long term quality index site

[brainhulk]

http://tradeinqualityindex.com

http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/what-is-quality-when-it-comes-to-a-used-car-1680930838/+pgeorge

Very cool they compiled this data.

 

[videogames101]

How can scion be so low compared to lexus/toyota? lol

 

[Jimzz]

How can scion be so low compared to lexus/toyota? lol

They use old cars so even first year Scions still show up. I was wondering why Cadillac was so low when most other reviews like this rate it very high and saw that the Caterra and Seville bring the rest down. Yet those cars have not been made for well over a decade but still count on their site.

So they have some decent data but you need to look closely to see what it really means not the headline charts.

 

[evident]

Never realized how much of a turd the Honda passport was

 

[brainhulk]

Never realized how much of a turd the Honda passport was

Iirc it was a rebadged Isuzu

 

[Midwayman]

Interesting how variable some brands can be. Validates my choice on a c350 though. Beats out most Hondas.

 

[Vdubchaos]

I think this study is flawed. In my life I had dozen vehicles and have not brought them for service ANYWHERE. How would ANYONE in this world know how reliable the cars I have were?

if this is based on Dealership data, it's worthless as well. Any one with a half a brain will never go to a dealer. And I'm pretty sure independent shops don't have a way to report or even store this type of information PAST 20+ years.

I also would like to know who sponsors/contributed to the organization that's responsible for this study.

I don't believe it one bit.

Interesting how variable some brands can be. Validates my choice on a c350 though. Beats out most Hondas.

You would have to be out of your mind completely to think that ANY MB will be more reliable over time than a honda.

But keep thinking that, MB loves you.

Reliability is based on COMPLEXITY of a vehicle, not really a make or model. If you have more moving part, more options and more complexity.....your car will simply be less reliable.

Modern day MB is EXTREMELY complex and has options galore. And let's not forget that Germans have a LONG LONG LONG history of poor electronics......electronics which today's cars have more of then any other time in the history.

All I'm going to tell you is good luck in your "long" term with your MB.....

I wouldn't recommend a German car outside of warranty to my worst enemy. But I also have lot of experiance working on German cars and have first hand experience with "German engineering". It's overly complex and expensive for no apparent reason. Much of the engineering I have seen on BMW, MB and Audi/VW has been sketchy at best, and in some areas very poor.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Never realized how much of a turd the Honda passport was

It was just a rebadged Isuzu Rodeo for a long time, which was a total piece of shit.

 

[Midwayman]

You would have to be out of your mind completely to think that ANY MB will be more reliable over time than a honda.

But keep thinking that, MB loves you.

Reliability is based on COMPLEXITY of a vehicle, not really a make or model. If you have more moving part, more options and more complexity.....your car will simply be less reliable.

Modern day MB is EXTREMELY complex and has options galore. And let's not forget that Germans have a LONG LONG LONG history of poor electronics......electronics which today's cars have more of then any other time in the history.

All I'm going to tell you is good luck in your "long" term with your MB.....

I didn't buy it thinking that it would be more reliable. Everything I saw ahead of time indicated the w204 C-class would be above average though. Its one of their best models in terms of reliability. After buying it I learned that the majority of the issues were concentrated in the c300 with 4matic. (Problematic transfer case). Plus is the end of a pretty long model run so most of the bugs will have been worked out. I don't find it terribly difficult to believe one particular model of MB will approach honda. Not like honda is made by god or something.

As far as MB having a long long history of being unreliable, that's not true. They had a bit of a dip through the 90's but older MB are known as practically indestructible. Ton's of them running with hundreds of thousand of miles particularly in other areas of the world where they are common as taxis. In my area I see far more old MBs on the road than other German makes as well.

 

[Vdubchaos]

I didn't buy it thinking that it would be more reliable. Everything I saw ahead of time indicated the w204 C-class would be above average though. Its one of their best models in terms of reliability. After buying it I learned that the majority of the issues were concentrated in the c300 with 4matic. (Problematic transfer case). Plus is the end of a pretty long model run so most of the bugs will have been worked out. I don't find it terribly difficult to believe one particular model of MB will approach honda. Not like honda is made by god or something.

If you were to say W123, I would tell you that is the PRIME of MB reliability. Anything after that is sketchy.

But yes, lower end C class is less complex but STILL expensive to fix and still with a lot of complex over average car......THUS less reliable.

IAs far as MB having a long long history of being unreliable, that's not true. They had a bit of a dip through the 90's but older MB are known as practically indestructible. Ton's of them running with hundreds of thousand of miles particularly in other areas of the world where they are common as taxis. In my area I see far more old MBs on the road than other German makes as well.

You do realize I used to be a hard core MB enthusiast right?

Do not compare W123 to ANYTHING after that, even in the 90s. Most of MB in the ninties are no longer kicking around......for a reason. These cars get totaled upon simple repair as often it's too costly to repair vs value of the car.

Why do you think they are so cheap 4-5 years later. No one in their right mind wants a MB or german car out of warranty period. SURE, people get lucky and end up with SOME reliable examples, but the risk is EXTREMELY HIGH.

Reliability from MODEL TO SAME MODEL can differ as well. For example, we have a BASE MPV DX with no power windows or rear vents etc. We know few people that have decked out MPVs and our reliability is WAY WAY WAY better than their.

My question is, how does the study even determine reliability differences WITHIN the models (not even makes).

That's something that SHOULD be considered as well.

In general, if you want reliable you get a simple car with the least options and most importantly ....TREAT IT RIGHT and maintain it.

Where in this study do they talk about shitty owners and the consequenses of that?

Looking over the used car market there is TONS AND TONS of cars that haven't had oil changes and negligent owners.

It's sad to see CAR MAKERS take reliability hits for that as well, that's not right.

This study is FLAWED.

 

[Midwayman]

Cost != less reliable. It might mean less desirable, especially for the person who can't do any of their own repair work, but actually breaking down. No.

Its not like I disagree with you in general. Germans are less reliable overall. More complex models means more stuff to break down, and its very expensive to fix if it does break.

However you keep talking German cars and MB in general. I'm talking one model specifically. Every study I'd seen on it says its not a turd like you seem to think. Sorry if you got burnt or something, but the available data doesn't back you up in this particular case.

 

[Vdubchaos]

Cost != less reliable. It might mean less desirable, especially for the person who can't do any of their own repair work, but actually breaking down. No.

Its not like I disagree with you in general. Germans are less reliable overall. More complex models means more stuff to break down, and its very expensive to fix if it does break.

However you keep talking German cars and MB in general. I'm talking one model specifically. Every study I'd seen on it says its not a turd like you seem to think. Sorry if you got burnt or something, but the available data doesn't back you up in this particular case.

I don't think your car is a turd, I just wouldn't recommend ownership of the car for extended periods of time.

You know this deep inside, it's just a matter of time before your wallet REALLY hates you.

 

[joutlaw]

I had a Mazda Millenia and agree with the findings.

 

[Meghan54]

Surprised no one read the guy's blog in which he details how his data set was comprised.

First, his definition of quality, from the OP's linked page, in the questions section--his first answer.

Long-term quality is defined by:
1) How long the owner was willing to keep the vehicle before trading it in.
2) The mechanical condition of the vehicle with separate calculations for the engine, transmission, and powertrain.
3) The mileage of the vehicle at the time it was traded-in.

I understand #2 and #3, but length of ownership is also a factor? How about people who just buy every 3 years out of habit/keeping up with the Joneses/etc.?

His blog......found here: https://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motor...c-guide-10-worst-used-vehicles-222709616.html

And on his blog, he explains he ignored all used car trade-ins at new car dealerships. Why?

To remove this bias, I decided to gather data on trade-ins sent to wholesale auctions by large used-car retailers and other regional used-car retailers that don’t cater to a single automaker.

Catch that? Trade-ins sent to wholesale auctions by Carmax, et al, not new car dealers. So he examined cars sent to auction by used car lots that didn't think the vehicles were good enough to keep on their own lot. The worst of the bad.

And the way the problem areas were investigated/discovered by his crack team of auto inspectors? Again, his blog explains:

So I decided to test my guesses about used vehicles by using data from auto auctions and the problems dealers themselves disclose.

So, only the self-disclosed problems heard at auction. Not bad, but not very investigative work.....nor difficult, nor using all those trained auto inspectors.....wait, he meant the trained auto inspectors at the used car dealerships. LOL!!!

Now, in all honesty, if a dealer is found to be pushing through used cars at auction under a green light sale and not disclosing known problems, he'll get at a minimum banned from that auction and others will be informed. No dealer wants to be shut out of an auction like Mannheim. Suicide if they couldn't get to those.

Not exactly a scientific study, to say the least. Ignoring the better levels of used car trades, instead focusing on used trades at used car only dealers.


BTW....what bias do new car dealerships have? He describes it here:

Clean cars can sometimes be traded-in at a retail price, and then financed to a sub-prime car buyer for even more money. Dealers who specialize in a given car brand are usually more effective in marketing and selling that specific name, and they also get a greater share of trade-ins from the brand — along with a better selection of clean vehicles.

So, ignore new car dealership used car trades because they, the dealers, can attract more of the same brand.....heaven forbid someones buys a car, likes it, and goes back to buy another of the same brand.

And they can pay more?

Bias my butt........

 

[soccerballtux]

scion, acura, honda should be higher because Toyota is.

fails my sniff test, ignored

will continue to recommend Toyota/Honda for reliability, Hyundai if you want the warranty, Ford if you want the truck or sport.

 

[Yuriman]

scion, acura, honda should be higher because Toyota is.

fails my sniff test, ignored

will continue to recommend Toyota/Honda for reliability, Hyundai if you want the warranty, Ford if you want the truck or sport.

Looks like Honda lost a bit overall from selling rebadged Isuzu's, and possibly from Accord transmission problems. Civics, for instance, are shown to have outstanding reliability by their charts.