Re: Toyota drags down new-vehicle quality average; Ford leads Detroit 3 gains, J.D. Power says

The problems that may show up early on are the best indicator of overall build quality, but the fact remains ALL vehicles fall within the 2% failure range for ALL manufactured products, that is why they all have a warranty, even Rolls Royce. Differences of 1% are meaningless. EVERY manufacturer is making great cars today. The only REAL difference among them is style and price.

My advise, when people ask for my advise because of my experience in building, selling, and servicing vehicles, is to test drive those three or more that best suits your needs, then get a total DRIVE HOME PRICE including selling price, dealer add-ons and financing costs, if you must finance, from at least TWO dealers of the top two or three models you choose then buy your vehicle from the dealer nearest you home that gives you the best price and has the lowest shop rate.

It never made sense to me when I was in retail, why some people are willing to pay 20% to 30% more for some of our brands because they thought they were "better." Thinking you will not get one of the 2%, is foolish at best. The odds are far greater that you will get one of the 98% that are trouble free.

Personally, I run two cars (trade or sell the one that is two years old) and get a new vehicle every year. I Email a list of what I want in the vehicle, to the Group or Fleet Sales Manager(s) at numerous dealerships for a bid price. Then I visit the dealerships that give me a price, closest to what I know I should be paying for the car as equipped, and get a total drive home price if I end up trading my car.

I've never put a lot of faith in any of these surveys. The JD Powers > initial quality survey is just that - how good a new car is. They are all > good...well almost. It is probably better than the crap Consumer Reports > prints, but only marginally. > > The whole range is between about 1 problem per car and less that 2 > problems.....I suspect the survey accuracy is probably =/- 1 problem..... > > In a year things are likely to be completely different... > > BTW, here is the list: > > 2010 IQS Nameplate Ranking > Problems per 100 vehicles > Porsche 83 > Acura 86 > Mercedes-Benz 87 > Lexus 88 > Ford 93 > Honda 95 > Hyundai 102 > Lincoln 106 > Infiniti 107 > Volvo 109 > Industry Average 109 > Ram 110 > Audi 111 > Cadillac 111 > Chevrolet 111 > Nissan 111 > BMW 113 > Mercury 113 > Buick 114 > Mazda 114 > Scion 114 > Toyota 117 > Subaru 121 > Chrysler 122 > Suzuki 122 > GMC 126 > Kia 126 > Jeep 129 > Dodge 130 > Jaguar 130 > Mini 133 > Volkswagen 135 > Mitsubishi 146 > Land Rover 170 > > Read more: >

formatting link

> Toyota drags down new-vehicle quality average; Ford leads Detroit 3 >> gains, J.D. Power says >> David Phillips >> Automotive News -- June 17, 2010 - 12:01 am ET >> UPDATED: 6/17/10 2:36 p.m. ET >> >> DETROIT -- Dragged down by Toyota Motor Corp., the quality of new cars >> and trucks sold in the United States slipped slightly this year -- the >> first time since 2007, according to a study released today. >> >> But Detroit's automakers -- helped by Ford Motor Co. and some of the >> smoothest new-model launches ever -- have matched or surpassed Asian and >> European rivals in initial vehicle quality for the first time, based on >> the closely watched J.D. Power and Associates survey. >> >> For the 2010 model year, General Motors Co., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler >> Group averaged 108 problems per 100 vehicles, compared with 109 problems >> for every 100 Asian and European vehicles, J.D. Power announced at an >> Automotive Press Association luncheon here today. >> >> Models such as the Ford Focus, Ford Fusion, Ram pickup and Buick Enclave >> helped drive Detroit's gains for 2010, the market research firm said. >> >> Among segments, J.D. Power said domestic brands lead rivals in cars and >> pickups, while foreign brands lead in crossovers, SUVs and vans. >> >> Ford -- with 12 models ranked among the top three in their respective >> segments -- was largely responsible for Detroit's showing in the latest >> survey. The Ford brand, with less than one problem per new model, jumped >> from eighth place in 2009 to fifth this year -- its best showing ever. >> Ford is the highest-ranked nonluxury brand in the survey as well. >> >> Overall, GM's initial quality slipped, with all four brands below the >> industry average, though the automaker had 10 models ranked in the top >> three of their respective segments. Buick, with 114 problems per 100 >> models, was the only GM brand to improve in the survey. J.D. Power said >> GM was hurt by the launch of several new models such as the Cadillac SRX, >> Buick LaCrosse, and Chevrolet Equinox and Camaro. >> >> Chrysler's four brands all improved but still fell below the industry >> average, although the new Ram truck brand scored just below the industry >> average. >> >> Industry slips >> >> Overall for 2010, new-vehicle quality slipped industrywide to 109 >> problems per 100 models from 108 in 2009. The results are based on a J.D. >> Power survey of 82,000 new-vehicle buyers after 90 days of ownership. >> >> A big reason for the slight drop in industry quality was Toyota Motor >> Corp.'s Toyota brand, which slipped below the industry average for the >> first time, to 21st place, with 117 problems reported per 100 models. >> >> The publicity surrounding sudden acceleration in several Toyota models >> was top-of-mind for many new owners of the brand's vehicles, J.D. Power >> said. >> >> "Clearly, Toyota has endured a difficult year," said Dave Sargent, vice >> president of global vehicle research at J.D. Power. >> >> Overall, Japanese brands averaged 108 problems per 100 models surveyed, a >> tie with U.S. domestic brands. South Korean brands averaged 111 problems >> and Europeans 114 problems. >> >> BMW's Mini was the most improved brand, and the Ford Explorer Sport Trac >> was the most improved model. Overall, 18 brands improved and 15 brands >> declined in the survey. >> >> Detroit showing >> >> For Detroit automakers, the results contrast sharply with a year ago, >> when the bankruptcies of GM and Chrysler underscored longtime consumer >> perceptions about the quality of domestic brands. >> >> "This year may mark a key turning point for U.S. brands as they continue >> to fight the battle against lingering negative perceptions of their >> quality," said Sargent. "Achieving quality comparability is the first >> half of the battle. Convincing consumers -- particularly import buyers -- >> that they have done this is the second half." >> >> The quality of new or revamped models continued to improve in 2010, led >> by product launches from Ford, Honda, Lexus, Mercedes-Benz and Porsche. >> In the past, new models, on average, experienced substantially more >> quality problems than carryover models. >> >> But in its latest survey, J.D. Power said more than a half of all models >> launched during the 2010 model year performed better than their >> respective segment averages. >> >> At the same time, the initial quality of carryover and refreshed models >> fell in 2010. >> >> At the top >> >> Porsche AG, which launched the four-door Panamera, was the top-ranked >> brand, with 83 problems per 100 models surveyed. It was followed by >> Acura, Mercedes-Benz, Lexus and Ford. Honda, Hyundai, Lincoln, Infiniti >> and Volvo also finished above the industry average. >> >> Last year, Lexus topped the survey with 84 problems per 100 models. >> Porsche and Lexus have led the survey for the past six years. >> >> At the bottom of the survey, with 170 problems per 100 models, was Land >> Rover. Mitsubishi, Volkswagen, Mini, Jaguar and Dodge also placed near >> the bottom. >> >> Sargent said the industry has nailed "the oily parts" of the car and >> truck, with engine, transmission and chassis problems all but extinct. >> But new technologies such as Bluetooth, navigation and cameras continue >> to stymie automakers and consumers. >> >> "The industry is still struggling to seamlessly integrate these features >> in a way that does not frustrate consumers," Sargent said. "It can be >> anything from a voice recognition system that fails to recognize commands >> or a bad sensor that monitors tire pressure." >> >> >> Read more: >>
formatting link
> > >
Reply to
Mike Hunter
Loading thread data ...

Bull. Not ALL manufactured products have a "2% failure range." If I am incorrect, prove it.

If every manufactured product had a 2% failure range, then the space shuttle would never have gotten off the ground, because it is made from hundreds of thousands of components. Buildings would be falling down all the time, because girders would be breaking during construction.

If you were correct, then the average number of defects would be about 2 per 100 cars, not 100 to 200 per 100 cars, as it is.

This has been pointed out to you in the past. And you still don't understand that 100 problems per 100 vehicles is a not a 2% failure rate.

Maybe they all make some good cars, but not all cars are great.

Really?

Gee buying something better for 20% or 30% more is a good idea, if it is better. I paid a lot more for my Apples than I would have for HP's or Dells, but I got better computers. I definitely got a better buy with more more expensive Apple than had I bought a cheaper HP or Dell.

What 2%? Just about all cars have defects, with defects around 100 per

100 vehicles.

You didn't know what you were talking about before.

And you don't know what you're talking about now.

Really? Very few cars are totally trouble free. The average number of defects per car is about one defecte per car (108 defects per 100 cars).

formatting link

Good for you.

Reply to
dr_jeff

I hate to be the rammer police but since you made the same mistake twice in one line... 'Advise' is a verb. 'Advice' is a noun.

Not to mention that Mike is a big fan of trading in cars every couple years. Depreciation is more important than initial price when you do that. Of course it is stupid to trade in cars that frequently but if you are going to do that, you better pick ones with good resale value. Generally that would be a Honda or Toyota.

Reply to
Gordon McGrew

NO! You made the claim - ergo you provide the evidence to support your rebuttal

Comparing the space shuttle and buildings to automobiles is apples and oranges therefore, a worthless comparison.

How very true. Not all cars are even moderately acceptable

This is an opinion not a proven nor proveable fact.

And you do?!!!!!!!! Since when? That would be a major change!!! DaveD

Reply to
Dave D

Did you notice I did? There is a failure rate of 108 per 100 cars or

108% failure rate.

Not when the OP said that *ALL* manufactured good have a 2% failure rate.

Correct. Except that because I work better with my Apple than a Dell, it is a lot of money that is well spent.

Reply to
dr_jeff

That is 2% for the total system. Richard Feynman predicted that the space shuttle would have that sort of failure. He was proved correct when they have crashed in about 1 in 50 missions.

Reply to
Ray

Look at how many missions were delayed because of problems with the computers, motors, fuel leaks, etc. It is far higher than 2% of the missions.

Jeff

Reply to
dr_jeff

A 2% failure rate would be the death of most all medical devices. Even a 2% complaint rate could lead to a recall (not every complaint is a failure, but all need to be investigated and probable root cause established).

That would be a better computer for you, probably not a better computer for me (even though I prefer them).

I've had one that I know of that was taken care of by the tranny recall. Of course, some may a different perception of what a defect is.......they all get counted, even the phantom defects.

Yes....I usually pay cash and drive it until the wheels fall off....(figuratively speaking).

Reply to
Stewart

dr_jeff wrote in news:JdSdnYHLZ_m52obRnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:

your math is pathetic. that is a little over one per car, which is just over 1% KB

Reply to
Kevin Bottorff

???????......over one defect per car is over 100% if each car is counted as one unit.

Reply to
Stewart

Per cent means per hundred (cent = 100).

One per car is 100%. 1 out of 100 is 1%.

My math is right on.

formatting link

Reply to
dr_jeff

Exactly. 2% was the catastrophic failure rate. And that was 2% of all missions, not 2% of all shuttles. Fully 40% of the shuttles were lost.

Reply to
Gordon McGrew

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.