Are Japanese cars really more reliable? Latest Consumer Reports info

There's a lot to consider when buying a car. Ideally, a biodiesel unit would be desirable because it doesn't contribute to greenhouse gasses overall, and the fuel source is infinitely renewable. Walking or biking of course are better for your body. However, if you're limited to a conventional car, there are a number of things to consider--I'm only reporting on one of those things here, and that's reliability.

When asked why I bought a Japanese car that I think is pretty mediocre in most respects, I answer that I got a Toyota because one of the most reliable brands, if not the most reliable.

Lately, people have been telling me that this may have been true years ago, American cars have caught up to the Japanese cars in quality and reliability.

To find out, I went to consumerreports.org and looked up the data myself. I'm not sure how the rumor that American cars caught up to Japanese ones started, but though American cars have improved their reliability substantially, the Japanese have been improving theirs more.

Here is the report I wrote up on the data I found on consumerreports.org two weeks ago.

The most surprising thing in my opinion, German cars have gone sharply downhill from top position in reliability to bottom. Note that no German cars made it into the most reliable list, though a Korean company (Hyundai) did! Most interestingly IMO, Mercedes-Benz, which used to make the most reliable autos of any reported on by CR, now has such poor reliability that they do not have a single model reliable enough to be in CR's recommended list! Apparently when they merged with Chrysler, they kept American auto engineering and German corporate management, instead of the other way around.

Here are the reliability reports for nine different types of vehicles. American cars Have gotten better in relation to English, German and Swedish vehicles, but nobody even comes close to the Japanese when it comes to reliability.

Sedans:

In the top ten for reliability, all ten are Japanese. Two are American-branded Japanese cars (Mercury Milan and Ford Fusion, which are both made by Mazda as the Mazda 6 and changed only cosmetically for Ford/Lincoln.) In the bottom ten, most of them are average in reliability except three are significantly below average: a Volvo, a Chevy and a Volkswagen.

Upscale Cars:

Only five models on this list are 40% or more more reliable than average. They are all Japanese. Only three models are 20% or more below average. One is Swedish, one is German and one is English.

Luxury Cars:

Four are 40% or more better than average, three are Japanese and one is Swedish. Eleven are more than 20% worse than average. None of these are Japanese. Two are American, seven are German and two are English.

Large Cars:

One is more than 40% better than average, it is Japanese. Interestingly, one is almost 40% above average, and it is a Buick. Three are more than 20% below average, all of them are American.

Small cars:

Eight are more than 40% above average, and two are right at 40% above average. All of these are Japanese. In fact, the only non-Japanese car on the list that's better than average at all is the Ford Focus. Seven are 20% or more below average. Two are German, four are American and surprise, one is Japanese.

Wagons & Hatchbacks:

Four are more than 40% above average. All are Japanese. One of the four is an American-branded Japanese car (The Pontiac Vibe, which is a Toyota Matrix.) Four are 20% or more below average, two of those are American and two is Swedish.

Small SUVs:

Nine are 40% or more above average, all of them are Japanese. Five are 20% or more below average. Two are Japanese (Suzukis), one is Korean, and two are American.

Medium SUVs:

Nine are 40% or more above average. One is American, the rest are Japanese. Twenty-three are 20% or more below average. None of those 23 are Japanese. Of those twenty-three, twelve are American, seven are German, two are English.

Large SUVs:

Only one is 40% or more better than average, it's Japanese. Five are more than 20% below average, Two of those are Japanese and three are American.

Here's a ranking of the reliability.

Number of exceptionally reliable models per country:

Japan-------51 USA----------1 Sweden------1 Germany-----0 England------0 Korea-------0

The winner is clear.

Number of unreliable vehicles per country:

USA----------30 Germany-----18 Japan----------5 Sweden-------4 England-------2 Korea----------1

The USA seems to fare pretty badly in this, but remember, Germany has far fewer models sold in the USA than US car companies do. Percentage-wise, I'm guessing that Germany might have the same amount or even more unreliable cars than the US.

Some more details from Consumer Reports in 2007:

(there are discrepancies between their stats and mine because I chose different criteria for "most reliable" and "least reliable." My criteria are stated under each vehicle category above)

____________________________ "Of the 47 vehicles on the most-reliable list, 39 were from Japanese automakers. Six came from the domestic automakers, and one each came from South Korea and Europe. Twenty-one Toyota vehicles earned top ratings. Honda had 11 vehicles at the top of our ratings. Ford, General Motors, and Subaru each had three, Mitsubishi and Nissan each had two, while Hyundai and Mini each had one."

"Of the 45 least reliable models, 19 were European, 20 were from U.S. manufacturers, 5 were Japanese, and 1 was South Korean. General Motors had

12, Mercedes-Benz had 8, Ford and Nissan each had 5, Chrysler and Volkswagen each had 3, BMW and Jaguar each had 2, while Kia, Land Rover, Porsche, Saab, and Volvo each had 1." ____________________________

And that's that. Japanese cars are, on average, far and away the most reliable; American cars have been steadily improving but are still poor, and German cars have gone sharply downhill from top position in the 1970s to the bottom today.

Reply to
That Guy
Loading thread data ...

Thanks for a great write up. When you consider that people are paying up to a half years salary for a medium priced car you can understand why more and more of those people are choosing quality and reliability over other factors. The Japanese companies seem to understand this very well. Their products show it.

Reply to
NickySantoro

I don't think that any of this is news for anyone here. The U.S. automakers have been trying to push the idea that the era of their lower reliability has passed, and they are now equal in reliability to their Japanese competition. Few people have fallen for their propaganda.

What's interesting is than increasingly the so-called Japanese cars are not only built in the U.S., with a high level of U.S. content, they also are designed at U.S. design centers.

Reply to
SMS

I didn't know the Fusion was a 626. It looks bigger than the Mazda. No wonder it's received decent reviews.

Reply to
badgolferman

Thanks!!

Reply to
That Guy

I never doubted that Americans could at any time start producing cars that would rival if not best all others in the world in reliability or anything else. I believe the problem has always been corporate attitude, but I don't really know that much about it so I could be wrong.

Reply to
That Guy

You should say this is the opinion of Consumer Reports Readers - hardly an unbiased group. The glaring short comings of the CR surveys have been enumerated countless times. It is as if you surveyed a group of White House Aides and announced that based on your survey, GWB has a 90% approval rating. True enough, but irrelevant if you are looking for facts. CR is an entertaining read, but they are one of the worst sources of good unbiased information on the planet. I don't doubt their honesty, but I do doubt there data collection methods, at least as far as the reader survey is concerned. Beside almost any time I buy something they recommend, I am disappointed.

Well you have this almost completely wrong. The Fusion and Milan are definitely related to Mazda 6, but they are not American-branded Japanese Cars. They are not built by Mazda at all (they are built in a Ford plant in Mexico). The engines are Ford engines, not Mazda. The V-6 six speed automatic transmission is a Japanese transmission, but not the same one as used in the Mazda 6. The interior and exterior sheet metal is completely different from the Mazda. The width, length, and wheelbase are all different than the Mazda 6. The suspension is based on the same design as the Mazda 6 but the parts are not directly interchangeable with the Mazda 6. And finally, you might as well claim the car is based on a Volvo or European Ford since they all have models that share this basic architecture (remember, Ford has a controlling interest in Mazda). So you probably ought to say the Mazda 6 and Fusion share a Ford world car architecture.

From

formatting link

"Ford calls the unibody base upon which the Fusion is erected its "CD3 architecture" and its expanded riff on the Mazda6. At 190.2 inches long, the Fusion is 3.4 inches longer than that Mazda and its 107.4-inch wheelbase is

2.1 inches longer. But the most significant dimensional difference is width, where the 72.2-inch-wide Fusion spans 2.1 inches broader than the Mazda. The structure is Ford's first to be completely conceived on a computer, and the company claims it's significantly stiffer than the Mazda original.

"Compared to rest of its direct competition, the Fusion is almost exactly their size. Honda's Accord, for instance, is 189.5 inches long, 71.5 inches wide, and rides on a 107.9-inch wheelbase. In practical terms, these differences are meaningless. The Fusion is, however, smaller than the outgoing Taurus sedan that stretches out 197.6 inches long and 73.0 inches wide and rides on a 108.5-inch wheelbase."

You might also review:

formatting link
One more thing - you might want to try one, some people think it is nicer than a Camry and it costs significantly less when similarly equipped (see
formatting link
But this is a Toyota newsgroup, so I can't imagine anyone here would even consider a Ford.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

formatting link

formatting link

formatting link

And a Mexican Ford is an "American" car and a Toyota made here isn't? Thanks Mike Hunter.

Reply to
Jim Higgins

While I don't doubt your expertise on the subject, neither have I reason to place any great faith therein. It is true that the survey's population is limited to subscribers of ConsumerReports.org or of Consumer Reports magazine. I confess to being more disposed toward accepting the results of a survey of fellow Consumer Reports subscribers who choose to respond than the results of a survey appearing in a ad-supported publication -- Motor Trend say -- or in a publication that works for the industry's advertisers and marketers -- JD Powers or Edmunds, say. An admitted bias which has served me well since the

1950's. Here is a link to CR's automobile reliability survey FAQ:
formatting link
course, you provide your own grain of salt!
Reply to
Derald

One of the *worst* on the planet? Really?

Idiot.

Reply to
dizzy

Men use skin mags to whack off with--Dizzy uses CR.

>
Reply to
sharx35

How so? If the information is derived from owners, then who's best to say what's what with their cars?

JD Power? JD Power "Initial Quality Survey"? Damn, man, when I buy a NEW car the "Initial Quality" had BETTER be high, or I'll never buy another one again! Even better when the quality further down the road remains high...then I'll be sure to buy another one again.

You have to pay attention to what people are saying..."Highest Initial Quality rating" means just that. I would trust what CR says more than anyone else, because they aren't PAID to say what they say. And the people they survey say what's really up with their cars.

Reply to
Hachiroku

formatting link
Of course, you provide your own grain of salt! CR's own FAQ on their survey is a glaring condemnation of the survey.

Problem 1 - they only survey their own readers. There is clear tendency for CR readers to spit back out the CR opinions as fact.

Problem 2 - less that 20% of the people CR send surveys to respond at all.

Problem 3 - they depend upon the respondent to decide what is and is not a problem. There is no clear standard. What bothers a Ford owner might seem trivial to a Toyota owner.

Problem 4 - CR's "professional" staff "interprets" the data. I feel certain the data is massaged to fit into CRs predetermined opinions. In the old days it was usual for the various GM divisions to get wildly different rating for cars that were essentially identical. This was often pointed out as proof that the CR surveys were worthless. These days that never happens. GM cars that are essentially identical get essentially identical ratings. I don't think people responding to the surveys have changed. I think CR is combining the results for similar models from a manufacturer and showing average results. JD Powers doesn't do that - for instance Mercurys often out score Fords, and Buicks always get much higher ratings than Pontiacs in the JD Powers Surveys, but not in the CR surveys.

Problem 5 - they only have 200 to 400 surveys for a particular model. For models that sell in the hundreds of thousands this hardly seems like a representative sample size - particularly when they are surveying people already predisposed to agree with CR's opinions and considering that only a small percentage of those bother to respond at all.

BTW, I always fill out my survey.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

JD Powers does have a long term reliability study (although I don't think of 3 years as long term).

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

formatting link
Oh oh! It seems to agree with Consumer Reports.

Reply to
Bill Tuthill

Any idea where they publish the results of that. IIRC, Toyota is the ONLY manufacturer that cites the LONG TERM results in their ads...

Reply to
Hachiroku

J D Powers long term survey is at five years. They will tell you not enough of the original owners keep their cars longer than five years.

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Because they are glad to be rid of their clunkers?

Reply to
Jim Higgins

formatting link

Do you think the difference between 1.94 problems per car and 2.37 problems per car (an average car) offsets higher costs, cramped interiors, and mediocre performance? If so, you are the quintessential Toyota owner. The last truly awful car I owned was a Toyota. Admittedly that was many years ago now. But since I have not owned anything close to that sorry since, why would I take a chance on a Toyota when the only advantage most people quote is reliability. In my opinion the designs are second rate, the interior are cheap looking, the performance mediocre, and they suffer from high routine maintenance costs. I can't see buying a second rate car just because it is marginally more reliable than an "average" car. And if I buy a Mercury instead of a Ford it is essentially rated just as reliable as a Toyota.

On a positive note, my SO just bought a new RAV4. Seems to be a nice car, but at $3K more than a similarly equipped Escape, it seems to be wildly overpriced. But (and this is the important part), she likes it, so who am I to complain.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

formatting link
>

What higher costs? Or are you forgetting the higher resale value that Toyota's bring bs the domestics?

Idiot. Been in a new Camry yet? Maybe you're a fat slob.

Evidence, please. Include quantifiable handling-performance information. The last GM's that I drove went "okay" in a straight line, but, when bent into a corner, screamed "I'm not happy doing this".

You sound like the quintessential usenet troll.

Yeah? Mine hasn't so much as burnt-out a light-bulb in 8 years.

Idiot.

Reply to
dizzy

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.