Last post on Dec 08, 2013 at 1:46 PM
You are in the Acura MDX
What is this discussion about?
Acura MDX, SUV
Go to NHTSA to file a safety complaint.
Or call Monday-Friday (8 am to 8 pm ET) (888) 327-4236 TTY: (800)424-9153
#702 of 996 Re: '04 MDX transmission/radiator failure [sweetreet93]
Nov 03, 2011 (5:16 am)
I won't buy another Acura product. Not because of the specific MDX problems, but because Acura has failed in the cusomer service area and will do whatever it takes to avoid backing their products.
Besides transmision problems, you have motor mount and ball joint failures.
Keep your old car for another two years and buy a Ford product in 2014. There are some really good things coming. Put $250 in savings every month until then.
#703 of 996 Re: 2008/2009 MDX transmission problems? [ooff]
Nov 03, 2011 (8:27 am)
Up until most recently almost all base FWD vehicles, when converted/adapted to/for F/awd capability, engaged the "awd" capability only when the road surface involved proved to be of such low traction that an otherwise reasonable level of engine torque could not be applied.
"Those" vehicles would also dethrottle the engine simultaneously with engaging rear drive, the "awd" aspect, in order to prevent an undue, improper, level of driveline stress/HEAT and/or tire scrubbing and at the same time reduce or alleviate the potentual for loss of directional control.
Then along came the SH-AWD system, more logical system, that "hooks in" the rear drive capability for ALL low speed, sub-20 MPH, acceleration efforts....
REGARDLESS of road conditions, HIGHLY TRACTIVE or no.
Other marques, as a result of the stellar success of the SH-AWD system, began casting about for a more functional but still transparent "automatic", FULL TIME, F/awd system. Most have seemingly settled on the tried and true (abet with a few dead soldiers scattered alongside US roadways) Ford Escape electromagnetic clutch system. Even Porsche now uses this technique in the new Cayenne and Panamera R/awd systems.
Engaging both rear and front drives simultaneously, for the clear majority of us, operating mostly on highly tractive roadbeds, will eventually take its "toll".
Pay be now or pay me later...
Lexus is now using this same F/awd system in the 2010 and later RX350 models. Should they, sometime in the near future, adapt the RX450h(***) to this F/awd technique I will be at the head of the purchasing line. But the switch modification, allowing me to manually select "awd" functionality only in truly adverse road conditions, will be added in very short order.
*** Even better would be a Venza/H, with its new I4 adapted to/for DFI but like the RX450h's V6, using multimode Otto/Atkinson cycles. Otto mode, base/native AND effective compression ratio of 15:1, automatically switching into Atkinson mode under acceleration, more complete cylinder "fills", effective CR of 12:1 (DFI "standard").
Even 40 MPG hwy via the use of an SC and a lower displacement DFI/Otto/Atkinson I4.
Nov 13, 2011 (6:03 am)
My 2010 torque converter was just replaced by my dealer under warranty. Vehicle has 36,000 miles. Problem began at approx 34,000 miles. Symptoms identical to all those reported here and elsewhere. What concerns me is that the replacement part has not been redesigned in any way that might prevent a reoccurance.
#705 of 996 Re: Concerned [curious52]
Nov 13, 2011 (6:48 am)
Confirm that the replacement torque converter has a 36k mile warranty from the time it was replaced. If it does, that's how long you have to buy a different vehicle. If not, buy and extended warranty (100k) through your dealer or go shopping now for a new non-Acura product now.
I like the new Ford products.
#706 of 996 Re: Concerned [jslivon]
Nov 13, 2011 (7:28 am)
I'll 2nd that endorsement of Ford products. I've just purchased 2 Fusions in the past 10 months; an '09 4-cylinder for my daughter and a '12 6-cylinder for my wife.
#707 of 996 Re: Concerned [mnty77]
Nov 14, 2011 (9:04 am)
The Ford F/awd products have/HAD, will continue to have, the very same problem with transaxle and PTO failures as have other marques that engage the rear drive under acceleration, etc, regardless of traction conditions.
#708 of 996 My 2002 MDX Needs Trans at 80K
Nov 14, 2011 (10:03 am)
I have a 2002 MDX and have been the sole owner. I did everything they told me to do at every serivce appt with acura. I purchased an extended warranty for 3,000.00 and already replaced the timing belt. out of no where the transmission just failed and is shot. They told me the price is 5600.00 and took it to talk to corporate acura since we are loyal customers. they came back and stated that acura would pay 50% for a new transmission and that the dealership would pay an additional 10%, so that my cost would be 2300.00 or so... and i need new hoses for a few hundred dollars.. why not right? it is just my credit card!!! I have read everything on every blog and forum and now I am PISSED OFF!! It is total discrimination that they are handling this on a case by case basis! I have low milage and have only done to the car exactly what was recommended and now I have to pay for a major problem that is Acura's responsibility!?! When is this lawsuit happening, sign me up! I dont like being called a sucker!!!
#709 of 996 Re: "judder" recall [acuraowner5]
Nov 15, 2011 (6:14 pm)
To advise you I just had my torque converter replaced on my 2010 MDX at 38,000 miles. My dealer said mine was the forth they had done. I also asked the service manager (whom I have known for 15 years) if the new part had been redesigned over the original. The answer was "no."
#710 of 996 Re: "judder" recall [curious52]
Nov 16, 2011 (6:31 am)
While the torque converter lock-up clutch would undoubtedly be the weakest link in the MDX drive train the usual standard operation mode is to have it unlocked under any and all acceleration situations.
As such it should not be subject to failure due to the sometimes extreme driveline stresses resulting from rear drive engagement during acceleration circumstances.
Yet here we are.
There is no doubt that the lockup clutch MUST be DISENGAGED during braking and/or with low road speeds but we cannot be fully certain otherwise.
Does anyone know for certain...??
#711 of 996 Re: "judder" recall [curious52]
Nov 16, 2011 (6:39 am)
If the lockup clutch is failing due to the extreme driveline stress resulting from having both rear and front drives engaged simultaneously, a highly likely scenario, the first line of defense/FIX would be, might be, a firmware revision.
Revise the SH-AWD system's control firmware to make less use of the SH-AWD system, say disable it at a lower speed. Or, if this is not already the case, always disengage the lockup clutch whenever the rear drive is being used at any level, even minor.