JD Powers Survey

"C. E. White" > wrote in message
...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Art" >
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.misc,alt.autos.ford,alt.autos.toyota
> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 9:54 PM
> Subject: JD Powers Survey
>
>
>> The worst have 3 times the number of problems as the best. That might
> make
>> a difference to somebody.
>
> Stating the differences that way is misleading. Suppose the best vehicles
> had no problems and the worst average 1 problem. Using your logic, the
> worst
> vehicle was infinitely worse than the best vehicle.......
>
> If the worst manufacturer had 30 problems per vehicle and the best 10,
> that
> might be significant. But the worst manufacturer (Kia) only averaged 4
> problems per vehicle, whicle the best (Lexus) averaged a little over 1
> problem per vehicle. How many people buying a Kia would have paid an extra
> $10,000 or more to buy a Lexus so they could avoid 3 problems
> (partiucularly
> since most are probably minor)?
>
> Ed
>

If the number of problems a vehicle has or its reliability was the sole
reason to purchase one vehicle or brand over another, then your point is
valid because as Mike Hunt and Ed point out, the differences are fairly
minor.

IMO, most people consider several factors when choosing a vehicle, among
them past experience, quality, reliability, style, ride and cabin comfort,
quietness, performance, fuel economy, utility, prestige, available
equipment, warranty, dealer service, country of origin, price, operating
costs, resale value, safety, even color.

Under the category "quality," there are other factors besides reliability
and defects. Fit and finish - the feel, comfort, alignment, and appearance
of the interior and body; engine and transmission smoothness; wind, road and
engine noise; ergonomics.

If reliability or problems per vehicle were the only purchase criteria,
everyone would be buying the cheapest car available and everyone else would
be out of business.
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply

Apparently you did not read that survey. It was of the
experiences of owner on THREE YEAR OLD vehicles. J D Powers does
another survey of new vehicles of owners perceptions of their
vehicle after 90 day. NOBODY ever said all manufactures make a
perfect one every time. On average EVERY manufacture makes at
least 1% up to 2% that are defective, that is why they all have a
warranty. The fact is you are far more likely to a get one of
98% that are good from ANY manufacture than you are of getting
one of the 2% that prove to be problematic from ANY manufacture.
Since that is a given why not chose the one that best suits your
particular needs and budget rather then betting 20% to 30% more
in the hope you will not get one of the bad ones? That survey
concluded that GM Ford and Toyota has the best vehicles in the
survey, but only because it was not listed as percentages.


mike hunt



Art wrote:
>
> If you want a souped up Charger, wait a while. A bigger V8 is on its way.
>
> "Dan J.S." > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> The just goes to show how closely cars are rated today for build
> >> quality by their owners. The best has a rate 1.39 defects per
> >> car and the worst 3.97 and the average of only 2.37. If one
> >> subscribes to J D Powers service they would see the failures are
> >> mostly minor in nature, such as squeaks and rattles
> >>
> >> Looks much different when presented as a list than if shown, as
> >> it should be, as a percentage of failures. The best as just over
> >> 98% trouble free, the average just under 98% trouble free, and
> >> the worst as just under 97% trouble free. That is what we see
> >> in our business, as well.
> >>
> >> All manufactures are building good vehicles today that will
> >> easily run to 200K, trouble free, if given the proper preventive
> >> maintenance. The only real difference among them is style and
> >> price. Your chance of getting a good one are basically 8 out of
> >> 9. The change of getting one not up to snuff is minor 1% to 2%
> >> since they all have a failure rate of at least 1%, that is why
> >> they all offer a warranty.
> >>
> >> Why some will spend 20% or 30% more to buy a comparable vehicle,
> >> of a certain brand over another, just in the hope that the ONE
> >> they get is not one of the 1% to 2%, always seemed like extremely
> >> poor gambling odds to me
> >
> >
> > But there are other issues. For example, a friend just bought a 2005
> > Corvette. He drove me to a business meeting a few miles away. I own a
> > 4runner. When he started the vette, it ran rough, and it took 10 minutes
> > for the car's AC to cool it down. In my 4runner, the engine runs so that I
> > don't even feel it on, and the AC cools it down in a matter of 2 minutes.
> > So there are still design issues that are still huge. I am thinking about
> > buying the Dodge Charger - and then souping it up. I really hope quality
> > is getting that good... we will see..
> >

Actually GM was rated better than all other manufactures, of
THREE year old vehicles. Those are NOT the vehicle GM sells
today. One must make their judgment between the vehicles
available today not three or ten years ago. The newer vehicle
are even BETTER than just three years ago.


mike hunt




"Dan J.S." wrote:
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
> > The just goes to show how closely cars are rated today for build
> > quality by their owners. The best has a rate 1.39 defects per
> > car and the worst 3.97 and the average of only 2.37. If one
> > subscribes to J D Powers service they would see the failures are
> > mostly minor in nature, such as squeaks and rattles
> >
> > Looks much different when presented as a list than if shown, as
> > it should be, as a percentage of failures. The best as just over
> > 98% trouble free, the average just under 98% trouble free, and
> > the worst as just under 97% trouble free. That is what we see
> > in our business, as well.
> >
> > All manufactures are building good vehicles today that will
> > easily run to 200K, trouble free, if given the proper preventive
> > maintenance. The only real difference among them is style and
> > price. Your chance of getting a good one are basically 8 out of
> > 9. The change of getting one not up to snuff is minor 1% to 2%
> > since they all have a failure rate of at least 1%, that is why
> > they all offer a warranty.
> >
> > Why some will spend 20% or 30% more to buy a comparable vehicle,
> > of a certain brand over another, just in the hope that the ONE
> > they get is not one of the 1% to 2%, always seemed like extremely
> > poor gambling odds to me
>
> But there are other issues. For example, a friend just bought a 2005
> Corvette. He drove me to a business meeting a few miles away. I own a
> 4runner. When he started the vette, it ran rough, and it took 10 minutes for
> the car's AC to cool it down. In my 4runner, the engine runs so that I don't
> even feel it on, and the AC cools it down in a matter of 2 minutes. So there
> are still design issues that are still huge. I am thinking about buying the
> Dodge Charger - and then souping it up. I really hope quality is getting
> that good... we will see..

You responded to the wrong post in the thread but in any case, any survey
that says GM and Ford are near the top in 3 year reliability is screwed up.


> wrote in message
...
> Apparently you did not read that survey. It was of the
> experiences of owner on THREE YEAR OLD vehicles. J D Powers does
> another survey of new vehicles of owners perceptions of their
> vehicle after 90 day. NOBODY ever said all manufactures make a
> perfect one every time. On average EVERY manufacture makes at
> least 1% up to 2% that are defective, that is why they all have a
> warranty. The fact is you are far more likely to a get one of
> 98% that are good from ANY manufacture than you are of getting
> one of the 2% that prove to be problematic from ANY manufacture.
> Since that is a given why not chose the one that best suits your
> particular needs and budget rather then betting 20% to 30% more
> in the hope you will not get one of the bad ones? That survey
> concluded that GM Ford and Toyota has the best vehicles in the
> survey, but only because it was not listed as percentages.
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
> Art wrote:
>>
>> If you want a souped up Charger, wait a while. A bigger V8 is on its
>> way.
>>
>> "Dan J.S." > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >> The just goes to show how closely cars are rated today for build
>> >> quality by their owners. The best has a rate 1.39 defects per
>> >> car and the worst 3.97 and the average of only 2.37. If one
>> >> subscribes to J D Powers service they would see the failures are
>> >> mostly minor in nature, such as squeaks and rattles
>> >>
>> >> Looks much different when presented as a list than if shown, as
>> >> it should be, as a percentage of failures. The best as just over
>> >> 98% trouble free, the average just under 98% trouble free, and
>> >> the worst as just under 97% trouble free. That is what we see
>> >> in our business, as well.
>> >>
>> >> All manufactures are building good vehicles today that will
>> >> easily run to 200K, trouble free, if given the proper preventive
>> >> maintenance. The only real difference among them is style and
>> >> price. Your chance of getting a good one are basically 8 out of
>> >> 9. The change of getting one not up to snuff is minor 1% to 2%
>> >> since they all have a failure rate of at least 1%, that is why
>> >> they all offer a warranty.
>> >>
>> >> Why some will spend 20% or 30% more to buy a comparable vehicle,
>> >> of a certain brand over another, just in the hope that the ONE
>> >> they get is not one of the 1% to 2%, always seemed like extremely
>> >> poor gambling odds to me
>> >
>> >
>> > But there are other issues. For example, a friend just bought a 2005
>> > Corvette. He drove me to a business meeting a few miles away. I own a
>> > 4runner. When he started the vette, it ran rough, and it took 10
>> > minutes
>> > for the car's AC to cool it down. In my 4runner, the engine runs so
>> > that I
>> > don't even feel it on, and the AC cools it down in a matter of 2
>> > minutes.
>> > So there are still design issues that are still huge. I am thinking
>> > about
>> > buying the Dodge Charger - and then souping it up. I really hope
>> > quality
>> > is getting that good... we will see..
>> >

Tell my buddy who had no end to problems with a late model Malibu. He was
diehard GM even after owning a Vega. But no more GM for him.


> wrote in message
...
> Actually GM was rated better than all other manufactures, of
> THREE year old vehicles. Those are NOT the vehicle GM sells
> today. One must make their judgment between the vehicles
> available today not three or ten years ago. The newer vehicle
> are even BETTER than just three years ago.
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
>
> "Dan J.S." wrote:
>>
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > The just goes to show how closely cars are rated today for build
>> > quality by their owners. The best has a rate 1.39 defects per
>> > car and the worst 3.97 and the average of only 2.37. If one
>> > subscribes to J D Powers service they would see the failures are
>> > mostly minor in nature, such as squeaks and rattles
>> >
>> > Looks much different when presented as a list than if shown, as
>> > it should be, as a percentage of failures. The best as just over
>> > 98% trouble free, the average just under 98% trouble free, and
>> > the worst as just under 97% trouble free. That is what we see
>> > in our business, as well.
>> >
>> > All manufactures are building good vehicles today that will
>> > easily run to 200K, trouble free, if given the proper preventive
>> > maintenance. The only real difference among them is style and
>> > price. Your chance of getting a good one are basically 8 out of
>> > 9. The change of getting one not up to snuff is minor 1% to 2%
>> > since they all have a failure rate of at least 1%, that is why
>> > they all offer a warranty.
>> >
>> > Why some will spend 20% or 30% more to buy a comparable vehicle,
>> > of a certain brand over another, just in the hope that the ONE
>> > they get is not one of the 1% to 2%, always seemed like extremely
>> > poor gambling odds to me
>>
>> But there are other issues. For example, a friend just bought a 2005
>> Corvette. He drove me to a business meeting a few miles away. I own a
>> 4runner. When he started the vette, it ran rough, and it took 10 minutes
>> for
>> the car's AC to cool it down. In my 4runner, the engine runs so that I
>> don't
>> even feel it on, and the AC cools it down in a matter of 2 minutes. So
>> there
>> are still design issues that are still huge. I am thinking about buying
>> the
>> Dodge Charger - and then souping it up. I really hope quality is getting
>> that good... we will see..

I had several Honda, one was a turkey from day one. Should I
assume that Honda therefore all turned to $#IT Get real LOL



mike hunt



Art wrote:
>
> Tell my buddy who had no end to problems with a late model Malibu. He was
> diehard GM even after owning a Vega. But no more GM for him.
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
> > Actually GM was rated better than all other manufactures, of
> > THREE year old vehicles. Those are NOT the vehicle GM sells
> > today. One must make their judgment between the vehicles
> > available today not three or ten years ago. The newer vehicle
> > are even BETTER than just three years ago.
> >
> >
> > mike hunt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Dan J.S." wrote:
> >>
> >> > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > The just goes to show how closely cars are rated today for build
> >> > quality by their owners. The best has a rate 1.39 defects per
> >> > car and the worst 3.97 and the average of only 2.37. If one
> >> > subscribes to J D Powers service they would see the failures are
> >> > mostly minor in nature, such as squeaks and rattles
> >> >
> >> > Looks much different when presented as a list than if shown, as
> >> > it should be, as a percentage of failures. The best as just over
> >> > 98% trouble free, the average just under 98% trouble free, and
> >> > the worst as just under 97% trouble free. That is what we see
> >> > in our business, as well.
> >> >
> >> > All manufactures are building good vehicles today that will
> >> > easily run to 200K, trouble free, if given the proper preventive
> >> > maintenance. The only real difference among them is style and
> >> > price. Your chance of getting a good one are basically 8 out of
> >> > 9. The change of getting one not up to snuff is minor 1% to 2%
> >> > since they all have a failure rate of at least 1%, that is why
> >> > they all offer a warranty.
> >> >
> >> > Why some will spend 20% or 30% more to buy a comparable vehicle,
> >> > of a certain brand over another, just in the hope that the ONE
> >> > they get is not one of the 1% to 2%, always seemed like extremely
> >> > poor gambling odds to me
> >>
> >> But there are other issues. For example, a friend just bought a 2005
> >> Corvette. He drove me to a business meeting a few miles away. I own a
> >> 4runner. When he started the vette, it ran rough, and it took 10 minutes
> >> for
> >> the car's AC to cool it down. In my 4runner, the engine runs so that I
> >> don't
> >> even feel it on, and the AC cools it down in a matter of 2 minutes. So
> >> there
> >> are still design issues that are still huge. I am thinking about buying
> >> the
> >> Dodge Charger - and then souping it up. I really hope quality is getting
> >> that good... we will see..

Ya right all owners lie, except the owners of the brand you like,
Get real LOL


mike hunt



Art wrote:
>
> You responded to the wrong post in the thread but in any case, any survey
> that says GM and Ford are near the top in 3 year reliability is screwed up.
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
> > Apparently you did not read that survey. It was of the
> > experiences of owner on THREE YEAR OLD vehicles. J D Powers does
> > another survey of new vehicles of owners perceptions of their
> > vehicle after 90 day. NOBODY ever said all manufactures make a
> > perfect one every time. On average EVERY manufacture makes at
> > least 1% up to 2% that are defective, that is why they all have a
> > warranty. The fact is you are far more likely to a get one of
> > 98% that are good from ANY manufacture than you are of getting
> > one of the 2% that prove to be problematic from ANY manufacture.
> > Since that is a given why not chose the one that best suits your
> > particular needs and budget rather then betting 20% to 30% more
> > in the hope you will not get one of the bad ones? That survey
> > concluded that GM Ford and Toyota has the best vehicles in the
> > survey, but only because it was not listed as percentages.
> >
> >
> > mike hunt
> >
> >
> >
> > Art wrote:
> >>
> >> If you want a souped up Charger, wait a while. A bigger V8 is on its
> >> way.
> >>
> >> "Dan J.S." > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> > > wrote in message
> >> > ...
> >> >> The just goes to show how closely cars are rated today for build
> >> >> quality by their owners. The best has a rate 1.39 defects per
> >> >> car and the worst 3.97 and the average of only 2.37. If one
> >> >> subscribes to J D Powers service they would see the failures are
> >> >> mostly minor in nature, such as squeaks and rattles
> >> >>
> >> >> Looks much different when presented as a list than if shown, as
> >> >> it should be, as a percentage of failures. The best as just over
> >> >> 98% trouble free, the average just under 98% trouble free, and
> >> >> the worst as just under 97% trouble free. That is what we see
> >> >> in our business, as well.
> >> >>
> >> >> All manufactures are building good vehicles today that will
> >> >> easily run to 200K, trouble free, if given the proper preventive
> >> >> maintenance. The only real difference among them is style and
> >> >> price. Your chance of getting a good one are basically 8 out of
> >> >> 9. The change of getting one not up to snuff is minor 1% to 2%
> >> >> since they all have a failure rate of at least 1%, that is why
> >> >> they all offer a warranty.
> >> >>
> >> >> Why some will spend 20% or 30% more to buy a comparable vehicle,
> >> >> of a certain brand over another, just in the hope that the ONE
> >> >> they get is not one of the 1% to 2%, always seemed like extremely
> >> >> poor gambling odds to me
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > But there are other issues. For example, a friend just bought a 2005
> >> > Corvette. He drove me to a business meeting a few miles away. I own a
> >> > 4runner. When he started the vette, it ran rough, and it took 10
> >> > minutes
> >> > for the car's AC to cool it down. In my 4runner, the engine runs so
> >> > that I
> >> > don't even feel it on, and the AC cools it down in a matter of 2
> >> > minutes.
> >> > So there are still design issues that are still huge. I am thinking
> >> > about
> >> > buying the Dodge Charger - and then souping it up. I really hope
> >> > quality
> >> > is getting that good... we will see..
> >> >

So when did you last own a GM or Ford product? For many years I
wouldn't touch a Toyota product becasue of a horrible personal
experince and equally poor experiences of people close to me. I have
owned vehciels from most major manufacturers (GM, Ford, Nissan, Toyota,
Chrysler, VW). Currently, I am most comfortable with Ford products. Not
every Ford I have owned has been perfect, but 100% of the Toyota I
owned reeked. Still, I am looking for a new farm truck (and have been
for almost a year) and of the possible candidates, Toyota seema to have
the best candidates from a size / function standpoint. Unfortunately I
just can't seem to convince myself I should pay more for a Tundra than
for an F250, just becasue I think the F250 is too big. Therefore I am
still driving my 13 year old F150. BTW, I have not spent enough on
repairs to the F150 in the last 13 years to make 2 months worth of
payments on a new Tundra. However, it is inevitable that something will
eventually kill the F150 (most likely a teenage son) and I really
dislike the current F150s and the current Rangers are just too small.

My Mother and Father have owned nothing but Fords for the last 48
years. In that time, I only remember one car that had any significant
problems, and they were mostly the result of poor dealer service. They
currently own three Ford products - 1999 Ranger, 2000 Grand Marquis,
2005 Freestyle. The only repair for any of these, was a new IAC for the
Grand Marquis and an IAC for the Ranger. So, I guess on a three year
dependability stdy, their average number of problems was <1. So, I
don't have any problems believing the JD Power results, as least as
they pertain to Ford products.

Ed

Well I had 2 91 Taurus's which were fix or repair daily vehicles. That is a
long time ago. But my father has a 2004 Saturn and it is very low in
quality. Shockingly bad I would say. A friend was just telling me about
his disasterous late model Malibu.


"Ed White" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> So when did you last own a GM or Ford product? For many years I
> wouldn't touch a Toyota product becasue of a horrible personal
> experince and equally poor experiences of people close to me. I have
> owned vehciels from most major manufacturers (GM, Ford, Nissan, Toyota,
> Chrysler, VW). Currently, I am most comfortable with Ford products. Not
> every Ford I have owned has been perfect, but 100% of the Toyota I
> owned reeked. Still, I am looking for a new farm truck (and have been
> for almost a year) and of the possible candidates, Toyota seema to have
> the best candidates from a size / function standpoint. Unfortunately I
> just can't seem to convince myself I should pay more for a Tundra than
> for an F250, just becasue I think the F250 is too big. Therefore I am
> still driving my 13 year old F150. BTW, I have not spent enough on
> repairs to the F150 in the last 13 years to make 2 months worth of
> payments on a new Tundra. However, it is inevitable that something will
> eventually kill the F150 (most likely a teenage son) and I really
> dislike the current F150s and the current Rangers are just too small.
>
> My Mother and Father have owned nothing but Fords for the last 48
> years. In that time, I only remember one car that had any significant
> problems, and they were mostly the result of poor dealer service. They
> currently own three Ford products - 1999 Ranger, 2000 Grand Marquis,
> 2005 Freestyle. The only repair for any of these, was a new IAC for the
> Grand Marquis and an IAC for the Ranger. So, I guess on a three year
> dependability stdy, their average number of problems was <1. So, I
> don't have any problems believing the JD Power results, as least as
> they pertain to Ford products.
>
> Ed
>

Except every GM vehicle he owned was crap. He just didn't give up on the
until the Malibu. His sister owned that 2 seater plastic space frame car
they made a decade or so ago. I forget what it was called. I remember
asking him how she liked it. He said it was a good car.... except for the
engine fire. LOL. He was still buying GM after that.


> wrote in message
...
>I had several Honda, one was a turkey from day one. Should I
> assume that Honda therefore all turned to $#IT Get real LOL
>
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
> Art wrote:
>>
>> Tell my buddy who had no end to problems with a late model Malibu. He
>> was
>> diehard GM even after owning a Vega. But no more GM for him.
>>
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Actually GM was rated better than all other manufactures, of
>> > THREE year old vehicles. Those are NOT the vehicle GM sells
>> > today. One must make their judgment between the vehicles
>> > available today not three or ten years ago. The newer vehicle
>> > are even BETTER than just three years ago.
>> >
>> >
>> > mike hunt
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Dan J.S." wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > The just goes to show how closely cars are rated today for build
>> >> > quality by their owners. The best has a rate 1.39 defects per
>> >> > car and the worst 3.97 and the average of only 2.37. If one
>> >> > subscribes to J D Powers service they would see the failures are
>> >> > mostly minor in nature, such as squeaks and rattles
>> >> >
>> >> > Looks much different when presented as a list than if shown, as
>> >> > it should be, as a percentage of failures. The best as just over
>> >> > 98% trouble free, the average just under 98% trouble free, and
>> >> > the worst as just under 97% trouble free. That is what we see
>> >> > in our business, as well.
>> >> >
>> >> > All manufactures are building good vehicles today that will
>> >> > easily run to 200K, trouble free, if given the proper preventive
>> >> > maintenance. The only real difference among them is style and
>> >> > price. Your chance of getting a good one are basically 8 out of
>> >> > 9. The change of getting one not up to snuff is minor 1% to 2%
>> >> > since they all have a failure rate of at least 1%, that is why
>> >> > they all offer a warranty.
>> >> >
>> >> > Why some will spend 20% or 30% more to buy a comparable vehicle,
>> >> > of a certain brand over another, just in the hope that the ONE
>> >> > they get is not one of the 1% to 2%, always seemed like extremely
>> >> > poor gambling odds to me
>> >>
>> >> But there are other issues. For example, a friend just bought a 2005
>> >> Corvette. He drove me to a business meeting a few miles away. I own a
>> >> 4runner. When he started the vette, it ran rough, and it took 10
>> >> minutes
>> >> for
>> >> the car's AC to cool it down. In my 4runner, the engine runs so that I
>> >> don't
>> >> even feel it on, and the AC cools it down in a matter of 2 minutes. So
>> >> there
>> >> are still design issues that are still huge. I am thinking about
>> >> buying
>> >> the
>> >> Dodge Charger - and then souping it up. I really hope quality is
>> >> getting
>> >> that good... we will see..