2001 Acura Tl

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 ACURA 3.2 TL. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN ACTIVATING THE AIR CONDITIONER, NO AIR WOULD BLOW FROM THE VENTS. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION, HE FOUND THAT THE ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR WAS MELTED AND CAUSING THE FAILURE. THE CONTACT REPAIRED THE VEHICLE BY REPLACING THE CONNECTOR AND BLOWER MOTOR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND THEY OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 145,000. UPDATED 9/27/11 *CN THE AC/HEATER STOPPED WORKING. THE CONSUMER SMELLED AN ELECTRICAL BURNING ODOR. IT WAS DISCOVERED THE FAN CONNECTOR AND FAN HAD BURNED UP. UPDATED 10/07/11

2001 ACURA 3.2TL. CONSUMER STATES PROBLEMS WITH VEHICLE TRANSMISSION *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED HE RECENTLY NOTICED A JUDDERING AND SLIPPING ON D5 WHILE SHIFTING FROM 2ND GEAR TO 3RD, ESPECIALLY WHILE GOING ON RAMPS, MERGING ON TO FREEWAYS AND BRIDGES. THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER, BUT THEY WERE UNABLE TO FIND A PROBLEM. TWO WEEKS LATER, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED AND THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE BACK TO THE DEALER. THE DEALER DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS INDEED A PROBLEM WITH THE P1750-CLUTCH PRESS, WHICH WAS RELATED TO THE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION RECALL. THE CONSUMER BELIEVED THE REPLACEMENT SHOULD BE FREE OF CHARGE AS A ONE TIME GESTURE. *JB

TRANSMISSION FAILURE: I BOUGHT THIS CAR AT 25K MILES IN SEPT "04". RECALL TOOK PLACE APR. "04". I WAS NEVER TOLD BY THE DEALER, THAT A "RECALL" WAS MADE ON THE TRANNY FOR 7/100K. ( IT WAS MORE IMPORTANT THAT THEY PUT THE SALE OF THE CAR OVER THE SAFETY OF ME AND MY CHILD )I FOUND OUT ON THE DAY MY TRANNY WENT OUT ON AUG. "10" AND THEY SAID I WOULD HAVE TO PAY $3,700 FOR THE REPAIR DUE TO THE WARRANTY HAS EXPIRED. I WAS COMING OFF THE FREEWAY AT 65 MPH WHEN I EXITED AND SLOWED DOWN TO APPROX. 35 MPH, THE CAR WENT "CRAZY" IT WAS BUCKING AND JUMPING AND THRUSTING US FORWARD IN A JERKING MOTION. I AM FEMALE AND HAD MY TODDLER WITH ME, I WAS SCARED, IT WAS A STRANGE BEHAVIOR FOR A CAR, IT FELT LIKE I WAS BEING HIT FROM BEHIND BY ANOTHER CAR. I COULDN'T SHAKE THE IDEA THAT WE JUST GOT OFF THE FREEWAY. HAD THIS CAR DONE THIS WHILE ON THE FREEWAY!! MY THOUGHTS ARE WE WOULD OF BEEN BADLY HURT ALONG WITH OTHERS. IT WAS A MATTER OF SECONDS THAT CHANGED MY OUTCOME, ALONG WITH THE "GUARDIAN ANGLES". I AM TERRIFIED TO DRIVE THIS CAR. I AM UNEMPLOYED AND GAVE THE DEALER ALL THE $$ I HAD. I HAVE READ ON YOUR NHTSA WEB SITE, OF PEOPLE HAVING TO REPLACE UP TO THREE TIMES. THE DESIGN PROBLEM IS NOT RESOLVED, FROM THE RESULTS, IT IS NOT RESOLVED, YET THESE CARS ARE ON THE ROADS AND EVERY OTHER DAY SOMEONE'S TRANNY IS GOING OUT AS WELL AS THEM EXPERIENCING NEAR INJURY CONDITIONS. I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND!!! WHEN "TYLENOL" WAS RECALLED...THEY REMOVED THE PRODUCT FROM THE SHELF TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC. WHY ISN'T THIS BEING DONE HERE AS WELL. GIVE US BLUE BOOK VALUE AT THE TIME OF TRANNY FAILURE AND SCRAP THESE CARS. BECAUSE THEY ARE UNABLE TO COME UP WITH A RELIABLE TRANNY FIX IN THEIR DESIGN FLAW, GIVE US BLUE BOOK VALUE SO WE CAN DRIVE A CAR THAT IS MORE SAFE.

MY 2001 ACURA TL WITH 162,000 MILES HAS A SUBFRAME THAT IS SEVERELY RUSTED AND WEAKENED TO THE POINT OF COLLAPSE ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE. ACURA HAS DECIDED TO CALL THIS NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR BUT I STRONGLY DISAGREE. THE AIR CONDITIONING CONDENSING UNIT HAS A SMALL HOSE FOR CONDENSATE THAT IS LOCATED DIRECTLY ABOVE THE SITE OF THE RUST. THIS HOSE HAS BEEN DRIPPING ONTO THE SUBFRAME WHENEVER THE AC HAS BEEN IN USE. THIS IS NOT WEAR AND TEAR, IT IS A DESIGN FLAW THAT ACURA IS NOT OWNING UP TO AND IF THE WEAKENED SUBFRAME WERE TO BREAK WHILE THE CAR IS BEING DRIVEN THIS WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT SAFETY ISSUE. THE OTHER PARTS OF THE SUBFRAME ARE IN FINE CONDITION, THERE IS ONLY ONE EXPLANATION WHY IT WOULD BE RUSTED OUT IN THIS ONE PLACE. *TR

2001 ACURA 3.2 TL, 47000+ MILES TRANSMISSION PROBLEMS: NEEDS TO BE REPLACED BOUGHT CAR NEW: ONLY DRIVER CALLED CLIENT SERVICES AND MY DEALER FOR REPAIR COMPENSATION THEY CLAIM VEHICLE IS OUT OF TIME PERIOD FOR RECALL (I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED OF PROBLEM) ACURA WILL PAY HALF: COST TO ME $2400+ BECAUSE OF LOW MILEAGE AND THE PROBLEMS ACURA HAS HAD WITH THE TRANSMISSION OF THIS MODEL, THEY SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE AND INCUR THE ENTIRE COST. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 ACURA 3.2 TL. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE KEY CAN BE REMOVED FROM THE IGNITION WITHOUT THE SHIFT BEING IN PARK. REMOVAL OF THE IGNITION KEY WHEN THE GEAR SELECTOR IN AN AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION WAS NOT SHIFTED INTO THE PARK POSITION COULD CAUSE THE VEHICLE TO ROLL AWAY AND CAUSE A CRASH. THE FAILURE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED BY A DEALER NOR WAS THE MANUFACTURER NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 118,000.

2001 ACURA 3.2 TL NEEDED TRANSMISSION REPLACED IN OCTOBER 2006 DUE TO A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT. MILEAGE ON CAR AT THAT POINT WAS ABOUT 61,000 MILES. AUGUST 2010 TRANSMISSION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AGAIN. THE CAR HAS ABOUT 98,000 MILES ON IT. SO THE TRANSMISSION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED WHEN IT HAD INCURRED 37,000 MILES ON IT. THE DEALERSHIP WILL NOT REPLACE IT UNDER THE SAFETY RELATED DEFECT. THE DEALERSHIP SAID ORIGINALLY THAT I HAD TO PAY ALMOST $5,000 TO GET A NEW TRANSMISSION. FINALLY, AFTER MUCH HASSLE, THEY MADE ME PAY $1,005 AND I HAD TO PAY $330 FOR A RENTAL. THE TRANSMISSION FAILED DUE TO THE SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AND I SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD TO PAY FOR IT. CLEARLY THE TRANSMISSION THAT THEY INSTALLED IN 2006 WAS DEFECTIVE, JUST AS THE ORIGINAL TRANSMISSION WAS DEFECTIVE. THE TRANSMISSION FAILED WITH LITTLE OR NO WARNING IN AUGUST AND I VERY EASILY COULD HAVE HAD A CRASH. IT LOCKED UP AND I COULD BARELY MOVE IT WHILE I WAS DRIVING. *TR

WHILE ENTERING HIGHWAY GA 400, I NOTICED THAT MY 2001 ACURA 3.2 TL SLAMMED IN TO FIRST AND SECOND GEAR. THEN, THE D5 DASH LIGHT BEGAN BLINKING, THEN THE TCS LIGHT, THEN THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT. I DROVE TO THE NEAREST DEALERSHIP (JACKSON ACURA), WHO ADVISED ME THAT THE TRANSMISSION HAD FAILED AND OFFERED 10% "HELP" WITH THE $5,331.65 COST FOR A NEW TRANSMISSION. I WAS "LUCKY", IN THAT WE WERE DRIVING IN EXCELLENT CONDITIONS. WE COULD HAVE BEEN HUNDREDS OF MILES FROM HOME, IN THE RAIN, IN THE DARK, WITH SMALL CHILDREN... THERE WAS NO WARNING. I CONSIDER THIS TO BE A MAJOR SAFETY HAZARD. *TR