Bias Against Domestic Cars

Not so. They have a much more accurate survey questionaire than the CR one.

Where have you seen any published reliability data on RR? They aren't in any published survey I've ever seen.

Wrong, Scion is WAY below industry average in the 2009 JD Power Dependability study!

formatting link
Derek

Reply to
Derek Gee
Loading thread data ...

What do you mean please explain? Can't you read? Look at the '89

4-cylinders for instance. The Ford's have extra black dots (or other lower ratings) the Mazda 626 doesn't. (Cooling, electrical, A/C, clutch, integrity, paint-trim) Why is the Ford version rated worse? They were made in the same plant with the same platform parts.

CR did rate the Mazda auto-trans worse, which is also wrong, being the same unit as the Ford.

Derek

Reply to
Derek Gee

How is the JD Power survey more accurate? Has there been a study on this? It may look better on paper, but it may not better in real life.

Jeff

Reply to
dr_jeff

It could be the expectations of the cars. In addition, a different group of people might be more likely to buy Mazdas than Fords, leading to different responses.

Jeff

Reply to
dr_jeff

Not so.

formatting link
D

Reply to
Derek Gee

From what I've been able to gather about the IQS and VDS surveys, it's a 44 point questionaire with specific questions about stuff like handling, braking, seats, audio systems etc. It's better than just asking which areas did you have a "problem" with and asking the user to check a single box.

Here's some very specific criticism of the CR methodology I recently ran across:

formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
formatting link

Derek

Reply to
Derek Gee

The website is a competitor to CR for car data. How reliable do you think its criticisms are?

Reply to
dr_jeff

Show me. I've gotten the CR survey a couple of times, and it basically asked if I had any problems in the past year in any of the areas listed in their car reliability survey tables. What does JD Powers ask? A Mar. 2004 US News magazine article said they lump too many aspects of the cars together:

"One gripe: In the new car quality survey, a car's basic attributes, gas mileage, and the placement of cup holders, for example, are lumped in with problems like rattles, buzzes, and broken equipment."

And the fact that JD Powers has rated Cadillac and pre-Ford Jaguar high in reliability proves that something's been seriously wrong with their surveys.

RR is pretty famous for bad quality, and I even heard an owner complain about his to my boss. Name a British car that isn't unreliable. And how do you explain Jaguar's high ranking in the Powers' surveys? You know Jaguar, the brand so bad that when Ford took over the company, one of its ads touted a brand-new wiring harness? Then there's the Powers' quality award given to the horrible cable TV company here. Really, you need to demonstrate that Powers has any credibility at all, especially when their sources of revenue are a mystery or could be from the very industries whose products and services they rank.

Wrong, Scion is WAY above industry average in the more trustworthy, non-sellout 2009 Consumer Reports reliability survey:

formatting link
Why shouldn't Scion score high when they have only three models, two of them based on the Toyota Yaris, which is rated high in reliability (Yet Consumer Reports doesn't recommend it because it scores too poorly in performance).

Reply to
larry moe 'n curly

I don't believe subjectivity affects the reliability ratings much because CR also asks owners if they'd buy the same vehicle again, and some vehicles where the owners overwhelmingly answer yes are ranked among the least reliable. IOW the very same people who love their cars admit that their cars have been troublesome, the Chevy Corvette being a prime example.

Reply to
larry moe 'n curly

Can't you read? For some components, the 626 rated worse than the Probe.

Why the difference then? I'm going to blame small survey samples, which tend to lead to wider variations in averages -- notice the * in some spots, indicating insufficient data.

You're not doing a Robert McNamara on statistics, are you? ;)

Reply to
larry moe 'n curly

You need to remember too, the JD Power report is not so much about reliability as "initial quality " - at least that's the report most often referred to. That means what the car was like when first purchased - has little to do with what you had 6 months later. A new Caddy is a sight to behold, and for the first couple weeks you may be "in heaven" - from the experience of several friends, that turns to a minimum of "purgatory" within 6 months.

Reply to
clare

Valid enough. I took a year of statistics in college. The True Delta guy is explaining how he plans to avoid those issues with his site. From what I've seen of his site (because I checked it out after reading those pages), his sample sizes are still too small for my liking.

Derek

Reply to
Derek Gee

I wish I could show you. I've only been able to fill out Power surveys on auto options. I haven't been able to get my hands on a IQS or VDS survey. I've had to rely on other descriptions of them.

I don't remember pre-Ford Jags ever being rated high in reliability anywhere. Do you remember which year you saw this?

I tend to believe the Power survey due to the better methodology, plus I have two first hand owner reports of failures (disabled) of Scion models. Granted, that's only a personal sample of two, but it fits the pattern of the Power data - Scions suck. My guess is that even though it's based on a Yaris, the customization is causing quality problems. That's a truism with automakers, the more options, the more potential for problems.

Derek

Reply to
Derek Gee

Only the auto trans on the year I cited. Looking at some of the other years, the pattern I cited generally holds. Only the Mazda auto-trans seems to get picked on.

Given how widely read and widely responded to that CR survey is, I doubt if small survey samples are the problem, but I don't have access to the raw numbers to prove that.

Derek

Reply to
Derek Gee

How about other products? What CR calls a design defect, I've often called a good feature. Their expectations differ too much from mine to be regarded as meaningful.

Reply to
Ed Pawlowski

The problem with Powers is they rate "initial quality" I happen to own a car rated very high by them for initial quality and they were correct; I was very pleased with it for a while. Just about the time the warranty ran out (at 18 months I had 36000 miles) the car started to deteriorate and has been falling apart ever since. Lots of little things like switches that don't work as well as big things like the transmission. Initial quality does not equal durability.

Reply to
Ed Pawlowski

formatting link
>

Because there's never been even the slightest bit of bias shown in Consumer Reports' reviews. These complaints have always been sour grapes.

Reply to
SMS

You should have know better than to buy an import ;)

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Sounds a whole lot like my Mystique. Love the car, but reliability is NOT it's strong suit - mostly nickel and dime stuff since I do most of my own repairs, but irritating at best. Being the high end V6 with all the toys, it is NOT easy to work on either. Something about it's mixed heritage I guess.

Reply to
clare

Right, the Buick was imported from Canada

Reply to
Ed Pawlowski

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.