Are Hondas the most reliable cars?

Are Hondas the most reliable cars? - 1

From new yes. But any car that has been treated badly can be unreliable. Full service history and a satisfactory test drive is essential for a used purchase.

Despite the claims, no. Hondas are no more reliable than other manufacturers.

Most Honda models do score at the top or near the top of many reliability charts but no automotive company is exempt from building a dud model or components. For example, some Honda vehicle years and models had high transmission failure rates.

I would not put them in the top three. Recent models have been decent, but Honda has had a number of shameful failings in the last couple decades. Even if we let go their inexplicable problems since 1980 or so with fuel pump relays and ignition switches, they entered a new era of poor reliability in 1998 with transmission problems. The ongoing problems with transmission failures earned all Accords from 1998 through 2004 a well-deserved rating of "avoid like the plague" from carcomplaints.com. The 2003 Accord was the same site's second worst vehicle on record. By 2005 the transmission debacle had eased a bit, and the 2005 Accord was only rated "beware of the clunker." In 2006 the Civic took over as their problem child, with porous engine block castings that tended to develop cracks, dooming the engine.

Honda had a pretty good year in 2007. In 2008-2009 Honda changed the proportioning on the brake system in the Accord, causing the rear brakes to wear out faster than the tires. Some owners took to having the rear brakes relined when they had the oil changed. That debacle earned the 2008 Accord carcomplaint.com "avoid like the plague" again.

In 2009 the award for Honda unreliability was switched to the Civic Hybrid, although the affected models spanned 2003-2011. The IMA (hybrid) battery was expected to last at least for the 8 year warranty, but a lot were failing after 3-4 years. In 2010 Honda changed the hybrid system programming to use the battery less heavily but that had a serious impact on fuel economy, which was then barely any improvement over the standard Civic. In 2014 a class action suit compensated original owners up to $100 for the loss of power and economy. The debacle is all the more shameful in that Toyota has used the same NiMH battery chemistry since 1998 and had no such problems. Toyota's secret was to restrict the battery charge and discharge limits more tightly than Honda did, even after the software patch.

Most of these big problems - transmissions, brakes, hybrid batteries - fell on the customers because Honda rushed changes to market. Toyota would not have put up with that level of recklessness with the company's reputation.

No new debacles have come to light since 2012, but the long and poorly addressed series of serious problems keeps Honda on my "don't buy new" list. By the 2022 model year they will be off my list if they keep a respectable focus on quality and reliability.

Rolls Royce.

For Practical purposes, I'd say Subarus.

Id rather check CR and put up with a few flukes with a Subaru or Mazda or Toyota or Honda than a reliable dog of a car like a Chrysler.

Honda, Toyota, Lexus and Subaru are generally the most reliable, but a lot of it has to do with the specific model. For instance, Accords are great, but the ones from around 2006 had lousy brakes. I had to have my rear brakes done 3 times in 5 years. I've got friends with Accords from around the same time, and they too have experienced brake problems. I got a Camry this time and I've had zero problems so far.

Hi No sadly even Honda have faults as do most cars nothing is ever fault proof.

Beats toyota

Any japanese cars is reliable.

Rtyuiop