Low Battery Charge warning light

Low battery charge warning light.
Does anyone know if Honda has cured this problem? Seems to be an annoyance with the 2010 and 2011 models. Thanks

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That would be referring to the Odyssey. And have they cleared it up on the 2012 models.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Another multi-poster... <sigh>
I posted the below in rec.autos.makers.honda, in reply to your identical message there:
-----------------
I'll bet it's an annoyance. But it's not a defect, it's a Congress/Obama "feature".
Remember that new 35mpg CAFE standard? Guess how many hoops Honda's trying to jump through to meet that standard and still offer you a 3.5L V6 engine?
Read Honda's carefully-worded press release, here: <http://www.hondanews.com/releases/2011-honda-odyssey-powertrain ? query=odyssey> Not that fuel economy is mentioned twice in the battery section.
Honda did something similar in the early-'90s, with a cruder form of the "low battery" light. It was called the Electrical Load Detector (ELD). It too was intended to increase gas mileage, and it too caused myriad problems until Honda got the bugs worked out.
You guys may feel confident and reassured when your elected representatives ditch the gridlock and take decisive action, but you sure don't like the side-effects!
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/14/2011 5:34 PM, Tegger wrote:

Side effects, such as stuffed toilets due to mandated smaller water tanks?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

It's a fleet average no? So sell more Fits and Civics. They don't make as much money on those I guess.
I really don't understand your point of view. We're running out of oil so we either need to destroy natural areas to get a bit more or trade with despots. Water is also a vital resource that is getting scarce in many areas, and disposal of waste water is also a problem, unless we want to dump it into the oceans and pollute those some more.
It seems to me that toilets that waste large amounts of water are against our national interest. Yes, it did take a bit of time for manufacturers to come up with good low-flow toilets, but I sure have no problem with them and haven't for many years. Maybe your plumbing needs a look.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It is not the purpose of the federal gov't to take decisive action on matters that are free market driven.
--



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/17/2011 04:17 PM, Stewart wrote:

really? so why are they spending trillions* of taxpayer dollars bailing out "free market" operations such as the auto industry? the [public and private] banks? the insurance industry? the housing industry [fannie and freddie]? i know i didn't vote for it. did you?
* that's trillions with "T", not a typo.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

They are overstepping their boundries. It seems everyone wants the gov't to do something about everything these days.....healthcare, welfare, businesses, banks....

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/22/2011 05:12 AM, Stewart wrote:

yeah, but you said "free market" we don't have a free market. we have "public risk, private profit" /illusion/ of a free market where the institutions that are supposed to be "by the people for the people" are now simply tax collection mechanisms to feed the corporations that these institutions now actually serve. to put it another way, your issue with "overstepping boundaries" is misdirected - it's not government that's the problem, it's who that government actually serves that is the problem.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The fact remains that the federal gov't has it's tendrils into areas that should be under the authority of the individual states. Who they serve is another issue that has been brought about partially by the archaic two party system, where one tries to out do the other making anal decisions that is in direct opposition to the other.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Somewhere on teh intarwebs Stewart wrote:

That's what happens when your 'economy' is a house of cards (designed to make the rich richer) built on sand and the tide turns.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The house of cards is an almost all service economy. Politicians speak about job creation, but speak nothing of what kinds of jobs are created. The main training for a majority of newly created jobs will probably be learning to say "would you like to large size that, sir" with the proper inflection.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Stewart wrote:

And the service economy is hardly a wealth builder. Low paying and an endless downward spiral.
I'm waiting for the military junta to take over...
JT
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Politicians do not create jobs. They can prevent them from being created, or they can force the creation to move from one place to another, but they cannot, on net, create jobs.
The increase in service jobs is a result of increased productivity. An MIT study in 2004 determined that it takes the average manufacturing worker 10 hours to create what it took 40 hours to make in 1950. Even with significant increases in our standard of living since 1950, we do not need 4 times the stuff to be manufactured. So the excess labor has migrated to other things, and that usually means service.
Think of the service industry as adding luxury and convenience to life: People not /making/ things for you, but /doing/ things for you. And I don't mean working the counter at a fast-food restaurant. For example, IT professionals are service-industry workers, as are paralegals, research- and-development, and other trades that generally make much more than minimum wage.
My own day job is in the service industry. There /is/ manufacturing in the background, but manufacturing productivity is now several times what it was 30 years ago (e.g.: a machine that had a crew of four 30 years ago now requires two and runs 3x as fast), so we've adjusted the employee mix to focus more time on selling and servicing customers, which improves our competitiveness.
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@example.com says...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -
What you say about productivity is correct, but the increase in demand due to the upward mobility of wages and population growth did pretty much cover the increase in productivity.
The thing that brought on this recession has never been mentioned, The free trade agreements our govenment signed. First came NAFTA, the result of wnich was american manufacturing started plants in Mexico,Honduras,Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic. Then came the World trade Organization agreement that open the doors to Chinese goods with no duties. Manufacturers quickly learned that they could buy finished goods cheaper than they could manufacture them. First the Textile industry collapsed. A year or two later the Furniture industry followed. Now furniture is bought from China and relabled by American companies.
I retiired from a Knitting company that I helped build in 2004 because I forsaw what would happen in January 2005 when the doors would open to China. Our few remaining customers would surely close up shop. They did.
PWY
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Did you own part of this company? If so, you must have been bought-out by somebody, like the other principals. What did you do with the money you got? Where did you put it, and why? Did you put your money into something where competition was high, margins low, and prospects for growth slim? Most people with money obviously won't do that, and that's why old businesses go under and new ones start up. "Creative destruction", like Schumpeter said.
And where did your people end up going? Well, they eventually found other jobs in industries that could survive competition. This is inevitably true, or unemployment would be near 100% now, not 9%: Almost no companies that were in existence in 1950 remain in existence now, and yet there are thousands more employers, and millions more citizens, than in 1950.
Take your thinking to its logical end: Why should you buy things not made in your state, or your city, or your street? Or your own house? Why stop at country borders?
Where does the /smart/ money go? What would you invest in with your /own/ money?
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Tegger,
No, I did not own part of the company. It was a family owned company and not my family.
I should have said ' our few remaining LARGE customers would close up shop.' The company I worked for is still in business. It was sold recently to a family member who owns another company that sells to the government for military wear.
Most of the machinery now sits idle and a lot of people I worked with for years are no longer there, and are no longer needed. Had I stayed, I would be no longer be needed as well. On the other hand I was 67 years old and would have retired by now anyway.
PWY
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Paul York wrote:

Clinton/Gore pushed and passed NAFTA and GATT. Remember Ross Perot and the, "Giant Sucking Sound?" They scoffed at him at the time but time surely has proven him correct.
All the political parties are complicit. Government creates the climate to do business and the current climate points to China...
JT
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They like to take credit for creating them.....

Most manufacturing is off shore. The service jobs you speak of require some sort of functional education, which may be out of reach for quite a few of the most current generation based on the current state of the economy.
While it (service jobs) may make our lives easier/better/more comfortable, a good portion of it isn't or can't be exported to or copied by other countries.
I see this everyday...I work in manufacturing for medical device companies, and components that used to go directly to hundreds of US sites now go to Puerto Rico, China, Mexico and Costa Rica while all of their US employees get laid off except for the R&D centers.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
That's unintended effects as when (shown in studies) that people are now flushing more than once. There was a reason for plumbing engineers to calculate the amount of water in the tank. Some political fiat that one could use less water results in the unintended effect that more flushes are needed. Her ladyship might only need one for her royal pee, but his lordship requires more than one for his royal dump, hence there is no savings of water. On the other hand it gives more work for the Squire of the Roto-Rooter.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.