SuperMan2012

Are the 2003 automatic transmission "defective" similiar to the 2001 and 2001 Civics, in that alot of them don't last more than 100,000 miles?

jponto07

Mine is an 03 Ex auto trans with 115000 miles and it's going strong. I change the atf every 6-8 thousand miles just as a precaution though. No idea if this is typical or I happen to have a good one.

SuperMan2012

Well, it's a known fact that 2001, 2002, and 2003 automatic transmissions have problems and fail earlier. This is especially true for 2001, and slightly lesser extend for 2002. It's also the case for 2003, but much less frequent than 2002, but this could be due to age difference.....or something something else?

sl33pyriceboi

iTrader: (3)

^where are you getting your information and "known facts?"

did joe smo from the super legit mechanic shop tell you what he heard from a friend who heard it from a friend?

my sister has 120k on her 03 and my bestfriend has 170k miles on his 03 (and he beats the ish out of it). never had any problems with either.

fsckewe

Your sample size is amazing.

Artificial

iTrader: (1)

It's much better than the one you gave us, or the "known" facts without a source or an example.

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

the carcomplaints.com page with over 500 fails did have plenty of 03-05 models in there, but majority was from 01-02. i imagine this difference is simply due to the cars being older and having more miles. give it a few more yrs for the newer models to catch up. the average fail is around 100k miles, and the newer models are not quite there yet at around 70-80k. while fails were reported below 100k, those seem to be rare compared to the average. there are also some that failed between 120-150k and those also were rare. living in places where the temps are higher can cause the fluid to go bad much quicker, and this speeds up the breakage from defective parts. but there are too many factors to list just one reason.

sl33pyriceboi

iTrader: (3)

^legit. i knew gear would come and save the day...always has, always will.

fsckewe

Shut up chump.

SuperMan2012

That's what I thought, but the 01 and 02 have been having much higher number of complaints for years, and the 03 has yet to catch up.

For example, 2002 had more complaints 3 years ago (when it was only 7 years old) than the 2003 today when it's 9 years old.

sl33pyriceboi

iTrader: (3)

easy ladies, easy.

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

yeah thats true, many failures for 01-02 autos happened between 15-90k miles. i really have no explanation for the differences other than maybe some parts were manufactured differently. driving style does not seem to determine lifespan. and the very early failures suggest the fluid is not to blame either. i guess the defect is worse in some trans than others, or maybe the overall build quality of the units since honda drastically changed their trans parts and labor in 2001. could just be a lot of variation in production. early 90s and before the auto trans was built so well, there are still cars driving around at 400k miles today with no trans issues. thats the honda reliability they were famous for.

SuperMan2012

So, there is a decent chance that a 2003 Civic's auto transmission will fail around 100,000 miles, do you think people should sell their 2003 Civic by 100,000 to avoid the repair bill which will cost about 50% or more of the value of the car?

sl33pyriceboi

iTrader: (3)

^absolutly. you need to sell your civic as soon as possible because when you hit 100k, your engine will take a dumb because ur tach will have too many zeros. its like Y2K but for 2003s....but only for 2003s.

then what you want to do is buy a civic that has over 100k, that way you KNOW it survived the 100k mark.

SuperMan2012

Did you have learning disability as a child. I said "around" 100,000 miles. Meaning if someone's Civic is now 70,000, he should prepare to sell it sometime when it passed say 95,000 miles or even 90,000 just to be extra safe. Ofcourse, it can fail at 80,000 miles, but based on stats, chances are it's less likely than around 100,000 miles.

sl33pyriceboi

iTrader: (3)

^dont think this guy understands sarcasm

Artificial

iTrader: (1)

Trolls...

Carry on everyone else.

sdaidoji

iTrader: (1)

Superman,

Look for more info in here:
https://www.civicforums.com/forums/1...n-problem.html

sdaidoji

iTrader: (1)

then get trapped in the loop and never get out, please.

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

im keeping mine til it dies, then prolly parting out the car. or maybe selling if someone else wants to drop in a new trans. to me its not worth it anymore. chances of finding a shop with someone that can actually rebuild one of these, with a tci racing kit, is practically zero. and without that, there is no point even trying.

johndeerebones

Not only that, I rebuilt my own. I know without a doubt that it went together right. BUT, let me say, they are not off base with the price of labor. I have had other transmissions and transaxles apart and this one was by far the biggest pita. Not only that, I have been a wrench turner every since I was old enough to hold a wrench (not joking, my grandpa ran his own shop next to his house when I was a kid). I have had more powerquads and autoquads (John Deere transmissions) apart than I care to count, and they are not only really heavy on all parts, but complex too. All that to say, unless you rebuild your own, they wouldn't be completely out of line if they charged 6 billion dollars for a quality rebuild. To hash over and over about the same topic I always do, most transmission shops are paying their "techs", if you can call them that, minimum wage or slightly above it. To get quality work, you have to pay for it.... I made 20 bucks an hour, which is good around here, and I am moving on to another field because I was topped out. The problem with most trans and shadetree shops is they don't pay worth a poop. The problem with dealers is they pay flat rate. They pay for speed, even good techs are rewarded for cutting corners and being sloppy.

fsckewe

Yeah it is interesting. Perhaps they changed suppliers for the 7th gen and even changed again mid run (2003, 2004 ish..... internals of course as they make their own trannys) Who knows.

So frustrating for the rest of us. I mean, I'm not afraid to take on a task, but have no experience and would obviously have to pay someone.

fsckewe

No, I'm not trolling. The guy gave 2, TWO examples of why OP was wrong, out of a couple hundred thousand cars. His point was as baseless as the OPs. One can't demand proof of one's argument by doing the same exact thing to make their point. It's a logical fallacy.


Then you make this comment to me(note, I'm NOT the OP.)



So what year is your civic? And how is the transmission?

Mine is a 2003 and suffers from cold slippage.

sl33pyriceboi

iTrader: (3)

^i beat your sample size by 1...

fsckewe

ha!

Artificial

iTrader: (1)

I also have a 2003, no tranny problems at all. My friend has an 02', no tranny problems.

johndeerebones

The problems with these trans was two fold. The first problem was that some of the tourqe convertor clutches came apart, the resultant trash plugged the filter causing nothing to work right. I would assume that was the major cause of the really early failures. I think Honda fixed that one pretty early in the model years. May have been fixed by 2002 or 3, don't know. I know mine is a 2001, had 142500 miles when I rebuilt it and the tcc was fine. I replaced the tourqe convertor because it is pretty cheap and had it out anyway. The old school of thought is to always replace it when there. It is a hard to clean out trap of trash if nothing else... That brings up the other "problem" which is through out all the years. The filter is inaccesible. If it stops up that is the end of it. The only way to change it is to split the case. the filter is very effective at keeping trash out of the hydraulics of the transaxle, its also very effective at keeping fluid out too, so mixed bag of rocks there, catch 22 if you will. The next problem was a defective 2nd gear clutch. They wore out prematurely, stopped up the filter with trash, and the transaxles couldn't work then. Of course there are exceptions to every rule, other problems might have existed, but those are the overwhelming problems. The 2nd clutch is the majority of the troubles. They were mostly fixed by 04 and 5. The problem plauged all the years though. Like you said especially the early years. It is obvious that the overwhelming majority of Honda owners are city dwellers. I grew up in the sticks with predominatly American mades. They cost just as much too. It was good for an auto to last anything over 100000 miles. Obviously the people with under 50000 had a reason to gripe for sure. Other than that, I say get over it. That's life, no it isn't "fair". Society is ate up with entitlement mentality.

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

i would love to pay someone $5k for a proper rebuild if it was done carefully and correctly. but sadly this would never happen unless i knew someone nearby from these forums that did it before (you and two other people in the entire history of this site). i have seen major trans shops botch countless jobs and even with a 2-3 yr warranty, the cars were in the shop every few months. not only would they always break down, they would never drive the same again. i know trans rebuilding is a big job, something i could never do but would gladly pay someone what they deserve. too many shops these days inflate prices for tiny jobs like spark plugs and air filters charging hundreds for something that takes 10 mins of labor. thats what i hate about the auto industry. most of it is a complete ripoff because they know nobody is smart enough to question it.

fsckewe

johndeerbones.... thanks for the insight.

I think most of us have accepted it. Looking for a solution I think is the main objective. Is swapping for an '04 or '05 transmission a viable option? Doesn't sound bullet proof.

'Such is life' really sucks when you have people considering running to failure then parting the car. It sucks because that is actually a good option, but rather ridiculous.

My car made it to about 86,000 before seeing any signs of failure. I understand moving parts fail, that is certainly part of life. It's just so discerning when the part that fails is so god damn expensive and one has limited options that are all equally expensive.

I think to come full circle..... yeah OP, it seems the 2003 are susceptible to some failures as the 2001 and 2002 models. And the consensus seems to be the millage is irrelevant.

johndeerebones

I think the only viable option to swap to is a manual. Then you are talking the same or more money, and they have problems too. If it concerns the only real option is to trade it off or sell it. 35 mpg is good while it lasts. I will not rebuild mine again, too much pain and not enough gain. There is almost no car on the road that isn't worth more parted out than sold whole. The only problem is be prepared to sit on it to get it all sold. To do that you have to be willing to let it sit around and take up space for a while, maybe a year or more..... You also have to have the time to take it apart piece by piece and sell it that way. Most people don't have the space, time, or tools. Even more wouldn't mess with it if they did.... I bought mine for around 2k, put about 500 in the fix and have put 20000 miles and a year on it. Sucky outlook, but I figure I have gotten my money out of it. I am with gearbox, I will drive it into the ground and go from there. I was able to buy and fix it with cash, so all it has cost is gas and insurance. To each his own, but I won't put another dime in this thing except oil changes. I don't know how these guys put 5 or 6 grand in an engine build and still have a car worth 4500 dollars or less and can still sleep at night :P The old saying goes, you can polish a turd but its still a turd...