2015 Vehicle Quality Study by JD Power released!

[Achtung!]

Exactly. Not too long after my wife bought her Dodge Durango she started to complain that sometimes while driving the engine would rev really hight but not go faster and then all of sudden she felt a lurch/thud. Then my sister in-law said it did the same to her. When I drove I never experienced it and could never get it to do it. So I took it to the dealer to check it out. They could not find anything either.

Then I realized that she was probably accidentally hitting the paddle shifters on the steering wheel. Sure enough that is what it was, she would accidentally downshift with her foot on the gas and of course if revved high and then when it would shift gears back up there would be a slight jerk because the high rpm and shifting. Now she watches to make sure she doesn't touch the paddle shifters and no more issues. Since we took it in to check out that would probably be considered a "mechanical problem" per the survey but it wasn't.

That's not how the JD Power IQS study works.

They only assess real problems (i.e. nothing to do with the user not being able to figure out something). They don't assess subjective problems or fake problems.

The whole aim of this study is to look at things as objectively as possible. Yes, it does include a survey, however it would be careful not to take any fake anecdotal reports as real problems.

 

[ramj70]

That's not how the JD Power IQS study works.

They only assess real problems (i.e. nothing to do with the user not being able to figure out something). They don't assess subjective problems or fake problems.

The whole aim of this study is to look at things as objectively as possible. Yes, it does include a survey, however it would be careful not to take any fake anecdotal reports as real problems.

Not according to this and JD Power themselves. It can be very subjective


In J.D. Power's official opinion, these are quality complaints. "When we ask consumers what they think is meant by quality, they include not only absence of defects and malfunctions but also what we would consider perceived quality, quality of materials, and very much also design quality," says JDP automotive research vice president Dave Sargent. "Not only is the component built the way it was designed, but was it designed right in the first place."The purpose of the Initial Quality Study is to measure quality problems as defined and reported by consumers. So, because consumers define quality broadly, we take the fairly broad approach that if a consumer considers something a problem, it is counted as a problem...whether it be a blown transmission or a wind noise or a squeaking panel, they all count the same, for a number of reasons,” Sargent continued. “For one, it's impossible to get a consensus as to what one problem is worth relative to another. And traditional defects, things that break, almost always get fixed fairly quickly by the dealer at little or no expense to the consumer. But design problems such as wind noise or a hard-to-use navigation system, the dealer has little chance of fixing, so the consumer has to live with those for the lifetime of the vehicle."

Read more: http://blogs.motortrend.com/j-d-pow...ally-measure-quality-25937.html#ixzz3eB1Yse7C

 

[Pacfanweb]

Uhh, no it's not. It's the most unbiased way to indicate quality and reliability for new cars.

Tell me another method that assesses quality and reliability for new cars.

All it means is which cars were built with less defects or mistakes at the factory.

Doesn't mean a thing if you want to know which cars will last longer or give less trouble over its lifespan.

 

[exar333]

All it means is which cars were built with less defects or mistakes at the factory.

Doesn't mean a thing if you want to know which cars will last longer or give less trouble over its lifespan.

This is going a bit far.

I would be cautious to state initial quality causes longer-term reliability. BUT it is not unreasonable to think higher initial quality could be correlated with less issues down the road.

If I have a lot of issues up-front with my car, that doesn't give me a lot of confidence long-term. The opposite is true. Doesn't necessarily mean that's true, but there could be some truth here, in some cases.

Edit: Personally, I think maintenance and care factor-in quite a bit in long-term reliability. But what can you do if your transmission blows 2x before 100k and you have babied it? (think circa 2000 Ford Explorer) Some things are unavoidable, others are not.

 

[Jimzz]

This is going a bit far.

I would be cautious to state initial quality causes longer-term reliability. BUT it is not unreasonable to think higher initial quality could be correlated with less issues down the road.

If I have a lot of issues up-front with my car, that doesn't give me a lot of confidence long-term. The opposite is true. Doesn't necessarily mean that's true, but there could be some truth here, in some cases.

Edit: Personally, I think maintenance and care factor-in quite a bit in long-term reliability. But what can you do if your transmission blows 2x before 100k and you have babied it? (think circa 2000 Ford Explorer) Some things are unavoidable, others are not.

It could if the data was given out, not just their final numbers.

There is good data here but unless we can see the raw data its worthless. The reason is what if a car line near the middle like Nissan or ford had mostly issues like "old flip phone would not connect to car radio..." or "car made a creek once..." and few were similar. Vs say the highest rank one Porsche mostly had the same "engine blew up..." or "Engine makes a lot of noise and is leaking oil now...".

In those cases the final added numbers make Nissan or Ford look worse yet they could go 100-200k easy. While the highest ranked one can't even go a couple years without major engine problems.

That's why these rankings are next to worthless now as blown engine and phone will not connect to Bluetooth radio are each 1 ding. We need to break the data out from low issues or at least allow people to see the raw complaints.

A good example of this is the complaints people make to the fed Gov of their cars. You can read the complaints raw. I remember 1 for my truck was "Truck stalled, installed fuel pump, maker was not notified...". The truck had over 150k on it at the time. So I dismissed that one but looked at others to see what problems might pop up. But if I just added up the complaints with no regard then that would have counted.

 

[exar333]

It could if the data was given out, not just their final numbers.

There is good data here but unless we can see the raw data its worthless. The reason is what if a car line near the middle like Nissan or ford had mostly issues like "old flip phone would not connect to car radio..." or "car made a creek once..." and few were similar. Vs say the highest rank one Porsche mostly had the same "engine blew up..." or "Engine makes a lot of noise and is leaking oil now...".

In those cases the final added numbers make Nissan or Ford look worse yet they could go 100-200k easy. While the highest ranked one can't even go a couple years without major engine problems.

That's why these rankings are next to worthless now as blown engine and phone will not connect to Bluetooth radio are each 1 ding. We need to break the data out from low issues or at least allow people to see the raw complaints.

A good example of this is the complaints people make to the fed Gov of their cars. You can read the complaints raw. I remember 1 for my truck was "Truck stalled, installed fuel pump, maker was not notified...". The truck had over 150k on it at the time. So I dismissed that one but looked at others to see what problems might pop up. But if I just added up the complaints with no regard then that would have counted.

Definitely agree.

The Ford Sync issues come to mind. They tank Ford's 'reliability' ratings due to issues, but they weren't necessarily related to the car's ability to keep going without major issues.

However, these types of awards do help highlight reliability, dealer QC and well-engineered products. In the Sync example, it wasn't explained well to many customers, was not the most intuitive and when it failed there was no workaround (who wants their car stuck at 85F when it warms-up! lol) Even though the Sync disproportionately hurt Ford, the heart of the matter was the system was flawed and these types of studies helped identify that.

The raw data would help considerably read into this more though...

 

[Achtung!]

Not according to this and JD Power themselves. It can be very subjective


In J.D. Power's official opinion, these are quality complaints. "When we ask consumers what they think is meant by quality, they include not only absence of defects and malfunctions but also what we would consider perceived quality, quality of materials, and very much also design quality," says JDP automotive research vice president Dave Sargent. "Not only is the component built the way it was designed, but was it designed right in the first place."The purpose of the Initial Quality Study is to measure quality problems as defined and reported by consumers. So, because consumers define quality broadly, we take the fairly broad approach that if a consumer considers something a problem, it is counted as a problem...whether it be a blown transmission or a wind noise or a squeaking panel, they all count the same, for a number of reasons,” Sargent continued. “For one, it's impossible to get a consensus as to what one problem is worth relative to another. And traditional defects, things that break, almost always get fixed fairly quickly by the dealer at little or no expense to the consumer. But design problems such as wind noise or a hard-to-use navigation system, the dealer has little chance of fixing, so the consumer has to live with those for the lifetime of the vehicle."

Read more: http://blogs.motortrend.com/j-d-pow...ally-measure-quality-25937.html#ixzz3eB1Yse7C

I highly doubt JD Power took fake accounts in their study though.

JD Power is a very highly respected study. Many people make their car purchasing decisions off this study.

 

[SSSnail]

In today's world of shared technologies, cross-platform productions, joint developments, etc... Are there really anything that's made by one company anymore?

 

[Ramses]

In today's world of shared technologies, cross-platform productions, joint developments, etc... Are there really anything that's made by one company anymore?

Not on European cars in a lot of cases. I can't speak as to very recently but for a very, very, very long time no matter if you bought a VW or a Mercedes or Porsche, you had for example Bosch designed and built fuel injection and frequently ignition. I wouldn't be shocked if it's still the case.

 

[Achtung!]

In today's world of shared technologies, cross-platform productions, joint developments, etc... Are there really anything that's made by one company anymore?

Most auto companies use auto parts from different companies. For example, Toyota, Honda, Mazda and Subaru use parts from Denso and Hyundai Mobis. Most European brands use Bosch but also parts from the other 2.

 

[Jeff7]

they should split mechanical issues from high tech issues.

Yeah...I didn't expect that to be grouped in there.

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.

I don't know if my car does voice recognition, and I think I've paired a Bluetooth device with it once in more than 3 years. For all I know, it died a year ago and I never noticed.

Taken from the Initial Quality Study (IQS), which looks at owner-reported problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership, this score is based on problems that have caused a complete breakdown or malfunction, or where controls or features may work as designed, but are difficult to use or understand.

My grandmother bought a used car that was still paired to several Bluetooth devices. She evidently drove past one and the car started talking loudly to her, saying that she had an incoming call. She didn't know how to disable that feature herself. Would that have been reported as a problem?

The 2015 U.S. Initial Quality Study is based on responses from more than 84,000 purchasers and lessees of new 2015 model-year vehicles surveyed after 90 days of ownership.

I dislike the temperature control knobs in my car because they offer little tactile feedback as to their current status - they're simply round knurled knobs, with only a visual indicator as to where they're turned. I don't think it's a good idea to have controls in a car that require you to look at them to use them properly, though it is still at least possible to turn them all the way to one side to gain a reference point.
But I'm not the only one with an opinion. There are cars out there that, bafflingly, have flat touchpanel interfaces for many of the interior controls.

 

[SSSnail]

Not on European cars in a lot of cases. I can't speak as to very recently but for a very, very, very long time no matter if you bought a VW or a Mercedes or Porsche, you had for example Bosch designed and built fuel injection and frequently ignition. I wouldn't be shocked if it's still the case.

Well, for one, Porsche, Audi, Lambo, are all owned by VW AG, so there are a lot of shared components. That leaves BMW and Mercedes; even they don't have any shared platform, but there are a lot of electronics that are manufactured by the same companies in those cars. They also source different components from third party manufacturers. So, I don't really know what you're saying.

 

[Ramses]

Well, for one, Porsche, Audi, Lambo, are all owned by VW AG, so there are a lot of shared components. That leaves BMW and Mercedes; even they don't have any shared platform, but there are a lot of electronics that are manufactured by the same companies in those cars. They also source different components from third party manufacturers. So, I don't really know what you're saying.

You said what I said, or at least what I intended to say.

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

Jaguar better put out a 5L V8 SC 2nd gen (2016+) XF, or it won't matter if they're ranked within the top #3 for quality

 

[Greenman]

The survey should be broken up into several sections.
Defects that left the vehicle inoperable.
Safety defects.
Cosmetic defects.
Stupid gadget defects/usability issues.

My guess is that the last one is where most of the problems occur. I personally don't give a rats ass if the mood lighting dimmer is hard to understand, or the glove box climate control is off by six degrees. I want a comfortable car that starts every time I get in it and will run for a quarter million miles without a major repair.

 

[Achtung!]

The survey should be broken up into several sections.
Defects that left the vehicle inoperable.
Safety defects.
Cosmetic defects.
Stupid gadget defects/usability issues.

My guess is that the last one is where most of the problems occur. I personally don't give a rats ass if the mood lighting dimmer is hard to understand, or the glove box climate control is off by six degrees. I want a comfortable car that starts every time I get in it and will run for a quarter million miles without a major repair.

They did do that, most likely.

I wouldn't call gadget defects/usability issues "stupid". They are still the most common problems with modern cars and many drivers complain about them.

This is why many Chinese car brands don't sell in the US. Because they don't meet quality standards.

 

[Phanuel]

This is why many Chinese car brands don't sell in the US. Because they don't meet quality standards.

And that they don't meet any safety standards and are blatant IP copies.

 

[Achtung!]

And that they don't meet any safety standards and are blatant IP copies.

It's going to take at least 10 years for the Chinese to come up with a satisfactory brand for themselves. And even then, it's going to be extremely difficult to enter an already competitive market.

For example, no single car company has greater than 15~20% market share in any given country, except their own domestic countries. For example, GM has a market share of around ~18~20% in the US.

And the other medium-big automakers have around 5% to 15% of the US auto market.

 

[Nebor]

It was a tough choice for me between the Porsche Macan and the Kia Sorento, but this morning I'm feeling like I made the right call.

 

[monkeydelmagico]

It was a tough choice for me between the Porsche Macan and the Kia Sorento, but this morning I'm feeling like I made the right call.

2 Kia's for the price of 1 Porsche? :biggrin:

 

[rumpleforeskin]

UK based car warranty firm "Warranty Direct" keep a continuous update of their reliability stats which can be viewed online. They have 50,000 policies of which most are newer cars and really 50,000 is only 0.14% of cars registered in the UK so I'm not sure that it would qualify as a conclusive survey.

May be of interest though
http://www.reliabilityindex.com/top-100

 

[marincounty]

CR recently had an article about which cars are likely to last 200K miles.
All of the cars listed were Toyota or Honda.
JD Power's surveys are almost useless, unless you trade your car in every 3 months.

 

[AdamK47]

CR recently had an article about which cars are likely to last 200K miles.
All of the cars listed were Toyota or Honda.
JD Power's surveys are almost useless, unless you trade your car in every 3 months.

LOL Consumer Reports.

Studies based on like-minded individuals that feed off each others like mindedness. Therefore, Consumer Reports.

 

[Achtung!]

UK based car warranty firm "Warranty Direct" keep a continuous update of their reliability stats which can be viewed online. They have 50,000 policies of which most are newer cars and really 50,000 is only 0.14% of cars registered in the UK so I'm not sure that it would qualify as a conclusive survey.

May be of interest though
http://www.reliabilityindex.com/top-100

That list seems even less reliable than Consumer Reports.

CR recently had an article about which cars are likely to last 200K miles.
All of the cars listed were Toyota or Honda.
JD Power's surveys are almost useless, unless you trade your car in every 3 months.

LOL @ Consumer Reports.

 

[marincounty]

That list seems even less reliable than Consumer Reports.



LOL @ Consumer Reports.

I hear this a lot. Consumer Reports doesn't accept advertising money from manufacturers, and has millions of consumers responding to it's surveys without colluding with each other.
If you have any comparable sources of information about auto reliability please let us know.
Otherwise CR is the best source of info on auto reliability available.