Bias Against Domestic Cars

hls wrote:

<snip>

> Might it also be that these types of vehicles, although similar, are not
> identical,
> and that they might actually be viewed differently by the buyer?
> Dealership
> handling of problems and warranty issues can certainly have a major
> impact on
> the degree of satisfaction one might have with the unit.

It's those things, plus it's the type of buyer that buys say a Corolla
verus a Prizm, and how they take care of the vehicle. Toyota buyers tend
to me more highly educated, higher income, and more likely to follow the
maintenance schedule, which would result in fewer Corolla problems.

You are correct for change, dr_jeff. Large fleets are NOT the same as
regular people.

Large fleet operators do a far better job of maintaining the huge investment
they have in the TOOLS used in their business.

In the case of vehicles, fleet vehicles are one of their best maintained
tools because federal corporate tax desperation laws require they be
deprecated over five years or 300,000 mile, WOF.

On the other hand the average new vehicle buyer replaces that vehicle with
another new vehicle in three to four years with 45,000 to 60,000 miles on
the odometer


"dr_jeff" > wrote in message
news
> Derek Gee wrote:
>> "dr_jeff" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Derek Gee wrote:
>>>> "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> "Derek Gee" > wrote in message
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>> 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.
>>>> No, Powers has TWO different studies, the IQS (Initial Quality Study),
>>>> and VDS (Vehicle Dependability Study). I pretty much ignore all of the
>>>> IQS surveys as most of the automakers are within a couple of defects
>>>> per 100 vehicles of each other. It's the VDS that's the important one.
>>>> Here's a link to the 2009 study, go check it out...
>>>>
>>>> http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/new...df/2009043.pdf
>>>>
>>>> Derek
>>> But this is still a survey, with the limitations of a survey.
>>>
>>> Plus, the study was with cars that were about 2 or 3 years old (2006
>>> model year study done in Oct. 2008). It doesn't say how well cars hold
>>> up after this period. What would be a far better study would be a study
>>> of what is actually replaced by owners during the life of the car. It
>>> would be a hard study to do.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>
>> Closest thing to that is dealership warranty and post-warranty info, and
>> I doubt you'll get any of that. Maybe some large fleet customers might
>> share info like that...
>>
>> Derek
>
> Yet the way cars and trucks in large fleets is not the same as regular
> people.

Really? the Toyota buyer can't be to smart, after all they paid a lot more
to buy the same car with Toyota on the grill, rather than Prizm LOL


"SMS" > wrote in message
...
> hls wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Might it also be that these types of vehicles, although similar, are not
>> identical,
>> and that they might actually be viewed differently by the buyer?
>> Dealership
>> handling of problems and warranty issues can certainly have a major
>> impact on
>> the degree of satisfaction one might have with the unit.
>
> It's those things, plus it's the type of buyer that buys say a Corolla
> verus a Prizm, and how they take care of the vehicle. Toyota buyers tend
> to me more highly educated, higher income, and more likely to follow the
> maintenance schedule, which would result in fewer Corolla problems.

"SMS" > wrote in message
...
> hls wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Might it also be that these types of vehicles, although similar, are not
>> identical,
>> and that they might actually be viewed differently by the buyer?
>> Dealership
>> handling of problems and warranty issues can certainly have a major
>> impact on
>> the degree of satisfaction one might have with the unit.
>
> It's those things, plus it's the type of buyer that buys say a Corolla
> verus a Prizm, and how they take care of the vehicle. Toyota buyers tend
> to me more highly educated, higher income, and more likely to follow the
> maintenance schedule, which would result in fewer Corolla problems.

I hope you don't really believe that. If you do I think your ego and
elitist attitude need some adjustment, your blanket statement is beyond
believeable sounds like a teenager.

Tom wrote:

> I hope you don't really believe that. If you do I think your ego and
> elitist attitude need some adjustment, your blanket statement is beyond
> believeable sounds like a teenager.

So you believe that the demographics of a Toyota buyer are the same as
the demographics of a Chevrolet buyer?

It may well be elitist for a car-buyer to have shunned a Geo/Chevy Prizm
in favor of a Toyota Corolla, but the sales figures of each model prove
that there had to have been reasons that the Corolla sold so much better
than the Prizm. Up until recently, one reason to have chosen a Chevy
over a Toyota would have been the wider availability of warranty
service, but at least in my area so many Chevy dealers have closed that
the Toyota now wins in that regard. The Corolla and Prizm were
comparably priced, the Prizm has a lower MSRP, but the Corolla was
heavily discounted, often to well below invoice.

On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:03:42 -0800, SMS >
wrote:

>C. E. White wrote:
>
>> Of course there are reasons, one is that the survey is faulty, another
>> is that the CR survey is basically an opinion poll, not a data
>> collection exercise.
>
>Clearly you've never seen one of the CR surveys if you think it's an
>opinion poll.


I've seen their surveys back when I subscribed. They are little
better then opinion polls. You can say anything you want, you don't
document anything, there is no attempt to make the sample
statistically representative of anything, they just take the answers
from whichever subscribers feel like replying. If you paid $2000 more
for your Toyota then for a comparable Chevy you an be sure many of the
respondents are going to sugarcoat their experience, after all, they
are not going to want to face up to the fact that every Toyota
dealership has a big repair shop in the back just like every Chevy
dealer does.

"hls" > wrote in message
> Might it also be that these types of vehicles, although similar, are not
> identical,
> and that they might actually be viewed differently by the buyer?
> Dealership
> handling of problems and warranty issues can certainly have a major impact
> on
> the degree of satisfaction one might have with the unit.

I recall a survey of the Mitsubishi Eclipse and the Dodge and Plymouth
version. They were ranked by consumers (not necessarily owners) to have
different quality levels. 1 Mitsu, 2 Dodge, 3 Plymouth. It was strictly
perception, not based on real facts. Some of the people surveyed had no idea
they were identical cars.

On Nov 25, 12:28*pm, "Tom" > wrote:

> I hope you don't really believe that. If you do I think your ego *and
> elitist attitude need some adjustment, your blanket statement is beyond
> believeable sounds like a teenager.

You can read the exact same remarks in the archives of the Saturn
newsgroup, where he trolled for a decade and compiled thousands of
posts attacking Saturn and other domestic automobiles under various
accounts. The best ones are where he contradicts himself and even
ignores (or attacks) Consumer Reports when it didn't support his
agenda. CR is like any other magazine. The editors are human. They
have biases. They know their demographic and cater to it very well,
because that's where their paycheck is. Their surveys aren't randomy
sampled or scientific in any way. The results are not peer reviewed
and they don't publish any statistical information like sample size,
margin of error, standard deviation, nada. In the case of their red
and black circles for reliability, they don't even tell you what they
mean on an absolute scale; usually only in percent above/below
average. That kind of information isn't all that helpful unless you
know what average is. 40% above average when average is near zero is
not a good way to scale your data to show people how many problems to
expect over a typical period of ownership. More importantly, they
don't tell you much about the severity or cost of the problems, only
what categories are most typical. Oxygen sensor, engine oil sludge or
worse? Who knows.

That's not to say the reviews and reliability results aren't any good,
but that they really aren't all that different from any other auto
magazine. If you find you generally agree with them, great, but that
doesn't make their results any more meaningful or accurate. I like
Consumer Reports for the most part, but the non-random surveys and
dumbed down results are not impressive by any statistical standard.
Their reviews are usually reasonable enough. Usually they seem close
to the mark, but sometimes they miss badly. Don't rely on them as the
only resource and you'll be fine. For example, I'm still not sure how
their 32mpg city fuel economy rating of the new Prius is anything
close to "real world". We never owned a hybrid before and from our
first tank it's been over 50mpg both estimated from the trip computer
and calculated from gas fill ups. No fancy driving habits or super
inflated tires or anything. Many other owners report the same. As
with everything, don't always believe what you read.

On Nov 25, 6:15*pm, "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote:
> "hls" > wrote in message
> > Might it also be that these types of vehicles, although similar, are not
> > identical,
> > and that they might actually be viewed differently by the buyer?
> > Dealership
> > handling of problems and warranty issues can certainly have a major impact
> > on
> > the degree of satisfaction one might have with the unit.
>
> I recall a survey of the Mitsubishi Eclipse and the Dodge and Plymouth
> version. *They were ranked by consumers (not necessarily owners) to have
> different quality levels. 1 Mitsu, 2 Dodge, 3 Plymouth. *It was strictly
> perception, not based on real facts. Some of the people surveyed had no idea
> they were identical cars.

Eventually, Consumer Reports lumped corporate twins together so that
the results were the same for all siblings. As it was, it showed the
very real problems inherent to their surveys and sampling.

wrote:

> Their surveys aren't randomy
> sampled or scientific in any way. The results are not peer reviewed
> and they don't publish any statistical information like sample size,
> margin of error, standard deviation, nada.

Of course they do. They always state the sample size, and if they don't
have a sufficiently large sample for a specific product then they leave
it out, as you can see in every one of their surveys, including the most
recent wireless carrier surveys.

Claims of bias are pure sour grapes. A few people that buy a product get
all upset when their choice is not validated by independent entities. No
where was such an attitude more prevalent than for Saturn owners which
could never accept the fact that all the marketing hype about the brand
was not supported by the statistical reports of reliability from
Consumer Reports and J.D. Power. You of course are well aware of this
behavior since you were one of those that engaged in it.