2007 Accord - Cruise Control
11-14-2006 | 11:08 PM
#46
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 14:34:39 -0500, no name <jason*.nyhq@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>The manufacturer's recommended break-in period for a Honda Accord, six
>cylinder, with automatic is 600 miles. I was advised by someone at the
>dealership that cruise control should not be used until the vehicle
>has been driven for 1500 miles. The owner's manual makes no mention of
>a separate break-in for the cruise control. Has anyone else ever
>heard this?
Yeah, I heard it forty years ago for GM iron engines, except they
didnt even HAVE cruise control back then, but you were supposed to
vary your speed a lot.
Does not seem to be an issue for current Honda alumino-silicate engine
technology. No 500 mile break-in oil, either. Don't even have to
crank the engine manually to start them anymore, either.
Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
that go on?!
J.
wrote:
>The manufacturer's recommended break-in period for a Honda Accord, six
>cylinder, with automatic is 600 miles. I was advised by someone at the
>dealership that cruise control should not be used until the vehicle
>has been driven for 1500 miles. The owner's manual makes no mention of
>a separate break-in for the cruise control. Has anyone else ever
>heard this?
Yeah, I heard it forty years ago for GM iron engines, except they
didnt even HAVE cruise control back then, but you were supposed to
vary your speed a lot.
Does not seem to be an issue for current Honda alumino-silicate engine
technology. No 500 mile break-in oil, either. Don't even have to
crank the engine manually to start them anymore, either.
Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
that go on?!
J.
11-14-2006 | 11:08 PM
#47
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 14:34:39 -0500, no name <jason*.nyhq@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>The manufacturer's recommended break-in period for a Honda Accord, six
>cylinder, with automatic is 600 miles. I was advised by someone at the
>dealership that cruise control should not be used until the vehicle
>has been driven for 1500 miles. The owner's manual makes no mention of
>a separate break-in for the cruise control. Has anyone else ever
>heard this?
Yeah, I heard it forty years ago for GM iron engines, except they
didnt even HAVE cruise control back then, but you were supposed to
vary your speed a lot.
Does not seem to be an issue for current Honda alumino-silicate engine
technology. No 500 mile break-in oil, either. Don't even have to
crank the engine manually to start them anymore, either.
Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
that go on?!
J.
wrote:
>The manufacturer's recommended break-in period for a Honda Accord, six
>cylinder, with automatic is 600 miles. I was advised by someone at the
>dealership that cruise control should not be used until the vehicle
>has been driven for 1500 miles. The owner's manual makes no mention of
>a separate break-in for the cruise control. Has anyone else ever
>heard this?
Yeah, I heard it forty years ago for GM iron engines, except they
didnt even HAVE cruise control back then, but you were supposed to
vary your speed a lot.
Does not seem to be an issue for current Honda alumino-silicate engine
technology. No 500 mile break-in oil, either. Don't even have to
crank the engine manually to start them anymore, either.
Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
that go on?!
J.
11-14-2006 | 11:08 PM
#48
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 14:34:39 -0500, no name <jason*.nyhq@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>The manufacturer's recommended break-in period for a Honda Accord, six
>cylinder, with automatic is 600 miles. I was advised by someone at the
>dealership that cruise control should not be used until the vehicle
>has been driven for 1500 miles. The owner's manual makes no mention of
>a separate break-in for the cruise control. Has anyone else ever
>heard this?
Yeah, I heard it forty years ago for GM iron engines, except they
didnt even HAVE cruise control back then, but you were supposed to
vary your speed a lot.
Does not seem to be an issue for current Honda alumino-silicate engine
technology. No 500 mile break-in oil, either. Don't even have to
crank the engine manually to start them anymore, either.
Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
that go on?!
J.
wrote:
>The manufacturer's recommended break-in period for a Honda Accord, six
>cylinder, with automatic is 600 miles. I was advised by someone at the
>dealership that cruise control should not be used until the vehicle
>has been driven for 1500 miles. The owner's manual makes no mention of
>a separate break-in for the cruise control. Has anyone else ever
>heard this?
Yeah, I heard it forty years ago for GM iron engines, except they
didnt even HAVE cruise control back then, but you were supposed to
vary your speed a lot.
Does not seem to be an issue for current Honda alumino-silicate engine
technology. No 500 mile break-in oil, either. Don't even have to
crank the engine manually to start them anymore, either.
Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
that go on?!
J.
11-14-2006 | 11:08 PM
#49
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 14:34:39 -0500, no name <jason*.nyhq@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>The manufacturer's recommended break-in period for a Honda Accord, six
>cylinder, with automatic is 600 miles. I was advised by someone at the
>dealership that cruise control should not be used until the vehicle
>has been driven for 1500 miles. The owner's manual makes no mention of
>a separate break-in for the cruise control. Has anyone else ever
>heard this?
Yeah, I heard it forty years ago for GM iron engines, except they
didnt even HAVE cruise control back then, but you were supposed to
vary your speed a lot.
Does not seem to be an issue for current Honda alumino-silicate engine
technology. No 500 mile break-in oil, either. Don't even have to
crank the engine manually to start them anymore, either.
Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
that go on?!
J.
wrote:
>The manufacturer's recommended break-in period for a Honda Accord, six
>cylinder, with automatic is 600 miles. I was advised by someone at the
>dealership that cruise control should not be used until the vehicle
>has been driven for 1500 miles. The owner's manual makes no mention of
>a separate break-in for the cruise control. Has anyone else ever
>heard this?
Yeah, I heard it forty years ago for GM iron engines, except they
didnt even HAVE cruise control back then, but you were supposed to
vary your speed a lot.
Does not seem to be an issue for current Honda alumino-silicate engine
technology. No 500 mile break-in oil, either. Don't even have to
crank the engine manually to start them anymore, either.
Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
that go on?!
J.
11-14-2006 | 11:39 PM
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
AZ Nomad wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 23:53:45 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Uh, generally, break-in periods suggest not driving at constant speeds.
>>> So, in this case, the advice may well have been appropriate.
>>>
>>> JT
>
>> Well, I just pulled out the owner's manual for my '06 Acura TSX. The
>> only restrictions for the first 600 miles are to avoid full throttle
>> acceleration, avoid agressive acceleration, avoid panic stop braking and
>> to leave the factory motor oil in the motor until the first oil change
>> interval.
>
>> The old procedures for running in rings, cams and the like do not seem
>> to apply to modern Honda products. I'm pretty sure Honda knows what
>> they are doing in this regard.
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
dude, with respect, time to move on. the improvements in precision,
materials and lubricants since the 50's and the detroit hunk-o-junk's
hay day render the old run-in procedure obsolete.
besides, have you ever worked on diesels? if so, you'll know that the
engine is controlled by the injection governor, not the pedal under the
drivers foot - it gives full throttle/injection with absolutely zero
regard to news groups. with that new knowledge and fear of blatant
abuse, can we suddenly expect the nation's diesel engine lifespans to
dramatically reduce?
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 23:53:45 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Uh, generally, break-in periods suggest not driving at constant speeds.
>>> So, in this case, the advice may well have been appropriate.
>>>
>>> JT
>
>> Well, I just pulled out the owner's manual for my '06 Acura TSX. The
>> only restrictions for the first 600 miles are to avoid full throttle
>> acceleration, avoid agressive acceleration, avoid panic stop braking and
>> to leave the factory motor oil in the motor until the first oil change
>> interval.
>
>> The old procedures for running in rings, cams and the like do not seem
>> to apply to modern Honda products. I'm pretty sure Honda knows what
>> they are doing in this regard.
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
dude, with respect, time to move on. the improvements in precision,
materials and lubricants since the 50's and the detroit hunk-o-junk's
hay day render the old run-in procedure obsolete.
besides, have you ever worked on diesels? if so, you'll know that the
engine is controlled by the injection governor, not the pedal under the
drivers foot - it gives full throttle/injection with absolutely zero
regard to news groups. with that new knowledge and fear of blatant
abuse, can we suddenly expect the nation's diesel engine lifespans to
dramatically reduce?
11-14-2006 | 11:39 PM
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
AZ Nomad wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 23:53:45 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Uh, generally, break-in periods suggest not driving at constant speeds.
>>> So, in this case, the advice may well have been appropriate.
>>>
>>> JT
>
>> Well, I just pulled out the owner's manual for my '06 Acura TSX. The
>> only restrictions for the first 600 miles are to avoid full throttle
>> acceleration, avoid agressive acceleration, avoid panic stop braking and
>> to leave the factory motor oil in the motor until the first oil change
>> interval.
>
>> The old procedures for running in rings, cams and the like do not seem
>> to apply to modern Honda products. I'm pretty sure Honda knows what
>> they are doing in this regard.
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
dude, with respect, time to move on. the improvements in precision,
materials and lubricants since the 50's and the detroit hunk-o-junk's
hay day render the old run-in procedure obsolete.
besides, have you ever worked on diesels? if so, you'll know that the
engine is controlled by the injection governor, not the pedal under the
drivers foot - it gives full throttle/injection with absolutely zero
regard to news groups. with that new knowledge and fear of blatant
abuse, can we suddenly expect the nation's diesel engine lifespans to
dramatically reduce?
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 23:53:45 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Uh, generally, break-in periods suggest not driving at constant speeds.
>>> So, in this case, the advice may well have been appropriate.
>>>
>>> JT
>
>> Well, I just pulled out the owner's manual for my '06 Acura TSX. The
>> only restrictions for the first 600 miles are to avoid full throttle
>> acceleration, avoid agressive acceleration, avoid panic stop braking and
>> to leave the factory motor oil in the motor until the first oil change
>> interval.
>
>> The old procedures for running in rings, cams and the like do not seem
>> to apply to modern Honda products. I'm pretty sure Honda knows what
>> they are doing in this regard.
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
dude, with respect, time to move on. the improvements in precision,
materials and lubricants since the 50's and the detroit hunk-o-junk's
hay day render the old run-in procedure obsolete.
besides, have you ever worked on diesels? if so, you'll know that the
engine is controlled by the injection governor, not the pedal under the
drivers foot - it gives full throttle/injection with absolutely zero
regard to news groups. with that new knowledge and fear of blatant
abuse, can we suddenly expect the nation's diesel engine lifespans to
dramatically reduce?
11-14-2006 | 11:39 PM
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
AZ Nomad wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 23:53:45 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Uh, generally, break-in periods suggest not driving at constant speeds.
>>> So, in this case, the advice may well have been appropriate.
>>>
>>> JT
>
>> Well, I just pulled out the owner's manual for my '06 Acura TSX. The
>> only restrictions for the first 600 miles are to avoid full throttle
>> acceleration, avoid agressive acceleration, avoid panic stop braking and
>> to leave the factory motor oil in the motor until the first oil change
>> interval.
>
>> The old procedures for running in rings, cams and the like do not seem
>> to apply to modern Honda products. I'm pretty sure Honda knows what
>> they are doing in this regard.
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
dude, with respect, time to move on. the improvements in precision,
materials and lubricants since the 50's and the detroit hunk-o-junk's
hay day render the old run-in procedure obsolete.
besides, have you ever worked on diesels? if so, you'll know that the
engine is controlled by the injection governor, not the pedal under the
drivers foot - it gives full throttle/injection with absolutely zero
regard to news groups. with that new knowledge and fear of blatant
abuse, can we suddenly expect the nation's diesel engine lifespans to
dramatically reduce?
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 23:53:45 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Uh, generally, break-in periods suggest not driving at constant speeds.
>>> So, in this case, the advice may well have been appropriate.
>>>
>>> JT
>
>> Well, I just pulled out the owner's manual for my '06 Acura TSX. The
>> only restrictions for the first 600 miles are to avoid full throttle
>> acceleration, avoid agressive acceleration, avoid panic stop braking and
>> to leave the factory motor oil in the motor until the first oil change
>> interval.
>
>> The old procedures for running in rings, cams and the like do not seem
>> to apply to modern Honda products. I'm pretty sure Honda knows what
>> they are doing in this regard.
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
dude, with respect, time to move on. the improvements in precision,
materials and lubricants since the 50's and the detroit hunk-o-junk's
hay day render the old run-in procedure obsolete.
besides, have you ever worked on diesels? if so, you'll know that the
engine is controlled by the injection governor, not the pedal under the
drivers foot - it gives full throttle/injection with absolutely zero
regard to news groups. with that new knowledge and fear of blatant
abuse, can we suddenly expect the nation's diesel engine lifespans to
dramatically reduce?
11-15-2006 | 10:42 AM
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
In article <7j4ll2dus1omee34d2bnc6htfvhir5lkeq@4ax.com>,
JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote:
> Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
> that go on?!
About 10 years. That's when the current Lexus gee-whiz parallel parking
technology will move its way down to the base Civic.
JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote:
> Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
> that go on?!
About 10 years. That's when the current Lexus gee-whiz parallel parking
technology will move its way down to the base Civic.
11-15-2006 | 10:42 AM
#54
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
In article <7j4ll2dus1omee34d2bnc6htfvhir5lkeq@4ax.com>,
JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote:
> Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
> that go on?!
About 10 years. That's when the current Lexus gee-whiz parallel parking
technology will move its way down to the base Civic.
JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote:
> Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
> that go on?!
About 10 years. That's when the current Lexus gee-whiz parallel parking
technology will move its way down to the base Civic.
11-15-2006 | 10:42 AM
#55
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
In article <7j4ll2dus1omee34d2bnc6htfvhir5lkeq@4ax.com>,
JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote:
> Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
> that go on?!
About 10 years. That's when the current Lexus gee-whiz parallel parking
technology will move its way down to the base Civic.
JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote:
> Still have to parallel-park them yourself, but how much longer can
> that go on?!
About 10 years. That's when the current Lexus gee-whiz parallel parking
technology will move its way down to the base Civic.
11-15-2006 | 05:19 PM
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
AZ Nomad wrote:
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
You must be joking, right? A good deal of Honda's business success
today is built upon their reputation for robust long lasting vehicles.
John
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
You must be joking, right? A good deal of Honda's business success
today is built upon their reputation for robust long lasting vehicles.
John
11-15-2006 | 05:19 PM
#57
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
AZ Nomad wrote:
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
You must be joking, right? A good deal of Honda's business success
today is built upon their reputation for robust long lasting vehicles.
John
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
You must be joking, right? A good deal of Honda's business success
today is built upon their reputation for robust long lasting vehicles.
John
11-15-2006 | 05:19 PM
#58
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
AZ Nomad wrote:
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
You must be joking, right? A good deal of Honda's business success
today is built upon their reputation for robust long lasting vehicles.
John
>
> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
> extended warranties.
You must be joking, right? A good deal of Honda's business success
today is built upon their reputation for robust long lasting vehicles.
John
11-15-2006 | 07:30 PM
#59
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:WnM6h.2138$5F2.1151@trnddc04...
> AZ Nomad wrote:
>
>>
>> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
>> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
>> extended warranties.
>
> You must be joking, right? A good deal of Honda's business success today
> is built upon their reputation for robust long lasting vehicles.
>
> John
Exactly so. Looking in today's auto classifieds I see a 2001 Ford Taurus
advertised for $2950 and a 2001 Honda Civic DX for $9995. Fords have a
reputation for the sort of design you mention, AZ. Hondas don't... and it
shows.
Mike
news:WnM6h.2138$5F2.1151@trnddc04...
> AZ Nomad wrote:
>
>>
>> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
>> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
>> extended warranties.
>
> You must be joking, right? A good deal of Honda's business success today
> is built upon their reputation for robust long lasting vehicles.
>
> John
Exactly so. Looking in today's auto classifieds I see a 2001 Ford Taurus
advertised for $2950 and a 2001 Honda Civic DX for $9995. Fords have a
reputation for the sort of design you mention, AZ. Hondas don't... and it
shows.
Mike
11-15-2006 | 07:30 PM
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2007 Accord - Cruise Control
"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:WnM6h.2138$5F2.1151@trnddc04...
> AZ Nomad wrote:
>
>>
>> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
>> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
>> extended warranties.
>
> You must be joking, right? A good deal of Honda's business success today
> is built upon their reputation for robust long lasting vehicles.
>
> John
Exactly so. Looking in today's auto classifieds I see a 2001 Ford Taurus
advertised for $2950 and a 2001 Honda Civic DX for $9995. Fords have a
reputation for the sort of design you mention, AZ. Hondas don't... and it
shows.
Mike
news:WnM6h.2138$5F2.1151@trnddc04...
> AZ Nomad wrote:
>
>>
>> Sure. Can't have all their engines lasting 300K miles. It's much
>> better for honda if their engines only last through the period of their
>> extended warranties.
>
> You must be joking, right? A good deal of Honda's business success today
> is built upon their reputation for robust long lasting vehicles.
>
> John
Exactly so. Looking in today's auto classifieds I see a 2001 Ford Taurus
advertised for $2950 and a 2001 Honda Civic DX for $9995. Fords have a
reputation for the sort of design you mention, AZ. Hondas don't... and it
shows.
Mike