This whole thing is sad, as Chrysler has had their "multi displacement system" out since 2005 with none of these issues. Had it on my '05 Hemi Magnum with zero issues in 100,000 miles, and none of the folks on LX forums did.
Please no VCM Honda
Disclaimer......I do love Honda's, no wheels, two wheeled or four.
As I imagine a lot of you are doing, I have been waiting for every scrap of news about the new RL. The one thing I hope doesn't make it onto the truck is VCM.
I just recently bought a 2012 Pilot which when Googled showed no indication the problems that VCM have inflicted on most if not all Pilot owners. From oil consumption issues due to coked up oil rings, from too much gas injected into the 3 working cylinders; resulting in piston ring replacement; to replacing driveshafts and carrier bearings, to active engine mounts being ruined to the tune of hundreds, if not thousands of dollars.
My truck had its rings replaced at 51,000 kms which was only disclosed to me when the extended warranty was transferred to me upon signing the contract. I did have 120 days to do an exchange, but I found something to ease my mind.
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/171813285117
I keep my vehicles for the long run and putting this device on my Pilot has made my truck work better and hopefully last longer.
I don't know how anyone could engineer a beautiful 6 cylinder engine to run on 3 cylinders and expect it to last and not vibrate itself, and everthing else around it to death.
Hopefully Honda will rethink designing a system, just for a mpg test, considering the implications further down the road in warranty costs. If not, please include an OFF button or I will have to order up another VCMuzzler.
Cheers
Tony
As I imagine a lot of you are doing, I have been waiting for every scrap of news about the new RL. The one thing I hope doesn't make it onto the truck is VCM.
I just recently bought a 2012 Pilot which when Googled showed no indication the problems that VCM have inflicted on most if not all Pilot owners. From oil consumption issues due to coked up oil rings, from too much gas injected into the 3 working cylinders; resulting in piston ring replacement; to replacing driveshafts and carrier bearings, to active engine mounts being ruined to the tune of hundreds, if not thousands of dollars.
My truck had its rings replaced at 51,000 kms which was only disclosed to me when the extended warranty was transferred to me upon signing the contract. I did have 120 days to do an exchange, but I found something to ease my mind.
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/171813285117
I keep my vehicles for the long run and putting this device on my Pilot has made my truck work better and hopefully last longer.
I don't know how anyone could engineer a beautiful 6 cylinder engine to run on 3 cylinders and expect it to last and not vibrate itself, and everthing else around it to death.
Hopefully Honda will rethink designing a system, just for a mpg test, considering the implications further down the road in warranty costs. If not, please include an OFF button or I will have to order up another VCMuzzler.
Cheers
Tony
21 - 40 of 82 Posts
There's a lesson to be learned there.. if you can't build it right don't build it!
I guess not everyone has had the same experience.This whole thing is sad, as Chrysler has had their "multi displacement system" out since 2005 with none of these issues. Had it on my '05 Hemi Magnum with zero issues in 100,000 miles, and none of the folks on LX forums did.
http://dodgeforum.com/forum/3rd-gen-ram-tech/144539-multi-displacement-system-override.html
That's kind of what I was thinking might be the case. My sensors just need calibrating I guess. :act024:I thought my comment came across as more sarcastic ... ....
Exactly! Don't engineer to the test; forgetting that the ultimate test is how durable your vehicles are perceived to be. The consumer will never notice 1mpg but will remember thousands of dollars in repairs over the long run.There's a lesson to be learned there.. if you can't build it right don't build it!
Cheers
Tony
Did you even read that post? Problem wasn't MDS related. But yes, some did override it just because they didn't like the idea or it screwed with their exhaust note with straight pipes.I guess not everyone has had the same experience.
http://dodgeforum.com/forum/3rd-gen-ram-tech/144539-multi-displacement-system-override.html
I don't think many would care unless it caused a problem. But I do remember assorted things being bypassed on cars for similar reasons. Don't get me wrong, I ran across a few others too mentioning MDS but nothing the magnitude of displeased Honda owners.Did you even read that post? Problem wasn't MDS related. But yes, some did override it just because they didn't like the idea or it screwed with their exhaust note with straight pipes.
I think it is possible to engineer a truck with improved MPG and not use VCM. VCM is a cop-out in my opinion. They have it on the shelf, so they are using it. Unless Honda found a way to hit 30 mpg with this truck, I will not be interested in VCM. I'm not buying the tradeoff of mechanical wear to fuel savings.
I have a 1996 Camaro that has been modified to road race. When it was stock it had a 5.7L V8 engine, 275 hp, and got 26-27 mpg on the highway with a 6 speed manual tranny. The mpg speaks to aerodynamics and factory engine tuning. No VCM.
In race form, the car has a 6.2L engine, 425hp (to the wheels), and the same aero and has a highly modified racing tune. It gets 25mpg on the highway. No VCM.
Honda can do it. They don't need VCM. And with the small numbers of RL sales expected, 1 or 2 mpg on the RL will have little to no effect on the corporate CAFE.
I have a 1996 Camaro that has been modified to road race. When it was stock it had a 5.7L V8 engine, 275 hp, and got 26-27 mpg on the highway with a 6 speed manual tranny. The mpg speaks to aerodynamics and factory engine tuning. No VCM.
In race form, the car has a 6.2L engine, 425hp (to the wheels), and the same aero and has a highly modified racing tune. It gets 25mpg on the highway. No VCM.
Honda can do it. They don't need VCM. And with the small numbers of RL sales expected, 1 or 2 mpg on the RL will have little to no effect on the corporate CAFE.
It seems Honda is investing less these days in what has always been their forte, excellent engineering. I am sure it is expensive, but the returns can be very lucrative over time. Accords and Civcs did not survive so long because they were band-aided over the years. They were well designed, and built to last.
I'm not disputing your statement, but I'm curious as to how much your Camaro weighs. In my experience weight and number of gears have more effect on mpg than (gas) engine size, straight 6, V6 or V8.I think it is possible to engineer a truck with improved MPG and not use VCM. VCM is a cop-out in my opinion. They have it on the shelf, so they are using it. Unless Honda found a way to hit 30 mpg with this truck, I will not be interested in VCM. I'm not buying the tradeoff of mechanical wear to fuel savings.
I have a 1996 Camaro that has been modified to road race. When it was stock it had a 5.7L V8 engine, 275 hp, and got 26-27 mpg on the highway with a 6 speed manual tranny. The mpg speaks to aerodynamics and factory engine tuning. No VCM.
In race form, the car has a 6.2L engine, 425hp (to the wheels), and the same aero and has a highly modified racing tune. It gets 25mpg on the highway. No VCM.
Honda can do it. They don't need VCM. And with the small numbers of RL sales expected, 1 or 2 mpg on the RL will have little to no effect on the corporate CAFE.
Well you live in Florida, you need an optinal 2 wheel drive RL that you can modify for your needs. Just ask for it and see what Santa brings you just like the off road version some of us want. Some of us have been naughty and aint going to see it, another words take what is offered or move on. Im sure the new RL will be some bad ass shopping truck.I think it is possible to engineer a truck with improved MPG and not use VCM. VCM is a cop-out in my opinion. They have it on the shelf, so they are using it. Unless Honda found a way to hit 30 mpg with this truck, I will not be interested in VCM. I'm not buying the tradeoff of mechanical wear to fuel savings.
I have a 1996 Camaro that has been modified to road race. When it was stock it had a 5.7L V8 engine, 275 hp, and got 26-27 mpg on the highway with a 6 speed manual tranny. The mpg speaks to aerodynamics and factory engine tuning. No VCM.
In race form, the car has a 6.2L engine, 425hp (to the wheels), and the same aero and has a highly modified racing tune. It gets 25mpg on the highway. No VCM.
Honda can do it. They don't need VCM. And with the small numbers of RL sales expected, 1 or 2 mpg on the RL will have little to no effect on the corporate CAFE.
Edit: sorry off track, NO VCM for me.
3650 LBS with driver. The 6 speed is stock which has two (2) overdrive gears. It also has 315 series tires on it (huge). Stock rear. I realize 3650 is a lightweight by comparison to a Ridgeline, but the Camaro also has excellent aero as opposed to a sheetmetal brick floating through the air .I'm not disputing your statement, but I'm curious as to how much your Camaro weighs. In my experience weight and number of gears have more effect on mpg than (gas) engine size, straight 6, V6 or V8.
My main point is to say that the Camaro is almost 20 years old and has an engine capable of nearly double the horsepower of the RL. I'm thinking the Honda engineers could wring 26 or 27 out of the new Ridgeline (lighter with better aero than the old RL) and not need VCM. I could be wrong.
I would agree with you except I'm one of those odd Floridians that actually needs 4wd. I am a real estate appraiser and find myself in the woods quite often. Then there is the towing boats and pulling them out on slick ramps side of things as well.Well you live in Florida, you need an optinal 2 wheel drive RL that you can modify for your needs. Just ask for it and see what Santa brings you just like the off road version some of us want. Some of us have been naughty and aint going to see it, another words take what is offered or move on. Im sure the new RL will be some bad ass shopping truck.
Edit: sorry off track, NO VCM for me.
Drop it into sand mode. I'm just kidding. Actually my gen 1 with heavy loads where I'm from could do it well. I never have used Honda At-4 lock system in that application when required. I have used it on a ramp but that was more for curiosity, I wasn't stuck. Not on stock tires either, BFG K2I would agree with you except I'm one of those odd Floridians that actually needs 4wd. I am a real estate appraiser and find myself in the woods quite often. Then there is the towing boats and pulling them out on slick ramps side of things as well.
I don't yet know whether the current VCM is good or bad but for the record, the current VCM that was introduced in the 2013 Accord is not the same as the first gen one that is being discussed so much here. So far at about 17k miles on my 2014 Accord it has been flawless.
I'll be most curious about your impressions when you have 117k miles on it. While Honda may have been able to make VCM operation transparent, I have serious concerns about the complexity of the system as well as the reliability of the engine over the long haul. The high oil consumption issue as well as engine rebuilds on (too) many VCM engines is pretty alarming.I don't yet know whether the current VCM is good or bad but for the record, the current VCM that was introduced in the 2013 Accord is not the same as the first gen one that is being discussed so much here. So far at about 17k miles on my 2014 Accord it has been flawless.
If you don't keep a vehicle past 100k miles, you're probably ok. But for those of us who run them until they are no longer economical to maintain (most likely several hundred thousand miles), VCM is another matter altogether.
The VCM on my wife's '08 Accord has been flawless thus far, with 108k miles. However, the TPMS light cane on about a month ago (but not the tire pressure symbol). Pretty sure the problem is with the car and not the sensors, since I swapped out winter tires/wheels since then, loaded new sensor ID's, and the TPMS light remains lit.
I'm with Speed. Let's remember also that the RL weighs in about 1000lbs more than Accord with what amounts to the same engine. VCM may not be so seamless with an extra 1000lbs to push around.I'll be most curious about your impressions when you have 117k miles on it. While Honda may have been able to make VCM operation transparent, I have serious concerns about the complexity of the system as well as the reliability of the engine over the long haul. The high oil consumption issue as well as engine rebuilds on (too) many VCM engines is pretty alarming.
If you don't keep a vehicle past 100k miles, you're probably ok. But for those of us who run them until they are no longer economical to maintain (most likely several hundred thousand miles), VCM is another matter altogether.
The 16 Pilot's VCM pretty much indicates what the GenII Ridge's experience will be. . . By most reports it is seamless and unnoticeable save for the fuel economy gauge shooting up. 16 Pilot is also reported to beat its EPA highway rating by a couple of MPG in steady highway cruising. Undoubtedly cylinder deactivation plays a role here.
Engine repairs and longevity are another matter entirely and would be the ONLY reason to avoid the technology (in its latest iterations) IMHO.
Engine repairs and longevity are another matter entirely and would be the ONLY reason to avoid the technology (in its latest iterations) IMHO.
And by default, those issues are THE reason to avoid VCM. IMNSHO.Engine repairs and longevity are another matter entirely and would be the ONLY reason to avoid the technology (in its latest iterations) IMHO.
21 - 40 of 82 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Honda Ridgeline Owners Club Forums
Honda Ridgeline Owners Club, forum community to discuss reviews, accessories, performance, care, mods, and more.
Full Forum Listing
