Honda cars less dependable than Toyotas?

Page 1 of 4  
At least according to the latest dependability study by J. D.Powers and Associates. Porsche, Ford's Lincoln and GM's Buick earned the top 3 spots, respectively. Toyota and its Lexus is 4th. Honda follows Toyota
in the list.
<http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?Feed=OBR&Date 100318&ID282915&Symbol=F>
I have a hard time believing that Honda is less dependable than Toyota, even before all this Toyota fiasco happened.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And you couldn't convince me, even with a big fat check, that Honda is less dependable than ANYTHING from Ford or GM.
--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
This survey only looks at the first 3 years of ownership. I think the second and third 3 years are more indicative of reliability.
-RC
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RC wrote:

Get back to me when those cars are at least 5 years old, and have higher miles on them. That's how I measure how reliable they are.
I will never buy GM, Ford or Crapsler. The only makes I would consider are Honda, Toyota and, believe it or not, Hyundai.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 16:38:28 -0400, Eternal Searcher

Primarily I agree these would be my main choices as well. Should I want to spend a tad more, I might include Infiniti and not sure about Lexus.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm not sure I would include Ford in that list since Alan Mulally took over there as CEO. He was a big believer of Toyota production methods and quality control when he was the head of Boeing's commercial airlines division. He implemented those methods there before leaving for Ford and that made a lot of difference at Boeing. I expect the same thing at Ford. Of course it takes some time before the old Ford culture changes accordingly.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Cameo wrote:

I know some Fords are supposedly scoring high in reliability, almost on par with Toyota and Honda. But these models (e.g. Fusion) haven't been around long enough to judge true long-term reliability. Wait a few more years and let's see how they hold up then.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ford is more popular in Europe than in US.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've found a more detailed report on that survey and that indicates long term reliability, after 3 years of ownership. Here is the link:
<http://blog.marketplace.nwsource.com/nwautos/2010/03/porsche_and_cadillac_tops_in_dependability_study_ford_debuts_new_police_car.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Joe wrote:

We are in 100% agreement. They can release these reports forever, but when it comes time for a new car, anyone in my family will be buying another Japanese vehicle.
This is based on bad personal experiences with Fords and GM's in the past, and no desire to be a test rat for another expensive domestic car purchase.
Pat
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/23/2010 8:00 AM, pws wrote:

But, but, but, but... That was the OLD GM. Think how much better it will be now that it's government owned. What could possibly go wrong? Watch for the recalls to drop dramatically on GM products.<g>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/23/10 09:37, Dddudley wrote:

It's not gov't managed.

Do you believe in Father Christmas, free markets, the withering away of the state, etc.?
:)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?Feed=OBR&Date 100318&ID282915&Symbol=F>

Most modern cars are very reliable. The differences among most major brands is in the noise range. The cars are so close that the top dozen or so are probably in a statistical dead heat. I believe that how you take care of one of the cars in the upper two thirds of the range has more to do with depndability than the actual choice of a car.
If you don't count the cars my younger son has abused into failure, I can only remember a few failures of any note of any car I've owned or people close to me have owned in the last seven years - my Sister's Honda needed a muffler, the coil pack failed on s Saturn and the power window failed (under warranty) on my Expedition. Again, leaving out my son who can destroy anything out of the discussion and not including the German cars owned by the SO's children, we've not spent $200 on car repairs among all of us (5 adults) in the last seven years. My younger son, the destroyer, has taken out one clutch and one engine (an beater up Firebird), one horn/air bag and one CVT transission (warranty - Saturn Vue), one automatic transission (14 year old F150 - $600 repair). Amazingly he has not been able to destroy a Mustang - well except for the parts he has replaced with "performance" junk destined to destroy the car eventually (horrid exhaut, K&N dirt charger, huge tires and wheels, illegal tint, "performance" chip, etc.). It must be the most indestructible car made. I keep expecting him to come home with it in pieces on a rollback.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
C. E. White wrote:

I also used to be a car destroyer, (those Mustang "upgrades" sound very familiar, just on a Datsun 280Z instead), but I wouldn't necessarily hold the 14 year old Ford transmission failure against your son, as that is not that unusual a lifespan for a Ford tranny, imho, especially if it was used a lot.
My previous 1990 Thunderbird SC was on the third transmission at just over 100K miles when I dumped the car, but one replacement transmission gave out almost immediately after it was installed.
Pat
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It was in a 14 year old farm truck that had led a relatively stressful life. However, I do blame my Son becasue he was playing truck pull with it. I had given him the truck, so I guess I can't be too mad. It turned out the failure was minor. The person who bought the truck paid $600 to have it fixed and is very happy. He is a meter reader and uses the truck daly. I sort of wish I had kept it now, but it was old and I didn't feel like rolling the dice on the transmission. However, I don't think Ford transmission are particularly failure prone. My parents, grandparents and various family memebers have owned many Fords and that was only the third transmission failure ever in the family (out of something like 34 Ford among various family memebers). And one of those other failures was a 1967 Fairlane I drove into a pond (not that submerging the transmission casued it to fail....but it did stop shigfting out of second the next day).
Your mentioning the Datsun 280Z brought back my memories of the nightmare problems I had with the clutch/transmission on the one of those I owned. It never exactly failed, but it never exactly worked right either. I loved the car, but the clutch/transmission problems were a constant source of irritation. I replaced the clutch, clutch master cylinder, pilot bushing, clutch slave cylinder, etc. bt never solved all the problems. I sold the 280Z to a friend and he eventually got the problem mostly sorted out (by replacing all the clutch componets fromt the clutch master cylinder to the transmission input shaft).

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

Had a 75 280Z, the 1st yr with fuel injection. Never had a lick of problems, except for a thermotime switch at about 15k miles which made it run rich like a stuck choke. A friend with a 76 model had the same experience.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
tww1491 wrote:

I had the last model of 280Z before they switched to the 280ZX. I never had a problem with the thermotime switch, though on both my 1976 and 1978 model 280Z there were U-joint failures.
Pat
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

joints given the IRS system used which was quite different from the ZX.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

My 280Z was a 1975 also, a very early 1975. It was recalled once for a fuel injection problem. I had to modify the car to kill off the "feature" that prevented the engine from dropping back towards idle properly while shifting. I had continual problems with the clutch / transmission (as previously noted). About once a month a wheel cover would go flying off into the weeds when I was going around a corner (I usually could find them). When the wheel covers weren't flying off, they "ticked." After the car was out of warranty it developed a stalling problem. The dealer tried to charge me for a fuel pump until I expalined to them I had already verified it wasn't the fuel pump...then they mysteriously figured out it was a loose connection under the dash. After three months in Michigan the car started rusting around the rear fenders. If you let the fuel level drop below about 1/4 tank the car would miss going around curves (apparently it would pick up air). The seat material was not durable. The power antenna had to be replaced. After I sold the car to a friend, he had the exhaust system collaspe internally (killed the power / mileage). I never had a problem with my actual fuel tank, although I heard later models with plastic fuel tanks did have problems.
Compared to most cars I owned around the same era, it was not a model of reliability. It was also a horrible autocross car. It was significantly slower than the Ford Fairmont I replaced it with (which BTW, I ended up hating). Despite all this, I loved the 280Z. It was one of the best looking cars of the last 50 years and was a terrific bargin. It was the most comfortable Japanese car I ever owned. Within months of selling it and buying a "sensible" sedan to replace it, I wished I had kept the Z. Oh well..it was not the last time I made a bad car buying decision.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Now *that's* lateral g's <g>!

One reason they don't use standard gas tanks in race cars. The other of course is to stop from the fuel pooling and catching fire and burning the driver to death, like what almost happened to Niki Lauda at the 'ring.

Nothing would be - in a straight line, but on a track (road *not* oval) the Fairmont wouldn't stand a chance.
--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

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.