• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 17:10
CEST 23:10
KST 06:10
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL22] Ro4 Preview: Mirror Mirror5[ASL22] Ro8 Preview: Within Reach5[ASL22] Ro8 Preview: In A Tizzy11[ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Holy Diver5[ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Rough Waters10
Community News
Rollback Netcode in Brood War565.0.17 Patch Notes - October 7, 202621Weekly Cups Results (Sep 28-Oct 4)0SC4ALL: II SC2 Complete Invited Player Lineup10StarCraft II 5.0.17 PTR Patch Notes (Sept 30, 2026)78
StarCraft 2
General
5.0.17 Patch Notes - October 7, 2026 [Old] StarCraft 3 Reportedly in Development StarCraft II 5.0.17 PTR Patch Notes (Sept 30, 2026) How do you feel about the mass reverts in the 5.0.17 PTR? Weekly Cups Results (Sep 28-Oct 4)
Tourneys
$3,500 WardiTV Not-Summer Championship ScienceCraft (October 24-25) - Live Event RSL 2026 Offline Finals LCQ Sign-Ups Stellar Fest TWO the Moon (Dec 16-20) ISSL (IntoTheTV x SOOP SC2 League): Premier
Strategy
[H] ZvP Mid-Late Game: Stalkers Collossi HT
Custom Maps
[M] (2) Sweltering Sands [M] (2) Frigid Storage
External Content
Mutation # 546 Catch the Train The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 545 And Drops and Rifts Mutation # 544 Double Trouble
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Repalyzer - replay analysis app for StarCraft: Rem Fantasy returning? TL Sidebar missing streams Rollback Netcode in Brood War
Tourneys
[ASL22] Semifinal B [ASL22] Semifinal A [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL22] Ro8 Day 4
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Cliff Jump Revisited (1 in a 1000 strategy) Replay Review Process - What do you do?
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread General RTS Discussion Thread Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Total Annihilation Zero
Dota 2
Dota 2 Champions League Season 3 Begins April 25! Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
[TL LoL EUW IHs] Teemo shall perish
Heroes of the Storm
Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Artificial Intelligence Thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Movie Discussion! Diablo Animated Series on Netflix
Sports
Football (Soccer) Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
Recent Gifted Posts
Blogs
[ASL22] Ro4 Day1 Ticket Giv…
bITt.mAN
Escaping Into Video Games: G…
TrAiDoS
38 yo Retired SWE loo…
PurE)Rabbit-SF
Can Bots Beat Pros?? Starcr…
namkraft
[meme] I finally understa…
LUCKY_NOOB
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 8142 users

2015 Vehicle Quality Study by JD Power

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
1 2 3 Next All
QuantumTeleportation
Profile Joined March 2015
United States119 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-06-24 04:36:38
June 24 2015 04:30 GMT
#1
Since the major motoring magazines and news sites are going crazy over this new study, I thought I might share it.

Porsche, KIA, Jaguar and Hyundai topped the list.

The worst automakers were Subaru, Chrysler, Smart and Fiat. Surprisingly, Mazda also did poorly.

http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/2015-us-initial-quality-study-iqs

Korean Brands Lead Industry in Initial Quality, While Japanese Brands Struggle to Keep Up with Pace of Improvement
Porsche Ranks Highest among Nameplates for a Third Consecutive Year
Press Releases: June 17, 2015

[image loading]

WESTLAKE VILLAGE, Calif.: 17 June 2015 — With a significant year-over-year improvement, Korean brands continue to widen the quality gap with other automakers, while Japanese makes collectively fall below industry average for the first time in 29 years, according to the J.D. Power 2015 U.S. Initial Quality StudySM (IQS) released today.

The study examines problems experienced by vehicle owners during the first 90 days of ownership. Initial quality is determined by the number of problems experienced per 100 vehicles (PP100), with a lower score reflecting higher quality.

The industry experiences a 3 percent year-over-year improvement in initial quality, averaging 112 PP100 compared with 116 PP100 in 2014.

Historic Shifts in Performance by Brand Origin

Korean brands lead the industry in initial quality by the widest margin ever, averaging 90 PP100, which is an 11 PP100 improvement from 2014. For the first time in the study, European brands (113 PP100) surpass Japanese brands (114 PP100), while domestic makes (114 PP100) equal the Japanese for only a second time.

Although Japanese brands overall experience a 2 PP100 improvement from 2014, this has proven insufficient to keep pace with the industry, causing Japanese makes overall to fall below industry average for the first time in the 29-year history of the U.S. Initial Quality Study. Only four of the 10 Japanese brands included in the study post an improvement.

“This is a clear shift in the quality landscape,” said Renee Stephens, vice president of U.S. automotive quality at J.D. Power. “For so long, Japanese brands have been viewed by many as the gold standard in vehicle quality. While the Japanese automakers continue to make improvements, we’re seeing other brands, most notably Korean makes, really accelerating the rate of improvement. Leading companies are not only stepping up the pace of improvements on existing models, but are also working up front to launch vehicles with higher quality and more intuitive designs.”

Technology Continues to be a Trouble Spot for the Industry

Entertainment and connectivity systems remain the most problem-prone area for a third consecutive year, with voice recognition and Bluetooth pairing continuing to top the problem list.
The majority of models included in the study that have voice recognition systems experience 10 or more PP100 related to this feature.
The number of owners who indicate having voice recognition in their new vehicle has increased to 67 percent in 2015 from 57 percent in 2013. Based on results from the J.D. Power 2015 U.S. Tech Choice Study,SM this will continue to increase as simple wireless device and near field communication are the top two entertainment/connectivity technologies consumers indicate wanting on their next vehicle.
“Smartphones have set high consumer expectations of how well technology should work, and automakers are struggling to match that success in their new vehicles,” said Stephens. “However, we are seeing some OEMs make important improvements along the way. What’s clear is that they can’t afford to wait for the next generation of models to launch before making important updates to these systems.”


This is an IQS study, so this information is only accurate for MY 2015/2016 vehicles.

The top 2 problems found in both the IQS study and long-term dependability study were to do with bluetooth connectivity and voice recognition systems. However, there were still numerous transmission and engine problems found in both the IQS study and long-term dependability study.


The JD Power studies also note that one major reason why Japanese vehicles are scored poorly was because of the Takata airbag scandal which has recently killed 8 people in the US and injured thousands others. However, this still can't explain Subaru's low rankings, as they only used Takata airbags for their Impreza's from 2004-2007. So I speculate problems with electronics/transmissions to be the top reasons.

Post your comments/thoughts.
ZeaL.
Profile Blog Joined April 2009
United States5955 Posts
June 24 2015 04:36 GMT
#2
Interesting stuff. Would be much more interested in a longer term dataset though as most problems that occur within 90 days shouldn't be that big of an issue. I would rather have a bluetooth connectivity problem in the first 30 days rather than have my transmission fall out after 50k miles.
WolfintheSheep
Profile Joined June 2011
Canada14127 Posts
June 24 2015 04:37 GMT
#3
Would be more interesting to see how this compares to the rest of the world.

I get the feeling that Ford, Ram, GMC and Dodge would be a lot lower in other countries.
Average means I'm better than half of you.
QuantumTeleportation
Profile Joined March 2015
United States119 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-06-24 04:39:36
June 24 2015 04:39 GMT
#4
On June 24 2015 13:36 ZeaL. wrote:
Interesting stuff. Would be much more interested in a longer term dataset though as most problems that occur within 90 days shouldn't be that big of an issue. I would rather have a bluetooth connectivity problem in the first 30 days rather than have my transmission fall out after 50k miles.


The thing is that even the long-term dependability study found that the main problems were to do with bluetooth connectivity and voice recognition.

So both the IQS study and long term dependability study correlate with each other.

The problem with long term dependability studies are that they don't say anything about newly released vehicles. Also long term dependability studies suffer from external biases such as driver care and external factors.
QuantumTeleportation
Profile Joined March 2015
United States119 Posts
June 24 2015 04:41 GMT
#5
On June 24 2015 13:37 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Would be more interesting to see how this compares to the rest of the world.

I get the feeling that Ford, Ram, GMC and Dodge would be a lot lower in other countries.


I would say there would be minor differences, however probably not off-trend when compared to North America.

Other regions also usually have their own manufacturing plants, however they mostly use the same parts.
andrewlt
Profile Joined August 2009
United States7702 Posts
June 24 2015 04:52 GMT
#6
On June 24 2015 13:39 QuantumTeleportation wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2015 13:36 ZeaL. wrote:
Interesting stuff. Would be much more interested in a longer term dataset though as most problems that occur within 90 days shouldn't be that big of an issue. I would rather have a bluetooth connectivity problem in the first 30 days rather than have my transmission fall out after 50k miles.


The thing is that even the long-term dependability study found that the main problems were to do with bluetooth connectivity and voice recognition.

So both the IQS study and long term dependability study correlate with each other.

The problem with long term dependability studies are that they don't say anything about newly released vehicles. Also long term dependability studies suffer from external biases such as driver care and external factors.


I last bought a new car in 2010. I did my research during that time. I'm pretty sure that Korean vehicles were already near the top on initial quality during that time. However, the Japanese (specifically Toyota and Honda with their luxury brands Lexus and Acura) still dominate the long term dependability studies.
WolfintheSheep
Profile Joined June 2011
Canada14127 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-06-24 04:56:28
June 24 2015 04:56 GMT
#7
On June 24 2015 13:41 QuantumTeleportation wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2015 13:37 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Would be more interesting to see how this compares to the rest of the world.

I get the feeling that Ford, Ram, GMC and Dodge would be a lot lower in other countries.


I would say there would be minor differences, however probably not off-trend when compared to North America.

Other regions also usually have their own manufacturing plants, however they mostly use the same parts.

There's also a vast difference in the actual cars sold to you if you live in North America, Europe or Asia.

Though I doubt that would change much when it comes to Bluetooth.
Average means I'm better than half of you.
QuantumTeleportation
Profile Joined March 2015
United States119 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-06-24 05:05:13
June 24 2015 05:04 GMT
#8
On June 24 2015 13:52 andrewlt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2015 13:39 QuantumTeleportation wrote:
On June 24 2015 13:36 ZeaL. wrote:
Interesting stuff. Would be much more interested in a longer term dataset though as most problems that occur within 90 days shouldn't be that big of an issue. I would rather have a bluetooth connectivity problem in the first 30 days rather than have my transmission fall out after 50k miles.


The thing is that even the long-term dependability study found that the main problems were to do with bluetooth connectivity and voice recognition.

So both the IQS study and long term dependability study correlate with each other.

The problem with long term dependability studies are that they don't say anything about newly released vehicles. Also long term dependability studies suffer from external biases such as driver care and external factors.


I last bought a new car in 2010. I did my research during that time. I'm pretty sure that Korean vehicles were already near the top on initial quality during that time. However, the Japanese (specifically Toyota and Honda with their luxury brands Lexus and Acura) still dominate the long term dependability studies.


I think it was 2014 when Hyundai and KIA surpassed the Japanese brands.

But the long term dependability studies have a 3 year lag. So if you saw those results in 2010, they were for MY 2006/2007 vehicles.
RapidTiger
Profile Joined April 2015
59 Posts
June 26 2015 02:34 GMT
#9
It seems nothing can beat Porsche both in terms of driving dynamics and quality.

Hyundai makes extremely reliable cars.

Currently own a 2010 Mazda 3 and so many transmission problems. It's a piece of crap that I can't wait to replace soon. Never buying a Mazda ever again.
QuantumTeleportation
Profile Joined March 2015
United States119 Posts
June 26 2015 05:31 GMT
#10
On June 26 2015 11:34 RapidTiger wrote:
It seems nothing can beat Porsche both in terms of driving dynamics and quality.

Hyundai makes extremely reliable cars.

Currently own a 2010 Mazda 3 and so many transmission problems. It's a piece of crap that I can't wait to replace soon. Never buying a Mazda ever again.


Well, that's your anecdotal evidence. But I guess what you're saying is in line with this study.

However you have to be careful when comparing your own observations to actual standardized studies. Because subjective observations are usually biased and do not represent the majority.
Jibba
Profile Blog Joined October 2007
United States22883 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-06-26 06:51:27
June 26 2015 06:30 GMT
#11
On June 26 2015 11:34 RapidTiger wrote:
It seems nothing can beat Porsche both in terms of driving dynamics and quality.

Hyundai makes extremely reliable cars.

Currently own a 2010 Mazda 3 and so many transmission problems. It's a piece of crap that I can't wait to replace soon. Never buying a Mazda ever again.

You've mostly got Ford to blame for that.

FWIW, Mazda does extremely well in Consumer Reports' longterm reliability surveys, and I believe CR draws upon the largest data set of anyone.

JD Power does market research so they can license using their name/badge. Their Initial Quality Survey doesn't differentiate between major/minor problems nor does it differentiate between defects and bad design, and it only covers the first 90 days of ownership. That's why Infotainment/Bluetooth systems are rated so highly. Some companies are still terrible at making Infotainment systems so it's tallied as a problem, but that doesn't mean the system is defective nor does it make the vehicle unreliable. I'd argue their sampling is worse than CR's too. Their Vehicle Dependability Study is better, because its methodology is a lot closer to CR's.

To put it another way, JD Power's business model is to sell its name/badge to the companies it reviews. They're literally paid by the companies they review, for undisclosed amounts. CR is a non-profit that barely stays afloat by selling magazines, but doesn't get paid by companies nor do they allow their name to be used in marketing material.

The truest information you can get (besides manufacturer's data, which will never be made public) is probably from third party warranty companies.
ModeratorNow I'm distant, dark in this anthrobeat
RapidTiger
Profile Joined April 2015
59 Posts
June 26 2015 13:07 GMT
#12
On June 26 2015 15:30 Jibba wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 26 2015 11:34 RapidTiger wrote:
It seems nothing can beat Porsche both in terms of driving dynamics and quality.

Hyundai makes extremely reliable cars.

Currently own a 2010 Mazda 3 and so many transmission problems. It's a piece of crap that I can't wait to replace soon. Never buying a Mazda ever again.

You've mostly got Ford to blame for that.

FWIW, Mazda does extremely well in Consumer Reports' longterm reliability surveys, and I believe CR draws upon the largest data set of anyone.

JD Power does market research so they can license using their name/badge. Their Initial Quality Survey doesn't differentiate between major/minor problems nor does it differentiate between defects and bad design, and it only covers the first 90 days of ownership. That's why Infotainment/Bluetooth systems are rated so highly. Some companies are still terrible at making Infotainment systems so it's tallied as a problem, but that doesn't mean the system is defective nor does it make the vehicle unreliable. I'd argue their sampling is worse than CR's too. Their Vehicle Dependability Study is better, because its methodology is a lot closer to CR's.

To put it another way, JD Power's business model is to sell its name/badge to the companies it reviews. They're literally paid by the companies they review, for undisclosed amounts. CR is a non-profit that barely stays afloat by selling magazines, but doesn't get paid by companies nor do they allow their name to be used in marketing material.

The truest information you can get (besides manufacturer's data, which will never be made public) is probably from third party warranty companies.


I thought Consumer Reports was total bs. That's what everyone I know says.

The wide variety of items that are reviewed by Consumer Reports like baby strollers to TV's makes me a little cautious when it comes to their reliability.
QuantumTeleportation
Profile Joined March 2015
United States119 Posts
June 27 2015 06:16 GMT
#13
On June 26 2015 22:07 RapidTiger wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 26 2015 15:30 Jibba wrote:
On June 26 2015 11:34 RapidTiger wrote:
It seems nothing can beat Porsche both in terms of driving dynamics and quality.

Hyundai makes extremely reliable cars.

Currently own a 2010 Mazda 3 and so many transmission problems. It's a piece of crap that I can't wait to replace soon. Never buying a Mazda ever again.

You've mostly got Ford to blame for that.

FWIW, Mazda does extremely well in Consumer Reports' longterm reliability surveys, and I believe CR draws upon the largest data set of anyone.

JD Power does market research so they can license using their name/badge. Their Initial Quality Survey doesn't differentiate between major/minor problems nor does it differentiate between defects and bad design, and it only covers the first 90 days of ownership. That's why Infotainment/Bluetooth systems are rated so highly. Some companies are still terrible at making Infotainment systems so it's tallied as a problem, but that doesn't mean the system is defective nor does it make the vehicle unreliable. I'd argue their sampling is worse than CR's too. Their Vehicle Dependability Study is better, because its methodology is a lot closer to CR's.

To put it another way, JD Power's business model is to sell its name/badge to the companies it reviews. They're literally paid by the companies they review, for undisclosed amounts. CR is a non-profit that barely stays afloat by selling magazines, but doesn't get paid by companies nor do they allow their name to be used in marketing material.

The truest information you can get (besides manufacturer's data, which will never be made public) is probably from third party warranty companies.


I thought Consumer Reports was total bs. That's what everyone I know says.

The wide variety of items that are reviewed by Consumer Reports like baby strollers to TV's makes me a little cautious when it comes to their reliability.


Consumer Reports can be very hit and miss. I tend not to rely on them on specific industrial information.
Jibba
Profile Blog Joined October 2007
United States22883 Posts
June 27 2015 06:17 GMT
#14
On June 26 2015 22:07 RapidTiger wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 26 2015 15:30 Jibba wrote:
On June 26 2015 11:34 RapidTiger wrote:
It seems nothing can beat Porsche both in terms of driving dynamics and quality.

Hyundai makes extremely reliable cars.

Currently own a 2010 Mazda 3 and so many transmission problems. It's a piece of crap that I can't wait to replace soon. Never buying a Mazda ever again.

You've mostly got Ford to blame for that.

FWIW, Mazda does extremely well in Consumer Reports' longterm reliability surveys, and I believe CR draws upon the largest data set of anyone.

JD Power does market research so they can license using their name/badge. Their Initial Quality Survey doesn't differentiate between major/minor problems nor does it differentiate between defects and bad design, and it only covers the first 90 days of ownership. That's why Infotainment/Bluetooth systems are rated so highly. Some companies are still terrible at making Infotainment systems so it's tallied as a problem, but that doesn't mean the system is defective nor does it make the vehicle unreliable. I'd argue their sampling is worse than CR's too. Their Vehicle Dependability Study is better, because its methodology is a lot closer to CR's.

To put it another way, JD Power's business model is to sell its name/badge to the companies it reviews. They're literally paid by the companies they review, for undisclosed amounts. CR is a non-profit that barely stays afloat by selling magazines, but doesn't get paid by companies nor do they allow their name to be used in marketing material.

The truest information you can get (besides manufacturer's data, which will never be made public) is probably from third party warranty companies.


I thought Consumer Reports was total bs. That's what everyone I know says.

The wide variety of items that are reviewed by Consumer Reports like baby strollers to TV's makes me a little cautious when it comes to their reliability.

Americans don't like them because they tend to kill American cars.

Also, they rate reliability as #1, so if you're a Corvette owner, your car is going to be rated fairly low even though you obviously didn't buy it for reliability.
ModeratorNow I'm distant, dark in this anthrobeat
Alakaslam
Profile Blog Joined September 2011
United States17336 Posts
June 27 2015 06:50 GMT
#15
As an automaniacal fool, I agree with JD power's list.

Ford has really improved their lineup though, especially the focus with that new suspension and the 4 cylinder option. I think that would make a great commuter and long trip car.

Their trucks are great too, the 5.0 engine is an amazing piece of engineering. However, they were actually doing much of what they did with that engine in a mechanical way back in the 1960's with the legendary side-oiler 427. That was the first application of VVT. They simply did it with computer aided controls this time and with a torque building emphasis, for better efficiency.

Kia has really impressed me though, a lot. They really are on their game, Hyundai as well.
If you think Elon Musk is a Nazi, it is because YOU radicalized him!
jmbthirteen
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
United States10734 Posts
June 27 2015 07:00 GMT
#16
On June 24 2015 13:37 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Would be more interesting to see how this compares to the rest of the world.

I get the feeling that Ford, Ram, GMC and Dodge would be a lot lower in other countries.

When it comes to Ford, it probably won't vary all that much. They have worked to make global platforms
www.superbeerbrothers.com
Alakaslam
Profile Blog Joined September 2011
United States17336 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-06-27 07:01:57
June 27 2015 07:01 GMT
#17
On June 27 2015 16:00 jmbthirteen wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2015 13:37 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Would be more interesting to see how this compares to the rest of the world.

I get the feeling that Ford, Ram, GMC and Dodge would be a lot lower in other countries.

When it comes to Ford, it probably won't vary all that much. They have worked to make global platforms

Zero hour post, nice job man

Edit: WTH TL STOP MESSING WIT ME HEAD
If you think Elon Musk is a Nazi, it is because YOU radicalized him!
RapidTiger
Profile Joined April 2015
59 Posts
June 27 2015 14:11 GMT
#18
On June 27 2015 15:50 Alakaslam wrote:
As an automaniacal fool, I agree with JD power's list.

Ford has really improved their lineup though, especially the focus with that new suspension and the 4 cylinder option. I think that would make a great commuter and long trip car.

Their trucks are great too, the 5.0 engine is an amazing piece of engineering. However, they were actually doing much of what they did with that engine in a mechanical way back in the 1960's with the legendary side-oiler 427. That was the first application of VVT. They simply did it with computer aided controls this time and with a torque building emphasis, for better efficiency.

Kia has really impressed me though, a lot. They really are on their game, Hyundai as well.


Porsche is the perfect luxury brand. They are the epitome of luxury and premium vehicles AND they are extremely high quality and reliable.

Hyundai/Kia are the perfect mainstream brands. Their top-range models are premium, however their lower end models are still extremely reliable.
Nemireck
Profile Joined October 2010
Canada1875 Posts
June 27 2015 15:39 GMT
#19
Not surprised by Mazda's placement at all. My experience is purely anecdotal, but since 2010 or so I've been hearing nothing but complaints about their cars.

FWIW, I drive a '94 Mazda Protege that my mechanics have assured me will run until the body rusts out on it.

Surprised to see Hyundai and Kia ranking so high on the list. If only because of their reputation in the past. It's good though, because I'm going to be purchasing a new car in the next few months and really like the look of the '15 Elantra, specifically.

That all said, I'll probably end up with a Yaris :p I love that little ball of reliability and gas mileage.
Teamwork is awesome... As long as your team is doing all the work!
RapidTiger
Profile Joined April 2015
59 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-06-28 05:44:09
June 28 2015 05:37 GMT
#20
On June 28 2015 00:39 Nemireck wrote:
Not surprised by Mazda's placement at all. My experience is purely anecdotal, but since 2010 or so I've been hearing nothing but complaints about their cars.

FWIW, I drive a '94 Mazda Protege that my mechanics have assured me will run until the body rusts out on it.

Surprised to see Hyundai and Kia ranking so high on the list. If only because of their reputation in the past. It's good though, because I'm going to be purchasing a new car in the next few months and really like the look of the '15 Elantra, specifically.

That all said, I'll probably end up with a Yaris :p I love that little ball of reliability and gas mileage.


Why would you buy a Yaris when gas is so cheap these days? Yarises are too small, and look really cheap and tacky.

Get the 2015 Hyundai Elantra GT or 2015 Corolla instead. I personally think the 2015 Corolla's front grille looks cheap though. Also consider a VW Golf.

I'm looking at the 2016 Hyundai Tucson. The best looking SUV in the fast-growing medium-sized SUV segment IMO.

[image loading]
1 2 3 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
BSL: Ladder Tournament
04:00
#3 - $100
ZZZero.O148
LiquipediaDiscussion
AI Arena Tournament
02:00
Swiss - Round 5
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft: Brood War
Leta 566
ZZZero.O 148
soO 53
Hyun 53
Dota 2
qojqva2308
monkeys_forever10
League of Legends
Doublelift2337
Heroes of the Storm
Grubby4800
Liquid`Hasu633
Other Games
summit1g6143
FrodaN1600
KnowMe352
Pyrionflax215
420jenkins184
Livibee182
QueenE98
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick711
StarCraft 2
angryscii 35
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 77
• Adnapsc2 20
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• blackmanpl 45
• FirePhoenix6
• niya90s 1
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Other Games
• imaqtpie992
• Shiphtur620
• Scarra449
Upcoming Events
Sparkling Tuna Cup
12h 50m
Patches Events
17h 50m
BSL Open Qualifier
21h 50m
BSL Open Qualifier
21h 50m
OSC
1d 1h
OSC
1d 14h
WardiTV Weekly
2 days
PiGosaur Cup
3 days
The PondCast
4 days
Online Event
5 days
[ Show More ]
Korean StarCraft League
6 days
Afreeca Starleague
6 days
Rush vs Soulkey
CranKy Ducklings
6 days
BSL Open Qualifier
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Acropolis #5 - GSB
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
Copium Cup

Ongoing

ASL Season 22
Super Anchor Qualifying S3
Acropolis #5
HCC Season 3
ESL Pro League Season 24
Stake Ranked Episode 4
1win Private Club #1
Logitech G Play Connect 2026
SL StarSeries Fall 2026
FISSURE Playground #3
BLAST Open Fall 2026
Esports World Cup 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer 2026

Upcoming

Acropolis #5 - GSC
BSL Season 23
SC4ALL II: Brood War
BSL 23: Non-Korean Championship
HSC XXX
Stellar Fest 2: Lunar Cup
SC4ALL II: StarCraft II
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
RSL Offline Finals
eXTREMESLAND 2026
PGL Major Singapore 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 6
BLAST Rivals Fall 2026
IEM Beijing 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 5
PGL Masters Bucharest 2026
1win Private Club #2
Thunderpick World Champ. '26
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.