Aren't the tires covered separately by the tire manufacturer? I mean when you buy the car, the manuals include a separate tire warranty by the manufacturer for so and so miles/years.

At 5,000 miles you should not have issues.

There is so much crap in the road you could hit in 5000 miles it is not funny. You could have hit something and not even have known it.

My Hondas have had Xenon lights which amplify road hazards with intense light even at night. The NSX (top of the line Honda) also had required ridiculous premature tire replacements initially as well. My TL tires were quite expensive and required vigilance when driving. I would have all tires thoroughly inspected and have replaced if its not from an obvious road hazard. Sorry even if you feel Honda is immune from issues I have often found otherwise.

Okay go out and buy a Ford Focus if you are so Pissed about your TL and its tires.! I am sure you'll be pleased with its best in class quality and reputation. Maybe you should check out the Cobalt. I hear it is a "premium" compact.

I totally disagree with the last comment, it has nothing to do with location of assembly. Honda and other Japanese makes are terrible over rated. When I had a Datsun japanese cars were not considered as the best cars, and nobody was surprised. I own an Accord EX-L 2003 and it has also had quality problems like exterior trim falling off, the radio screen going blank and 90% worn out brakes after just a year. I will not be getting another Honda, next time I will try out a domestic car, I will get a good financing deal and I have seen some new Fords, they look really good and the parts are cheap if it breaks.

There could be some basis in my opinion that the reliability of the imports made in America (and there are many) have had more problems than I have noticed in the past. I have been buying imports since the seventies. I had very few problems when they were made in Japan. I have had Toyotas cars/trucks and Hondas from that time that I actually did not maintain as well as I should except I always kept the oil and filters changed. I had some that actually never had to have any warranty work done at all. Lately and being older I take better care of them and yet they have been back a lot more than necessary. And for major work. It would be interesting to see a manufacturer such as Honda or Toyota do a reliability comparison on themselves... comparing % of warranty repairs on a late model to the exact model built 15-20 years ago. Consumer Reports has done this for years anyway. I still look at that as well. I would rather own an older low mileage Civic, Accord than a new one long term.

No, it is where they are built. I owned 3 Civics: a 1988 Civic DX, 1989 Civic Si, 1993 Civic Si. The first two were bulletproof in their reliability (the 89 Si going to 98,000 miles with few problems). The 93, the only one built in America, had so many problems I should have lemon lawed it. Eight times to the dealer for the same problem is NOT reliable.

It is known that better quality controls are used in Japan, thus resulting in a better vehicle. A US-made vehicle typically will not last as long as a Japanese-made.