2003 ACURA CL Complaints

I HAVE A 2003 ACURA CLS THAT REQUIRED REPLACEMENT OF A HEADLIGHT AT 66000 MILES. THIS HEADLIGHT COST $928.85. THIS IS A TRAFFIC SAFETY ITEM. IT SHOULD NOT COST SO MUCH TO MAKE A "YOUNG" AUTO SAFE TO DRIVE. I BELIEVE THIS A MANUFACTORING DEFECT. IT SHOULD BE LISTED AS A SAFTEY RECALL.

I PURCHASED A NEW ACURA 3.2CL TYPE S WITH A 6 SPEED MANUAL TRANSMISSION ON 5/24/03. IN 6/16/04 WITH 14,396 MILES I HAD TO HAVE THE FRONT ROTORS RESURFACED AND MY BRAKE PADS REPLACED WITH UPDATED PADS PER TSB01-017 BECAUSE OF EXTREME VIBRATION WHILE BRAKING (OUT OF ROUND ROTORS DUE TO OVER HEATING). THIS WAS DONE AT NO CHARGE UNDER WARRANTY. ON 4/26/05 (LESS THAN ONE YEAR LATER) WITH 26,097 MILES, ACURA RESURFACED THE ROTOR AS A "GOOD WILL GESTURE" AT NO CHARGE BECAUSE OF EXTREME VIBRATION WHILE BRAKING AGAIN. I WAS ADVISED THAT THE NEXT TIME I WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR THE REPAIRS. NOW 10/25/06 WITH 34,500 MILES I'M REPLACING THE BRAKE ROTORS AND PADS WITH BREMBO ROTORS AND PADS NOT OEM BECAUSE OF THE SAME REASON. IN 2004 ACURA TL'S WITH MANUAL TRANSMISSIONS HAD BIGGER ROTORS AND PADS. PROBABLY TO CORRECT THE DESIGN PROBLEM THAT SURFACED WITH 2003 MANUALS. *NM

2003 ACURA CL HAS A GLARE ON THE WINDSHIELD WHICH BLOCKS THE CONSUMER'S VIEW OF THE STREET.***NO ANSWER REQUIRED***. *MR THE CONSUMER TRIED WEAR SUNGLASSES BUT THAT DID NOT ELIMINATE THE GLARE OR RECTIFY THE PROBLEM. *NM

DT: WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH WAS CUT OFF ON INTERSTATE. TO KEEP FROM HITTING ANOTHER VEHICLE RAN OFF THE ROAD. WHEN CONSUMER'S VEHICLE WENT OFF ROAD STRUCK SOME TREES WITH FRONT IMPACT WITH EXTENSIVE DAMAGE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOTALED AND DAMAGED WAS SUSTAINED ON THE RIGHT SIDE AS WELL AS THE FRONT. THE VEHICLE IS EQUIPPED WITH 4 AIR BAGS. HOWEVER ONLY ONE ON THE PASSENGER SIDE DEPLOYED. THE CONSUMER WHO WAS IN DRIVER'S SEAT DID SUSTAINED A FRACTURED STERNUM. CONSUMER WAS AWAITING POLICE REPORT, BUT INSURANCE DID STATE IT WAS TOTALED. *AK

I HAVE A 2003 ACURA CL TYPE S. ACURA HAS REPLACED THE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION TWICE AND THE 3RD TRANSMISSION CURRENTLY IN THE CAR IS HAVING PROBLEMS. ALTHOUGH THE MANUFACTURER EXTENDED THE WARRANTY TO 7 YEARS AND 100,000 MILES, THEY SENT SERVICE BULLETINS REQUESTING SERVICE INDUCED SLIPPAGE BETWEEN GEARS AND REDUCTIN OF HORSEPOWER TO REDUCE STRAIN ON THE TRANSMISSION. THIS CAR IS ADVERTISED AS A HIGH PERFORMANCE AUTOMOBILE AND UNKNOWN TO THE CUSTOMER TO TAKE CARE OF A MANUFACTURING DEFECT THEY ARE ADJUSTING THE OVERALL PERFORMANCE OF THE CAR. MY CAR HAS BEEN IN FOR REPAIR IN EXCESS OF 15 TIMES. AS A PARAPLEGIC CONFINED TO A WHEELCHAIR THIS HAS DRAMATICALLY IMPACTED MY QUALITY OF LIFE. ANY ASSISTANCE YOU COULD PROVIDE WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. RON CHEEK

2003 ACURA CL TYPE S 6 SPEED MANUAL TRANS. TRAVELING SLOW IN 1ST. GEAR ON AND OFF THE GAS TRANS. POPS OUT OF GEAR WITH A CLUNK. IF I HOLD THE SHIFT LEVER IN PLACE IT WILL NOT POP OUT IF GEAR. THIS HAS HAPPENED SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR NEW IN 08-2003. DEALER CHECKED INTO IT BUT SAID EVERYTHING LOOKED FINE. I LOVE THE CAR BUT THIS PROBLEM WITH IT POPING OUT OF GEAR IS CONCERNING AND DANGEROUS. I'M WONDERING IF THIS IS CAUSING DAMAGE TO MY CAR IN OTHER WAYS.*AK

THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONSUMER OF A TRANSMISSION RECALL. THE CONSUMER HAD NEVER RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE IN REFERENCE TO A TRANSMISSION PROBLEM. *NM *JB RECALL#04V176000

TRANMISSION FAILURES: 2003 ACURA CL. 1ST INCIDENT WAS AT 3,000 MILES. CAR STALLED AND WAS ACTING UP ON A VERY BUSY FREEWAY IN CA (405 FREEWAY). I WASN'T IN A FAMILIAR AREA WHEN I PULLED OVER. ACURA ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE SAID TO DRIVE TO THE NEAREST DEALERSHIP WHEN I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WHERE ONE WAS. IT WAS DANGEROUS BUT I ENDED UP MAKING IT TO DEALERSHIP. REPLACED TRANSMISSION AND SOME OTHER FLUIDS AFTER 1 WEEK OF BEING IN THE SHOP. 2ND INCIDENT WAS AT 25K MILES AND NOT EVEN 2 YRS OLD. CAR WAS PULLING I SLOWED DOWN AND HAD A BLOW OUT ON ANOTHER FREEWAY. IT IS IN THE SHOP AS WE SPEAK. THEY HAVE TO REPLACE THE TRANSMISSION AGAIN. I'LL BE WITHOUT MY CAR A WEEK.*AK

I HAVE A 2003 ACURA CL S TYPE AT 400 MILES A TIRE WAS MICHELIN TIRE WAS REPLACED FOR A BUBBLE IN THE TIRE WALL, THE CAR IS LESS THAN A YEAR OLD AND WITH 11,000 MILES. I HAVE REPLACE TWO MORE TIRES FOR BUBBLES. NOW A FOURTH TIRE HAS A BUBBLE. I AM TOLD BY ACURA AND MICHELIN THAT THESE ARE CAUSED BY POT HOLES. THERE IS NO RIM DAMAGE AND I WAS TOLD BY COSTCO THAT THIS IS A BIG PROBLEM WITH THIS TYPE ACURA BECAUSE OF SUSPENSION. THIS IS NOT SAFE, SOME BUBBLES ARE ON INSIDE WALLS AND CAN NOT BE SEEN. I DON'T BELIEVE ANY TESTING WAS DONE. THIS TIRE SHOULD BE OUTLAWED. NO ONE WANTS TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY AND I CAN NOT AFFORD TO REPLACE TIRES EVERY MONTH THESE TIRE ARE BRAND NEW AND MICHELIN IS MAKING A TON OF MONEY. I HAVE READ MANY COMPLAINTS WHERE PEOPLE HAVE CRASHED. I WOULD LIKE TO AVOID THIS....I WOULD LIKE EITHER MICHELIN OR ACURA TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM OR I WOULD LIKE TO GET OUT OF MY LEASE SINCE I WAS NOT AWARE OF THE UNSAFE CONDITION OF MY VEHICLE. *AK *JB

WHILE DRIVING, VEHICLE SUFFERED A SIDEWALL CUT AND SUDDEN DEFLATION OF THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE. *LA THE CONSUMER STATED THIS WAS THE THIRD TIME THE VEHICLE SUFFERED SIDEWALL DAMAGE, WHICH REQUIRED THE REPLACEMENT OF THE TIRES AND WHEELS. THE CONSUMER BELIEVED THE COMBINATION OF THE LOW PROFILE TIRES AND THE DESIGN OF THE 17 INCH WHEELS ON A LOW SPEED ROLL OF THE WHEEL INTO A POTHOLE CAN CAUSE THE TIRE TO BE PINCHED AND CUT OR DAMAGED BY THE RIM OF THE WHEEL. THE TIRE DEALER AND THE ACURA DEALER STATED THE TIRE FAILURES WERE DUE TO ROAD HAZARDS, HOWEVER THE CONSUMER DISAGREED SINCE THE FAILURE HAPPENED THREE TIMES. *JB