|
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]](http://www.jdpower.com/sites/default/files/2015%20IQS%20Rank%201.JPG)
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
United States22883 Posts
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
United States22883 Posts
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.
|
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.
|
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
|
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
|
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.
|
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.
|
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]](http://o.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/GLOB/legacy_thumbnail/750x422/quality/95/http://www.blogcdn.com/slideshows/images/slides/337/642/6/S3376426/slug/l/01-2016-hyundai-tucson-geneva-1.jpg)
|
The quality always depends on the manufacturing plant.
I have heard of bad experiences with Kia and Hyundai produced here in Europe, and the road service statistics of the largest German automobile club confirm my suspicion. On the other hand VW has such a bad reputation in the US because of the manufacturing plants in Mexico, the vehicles produced in Germany are pretty reliable.
|
I heard that if u need proper anti rust protection from road salt like we have in the north one cant really get an asian car. Heard a famous swedish motor journalist say it. Dont know how much truths in it thought but he claimed they barely had rust protection since there was no salt in asia.
|
On June 28 2015 15:33 Maenander wrote:
The quality always depends on the manufacturing plant.
I have heard of bad experiences with Kia and Hyundai produced here in Europe, and the road service statistics of the largest German automobile club confirm my suspicion. On the other hand VW has such a bad reputation in the US because of the manufacturing plants in Mexico, the vehicles produced in Germany are pretty reliable.
Don't they still use the same auto parts? What accounts for the quality difference between different manufacturing plants?
I don't see how this is logical.
On June 28 2015 16:40 unkkz wrote:
I heard that if u need proper anti rust protection from road salt like we have in the north one cant really get an asian car. Heard a famous swedish motor journalist say it. Dont know how much truths in it thought but he claimed they barely had rust protection since there was no salt in asia.
I heard this was a problem with Mazda's. Not sure about any other Asian car manufacturer.
|
On June 28 2015 20:45 RapidTiger wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2015 15:33 Maenander wrote:
The quality always depends on the manufacturing plant.
I have heard of bad experiences with Kia and Hyundai produced here in Europe, and the road service statistics of the largest German automobile club confirm my suspicion. On the other hand VW has such a bad reputation in the US because of the manufacturing plants in Mexico, the vehicles produced in Germany are pretty reliable. Don't they still use the same auto parts? What accounts for the quality difference between different manufacturing plants? I don't see how this is logical. Show nested quote +On June 28 2015 16:40 unkkz wrote:
I heard that if u need proper anti rust protection from road salt like we have in the north one cant really get an asian car. Heard a famous swedish motor journalist say it. Dont know how much truths in it thought but he claimed they barely had rust protection since there was no salt in asia. I heard this was a problem with Mazda's. Not sure about any other Asian car manufacturer.
Cars that are manufactured abroad should use mostly the same parts, if I'm not mistaken.
There should be no quality difference between cars manufactured domestically and those manufactured overseas. The only differences are in costs. It's far more profitable to manufacture cars when the domestic currency is lower.
|
On June 28 2015 16:40 unkkz wrote:
I heard that if u need proper anti rust protection from road salt like we have in the north one cant really get an asian car. Heard a famous swedish motor journalist say it. Dont know how much truths in it thought but he claimed they barely had rust protection since there was no salt in asia.
my toyota doesnt have rust on it because I use anti rust ( 2008 )
mazda are known to be prone to rust, the one I used to have didnt rust ( 2000 ) until the fall where I was too broke to get the car oiled.
my parents have always driven japanese cars since the 80's ( honda, nissan, acura, mazda ) and never had any rust issues either.
I would tend to say that except for mazda I dont know any asian brand that is that prone to rust or that has the reputation...
( never had a block heater on any of my asian rides either )
|
"smart"... what a misnomer lol
I'm surprised Kia is top tier!
|
I find the difference between BMW & Mini kind of hilarious. Though the JD Power's surveys really leave a whole lot to be desired. Whether the bluetooth is a pain or the transmission is going to fall out are far more important information.
|
United States22883 Posts
On June 30 2015 13:35 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2015 16:40 unkkz wrote:
I heard that if u need proper anti rust protection from road salt like we have in the north one cant really get an asian car. Heard a famous swedish motor journalist say it. Dont know how much truths in it thought but he claimed they barely had rust protection since there was no salt in asia. my toyota doesnt have rust on it because I use anti rust ( 2008 ) mazda are known to be prone to rust, the one I used to have didnt rust ( 2000 ) until the fall where I was too broke to get the car oiled. my parents have always driven japanese cars since the 80's ( honda, nissan, acura, mazda ) and never had any rust issues either. I would tend to say that except for mazda I dont know any asian brand that is that prone to rust or that has the reputation... ( never had a block heater on any of my asian rides either )
Both Honda/Acura and Toyota/Lexus had a reputation for rusting for a very long time. That was about their only weak spot, while they were clobbering the Big 3 during the 80's and 90's.
|
United States1225 Posts
Fiat staying true to their old ways.
Honestly pretty surprised that Subaru scores so low. All of my friends who have them haven't had many issues. The only model that I've heard having problems is the BR-Z. Around New England especially, they have a pretty good reputation.
Also Porsche still being based.
|
On July 02 2015 02:40 peanuts wrote:
Fiat staying true to their old ways.
Honestly pretty surprised that Subaru scores so low. All of my friends who have them haven't had many issues. The only model that I've heard having problems is the BR-Z. Around New England especially, they have a pretty good reputation.
Also Porsche still being based.
Are you serious?
There are so many people saying that Subarus have guaranteed transmission problems within 2-3 years of ownership.
Mazda, Fiat and Subaru are all unreliable from what I've heard and experienced.
|
On July 02 2015 11:38 RapidTiger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2015 02:40 peanuts wrote:
Fiat staying true to their old ways.
Honestly pretty surprised that Subaru scores so low. All of my friends who have them haven't had many issues. The only model that I've heard having problems is the BR-Z. Around New England especially, they have a pretty good reputation.
Also Porsche still being based. Are you serious? There are so many people saying that Subarus have guaranteed transmission problems within 2-3 years of ownership. Mazda, Fiat and Subaru are all unreliable from what I've heard and experienced.
This. Although, I wouldn't say all Subaru models have the same transmission problems.
The Subaru BRZ was rated as the most unreliable sports car/coup/convertible of 2014: http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2014/10/top-10-least-reliable-cars.html/6
I wonder what's the problem with them (the article doesn't actually mention any specific problems)?
|
On July 02 2015 11:38 RapidTiger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2015 02:40 peanuts wrote:
Fiat staying true to their old ways.
Honestly pretty surprised that Subaru scores so low. All of my friends who have them haven't had many issues. The only model that I've heard having problems is the BR-Z. Around New England especially, they have a pretty good reputation.
Also Porsche still being based. Are you serious? There are so many people saying that Subarus have guaranteed transmission problems within 2-3 years of ownership. Mazda, Fiat and Subaru are all unreliable from what I've heard and experienced.
Mitsubishi's ranked lower than Mazda, and I've had my Lancer for 8 years and about 105K miles... never a single problem, ever.
All of this is anecdotal of course, but neither myself nor my 5 other friends with Mitsubishis have had problems over the years.
|
My 1997 Ford mustang blew a head gasket in 2011. Is 14 years good enough to expect no serious problems with your car? Probably but it was sad for me when it happened. Ruined the engine and cost more to replace it than just sell it. Now I own a Nissan Murano family wagon. Times and needs change. Still miss my old 5 alive pony car.
|
Anecdotal evidence should really be taken with a grain of salt. The auto industry literally sells millions of cars every year. Not even 1000 individual problems are significant. Large scale studies like the one from JD Power are thus needed to assess reliability across the auto industry at a much larger scale.
On July 05 2015 13:12 ElMeanYo wrote:
My 1997 Ford mustang blew a head gasket in 2011. Is 14 years good enough to expect no serious problems with your car? Probably but it was sad for me when it happened. Ruined the engine and cost more to replace it than just sell it. Now I own a Nissan Murano family wagon. Times and needs change. Still miss my old 5 alive pony car.
Depends on the quality of the vehicle over the 14 years. Many, if not most, cars can last 10+ years these days.
Some vehicles can last 10+ years without many issues, whereas others need many expensive repairs. So it's not only the duration that matters, it's the quality during that time that matters more.
|
No idea what kind of Hyundais are good quality, my family's owned two Elantras and both of them were shit. Especially the stick one, all the gears are close together so each time you're going 3rd to 4th to 5th you have to pray to Ford you're not shifting back to 3rd.
My 2000 VW Passat's been going strong for 15 years with a little regular home maintenance but nothing too expensive.
I don't hear nice things about the newer Passats though.
Anecdotal is what most of us have to go on, though. Like sure, Hyundais across the board might have less problems but that's not going to encourage me to look at a third Elantra.
|
On July 10 2015 23:14 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
No idea what kind of Hyundais are good quality, my family's owned two Elantras and both of them were shit. Especially the stick one, all the gears are close together so each time you're going 3rd to 4th to 5th you have to pray to Ford you're not shifting back to 3rd.
My 2000 VW Passat's been going strong for 15 years with a little regular home maintenance but nothing too expensive.
I don't hear nice things about the newer Passats though.
Anecdotal is what most of us have to go on, though. Like sure, Hyundais across the board might have less problems but that's not going to encourage me to look at a third Elantra.
Well your problem with Hyundais weren't anything to do with quality and reliability, more like driver's preference.
The JD study is about quality and reliability, not driver's preference.
Ask a doctor or a lawyer which car he'd buy, and he would definitely choose the Mercedes, Porsche or BMW.
Ask the average person which car he'd buy, and he would buy the Hyundai or Toyota.
|
On June 30 2015 13:03 QuantumTeleportation wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2015 20:45 RapidTiger wrote:On June 28 2015 15:33 Maenander wrote:
The quality always depends on the manufacturing plant.
I have heard of bad experiences with Kia and Hyundai produced here in Europe, and the road service statistics of the largest German automobile club confirm my suspicion. On the other hand VW has such a bad reputation in the US because of the manufacturing plants in Mexico, the vehicles produced in Germany are pretty reliable. Don't they still use the same auto parts? What accounts for the quality difference between different manufacturing plants? I don't see how this is logical. On June 28 2015 16:40 unkkz wrote:
I heard that if u need proper anti rust protection from road salt like we have in the north one cant really get an asian car. Heard a famous swedish motor journalist say it. Dont know how much truths in it thought but he claimed they barely had rust protection since there was no salt in asia. I heard this was a problem with Mazda's. Not sure about any other Asian car manufacturer. Cars that are manufactured abroad should use mostly the same parts, if I'm not mistaken. There should be no quality difference between cars manufactured domestically and those manufactured overseas. The only differences are in costs. It's far more profitable to manufacture cars when the domestic currency is lower.
Sorry to say, but this is not true at all. Sure, the parts have the same specifications (though even then there can be variations, if the car is not exactly the same; for example, the Ford Fusion is branded Ford Mondeo in Europe and althoug it is generally the same car, it does use different parts. In another example, the US VW Passat is not the same car as the original Ger Passat at all) - but they can use a wildly different supply chain. You always try to produce at least the chassis as close to the assembly line as possible, to avoid the huge costs associated with transatlantic shipping. Even if the parts should be the same, the quality of the assembly line itself has a large impact on the final product, ranging from the chemicals applied, the mechanics hitting their clearance parameters, interior assembly up to QA thoroughness. Of course all manufacturers (I assume) have company wide quality metrics, but local success in adhering to them can differ wildly. It takes years to get an assembly line to full quality, and for example the VW plants in Mexico (has gotten better over the years) and Chattanooga are notorious to fail company wide quality rankings.
TL;DR: There can be wide, wide quality differences depending on assembly line. Which means that reports such as the one linked in OP should be taken under consideration of the target market they examined (the US in this case). This also explains the differing views on brand quality, depending on the continent/market you are talking about.
|
On July 16 2015 19:02 RapidTiger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2015 23:14 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
No idea what kind of Hyundais are good quality, my family's owned two Elantras and both of them were shit. Especially the stick one, all the gears are close together so each time you're going 3rd to 4th to 5th you have to pray to Ford you're not shifting back to 3rd.
My 2000 VW Passat's been going strong for 15 years with a little regular home maintenance but nothing too expensive.
I don't hear nice things about the newer Passats though.
Anecdotal is what most of us have to go on, though. Like sure, Hyundais across the board might have less problems but that's not going to encourage me to look at a third Elantra. Well your problem with Hyundais weren't anything to do with quality and reliability, more like driver's preference. The JD study is about quality and reliability, not driver's preference. Ask a doctor or a lawyer which car he'd buy, and he would definitely choose the Mercedes, Porsche or BMW. Ask the average person which car he'd buy, and he would buy the Hyundai or Toyota.
You misunderstand me. In terms of quality, the car was shit (can't shift properly, that's going to mess up the transmission at some point). In terms of reliability, the car was shit (two broke in quick succession while the rest of our cars were fine).
|
On July 16 2015 20:51 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2015 19:02 RapidTiger wrote:On July 10 2015 23:14 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
No idea what kind of Hyundais are good quality, my family's owned two Elantras and both of them were shit. Especially the stick one, all the gears are close together so each time you're going 3rd to 4th to 5th you have to pray to Ford you're not shifting back to 3rd.
My 2000 VW Passat's been going strong for 15 years with a little regular home maintenance but nothing too expensive.
I don't hear nice things about the newer Passats though.
Anecdotal is what most of us have to go on, though. Like sure, Hyundais across the board might have less problems but that's not going to encourage me to look at a third Elantra. Well your problem with Hyundais weren't anything to do with quality and reliability, more like driver's preference. The JD study is about quality and reliability, not driver's preference. Ask a doctor or a lawyer which car he'd buy, and he would definitely choose the Mercedes, Porsche or BMW. Ask the average person which car he'd buy, and he would buy the Hyundai or Toyota. You misunderstand me. In terms of quality, the car was shit (can't shift properly, that's going to mess up the transmission at some point). In terms of reliability, the car was shit (two broke in quick succession while the rest of our cars were fine).
If your family hated their first Elantra so much, why the fuck would they buy a second one?
Obviously all car brands have some models that are better / worse than their average, but Korean cars are far from being the cheapo Japanese knockoffs that they were in 90s, both Hyundai and Kia have won numerous accolades in the last decade in just about every car category.
That said, are there any weightings based on seriousness of issues encountered, or does every customer complaint = one 'penalty point' to the brand? Some cars are rather fickle and finicky with minor things like bluetooth connectivity or stock audio systems etc, but at the same time have better than average chassis / motors and so on -- surely a model that has bluetooth issues in 10 out of 100 cars but needs serious repairs in 1 out of 100 cars in its first year should be ranked higher than a model that needs major repairs in 5 out of 100 cars in their first year?
|
Kinda sad to see subaru so low but also not really because I've disliked all their newer cars post 2009.
|
aww i really like my fiat . . .but its pretty right ive had a few problems with this brand with 2 brand new cars
|
On July 17 2015 00:59 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2015 20:51 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:On July 16 2015 19:02 RapidTiger wrote:On July 10 2015 23:14 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
No idea what kind of Hyundais are good quality, my family's owned two Elantras and both of them were shit. Especially the stick one, all the gears are close together so each time you're going 3rd to 4th to 5th you have to pray to Ford you're not shifting back to 3rd.
My 2000 VW Passat's been going strong for 15 years with a little regular home maintenance but nothing too expensive.
I don't hear nice things about the newer Passats though.
Anecdotal is what most of us have to go on, though. Like sure, Hyundais across the board might have less problems but that's not going to encourage me to look at a third Elantra. Well your problem with Hyundais weren't anything to do with quality and reliability, more like driver's preference. The JD study is about quality and reliability, not driver's preference. Ask a doctor or a lawyer which car he'd buy, and he would definitely choose the Mercedes, Porsche or BMW. Ask the average person which car he'd buy, and he would buy the Hyundai or Toyota. You misunderstand me. In terms of quality, the car was shit (can't shift properly, that's going to mess up the transmission at some point). In terms of reliability, the car was shit (two broke in quick succession while the rest of our cars were fine). If your family hated their first Elantra so much, why the fuck would they buy a second one? Obviously all car brands have some models that are better / worse than their average, but Korean cars are far from being the cheapo Japanese knockoffs that they were in 90s, both Hyundai and Kia have won numerous accolades in the last decade in just about every car category. That said, are there any weightings based on seriousness of issues encountered, or does every customer complaint = one 'penalty point' to the brand? Some cars are rather fickle and finicky with minor things like bluetooth connectivity or stock audio systems etc, but at the same time have better than average chassis / motors and so on -- surely a model that has bluetooth issues in 10 out of 100 cars but needs serious repairs in 1 out of 100 cars in its first year should be ranked higher than a model that needs major repairs in 5 out of 100 cars in their first year?
We actually had two concurrently, first one broke a bit after we got the second one.
|
|
|
Yeah i got a 2009 TSX with tons of features and everything works perfectly.
How is it possible that acura is lower then honda when they use the exact same parts? If anything, Honda should be lower because their cheaper, economy class vehicles should bring them down.
Also in my experiance, audis are the worst cars once they hit 100k km/s. They seem to start having major problems and cost large to fix. I have a few friends that had them and they all grew to hate their cars.
Chrysler and dodge are the exact same cars. They 300 is a charger so how can they be so far apart in quality?
This study is off.
|
Fiat/Chrysler is just a terrible company. No surprises there. Don't ever buy their cars (especially jeeps).
I have a Mazda 6 diesel and it has been great. I did previously have a Mazda mps though and while a great car it had recurring mechanical issues.
Korean cars have come so far.
|
On September 19 2015 19:48 RowdierBob wrote:
Fiat/Chrysler is just a terrible company. No surprises there. Don't ever buy their cars (especially jeeps).
I have a Mazda 6 diesel and it has been great. I did previously have a Mazda mps though and while a great car it had recurring mechanical issues.
Korean cars have come so far.
Mazda is Japanese not Korean  They have had an excellent reputation for reliability for some years now, great cars. I like their newer designs as well, and with the engine technology, they go their own way (no downsizing).
|
On September 19 2015 20:35 ACrow wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 19:48 RowdierBob wrote:
Fiat/Chrysler is just a terrible company. No surprises there. Don't ever buy their cars (especially jeeps).
I have a Mazda 6 diesel and it has been great. I did previously have a Mazda mps though and while a great car it had recurring mechanical issues.
Korean cars have come so far. Mazda is Japanese not Korean They have had an excellent reputation for reliability for some years now, great cars. I like their newer designs as well, and with the engine technology, they go their own way (no downsizing).
I'm pretty sure his reference to Mazda and Korean cars were mutually exclusive.
Mazda has paint quality/rusting issues. It's everywhere in the auto magazines.
Korean/Japanese cars are reliable, but they lack sophistication.
The only "mainstream" cars that really differentiate themselves from the rest are Mercedes Benz, Porsche, and to some extent BMW.
A Toyota Camry and a BMW 5 series just can't be compared.
|
Of course, because the Camry is half the price. The comparable model would be the Lexus GS.
|
In other news, Volkswagen is getting CRUSHED. Shares have plunged 25% after news of a likely $18 billion USD fine on Volkswagen for falsifying emissions data controls. The shares of BMW and Mercedes Benz also took a beating.
http://www.ft.com/fastft/394391/volkswagen-shares-driven-lower-down-20
Looks like German carmakers are in for a massive sales disappointment in the next year or so.
I think this will make an even better chance for Korean/Japanese automakers to shine.
|
On September 21 2015 19:21 RapidTiger wrote:In other news, Volkswagen is getting CRUSHED. Shares have plunged 25% after news of a likely $18 billion USD fine on Volkswagen for falsifying emissions data controls. The shares of BMW and Mercedes Benz also took a beating. http://www.ft.com/fastft/394391/volkswagen-shares-driven-lower-down-20Looks like German carmakers are in for a massive sales disappointment in the next year or so. I think this will make an even better chance for Korean/Japanese automakers to shine.
I dont know. Shure, VW will have a harsh time with that shit. Not the fine by the US Gouvernemnt, that wount be 18 billion, it cant be after the GM thing, but more because people just wount buy their cars anymore, at least no diesels. And the "fixed" cars will have problems, because the "fixed" cars will lose alot of power.
For BMW and MB, I dont see so much problems: It is common, that VW is not the only one, but that means not the only one in the world. I bet every carmaker uses this kind of software for its diesels. You cant combine alot of power, low fuel usage and super low emission of SOx with a diesel. Okay you can, but then the drivers have to refill carbamide (buyable under "Adblue" ) what they dont want to do. And thats a problem for all smaler diesel cars downsized under 2 liters or less.
We will see what happens, but VW is fucked, they are extremly focused on their "clean" diesels in Europe (more then 50% of the cars use diesel allready in germany) and now this shit.
|
On September 23 2015 01:35 Clonester wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2015 19:21 RapidTiger wrote:In other news, Volkswagen is getting CRUSHED. Shares have plunged 25% after news of a likely $18 billion USD fine on Volkswagen for falsifying emissions data controls. The shares of BMW and Mercedes Benz also took a beating. http://www.ft.com/fastft/394391/volkswagen-shares-driven-lower-down-20Looks like German carmakers are in for a massive sales disappointment in the next year or so. I think this will make an even better chance for Korean/Japanese automakers to shine. I dont know. Shure, VW will have a harsh time with that shit. Not the fine by the US Gouvernemnt, that wount be 18 billion, it cant be after the GM thing, but more because people just wount buy their cars anymore, at least no diesels. And the "fixed" cars will have problems, because the "fixed" cars will lose alot of power. For BMW and MB, I dont see so much problems: It is common, that VW is not the only one, but that means not the only one in the world. I bet every carmaker uses this kind of software for its diesels. You cant combine alot of power, low fuel usage and super low emission of SOx with a diesel. Okay you can, but then the drivers have to refill carbamide (buyable under "Adblue" ) what they dont want to do. And thats a problem for all smaler diesel cars downsized under 2 liters or less. We will see what happens, but VW is fucked, they are extremly focused on their "clean" diesels in Europe (more then 50% of the cars use diesel allready in germany) and now this shit.
I find it absolutely criminal that GM was only charged $900 million USD for a ignition switch fault that killed over 100 people.
Yet Volkswagen's emissions fraud system didn't directly kill anyone, yet it has to pay potentially $18 billion USD in fines as well as suffer a hugely tarnished brand image.
|
On September 19 2015 22:29 RapidTiger wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 20:35 ACrow wrote:On September 19 2015 19:48 RowdierBob wrote:
Fiat/Chrysler is just a terrible company. No surprises there. Don't ever buy their cars (especially jeeps).
I have a Mazda 6 diesel and it has been great. I did previously have a Mazda mps though and while a great car it had recurring mechanical issues.
Korean cars have come so far. Mazda is Japanese not Korean They have had an excellent reputation for reliability for some years now, great cars. I like their newer designs as well, and with the engine technology, they go their own way (no downsizing). I'm pretty sure his reference to Mazda and Korean cars were mutually exclusive. Mazda has paint quality/rusting issues. It's everywhere in the auto magazines. Korean/Japanese cars are reliable, but they lack sophistication. The only "mainstream" cars that really differentiate themselves from the rest are Mercedes Benz, Porsche, and to some extent BMW. A Toyota Camry and a BMW 5 series just can't be compared.
And yet, according to the above study, the average Toyota has half as many problems as a BMW?
Is that how I'm supposed to interpret the ratings?
|
Mazda is owned by Ford.
Calling them Japanese is still true but kind of a matter of perspective. I presume a lot of the parts are likely made in Mexico, however according to this
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda
It seems Ford's share has really depreciated. So, actually they are Japanese; carry on.
|
The 2015 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study looks at long-term reliability of vehicles. And Skoda, KIA and Suzuki came out at top.
That's not to say Toyota and Volkswagen are unreliable. Any auto brand with less than 100 problems per 100 vehicles should be reasonable in terms of reliability.
On September 24 2015 12:57 Alakaslam wrote:Mazda is owned by Ford. Calling them Japanese is still true but kind of a matter of perspective. I presume a lot of the parts are likely made in Mexico, however according to this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MazdaIt seems Ford's share has really depreciated. So, actually they are Japanese; carry on.
Mazda has a lot of new gimmicky tech in their new cars, but they have poor reliability as seen in both the 2015 JD Power Initial Quality Study and the 2015 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study.
|
On September 25 2015 11:02 QuantumTeleportation wrote:
The 2015 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study looks at long-term reliability of vehicles. And Skoda, KIA and Suzuki came out at top.
That's not to say Toyota and Volkswagen are unreliable. Any auto brand with less than 100 problems per 100 vehicles should be reasonable in terms of reliability.
So Audi, BMW, Jaguar, Chevy, etc. are relatively unreliable car manufacturers, on average.
|
On September 25 2015 14:06 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2015 11:02 QuantumTeleportation wrote:
The 2015 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study looks at long-term reliability of vehicles. And Skoda, KIA and Suzuki came out at top.
That's not to say Toyota and Volkswagen are unreliable. Any auto brand with less than 100 problems per 100 vehicles should be reasonable in terms of reliability. So Audi, BMW, Jaguar, Chevy, etc. are relatively unreliable car manufacturers, on average.
According to the 2015 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study, yes.
However, if you look at the 2015 JD Power IQS Study, BMW and Jaguar are likely to see a rebound in vehicle dependability (aka long-term reliability) in the coming years.
|
On September 26 2015 15:25 QuantumTeleportation wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2015 14:06 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 25 2015 11:02 QuantumTeleportation wrote:
The 2015 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study looks at long-term reliability of vehicles. And Skoda, KIA and Suzuki came out at top.
That's not to say Toyota and Volkswagen are unreliable. Any auto brand with less than 100 problems per 100 vehicles should be reasonable in terms of reliability. So Audi, BMW, Jaguar, Chevy, etc. are relatively unreliable car manufacturers, on average. According to the 2015 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study, yes. However, if you look at the 2015 JD Power IQS Study, BMW and Jaguar are likely to see a rebound in vehicle dependability (aka long-term reliability) in the coming years.
With VW's diesel emissions scandal, I wonder how it will impact JD Power's Quality studies in the future. Would they nullify this scandal? Because VW's diesel emissions scandal is a reliability issue, just not in the sense that most people would contextualize reliability into.
My dad owns an MY2012 BMW 535i and it's been super reliable. We are glad we didn't buy diesel, although the results of the probe are still inconclusive.
We are thinking of buy a new 2016 Hyundai Tucson, and replacing our old Nissan Pathfinder.
So I think the make and model of the car also needs contextual analysis which JD Power did but not really seen in the graph.
Consumer Reports also came up with a similar list. But I don't buy into CR's bs.
|
On October 07 2015 23:07 RapidTiger wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2015 15:25 QuantumTeleportation wrote:On September 25 2015 14:06 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 25 2015 11:02 QuantumTeleportation wrote:
The 2015 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study looks at long-term reliability of vehicles. And Skoda, KIA and Suzuki came out at top.
That's not to say Toyota and Volkswagen are unreliable. Any auto brand with less than 100 problems per 100 vehicles should be reasonable in terms of reliability. So Audi, BMW, Jaguar, Chevy, etc. are relatively unreliable car manufacturers, on average. According to the 2015 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study, yes. However, if you look at the 2015 JD Power IQS Study, BMW and Jaguar are likely to see a rebound in vehicle dependability (aka long-term reliability) in the coming years. With VW's diesel emissions scandal, I wonder how it will impact JD Power's Quality studies in the future. Would they nullify this scandal? Because VW's diesel emissions scandal is a reliability issue, just not in the sense that most people would contextualize reliability into. My dad owns an MY2012 BMW 535i and it's been super reliable. We are glad we didn't buy diesel, although the results of the probe are still inconclusive. We are thinking of buy a new 2016 Hyundai Tucson, and replacing our old Nissan Pathfinder. So I think the make and model of the car also needs contextual analysis which JD Power did but not really seen in the graph. Consumer Reports also came up with a similar list. But I don't buy into CR's bs.
Not sure what you mean by that the VW diesel scandal is a reliability issue. Yes, in terms of keeping their promises, it may be a reliability issue. But not in terms of quality assurance.
German cars, including those from VW, are still the epitome of high quality. This VW diesel scandal will only strengthen VW in the future.
For example, VW is turning to a massive drive in electric vehicles in the future. Diesel is no longer on their list of top priorities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.jdpower.com/sites/default/files/2015%20UK%20VDS%20Rank%201.JPG)
