GM is missing the point again

Page 1 of 2  
The Autobeat http://snipr.com/1n8lb
..General Motors and Chrysler tumbled down the list in J.D. Power and Associates annual Initial Quality Study. The study measures problems
found in the first 90 days of ownership after interviewing 97,000 consumers.
GM did poorly and a company spokesman argued that the survey doesnt matter. All of GMs brands finished below the industry average, which is 125 problems per 100 vehicles...
The reason it doesnt matter, says the spokesman, is that the difference between top performers and the middle of the pack is statistically irrelevant. Toyota, which tied Jaguar for sixth with 112 problems per 100 vehicles, beat Chevy by just 17 problems per 100 cars. He makes a point. Few consumers will notice 17 problems per 100 vehicles. The Power study, he told me, is becoming less and less relevant because quality is reaching parity.
There's some truth to that. But the argument naively misses a huge point. While some brands like Mercedes moved way up the charts this year and others, like Chrysler, tumbled way down, hot names like Honda and Toyota are in the top 10 every year. Every year!
Consumers love and trust those brands. And those companies have been dining on Motowns market share for decades now. Sure, Detroit is close, by the numbers anyway. But consumers wont believe that Detroit is as good as Honda and Toyota until they beat them and beat them consistently in J.D. Power surveys, Consumer Reports studies, word-of- mouth recommendations and just general buzz. Im sorry, why should a guy whos on his third Toyota or Honda buy a Chevy? Because the initial quality is almost as good and the disparity is statistically minuscule? Theres a great sales pitch... =========Rising Sun: http://snipr.com/eat_me_jarhead
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The fact is most ALL of the vehicle manufacturers fall within the statistical average of 2%, which is the average number of faults for ALL manufactured products. Naturally one will be on top and one will be on the bottom in ANY list but a variation of .05% to 1% is in indeed meaningless.
What the customers should be more concerned about is the total cost to drive the vehicle home, dealer service, shop rates for that service, insurance, and parts costs, not whose brand in on the grill.
mike

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

That is why the best vehicle, a Lincoln, had 37 problems per 100 vehicles.
I guess 98% of the vehicles have no problems, but 2% of the vehicles have at 17 problems, on average.
> Naturally one will be on top and one will be on the

What's meaningless is your 2% statistic. The average was 125 problem per 100 vehicles. How that works to 2% is beyound me.

Including the cost of taking those cars, with average 1.25 problems per car, back to the dealer.
Jeff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It is quite obvious that it is beyound you LOL
mike

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 13:39:41 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
It is obviously beyond you as well since you can't explain it.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 17:27:00 -0400, Mike Hunter wrote:

Valid point. It is - after all - the total time behind the wheel that matters.
Oh, and Mike - *PLEASE* stop top posting. It is very annoying.
--
k
www.perfectreign.com

making the impossible happen
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike, I agree, that's why you should try a cost to own comparison on edmonds.com. They compare on a 4 year basis, Maintenance, think repairs before and after 90 days, more like about the time the warranty ends, Resale Value (you know about that one Mike ), and yes original sale price and regular maintenance. Try for example comparing Camry, Accord, Malibu, and any other comparible domestics, and see what you come up with.
Most people don't own their only cars 90 days. I had a 92 Saturn SL2 that rated high in JD Powers and it was a terrible car. Three brake jobs before the warranty ran out (obviously my fault per the dealer). Used non-GM brakes after the warranty and never replaced them again up to 73k miles. Alternator died at 37k, dealer said can't help, rarely happens, parts guy said they fail all the time, hmmmm. Rattles, loose trim parts, noisy engine, bad body panels. Real quality car for the first 90 days, after that, well, downhill from there. In the end, trade in value was horrible too. The folks at saturn basically said too bad, so I say too bad when I don't consider them in the future.
Can't say that for my 3 Toyotas and my wife's 2 Hondas.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 8 Jun 2007 17:27:00 -0400, "Mike Hunter"

What is meaningless is your 2% number. 2% of what? 2% of all transmissions fail every day? 2% of cars will need a repair if driven 300,000 miles?
If you keep cars for two years (like you do) and have connections in the industry and/or enough money that you don't care about resale value, then it may not matter. For people who want to drive a car for 5 - 10 years and don't want to be making monthly trips to the garage, it makes a difference.

Economical car ownership is most dependent on avoiding depreciation costs and finance charges. High-quality, durable and reliable cars are best for this.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Can't prove it by me. Of all the cars I have owned, only two were problematic over time, a '51 Chevy and a '97 Lexus. Although I do not keep my cars ten years most of them have gone to relatives and friends, some of whom keep then even longer than ten years. If one does the proper preventive maintenance any brand today will run to 200K or more.
I also own a '41, '64, '71, and a '83 domestics. All but the '41, where purchased new and currently have from 100K to 300K on the clock and they all look and run just fine.
Since I was in the fleet service business I have learned to do what corporate fleet mangers do. I look at the total cost over time to acquire, insure, maintain, repair and replace my vehicles. That is the reason why I no longer buy imports
mike

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

For you so say that, the '97 Lexus must have been a lemon. In my case, it would take a really good deal to get me back into a Big Three car. My three Toyotas (and my daughter's Matrix) have made me realize that going to a repair shop with a problem is not necessarily a two-or-three times a year thing, it can become an "every two years, whether it needs anything or not" kind of thing. Now and then, I read the used car ads for amusement, and continually see 3 or 4 year old Cads which the owner states "85K miles, new transmission" and such ads for other American iron. I still like my American car, built in Georgetown, KY with the badge "Avalon" on it. ...And my Japanese Camry, now pushing 138K miles where only the starter, the water pump, timing belt and brake pads have been replaced. And the transmission is still smooth as silk.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm really not trying to start a fight here, or even try to be smart. I've owned 14 GM products over the past 30 years and have been satisfied with all of them;of course, some more than others. Some vehicles I have kept for many many years, others, I sold or traded after a couple of years. One thing has been constant in ALL of the GM cars I have owned is this: I have NEVER owned a GM car that I have had to get rid of because it was mechanically unsound or unreliable. And if I had to replace a starter, water pump,AND timing belt after only 138000 miles, I would probably not continuing to own GM products!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Blah Blah Blah. What does 2% mean?
On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 14:09:23 -0400, "Mike Hunter"

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It is what left after one subtracts 98% from 100%, Blah, Blah, Blah. LOL

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 18:19:47 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
IOW, it has nothing to do with automotive reliability, it is just a number you pulled out of your ass. Thanks for confirming that.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It is there for all to read. in the various survey reports. Apparently you can't see it LOL
mike

\
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 20:17:23 -0400, "Mike Hunter"

IOW, it is just a number you pulled out of your ass. Thanks for confirming that.

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

If God have intended for JD Powers or Consumer Reports to think for you, he wouldn't have given you a brain. All cars built today are pretty much equal, and have been for a long time. Continue to buy your Japanese products, I'll buy my American, which for some reason, does not break down nor get recalled at nearly the rate as these "perfect" Toyotas do. (BTW, is it my opinion, or does EVERY NEW GENERATION Camary look more ugly than the one before it?)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 00:08:28 -0700, coachrose13 wrote:

It's just that some are more equal than others...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 00:08:28 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote:

Neither JD Power not CR constitute thought. They are information, data if you will. Thought is the brain's process for interpreting data.

Just as you shouldn't confuse data with thought, you shouldn't confuse unsupported assertions with data. CR data shows that there are big differences in reliability among the cars on the market.
Unfortunately, CR changed their reporting a couple years ago and it is now harder to determine exactly what the failure rates are. One assumes they are not much different from what they were before the change. Some domestic and German 5-7 year-old cars have 5 or 6 problem areas where failure rates exceed 10% or even 15% per year, not to mention less than stellar rates in the other areas. There are some domestics with reliability records which are not terrible and some are equal to the second tier Japanese manufacturers. 5-7 year-old Toyotas and Hondas seldom have any area with worse than 5% failure rate. and many areas have less than 2% failures. With 14 different systems, and a few years of ownership, this difference really adds up.

Yeah, I continually buy one every eleven or twelve years.

This is what is known as the straw man argument. No one claims that Toyotas or Hondas are perfect.

Yes, it is your opinion. A fact would be that every generation sells better than the one before it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gordon McGrew wrote:

Hmmm. Recall rate... I have an 06 Si. No recalls yet, and not a single service visit. I've never had an American car with that kind of reliabilty. A few oil changes in 20,000 miles, and a tire rotation.
Yep, that damned Japanese reliability just sucks...
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.