2015 Vehicle Quality Study by JD Power released!

[Jimzz]

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.

No they do not. They do not give out their totals and they ONLY survey those that subscribe to Consumer Reports.

They violate the first rule of any good survey, a open and random pool of samples. Any one that dives a car in the US should be in that pool, not just those that subscribe to CR. Let alone the sample size, they never release numbers, the average age/race/location/etc... of their pool, and on and on...

 

[marincounty]

No they do not. They do not give out their totals and they ONLY survey those that subscribe to Consumer Reports.

They violate the first rule of any good survey, a open and random pool of samples. Any one that dives a car in the US should be in that pool, not just those that subscribe to CR. Let alone the sample size, they never release numbers, the average age/race/location/etc... of their pool, and on and on...

In other words, you got nothin'.

 

[deathBOB]

No they do not. They do not give out their totals and they ONLY survey those that subscribe to Consumer Reports.

They violate the first rule of any good survey, a open and random pool of samples. Any one that dives a car in the US should be in that pool, not just those that subscribe to CR. Let alone the sample size, they never release numbers, the average age/race/location/etc... of their pool, and on and on...

How does the status of the driver affect the reliability of the vehicle? Unless automakers target CR subscribers with specially prepared vehicles, the status of the reporting individual (CR subscriber or not CR subscriber) should not matter.

 

[Jimzz]

How does the status of the driver affect the reliability of the vehicle? Unless automakers target CR subscribers with specially prepared vehicles, the status of the reporting individual (CR subscriber or not CR subscriber) should not matter.

Because you get like minded people, and with the internet now, probably mostly older that subscribe, let alone race/gender/etc... issues.

Since they do not release their data or demographics their data is flawed as you can't really get anything from it without the full picture.

How about how did the Geo Prism have a lower rating than the Toyota corolla one year? That is one of many of their f-ups.

 

[deathBOB]

Because you get like minded people, and with the internet now, probably mostly older that subscribe, let alone race/gender/etc... issues.

Since they do not release their data or demographics their data is flawed as you can't really get anything from it without the full picture.

How about how did the Geo Prism have a lower rating than the Toyota corolla one year? That is one of many of their f-ups.

So your claim is that the internet, "groupthink," and the demographics of CR readers affect how those readers report reliability issues? Do you have any proof to back up this claim?

 

[marvdmartian]

Huge improvement by Kia, from last year, while Toyota and Honda both slipped pretty badly.

http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/2014-us-initial-quality-study-iqs

 

[Squisher]

So your claim is that the internet, "groupthink," and the demographics of CR readers affect how those readers report reliability issues? Do you have any proof to back up this claim?

He just did. The Prism and the Corolla are the same car made on the same line. The foreign Corolla was rated higher than the domestic Prism.

 

[deathBOB]

He just did. The Prism and the Corolla are the same car made on the same line. The foreign Corolla was rated higher than the domestic Prism.

He is claiming widespread bias that invalidates CR as a source. Even if his claim about the Prizm/Corolla were true, it would not prove such a widespread issue (although it could be combined with other evidence to do so).

As to the Prizm itself, I don't have access to that information, but Steve Lang at The Truth About Cars does address it in this article:http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/08/unraveling-the-mystery-of-consumer-reports-brand-spread/

 

[Scarpozzi]

I'm surprised Ram is so high on the list....considering how poor quality of every other brand Chrysler touches is so poor. I wouldn't buy anything from that company based on past performance and association....they lost me as a customer when I used to own a Jeep.

I'm really intrigued by the Korean vehicles considering I still don't see them as anything more than cheap cars. To me, they are a step down in quality from Japanese models (once again, this has to do with my perception).

 

[Jimzz]

So your claim is that the internet, "groupthink," and the demographics of CR readers affect how those readers report reliability issues? Do you have any proof to back up this claim?

People have looked at CR a lot and any one that understands basic scientific surveys knows its flawed. Here are just a few examples when looked at.

http://www.allpar.com/cr.html

http://blog.bluespringsfordparts.com/233/consumer-reports-rating-methodology-flawed/

 

[sontakke]

Obviously, AllPar and FordParts are the most objective parties here but CR is biased!

 

[Torn Mind]

With no control group, it is indeed impossible to take for granted that the population of Consumer reports readers behave exactly as non-readers. The term is not groupthink, but rather a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Some sites might indeed have their American car bias, but shooting anything they say down merely because they say is a classic shoot the messenger error in reasoning. You target the exact sentences in the article, not their previous opinions on other matters.

 

[exar333]

No they do not. They do not give out their totals and they ONLY survey those that subscribe to Consumer Reports.

They violate the first rule of any good survey, a open and random pool of samples. Any one that dives a car in the US should be in that pool, not just those that subscribe to CR. Let alone the sample size, they never release numbers, the average age/race/location/etc... of their pool, and on and on...

Well said.

For those that have actually done scientific surveys (which is probably not most here) a specific methodology needs to be followed for the results to be considered valid outside that population. The size of the survey group is important, but there is so much more at play. Size, demographic, bias(es) and response rates are all very key. For example, it is well-known that specific types or responses are received in survey-type polls. Generally, more 'passionate' or extreme response types appear in these vs. sampling a specific population for answers. That means in this case, you get a lot of more 'fanboys' and 'haters' responding, which can definitely skew responses.

It is probably not likely, and frankly too expensive, to do this 'right' and have groups of researchers sample different demographics all around the country, in-person, and get a large, representative sample population and compare to a control. That just will not happen.

All that said, I do believe CR does have some significant biases that have been identified in the past and ignoring that is rather ignorant IMHO. There is no practical way to get it 100% right, but at least the sample information should be released so we can draw our own conclusions. Failure to do so make me inclined to think there is a reason they are not doing so...

 

[AdamK47]

It seems like the Consumer Reports argument comes up at least once a year on this sub-forum. It's whenever the Japanese makes rank lower than other makes in another study. The nature of the Consumer Reports surveys are indeed questionable. There will always be those that deny it.

I say pick a survey that makes you feel good about your purchasing preferences. In the end, people will be swayed based on group confirmation anyway.

 

[Achtung!]

No they do not. They do not give out their totals and they ONLY survey those that subscribe to Consumer Reports.

They violate the first rule of any good survey, a open and random pool of samples. Any one that dives a car in the US should be in that pool, not just those that subscribe to CR. Let alone the sample size, they never release numbers, the average age/race/location/etc... of their pool, and on and on...

My friend once bought a Westinghouse washing machine according to Consumer Reports' advice and he says he will never refer to it again.

 

[FeuerFrei]

He just did. The Prism and the Corolla are the same car made on the same line. The foreign Corolla was rated higher than the domestic Prism.

There were differences. For instance the Prism doesn't seem to have adjustable headlights while the Corolla does. I would know, I tried to help a Prism owner once. Of course head/taillamps may have been the main differences overall, who knows for sure. Not many Prisms around.

Perhaps Geo could have re-specced materials in a way that degraded owners experience - inferior plastics, bonding agents. Just conjecture.

 

[Achtung!]

The 2015 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study is out:

Skoda, KIA and Suzuki topped the list. I expect Hyundai, Jaguar and BMW to increase their rankings in future vehicle dependability studies since their recent Initial Quality Study were excellent.

So I guess KIA ranks at the top both in terms of initial quality and long-term reliability.

http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/2015-uk-vehicle-dependability-study-vds

 

[Jimzz]

^

Unless its different in the UK Kia and Hyundai use the same engine/trans yet 1 is about the best there is and the other is below average. Again this just shows that these surveys are not true car reliability but how much people like the car.

 

[MustISO]

^

Unless its different in the UK Kia and Hyundai use the same engine/trans yet 1 is about the best there is and the other is below average. Again this just shows that these surveys are not true car reliability but how much people like the car.

If you look at the criteria the drivetrain is only one component measured.

The study measures problems experienced during the past 12 months by original owners of vehicles in the United Kingdom after 12-36 months of ownership. The study examines 177 problem symptoms across eight categories: engine and transmission; vehicle exterior; driving experience; features/controls/displays; audio/communication/entertainment/navigation (ACEN); seats; heating, ventilation and cooling (HVAC); and vehicle interior.

So a bad interior or radio could put you lower on the list. For me dependability is things breaking and the car in the shop, not whether the driving experience is good. Honda is probably low on the list for having some of the worst seats ever put into a car.

 

[sontakke]

When Skoda and Yugo and Kia are topping the "dependability" list, I am not sure I am going to depend on the list

 

[Jimzz]

If you look at the criteria the drivetrain is only one component measured.

The study measures problems experienced during the past 12 months by original owners of vehicles in the United Kingdom after 12-36 months of ownership. The study examines 177 problem symptoms across eight categories: engine and transmission; vehicle exterior; driving experience; features/controls/displays; audio/communication/entertainment/navigation (ACEN); seats; heating, ventilation and cooling (HVAC); and vehicle interior.

So a bad interior or radio could put you lower on the list. For me dependability is things breaking and the car in the shop, not whether the driving experience is good. Honda is probably low on the list for having some of the worst seats ever put into a car.

Yea I know, and that makes these things worthless. A loose radio knob is the same as a blown motor on the side of the road.

So VW/Audi has a lot of major transmission problems but if Kia has 2 loose knobs in their cars they would rank lower. That's just stupid IMO.

 

[RLGL]

All of you miss the point about a survey. A survey can be written so the result can be what the writer wants the end result to be. Favorable to the company(s) who commissioned it. All surveys need to be taken with a grain of salt. Remember just because it is on the internet, don't mean it is true!

 

[Achtung!]

All of you miss the point about a survey. A survey can be written so the result can be what the writer wants the end result to be. Favorable to the company(s) who commissioned it. All surveys need to be taken with a grain of salt. Remember just because it is on the internet, don't mean it is true!

It's more than just a "survey". It's a study and, hence, more reliable than a survey.

The data has been standardized across the board such that there is no inherent bias.

I wish people were able to differentiate a study from a survey. A study can have a survey in it, but that doesn't make the study a survey in itself.