Did you make the sensible, sane choice of the four-cylinder engine in your 2015 Accord? What about refusing to perform an LS7 swap in your CR-V immediately after taking delivery? Well, now you are going to (have a one in three thousand chance that you will have to) pay for that mistake.
Quoth Honda:
Honda will voluntarily recall 137 model-year 2014-2015 Accord 4-cylinder and 2015 CR-V vehicles in the United States to replace the engine short block, free of charge. During engine assembly, an automated system that verifies engine connecting rod bolt torque may not have identified improperly torqued bolts in a specific group of engines. An improperly torqued connecting rod bolt could come loose, leading to potential engine damage and stalling, which could contribute to a crash. No crashes or injuries have been reported related to this issue, which was discovered through a warranty claim review process.
Honda is announcing this recall to encourage all owners of affected vehicles to take them to an authorized dealer as soon as they receive notification of this recall from Honda. Mailed notification to customers will begin in late-March. In addition, owners of these vehicles can determine if their vehicles require repair by going to www.recalls.honda.com or by calling (800) 999-1009, and selecting option 4.
So, how did this happen, and how do they know about it? It was likely the result of auditing logs from a FANUC machine or something similar and comparing them to a torn-down engine. The Anna Engine Plant turns out a few thousand engines every day so the actual range of time where the machine was not adjusted properly could be very small. It’s also possible, of course, that every four-cylinder Honda built last year will explode. You never know. I think we can all agree that the important lesson to learn from this is: always get the bigger engine.
Full disclosure: At one point in the past, your humble author might have been directly responsible for this error or at least in the chain of responsibility identified by Honda’s 5P Process. Thankfully, this happened long after I bid goodbye to the Marysville Assembly Plant and I had nothing to do with it. This is the sort of thing for which American Honda will immediately terminate even a long-standing employee.
Honda makes about a thousand CR-Vs and a thousand Accords on any given business day in the US. How did 137 engines manage to span two model years and two models? Firing employees that screw up their jobs is essential to running a successful enterprise. The only way to survive with unaccountable employees is to take other people’s money and property at gun point, like the US government does, or have the government take other people’s money and property at gun point for you, like the UAW, teachers unions, SEIU and other rackets have done.
The logistics of getting engines across the country from AEP mean that not every engine immediately finds a home.
Alternately, there could have been an issue where the robot mis-tightened its first job of the shift for months.
Ok, nerve struck.
The best, safest and most reliable plants, industries, companies, etc don’t “hold employees accountable” as you state.
Why? Because very rarely are employees guilty of gross negligence (which is and should be an offense rewarded with termination) Most often it’s a greater issue of training, procedure, and processes.
“Holding employees accountable” only serves to stoke fear, separate management from labor and encourage cover-ups of honest mistakes or mistakes related to processes (which will reoccur regardless of firings) The cover ups being the worst as it prevents systemic problems from being identified and real improvements from being implemented.
As for your government rants, that is a separate subject. But on this one the issue could be as simple as a torque calibration was off spec for a wide variety of reasons, non of which may be applicable to any one person. But threaten them and you will never get the information needed to prevent that from happening in again.
Fantastic comment. Far too few seem to realize that baying for blood at the first sign of mistake is an excellent way of ensuring that mistakes are covered up instead of addressed.
No way to run a business.
When such news comes out, new owners get panicky. “Haven’t even made the first payment yet, Marge, and already they’re recalling this POS!”
Jeep had a recall for their V6 Pentastar engines in 2011 for the 2011 and 2012 Grand Cherokee equipped with that engine.
As it happened, the serial number of our Grand Cherokee was not included although it fit the time frame of the build.
For us it was an “Awwwww, sheeeeeeee-it” moment followed by a happy-dance when our VIN was not on the list.
@theirishscion
Or a government, for that matter.
No, indeed. As a Eurotrash expat, America’s political system (and the attitude of the general population towards it) both delights and horrifies me. I sometimes suspect that our strength as a nation (and I’ve been hanging my hat here for fifteen years now) lies largely in the political stability brought about by our almost total inability to actually change any meaningful legislation. That and no other first world country has handed political control so completely over to corporate interests with quite such gay abandon.
European governments are, if anything, even more in bed with home-based corporations. They just do a better job of hiding it.
I am with you. I don’t know exactly what they mean and although I have worked in factories before I don’t now. In my current line of work, if you are not in danger of causing problems for thousands of people then you are not doing anything important. If you fired us everytime we caused a problem the whole sub-continent could not staff your company.
@CJinSD, that’s just crazy talk. It’s an Illuminati conspiracy. Now take your meds and settle down
Here’s a thought, which occurred to me while watching an episode of “Air Disasters.”
Regarding the principle of Accountability, do you think there’ll ever come a point at which the penalties for breaking rules, either deliberately or accidentally, would become so great that it actually starts to scare people away from particular career fields, such as aviation, architecture or nuclear engineering?
Or would man’s psychology adapt to consider the legal risks of screwing up in a particular job to be just another acceptable workplace hazard?
I just got to thinking – “how far are they going to tighten up the rules before people avoid certain jobs due to the risks of making a mistake?”
…which segues into another terrifying thought.
Is the reason that we consider flimsy, dangerous, hideously-expensive tinfoil cans to be legitimate spacecraft because we ARE able to engineer a nuclear-powered spaceplane, but are forbidden by law to do so because it can’t be done in a way that satisfies modernist notions of “safety” and “environmental friendliness?”
I don’t want NASA’s warp engine held up because they can’t get insurance for the damned thing.
If you fire employees for all mistakes, you will run out of employees quickly. Especially in this case it may be a chain of events and multiple employees being part of the fault without one single person at fault.
If you fire employees for mistakes, they will do everything to cover up problems, never to resolve the root of a problem. They also will never innovate and improve the process out of fear to make a mistake. It would be the opposite of the Toyota Kaizan production principle.
You are correct but I suspect there is a checkered history between Clarkson and the producers/managers.
^^^
Cross-thread alert!!
:)
The connecting rod bolts were cross-threaded? :-) :-)
As someone who has recently undergone some “Kaizan” problem solving – I’m not sure that getting fired isn’t the better option! :)
Scott Adams once expressed his relief at the fact that he lives in a world without any PROBLEMS whatsoever.
Oh sure, there are “issues,” “challenges” and “opportunities” aplenty, but there are never any PROBLEMS.
It’s like that Onion headline:
“Eight Million Americans Rescued From Poverty by Redefinition of Term.”
“Honda will voluntarily recall 137 model-year 2014-2015 Accord 4-cylinder and 2015 CR-V vehicles in the United States to replace the engine short block, free of charge.”
Are they really going to do that? Wouldn’t it be faster to just drop a new complete engine assembly in there instead of just replacing the block? Or at least it would be faster to drop a “long block” in instead of a “short block.”
Send the engines you remove off to be re-manufactured and sell them as replacements in the parts market.
Amen to that – a short-block would require the dealer (or designee) to build most of the engine – and all of the potential failures that could result.
“Well, now you are going to (have a one in three thousand chance that you will have to) pay for that mistake.”
Well, for values of “pay” that mean “have Honda fix it for free”, and “probably get a gratis loaner from the dealer, too”.
“Have Honda fix it for free”, yeah, you could only hope it would be that simple.
There are all kinds of things that could go wrong when a dealership tech removes an engine, disassembles the engine, puts it back together, and re-installs the engine.
Agreed. I’m not impressed by my Honda shop. They’re either not used to fixing stuff and thus are overwhelmed by actual work, or they’re just incompetent. Prices are outrageous, but they match similar offers from independent shops to get people to use the Honda certified mechanics – which is a great tactic. I’ve halfed work proposals three times.
“Agreed. I’m not impressed by my Honda shop. They’re either not used to fixing stuff and thus are overwhelmed by actual work, or they’re just incompetent.”
Car dealership maintenance seems to have evolved towards this school of thought:
Hook up diagnostic machine
Do what machine tells you to do
Remove and replace major component
Even for an oil change, the “factory trained and certified tech” at my dealership put my underbody splash pan back on the wrong way and left out a couple fasteners. Nice IDGAF work ethic there, dude… you just removed it like ten minutes ago… I mean REALLY?!?
I’m sure that the “Boss’s Nephew Who Needed a Job” changed your oil – they’ll never use an ASE tech to do that.
For instance, every connector in the wiring harness could be broken, leading to countless malfunctions down the road. I’ve seen this happen.
Yeah, literally, there are a thousand chances for something to go wrong. This is not a routine repair. Incorrect torque on who knows how many nuts/bolts, not seating gaskets properly, breaking clips/connectors, scraping or marring a gasket surface, wrecking engine mounts, misalignment of engine/transmission, and many other things I can’t think of off the top of my head.
I want a factory robot assembling as much of my engine as possible. They’re not lazy, they don’t cut corners, they’ve done it thousands of times, and they’re never hung over.
Factory robots may not be lazy but they are only as good as the human who programmed them.
Yes, robots are perfect. That’s why this recall is taking place in the first place. A robot has no critical thinking to realize when something is wrong. I tightens a bolt to a specified torque, and that’s it. If that bolt is sticking out 1/4″ from the part it’s supposed to be holding down, it doesn’t stop. The torque is right.
“If that bolt is sticking out 1/4″ from the part it’s supposed to be holding down, it doesn’t stop. The torque is right.”
I’m sure that the robot can detect the number of rotations required to eliminate this mistake.
My guess is that the machine should be “fine” calibrated before each run, and the calibration was overlooked, or the records were lost. Without verified calibration, they have to assume that the fasteners weren’t torqued properly, even though there’s a good chance that they’re OK using the baseline calibration in the application code.
Not terribly concerning since they’ll be getting assembled short blocks. If the techs had to clearance and install bearings and whatnot, I’d be scared. But most dealer heavy techs can install a cylinder head and hook up a bunch connectors without much issue.
“I want a factory robot assembling as much of my engine as possible. They’re not lazy, they don’t cut corners, they’ve done it thousands of times, and they’re never hung over.”
Humans do most of this in the plant as it is. There’s specialized machinery and tools in place to help the people doing the assembly do it in a fast and uniform way, but an experienced tech will be able to do the same.
“most dealer heavy techs can install a cylinder head and hook up a bunch connectors without much issue”
Yeah, hope so, and I guess we’ll see.
I’m not holding my breath- see my comment about dealer techs (yes, it was a Honda guy, not Jiffy Lube, who F’ed up doing my oil change).
Yeah, I’m with you.
Obviously robots aren’t perfect, but I trust them more than a dealer tech. Sure there are good dealer techs, but I’ve had too many things screwed up at a dealer. They might fix one thing and break another.
I’ve known plenty of mechanics who have installed cylinder heads while still legally intoxicated.
New shortblock, ugggh. I had a 2013 Subaru Impreza that liked to drink oil and the remedy was a new shortblock. I left it alone, then traded it away. I really don’t like idea of a dealership tearing down a brand new engine and putting it back together. I’d rather the factory do that. +1 on just putting a new engine in. And I was THIS close to getting an Accord Sport. Man, I would’ve been so pissed, getting rid of an Impreza that needed a new shortblock only to get a Honda that needed a new shortblock.
Regarding the V6, did Honda ever solve the plug fouling and oil consumption issues? Still might be better off with the 4 if you’ve got a Honda.
Meh. Another snoozemobile failure.
Yeah, not as exciting as a Ferrari spontaneously combusting or even a VW with a bunch of cool lights lit up on the gauge cluster.
How does factory automation using FANUC robotics make a selection of 137 mistakes? Honda is famous for their factory automation. Sounds like someone made a big mistake!
137 engines over 2 years? Could be some sort of software bug with the robotic systems where the calibration is off for the first engine assembled after a reboot or some event like that.
I tend to view recalls as a good thing. It tells me the company recognizes they made a mistake and that they are prepared to act on it. This is way better than not acting and / or not bothering to look for, or even realize there is an error.
2nd thought and one of my favorite quotes, if you aren’t making mistakes you aren’t trying hard enough!!!
You know, I’ve seen some tuner cars with exposed geartrain, and I always think “how is that in any way safe or reliable?” Especially with what seems to be a rubber timing belt.
Back in my Detroit days, I worked for a company that made DC electric tooling (think Atlas or CP) likely similar to the one that could potentially be responsible for an error like this. We even had some systems in the Marysville plant. It could have happened for a number of reasons; a defective spindle, somebody programmed the system incorrectly, whomever was supposed to be monitoring that system was asleep at the wheel so to speak.
All I know is I won’t ever buy a Honda! That comment was tongue in-cheek, I wouldn’t buy one to begin with. At least they’re doing the right thing by the customers.
Not the first time this has happened to Honda. The first 1800 or so 500 Interceptor motorcycles had out of spec main bearings, nearly every magazine test bike spun its bearings. Honda replaced all the motors, very few bikes made it into customer hands. But that was in the mid 1980s.
The dealerships got 36 miniatures of time for the motor swap. When they complained, Honda sent them a video of someone doing it in 24 minutes with racks of t handle wrenches (they got 12 min of set up and clean up time).
If the torqueing issue was a blatant procedural or process violation then the employee should be fired. We have the same in the aviation industry.
You will find most violations are committed by a more senior person who considers his/her skillsets and knowledge better than others.
With time constraints on employees’ for productivity they may have been pressured to perform at too high a level. If the supervisor and manager/engineer erred they should be removed.
You can also trace violation and errors to the top of the management structure. High level managers are responsible for dollars, ie, profit and saving resources.
At time managers are similar to a person on the floor who commits a violation of processes and procedures. So, to accommodate the managers wishes “work arounds” are created by the lower skilled line workers and supervisors, etc to meet productivity requirements.
There are maintenance or production errors which aren’t a violations, just unforeseen problems could of arose.
I’d bet some form of Occurrence/Incident inquiry will be initiated. The problem with these types of inquiries is the managers can orchestrate and re-direct responsibility in a disproportionate way, especially if they are the ones who have f#cked up.
It’s a big call to say some had inadequate training. Training this day and age in any modern economy is quite adequate.
An independent person should conduct any inquiry.
I’m don’t entirely buy your management cover up theory. Having been part of the Pharma-compliance dog-and-pony show, I know managers DO skate on certain things. But when there’s a lot of $$$ (or bad publicity) at stake, some ONE in management is held accountable.
Now ‘accountable’ does not necessarily mean firing. I’m guessing the action taken would be a function of the manager’s performance history, how ‘obvious’ the incident was, how the manager communicated when the incident became known, and probably 3 other metrics known only to Honda.
@ihatetrees,
I didn’t state ALL situations end up that way. But there is a culture among higher level managers.
Look at it this way. Look at all of the recall cover-ups. Did the truth really come out of the investigations. How much do managers at the top know? Is blame meted out fairly, or are there scape goats?
Any large institution works similarly as each other.
1. The institution is protected first, ie, the name. In this case Honda has no choice but to act.
2. The chain of command is next protected. I’m not stating the degree of protection as it can vary from each institutions culture.
3. The instigator of a breach, incident, occurrence, etc is the last to be protected along with the victims.
This is a sad fact. Individually or even within sections or departments within an institution cultures varies and differing views are found.
Institutionalised organisations are political, very political. If you are batting for the correct team you can be moved up the chain quicker.
This is a fact of life.
Seems that Honda found itself in a position where they couldn’t write off a failure with “customer abuse” as the cause or the arrogant attitude of “Honda’s are perfect – not our problem” line. My experience with them is they don’t admit things like this about their products unless there is absolutely no way to wiggle around an issue. Please pardon my schadenfreude.
My experience has been the exact opposite. They are more likely to admit that there is a problem, and correct it, than other manufacturers. Particularly the European manufacturers.