Sports Sedan

Page 2 of 3  


Are you sure? I thought they got Ford Pintos and were made to have rear end collisions!
nospam
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've had a Chevy, and I now have a BMW. Your post looks a lot like a troll to me.
Mark Folsom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
rofl.... ah, thats hilarious. 'chevy quality.....' dude, you need an HBO special.
ted neon wrote:

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

Dude, you need to read JD Power -- the Malibu has topped the quality charts for the last several years.
Matt O.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
from a hole in the ground when it comes to mechanical engineering quality. So as long as the *think* they got a great deal on their latest japmobile they are in heaven.
In the future, try not to drag out JD Powers as proof of anything important.
-Fred W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
from a hole in the ground when it

For reasons I won't mention here (unless he wants me to), I think Matt knows better. Otherwise, your response is the same as mine would be. The JD Power survey of *initial* customer satisfaction asks people who *bought them* if they're satisfied with their cars. Well, *duh*!
Your average GM customer seems to me to be a helluva lot more tolerant of crappy quality than some of the typical Audi/BMW/Benz/(fill-in-high-buck-car-here) whiners we see here. Not that that's a good or bad thing, but it *does* skew the results. A Chevy buyer will normally be satisfied if the dealership promptly fixes things while a significant percentage of A-B-B-? buyers expect their cars to be perfect and tolerate no less before complaining about it - especially to JD Power.
In addition, damn few of them have ever actually bothered to *compare* the different makes or they'd instantly realize (as I did when I sat down in a 600-mile brand new Cavalier rental last year) that there are *other* things in a car that constitute 'quality' than simply getting one dependably from one place to another. *Comfort*, for one. *Performance* for another. A couple of good reasons I'll buy BMWs old enough to have their own driver's licenses. ;^) -- C.R. Krieger (More rust than that)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
from a hole in the ground whenit

JD offers multiple surveys, only one of them is the initial quallity survey. They also have a dependability survey and GM does rather well there as well.
I do not work for JD (nor have I ever worked with them), but as someone that works in the data analysis industry, they are respected and their survey methods are scientific and proper. I have noticed that whenever someone is unhappy about the results of their "favorite" in a survey Mark Twain's "lies" quote (or a variation thereoff) comes out.
Before someone gets too excited, I do not own a GM vehicle, the closest I ever got to one was when I had a GM engine in an AMC Jeep. Like it or not, GM has consistently got good results in JD and other surveys - I would argue that this is proof enough that their build quality is competitive in the industry and not the joke people try to make.
IIRC, when Japanese cars got the good results in the 70's and 80's - the same attitude was relevant against their quality because of previous results. I guess that there is always a lag between quality and percieved quality.

Unless you can provide a scientific study that proves this, it is nothing more than a theory. I would argue that the percieved value for purchase price might skew the results somewhat, but scientific surveys that use proven statistical tools always provide a margin of error and a degree of confidence in the results. From what I have seen about the JD dependability surveys, they are using the same standards used in the industry for non critical applications.
Ron.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There is nothing "scientific" about these surveys. They are merely surveys with no control group. No hypothesis. Nothing suggesting a scientific method.

Yes they are. They are all equally flawed.
-Fred W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It is a survey conducted using a proper SRS. What do you need a control group for if you have no motive to prove a theorem (or hypothesis)? Once you take a large enough sample you can use scientific methods to create a confidence interval. Hypothesis testing is just one use for the statistical methods used in surveys like these.
Anyway, how are you going to have a control group? Sell people placebo cars that just look like a BMW but are actually a Hyundai under the skin?
Since the same formulas and survey methods are used for the creation of the confidence intervals as what would have been used in a hypothesis testing, I fail to see how one is more scientific than the other.
Ron.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You are pointing out the differences between statistics and science. Statistics do not *scientifically* prove or disprove anything. That is my point. Not that what they say is or is not valid, but that it is not *scientific*.
-Fred
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Statistics use science (math) in order to predict population parameters based on a sample with confidence levels and margins of errors (that's the science part of it). If a survey is done using true SRS with large enough sample sizes, we can say that we are presenting statistical data analyzed and collected scientifically from it. That's all I mean by that.
They do not provide a e=mc^2 kind of proof, but than the world we live in is too complicated to reduce into simple linear equations - and statistics (when properly interpreted, but this is an entirely different issue) can provide us with very accurate prediction of the real population parameters. All I saying is that from my understanding, JD follows the required procedures in order to present information that is not biased, and thus (as the science tells us) is a good indication of the true situation.
Before we get into sematics of language - my original post was that slamming JDPower as a mere marketing organization that provides useless information is far from the truth as I see it.
FWIW - We know from Quatum Mechanics that even e=mc^2 breaks down in certain situations - so there is no true scientific "silver bullet" out there.
Ron.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 17:27:44 +0000, Ron Loewy wrote:

Anyone who even tries to claim science can prove anything is idiot.
[the kind of idiot that would buy an Audi... ;o) ]
--
Levi Ramsey
snipped-for-privacy@cygnetnet.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"in any axiomatic mathematical system there are propositions that cannot be proved or disproved within the axioms of the system" - Kurt Godel.
Ron.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Paging Douglas Hofstadter to the thread :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What does the above sentence mean? I don't get it.

Don't have one, personally, but if the standard for idiocy is so low, I'm sure I can qualify in some other way. ...or was that an Audi "insider" joke?
-Fred W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I never said it was *totally* useless. Just *marginally* useless. Marketing analysts simply want to predict what people *will* want and dammit, *I* am just not that predictable! You can pretty much tell where one of a flock of *sheep* will end up, but that doesn't apply to real Car Guys (TM).
There is no way that J.D. Power or any marketing organization can provide any meaningful input to an enthusiast that will tell me, for example, whether I'll be happier or feel more at home in a 2002 Jaguar X-Type or in a 1988 BMW 535is or in a 2003 Chevy Cavalier. Anybody want to hazard some guesses as to the "C.R. Krieger Satisfaction Rating" of those three? Those who know me well from my years here will have no problems ... -- C.R. Krieger (Been there; done that)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Lessee... 1) 535is 2) Jag ... ... ... 145) Cavalier
Close?
-Fred W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Statistical data about non-critical applications (like this) is useful to help you make a decision. If you have a couple of cars that appeal the same to you from a driving dynamic pov, for example - it is nice to know which one is more likely to be reliable and provide more usage enjoyment. But here we are getting into the "interpration" issue I mentioned before.

That's not their goal and anyone that approaches this data this way has no idea what it means.
Having said that - there is no way that anyone can predict what you will like more other than you - including enthusiast media, your buddies at the local car club, people on this board or even your significant other - but we all have practical limits to the amount of time and money we can devote to our decisions and have to use other sources of information in order to help us make a decision. If you take it in this grain - it is a very useful source of information.
Ron.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ted neon wrote:

S4 - not sporty enough. I'd suggest an older mint condition used S70R. 540i - get a M3 instead. No brainer. A6 - *try* to get any work on the engine without removing it. This killed it on my list. The E430 - too pricey.
Want real sporty? The IS300 and M3 are pretty much it. Inline 6, RWD, and manual(real with a clutch and linkage - no computers) transmission.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You must be first one to say S4 is not sporty. In my eyes, S70 is a family car with some muscles, but S4 beats it back-and-forth with standard four wheel drive and plenty of horse power. Some say it is even faster than M3.
BR:Z
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.