This (112 v 120) is what I hate about the way they present this data.
You look at those numbers and people think WOW, 120 is a LOT more then
112. Or if you look at the bigger list you'll find some models with
101 problems to compare to the one with 120. And the consumer is left
with the impression there is this HUGE difference of 19 points between
these cars and will most likely be thinking "If I by the ACME sedan
I'll have 19 more problems then if I buy the SQUAT Coupe. But what it
really means is that the ONE ACME vehicle he buys will have 1.2
problems to worry about and the SQUAT will have 1.01 problems. What's
that mean in practical terms? It means SQUAT, i.e., nothing. He'll
need to take either car back to the dealer to get the problem fixed.
It maybe, might, possibly mean that over the course of a couple years
the ACME will go back to the shop 2 times and the SQUAT will go back 3
times. Or depending on what breaks and when, they both may only go
back 2 times. So the bottom line for the vast majority of car buyers
is that all these cars are pretty much the same as far as how much
"trouble" they are going to have in terms of these JDPowers figures.
It's only if you compare the cars on the tail end of the distribution,
one with a rating of 73 to one with a rating of 130 that there is
really enough difference in "quality" that it should matter to a
buyer. But CU and the like are taking these trivial differences for
the vast majority of cars and turning the trivial into the difference
between giving one a 2 star rating and the other a 5 star rating.
CU (CR) does not use these results for anything. They do their own
surveys which find that some cars are much more reliable than other
over the course of 5+ years. The differences are not trivial.
JDP is a joke.
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.