2005 Acura Tl

I HAVE A MAJOR SAFETY CONCERN WITH MY 2005 ACURA TL. IN APRIL, 2010, THE ACURA DEALER REPLACED BROKEN COMPLIANCE BUSHINGS DURING A ROUTINE SERVICE (82,000 MILES). AFTER THE SERVICE, I IMMEDIATELY NOTICED MY CAR FELT UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND HAD A VERY ROUGH RIDE. AFTER NUMEROUS DEALER VISITS, THEY REPLACED THE REAR STRUT ASSEMBLY. NONE OF THIS IMPROVED THE HANDLING OR RIDE. AT THIS TIME, THE DEALER STATED I HAD THE WRONG TIRES AND NEEDED TO REPLACE THEM WITH ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT MICHELIN PILOT MXM4 TIRES. I HAD NEARLY NEW MICHELIN PILOT SPORT A/S PLUS TIRES AND NOT EXPERIENCED A PROBLEM PRIOR TO THE REPLACEMENT OF THE BUSHINGS. I CHECKED AT COSTCO, WHERE I PURCHASED THE TIRES, AND THEY INDICATED THAT MICHELIN PILOT SPORT PLUS TIRES WERE AN ACCEPTABLE UPGRADE FOR MY VEHICLE. THE OWNERS MANUAL DOES NOT MENTION THAT THE ACURA SUSPENSION REQUIRES TIRES ONLY PURCHASED AT THE DEALER. ON NOV. 8, 2010, DURING A ROUTINE SERVICE VISIT, THE DEALER NOTED FINGERNAIL SIZE CHUNKS OF RUBBER PEALING OFF MY 2 FRONT TIRES. THEY RECOMMENDED I IMMEDIATELY CHANGE THEM SINCE THEY WERE UNSAFE. COSTCO AGREED TO PRORATE AND REPLACE THEM WITH THE DEALER RECOMMENDED TIRE. I NOTIFIED THE DEALER OF THE PURCHASE AND THEN WAS TOLD THAT MICHELIN MADE SPECIAL TIRES ONLY AVAILABLE AT THE ACURA DEALER. UNTIL TODAY, THE DEALER NEVER STATED THAT MICHELIN PILOT MXM4 TIRES MANUFACTURED ESPECIALLY FOR ACURA WERE THE ONLY TIRES THAT WOULD WORK WITH THE ACURA SUSPENSION. I HAVE SEVERAL PROBLEMS WITH THIS. NOWHERE DOES IT SAY YOU MUST BUY REPLACEMENT TIRES FROM THE DEALER TO HAVE A SAFE CAR. ACURA SHOULD NOT SELL A CAR THAT CAN BE SAFELY DRIVEN WITH TIRES ONLY PURCHASED FROM THEM. I AM VERY CONCERNED THAT HAD I NOT TAKEN THE CAR IN FOR SERVICE, I MAY HAVE HAD A MAJOR TIRE FAILURE CAUSING SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH. I AM REQUESTING THAT THE NTSB INVESTIGATE THIS ISSUE AND DETERMINE IF OTHER ACURA DRIVERS ARE AT RISK DUE TO THE PURCHASE OF TIRES FROM ANYONE OTHER THAN THE ACURA DEALER. UPDATED 01/20/11 *BF

CONSUMER'S DAD PURCHASED A 2005 ACURA TL THAT HAVE FAULTY TIRES AND OTHER PROBLEMS. *NJ WITHIN TWO WEEKS OF PURCHASING THE VEHICLE, THE CONSUMERS DAD HAD TO RETURN TO THE DEALER, BECAUSE THE DOOR SEAL NEEDED TO REPLACED AND THE BATTERY DIED. THE CONSUMER WAS ALSO LEFT STRANDED WHEN ONE OF THE TIRES DISINTEGRATED. THE CONSUMER PICKED THE VEHICLE UP FROM HER DAD AND WHILE DRIVING, ANOTHER TIRE FAILED. *JB

I BOUGHT A SET OF DUNLOP 235/45R17 SP SPORT SIGNATURE TIRES IN FEBRAURY, 2008 -- AND REPLACED ONE OF THEM IN SEPTEMBER 2008 DUE TO UNRELATED ISSUE. IN EARLY JULY, 2009, ONLY ABOUT 17 MONTHS AFTER I BOUGHT AFTER I MADE MY INTIAL PURCHASE, AND LESS THAN A YEAR AFTER I BOUGHT THE REPLACEMENT 4TH TIRE, THE SIDEWALL BEGAN TO DETERIORATE (ON THE NEWER 4TH TIRE) AND THE TREAD BEGAN SEPERATING FROM ONE OF THE OTHER 3 TIRES. HAD MY MECHANIC (DOING A BRAKE JOB) NOT NOTICED THE DEFECT, I COULD'VE EASILY HAD A BLOW-OUT AND SERIOUS INJURY. I TOOK THE CAR INTO THE TIRE STORE WHEN I BOUGHT ALL 5 TIRES. THEY INSPECTED THE TIRES AND FOUND THAT ALL 4 WERE DEFECTIVE. THEY CALLED GOODYEAR/DUNLOP (I SPOKE WITH MARY IN THE CUSTOMER SERVICE DEPT.) GOODYEAR/DUNLOP ACKNOWLEDGED THAT ALL 4 REMAINING TIRES WERE DEFECTIVE AND INITIALLY DEMANDED $200 TO REPLACE ALL 4 OF THE DEFECTIVE DUNLOP TIRES (WHICH I ORIGINALY PAID $1,000 FOR). EVENTIALLY I AGREED TO PAY $120.51, BUT I STILL THINK I GOT SCREWED. MEANWHILE, THERE'S NO RECALL NOTICE, BUT CLEARLY THESE ARE DEFECTIVE TIRES. *TR

TIRE SPECS -GOODYEAR EAGLE 235/45ZR17 94Y S2 EAGLE RESPONSE EDGE VSB ON 2005 ACURA TL WITH VARIABLE ASSIST STEERING. I RECENTLY REPLACED MY TIRES WITH GOODYEAR RESPONSE EDGE CARBON FIBER SIDEWALL TIRES. THESE TIRES PLAYED HAVOC WITH THE VAS SYSTEM. THE STEERING WHEEL COULD NOT BE CENTERED. IN FACT THE CENTERING CHANGED THROUGHOUT A DRIVE. CORNERING, ON ACCELERATION, THE CAR TURNED ABRUPTLY INTO THE CORNER, ON BREAKING THE CAR TURNED OUT OF THE CORNER WITHOUT MOVING THE WHEEL. REPLACED TIRES WITH DUNLAP SP 5000 WHICH FIXED THE PROBLEM TIRE SPECS -GOODYEAR EAGLE 235/45ZR17 94Y S2 EAGLE RESPONSE EDGE VSB. *TR

I RECENTLY PURCHASED A DEALER-CERTIFIED USED 2005 ACURA TL WITH NEW, DEALER-INSTALLED BRIDGESTONE TURANZA EL42 TIRES. IN MY FIRST EXPERIENCE DRIVING THE VEHICLE IN RAIN, I NEARLY LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AT 60 MPH WHEN I HIT A SHALLOW STANDING WATER (~1" DEEP) IN THE ROADWAY. BEING A FRONT-DRIVE VEHICLE, I WAS VERY SURPRISED TO FEEL THE FRONT TIRES DISTINCTLY HYDROPLANE AND CAUSE ME TO ALMOST LOSE CONTROL OF MY VEHICLE. THESE TIRES ONLY HAVE 2,000 MILES ON THEM AND I FIND THEIR LACK OF HYDROPLANING RESISTANCE TO BE WELL BELOW NORMAL EXPECTATIONS AND THEREFORE DISTINCTLY DANGEROUS. *TR

TL* - THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 ACURA, AND COMPLAINED ABOUT THE TIRES. THE CONTACT HAD 3 INCIDENTS WITH THE TIRES THAT WERE ON THE VEHICLE AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE. DURING THE FIRST INCIDENT, THE DRIVER'S SIDE TIRE LOST AIR DUE TO A NAIL. THE TIRE WAS REPAIRED ON MAY 6, 2006. IN JULY THE CONTACT NOTICED THE SAME TIRE WAS LOSING AIR, AND WAS REPAIRED ON DECEMBER 1, 2006. ALSO, THE CONTACT HAD THE TIRES ROTATED, ALIGNED, AND THE TIRE PRESSURE CHECKED. ON DECEMBER 31, 2006, THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING AND NOTICED THE VEHICLE WAS SLOWING DOWN . SHE THEN ACCELERATED, BUT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO SLOW DOWN. SUDDENLY A CLOUD OF SMOKE APPEARED ON THE FRONT PASSENGER'S SIDE . THE POLICE ESCORTED THE CONTACT TO A SAFE LOCATION. THE TIRE WAS BURNT, AND THE RIM WAS DAMAGED. ON JANUARY 2, 2007 ALL 4 TIRES WERE REPLACED AT THE DEALER. THE CONTACT FELT THAT ACURA SHOULD NOT USE THIS TYPE OF DEFECTIVE TIRE. *AK

MICHELIN PILOT HX MXM4 TIRE FAILURE COMPLAINT AGAINST ACURA AND MICHELIN TIRE CORPORATIONS**CC THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE DISLODGED COMPLETELY OFF OF THE RIM. THE PORTION OF THE TIRE WHICH COMES IN CONTACT WITH THE ROAD SURFACE COMPLETELY SEPARATED FROM THE REMAINDER OF THE TIRE. THE DISLODGE PORTION OF THE TIRE PASSED COMPLETELY OVER IN FRONT OF THE CONSUMERS VEHICLE AND PROCEEDED TO ROLL IN THE PATHWAY OF THREE ADJACENT LANES OF TRAFFIC. THE CONSUMERS VEHICLE WAS DAMAGE DUE TO LOOSING SOME CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED. THE TIRE WAS INSPECTED BY A TIRE DEALER AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS PUNCTURE TO THE TIRE OR ANY PRIOR DAMAGE TO THE TIRE, IT WAS CLEARLY A DEFECT WITH THE TIRE. THE CONSUMER ALSO EXPERIENCED PROBLEMS WITH THE DRIVERS SIDE WINDOW. THE REGULATOR AND MOTOR WERE REPLACED.*JB

MY 2005 ACURA TL EL42 BRIDGESTONE REAR TIRES WENT COMPLETELY BALD ON A 3000 MILE TRIP(19000 MILES TOTAL) FROM DALLAS TO COLORADO AND BACK. IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS A SUSPENSION/TIRE PROBLEM WHERE THE REAR ALIGNMENT UNDER FULL LOAD OF 2 PASSANGERS AND LUGGAGE IN THE TRUNK DEGRADES AND CAUSES SEVERE TIRE WEAR. THIS CAUSES SEVERE LOSS OF CONTROL ON WET PAVEMENT WITH REAR HYDROPLANING AT EVEN <50 MPH. ACURA HAS A TSB AND REPLACE TIRES AT LOWERED COST BUT ONLY WITH THE SUSPECT EL42 TIRES. AFTER FURTHER INTERNET SEARCHES THIS SEEM NOT TO BE ISOLATED INCIDENT.

MY 2005 ACURA TL HAS 21,000 MILES AND ALREADY THE TIRES NEED TO BE REPLACED DUE TO WEAR. THE BRIDGESTONE TURANZA EL42 TIRES ARE RATED FOR MUCH HIGHER WEAR AND I HAVE NOTICED MANY, MANY COMPLAINTS ON THE INTERNET. SOME ON THIS WEBSITE BUT THE MAJORITY ON OTHER WEBSITES. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE TIRE IS DEFECTIVE. THE DEALER SAYS WE NEED TO REPLACE THEM, I REACHED OUT TO BRIDGESTONE BUT HAVE NOT RECEIVED THEIR COMMENTS YET. *NM