolant manufactured today. > > Read the label on the jug of coolant. Do you really think any of the > coolant manufactures are going to claim to be compatible with all > types of antifreezes if they aren't? Just imagine all the lawsuits > that would set up and the billions of dollars in judgments. > > Jack The only issue is the standard manufacturers disclaimer that if one does not use the branded products, the warranty may be voided (no matter how unreasonable that is). While I'm sure that one could prove equivalency in a court of law, no one probably wants to be the test case. This could be a mitigating factor for most.
From: Bob Jones on 13 Oct 2008 19:39 "L Alpert" <alpertl(a)xxsbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:tUPIk.2377$hc1.2294(a)flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com... > > "Retired VIP" <jackj.extradots.180(a)windstream.net> wrote in message > news:t0o6f4tldcf1g5akhge8fakbv39sddjodc(a)4ax.com... >> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:53:26 -0400, "L Alpert" <alpertl(a)xxgmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>>"Bob Jones" <email(a)me.not> wrote in message >>>news:pwpIk.3148$as4.2210(a)nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com... >>>>> I have had Honda vehicles for 30+ years, and never used any Honda >>>>> branded fluids, and never had an issue, though my personal >>>>> experiences are a small sample size as well, even if they differ >>>>> from yours. >>>>> >>>> >>>> What year is your Honda? Maybe older models are not subject to this >>>> kind of requirements. >>>> >>>> On my 2005 service manual, it clearly say that non-Honda antifreeze >>>> could lead to corrossion. I am not sure if Prestone will do that but >>>> why take the chance. Antifreeze is much cheaper than a water pump or >>>> a radiator. >>>> >>> >>>'79 Accord, '82 Accord, '01 Accord, '02 Civic, '04 Accord (the '01 and >>>'04 Accords are current). Non silicate DAT type antifreeze is all >>>that is required for newer Honda vehicles, a type that every major >>>manufacturer makes. >>> >>>Why would Honda require a coolant different than Audi, Nissan, Toyota, >>>Subaru, Jaguar, Porsche or (place your brand of vehicle here)? Would >>>all of these auto manufacturers as well as all of the others specify >>>something different? >>> >> >> I have already given up, these folks in the newsgroups don't >> understand the economics of manufacturing. Off the shelf is always >> cheaper than custom and, if care is used in selecting a supplier, just >> as good. The older style iron block / aluminum head engines as well >> as the aluminum block / iron head did require a special coolant >> because the stuff for all-iron engines would promote electrolysis. But >> new all aluminum engines need something that won't attack aluminum and >> that includes almost every coolant manufactured today. >> >> Read the label on the jug of coolant. Do you really think any of the >> coolant manufactures are going to claim to be compatible with all >> types of antifreezes if they aren't? Just imagine all the lawsuits >> that would set up and the billions of dollars in judgments. >> >> Jack > > The only issue is the standard manufacturers disclaimer that if one does > not use the branded products, the warranty may be voided (no matter how > unreasonable that is). > > While I'm sure that one could prove equivalency in a court of law, no one > probably wants to be the test case. > > This could be a mitigating factor for most. > In addition, corrosion is a slow process. Who is going to notice the difference? It affects the water pump or radiator more than the engine.
From: Retired VIP on 13 Oct 2008 19:41
On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:24:31 -0400, "L Alpert" <alpertl(a)xxsbcglobal.net> wrote: > >"Retired VIP" <jackj.extradots.180(a)windstream.net> wrote in message >news:t0o6f4tldcf1g5akhge8fakbv39sddjodc(a)4ax.com... >> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:53:26 -0400, "L Alpert" <alpertl(a)xxgmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>>"Bob Jones" <email(a)me.not> wrote in message >>>news:pwpIk.3148$as4.2210(a)nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com... >>>>> I have had Honda vehicles for 30+ years, and never used any Honda >>>>> branded fluids, and never had an issue, though my personal >>>>> experiences are a small sample size as well, even if they differ >>>>> from yours. >>>>> >>>> >>>> What year is your Honda? Maybe older models are not subject to this >>>> kind of requirements. >>>> >>>> On my 2005 service manual, it clearly say that non-Honda antifreeze >>>> could lead to corrossion. I am not sure if Prestone will do that but >>>> why take the chance. Antifreeze is much cheaper than a water pump or >>>> a radiator. >>>> >>> >>>'79 Accord, '82 Accord, '01 Accord, '02 Civic, '04 Accord (the '01 and >>>'04 Accords are current). Non silicate DAT type antifreeze is all >>>that is required for newer Honda vehicles, a type that every major >>>manufacturer makes. >>> >>>Why would Honda require a coolant different than Audi, Nissan, Toyota, >>>Subaru, Jaguar, Porsche or (place your brand of vehicle here)? Would >>>all of these auto manufacturers as well as all of the others specify >>>something different? >>> >> >> I have already given up, these folks in the newsgroups don't >> understand the economics of manufacturing. Off the shelf is always >> cheaper than custom and, if care is used in selecting a supplier, just >> as good. The older style iron block / aluminum head engines as well >> as the aluminum block / iron head did require a special coolant >> because the stuff for all-iron engines would promote electrolysis. But >> new all aluminum engines need something that won't attack aluminum and >> that includes almost every coolant manufactured today. >> >> Read the label on the jug of coolant. Do you really think any of the >> coolant manufactures are going to claim to be compatible with all >> types of antifreezes if they aren't? Just imagine all the lawsuits >> that would set up and the billions of dollars in judgments. >> >> Jack > >The only issue is the standard manufacturers disclaimer that if one does not >use the branded products, the warranty may be voided (no matter how >unreasonable that is). > >While I'm sure that one could prove equivalency in a court of law, no one >probably wants to be the test case. > >This could be a mitigating factor for most. > I understand. The manufacturer has no control over what fluids you buy. So protect his pocket, he has to ensure that you use quality products hence the threat of no warranty coverage if you don't use his stuff. No one has said, and I'm not implying, that the manufacturer's branded product is inferior to OTC products. But the burden of proof is on you. You would have to prove that the product you use meets the manufacturer's specs. Once you do that, I think most dealers would honor the warranty. There have been numerous lawsuits over just this kind of thing. Jack |