CR’s Annual predicted reliability issue showed up in the mail the other day, so I thought I’d share it. I’m not going to comment much on it, as folks tend to have strong feelings about the subject. But before anyone is going to say that CR has a bias against certain automakers, please note that GM vehicles are to be found both at the very top and very bottom of the rankings. And I will comment on one car.
The one that jumped out to me was the very poor showing by the Chevrolet Volt. It’s reliability has become under increasing fire, with class-action lawsuits about a defective steering column and many other various issues. I did wonder at the time if GM was going to be able to handle this issue with its “Prius fighter”. Apparently not.
For all-new 2017 vehicles, CR is taking a stab at predicting their future reliability based on brand record and other factors.
FCA…yikes. Also, what exactly makes GM’s full-sized trucks so unreliable?
It’s mainly the HD series that are affected, the 1500 series seems to be rated higher than Ford and Ram but lower than the Tundra.
Not surprising to see the Tundra now showing a good rating as it’s basically the same truck since 2007 with the same 5.7 V8 and basic body. The interior was refreshed and the grille and tail but not much else. The Silverado/Sierra were all new in 2014 with all new engines and the F-150 with the aluminum body is basically new too with a few carryover engines. The Ram is getting long in the tooth but is due for a new model in 2018 and the F-150 is getting the new 10 speed transmission for 2017 so that may affect there reliability.
It’s amazing (in a good way) to see Chevy with the Cruze at the top of the compact chart. And shocking to see the Civic so far down it.
And the Koreans seem to be doing extremely in most categories (also noting that the Cruze is a Daewoo design).
Very interesting, Paul, thanks for posting this.
Yikes. I bought a leftover ’15 RAM 2500 earlier this year (listed last on the CR report), and have already had to have one issue fixed at the dealer. I took it in because there’s an annoying whistle/squeal sound that seems to be tied to engine vacuum (as opposed to road speed or engine RPM – it gets louder with more load on the engine). First attempt by the dealer turned up a harmonic balancer that was “coming apart,” which was repaired under warranty. They said that should fix the noise.
Didn’t, so back it went. This time, they replaced part of the exhaust system and said that should fix the noise.
Didn’t, so back it went again. They said “they all do that,” and handed me my keys back.
Online searches turn up others with the same noise, both on the 5.7 and 6.4 gas engines. Sometimes replacing all or part of the exhaust fixes it, sometimes other repairs do (water pump, for example – which I doubt is my problem since it’s not variable to engine RPM).
Love the truck itself, but am now a bit wary. It was intended to be my last lifetime truck purchase!
It’s yer tuurrrboooo! 🙂
No, try a different dealer and show them the documentation you found online. FCA’s now had two (three?) bites at the apple. One more and it’s potentially a lemon law-able issue if it “significantly impairs” the use of the vehicle which I am not sure this would qualify as.
FCA also offers a fairly comprehensive factory extended warranty that can be bought from different dealers online so you could shop that around, I looked into it once for the 2014 300C I had and thought it was reasonably priced, but traded the car before it became an issue. My 5.7 never had the issue that you describe, for the record.
Probably a short in my catastrophic converter!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C5ED_5eiccE
That Volt steering issue has a parallel with the Malibu Maxx. Its electric steering would lock up at times. I was thinking of picking up a used one about 8 years ago and found lots of complaints about it, so I “steered clear”.
I did a double take when I saw the Hyundai Azera atop the “Large Cars” category — not because I thought it would be unreliable, but because I had completely forgotten it existed.
Turns out Hyundai hasn’t managed to sell more than 1,000 Azeras in a calendar month since December 2013. Since then, they’ve only shifted about 16,500 units — in other words, about the same number of Toyota Camrys sold every two weeks. It’s currently being outsold by (to name a few) the Maserati Ghibli, Porsche 911, and the 12-year-old design of the Nissan Armada.
For a car brand as prominent and increasingly well-respected as Hyundai, the Azera is surprisingly irrelevant.
But at least it’s reliable.
Forgot about the Azera as well! We won’t get the next generation, unfortunately. The one that confused me was the Infiniti QX30 – a weird contraption that appears part 1970s Datsun and part Lexus RX.
Isn’t the QX30 a “re-body” of a Mercedes-Benz design? I could be wrong as Infiniti has lost me with it’s model “names”.
Oops, apparently I’ve confused a Q30 and a QX30.
I gather there is a minor difference between the two, so you are right either way
I did not even know there was such a car, Hyundai Austria wisely did not bother importing it into the country – the biggest we get is the i40…
It is a bummer that Fiat Chrysler is at the bottom since I want to like their products and I deal with a lot of them at work. Hopefully the Pacifica is not an unreliable piece of junk in the long run. I entered a contest to win a free Fiat Chrysler product so now i have to figure out which is the least crappy model. I had no idea the Transit Connect was doing so well.
I wonder what aspect of the Civic (electrical? drivetrain? body?) caused it to rank so low in CR’s predictions. The low ranking of the Jetta is not really encouraging either, as I am contemplating getting a 1.4T S model.
The “audio” category is the biggest issue with the Golf/GTI/Jetta/Passat vehicles when you look at the 17 breakout areas, probably due to the introduction of the new system incorporating Android Auto and Apple CarPlay.
I bought a 16 Golf that will become my teenage daughters car in a couple of years knowing full well what VW’s are and are not. If statistical reliability is your highest priority, there is only one automaker to consider, Toyota.
The car has been flawless for 13k miles thus far and I just got back from a very enjoyable morning flogging it through the back roads of western NC under the canopy of fall color. It’s a perfect car for that, a perfect car for driving in heavy traffic, and can be comfortably driven 700 miles in a day – who cares if statistically it will require an extra trip to the shop here and there.
I test drove the very car you are considering when shopping and liked it but felt the newer platform would be better in the long run for my daughter. If you like it, go for it. There is a worldwide VW fan base to help deal with issues that come up. The dark days of the MK IV Jetta are long gone.
Thank you for exploring VW more in-depth. Our ’14 Passat has been almost flawless in over 25,000 miles.
The only wrinkle was just that – a vapor barrier of some type in the driver’s seat was wrinkled, causing an odd sound between my shoulder blades as I moved around. Had I been shorter or taller I never would have discovered it.
Being the base model, we don’t have any audio issues to worry about. Plus, in all that time, only one tank of fuel fell below 30 mpg, with the high twice having been a smidgen over 37 mpg.
That’s reassuring to know as I am not a big audiophile; all I want out of the audio system is to be able to play songs from a USB stick through four speakers. I know full well that a Jetta probably won’t be as reliable as my Accord of 13 years but life is short and change is a good thing.
Even the “dark days” of the MK IV weren’t all that dark. The biggest issues were the bad window regulators on some cars and the run of bad coilpacks on the 1.8T engine. Both of those were poor QC of suppliers and affected relatively few cars. IIRC, most of the other problems that caused the complaints were driven by poor customer service at VW dealers.
I also bought a Golf (2015 TSI) knowing exactly what I might be getting myself into and I have yet to regret it at all. The silver lining is, even if things start to go awry later in its life, I have a 12 year rustproofing guarantee and I live in Minnesota.
From what I know about the Civic (and Honda in general), it’s just the weird touch-only screen. That’s why the new CR-V will be using a touch screen with a volume knob.
I just looked and it is the “audio” breakout area that is the sore spot. There are a couple of other areas that are less than dark green “excellent”, “power equipment”, “paint/trim”, “body hardware”, etc. That’s all it takes to be towards the bottom. My guess is Honda will rein in the issues with the new design and next year the Civic will rate average or better than average.
Even though 15 was the new design, my 16 Golf dropped in reliability mostly due to the new audio system. The Jetta has a few areas with more problems than the Golf.
Again, if you want dark green “excellent” scores in all 17 categories year after year, you have but one automaker that hits that target consistently. I have the utmost respect for the Corolla, Camry, and Prius in particular. Decent automobiles that provide real value for their owners.
My brother just bought a 2017 RAM Limited. We shall see, but I will say, he has been driving Chrysler trucks since the mid ’90s, mostly company rigs, and has never once had to replace the cat bearings, and only one (’97 Dakota) left him walking when the fuel pump died.
I want a used FIAT 500 Pop as a second car. Sooooo reminds me of my VW Beetle as a kid.
However, it’s got the crappest ratings from CR, the nearest FIAT studio is 300 miles away, and CarMax will sell me an extended warranty, but not sure if they could fix it anyway.
If I follow CR’s recommendation, I’m stuck with a Hyundai!! ????????
Darn those pesky CR editors?????
If my experience is worth anything, screw CR’s reports. I’ve got a 2013 500c Abarth and have had no problems with it so far. Mileage is not quite 17,000 (I use a scooter for most of my commuting).
I’ve never followed CR for car reports, because their intent is completely different from mine. They want white bread on four wheels, cars that never have to have a repair other than consumables for 300,000 miles. Cars for people who either hate cars, or at best, consider them unfortunate necessities.
I want something interesting to drive, something that makes me smile every time I take it out of the driveway, and if I have to have it worked on periodically, so be it. The more interesting and fun, the more I’ll tolerate periodic repairs. Yes, I’d own a Ferrari if I could afford the maintenance costs. I can’t, so I own motorcycles. Lots of motorcycles. And small, fast cars.
What convinced me to go with the Fiat (it was very high on my list to replace my Toaster) was driving a 2012 base model Pop with 122,000 miles on it. Solid, handled like a hoot, a very good driver, and I’m still tempted to buy it (its in the back of a local buy-here, pay-here) to build up as a track day car.
So far my Abarth shows every sign of following in the footsteps of that Pop.
Remember, Consumer Reports will never own a Ferrari or a motorcycle. Which means, in my eyes, they’re not car owners. They’re skinflint bookkeepers, and deserve every base model Corolla they ever drive.
CR has a large GIGO problem and has for a long time.
I would expect that stats from a million green eyeshade wearing subscribers to a no-ads consumer magazine would be pretty reliable.
Yes. If that’s your idea of car ownership.
If not, prepare to be bored to death with what you’re driving, and your only solace is a bit more money in your bank account.
…until they rate bolt for bolt identical cars differently! GIGO.
I’m glad to see CR (finally) moving away from its better or worse than average scoring. In an era when “all new cars are basically good,” the old scale could seam to mean a decent enough car could get undeserved bad press.
The bad news about FCA seems to confirm what everybody has been thinking the past few years. The infusion of Fiat DNA into Chrysler has done it no favors.
A Charger V-6 AWD has been on our short list for cars, and 2017 is probably when we will pull the trigger. The new Sport Fusion is suddenly looking very attractive, and the Accord, particularly the Sport version as well, seems compelling on a variety of levels.
For several years, I’ve been an advocate that Ford’s Expedition really deserves consideration over the Suburban for a variety of reasons – from interior room to ride, and possibly price (or at least concessions). With the importance and prestige the Suburban has given GM over the years, the current state of their transmissions and four wheel drive systems is indeed bad news for them.
One reason I like the 2017 Expedition and Expedition XL over the Tahoe/Suburban is the styling is nicer in my opinion. The Expedition feels more airy inside and the windows bigger. Another plus with the Expedition is the fact you can have the key in run without the engine on while listening to the radio and you can leave the driver door open without the warning chime constantly going off.
I’ve had no serious problems with my 300c. I also have Mopars at work that give us no problems.
I know you can’t universalize personal experience, but I’ve had no major problems with the cars I’ve had from the Big 3, save for just wearing out at well over 100k or 200k miles. I also know people who have had lemons from the Big 3, German luxury, Japanese, you name it.
Tl;dr-I never bothered to care what Consumer Reports says. I buy what I like.
No big surprises in this report. Not surprised at all that FCA cars didn’t do well. Even before the merger, Chryslers never did overly well in reliability stats. While Paul pointed out the issues with the Volt, one thing that I have noticed for a while with CR reports is how the Tesla does not have a great track record either. Funny how those who love this car never mentioned it’s reliability.
I usually buy at least one CR report over the year to follow the reliability stats (I never much cared for their road test opinions). At least they do make a decent effort to reliably collect long term data for vehicles. While not perfect, it is a tool I have used many times in purchasing a car, as quite frankly reliability ranks pretty high on my needs list. My issue with their stats is they never tell you specifically what the problems are, and what the cost is to repair them. I mean what’s a transmission problem? Are they prone to complete failures or is it a lock-up solenoid? Big difference.
This is why I also use True Delta’s website. I joined up a number of years ago, and they email you every so often to see if you have any problems to report. It’s very easy. Unlike CR though, it asks for details on the repair including the cost. When you join the site, you can see all the stats on other cars and see specifically what the problems are for each car. Not surprisingly. the most reliable cars on CR are also pretty much the most reliable with True Delta.
I guess I’m happily stuck with my 2012 Abarth, which has been totes trouble-free and a profligate producer of big grins. I’m glad I didn’t wait and purchase a Fiesta ST, as it appears I would’ve been left with a steaming pile of ? on my hands.
Also have been pleased – so far – with my first diesel car, an E350 BlueTec bought new in 2013. The darn thing averages around 33 mpg.
FWIU the majority of Focus and Fiesta problems are with the Powershift automatic, which the ST models sidestep by being manual-only.
Why is the Acura TLX ranked so poorly ? Thats a suprise.
Looking at Edmunds reviews, seems like transmission problems.
It’s very interesting about the definition of ultra luxury cars, when Genesis G90 is and Lincoln Continental isn’t, while Cadillac CT6 is placed with Buick LaCrosse. I would say this can tank the whole credibility of the report.
The Genesis G90 is an S-Class competitor, while the CT6 and Continental compete with the likes of the BMW 5 Series, Audi A6 and Mercedes E Class. Probably why they lumped the Cadillac with the Buick.
Motorweek reviewed it. They say that it is a very good car, but not yet an S-class.
German companies don’t have the right to define luxury cars, it’s just a market thing, defined by all companies. It doesn’t have to be a Mercedes S-Class benchmark to be an ultra luxury car. Higher labor inflates the MSRP also, and it doesn’t guarantee the correspondence in terms of vehicle class.
If you think that’s bad, you should’ve been around when they lumped cars together by SIZE…the Mercedes E-class was in the same group with the Cutlass, and some of the larger K-cars!
Well, it made more sense when the biggest cars were also the most expensive cars.
“Well, it made more sense when the biggest cars were also the most expensive cars.”
Not really, because the Chevrolet Impala was in the same class (full-size) as the Cadillac Deville and Fleetwood!
That time there was a term, full size affordable cars with the likes of Chevrolet Caprice offering good riding quality at a fraction of price at a larger size than Mercedes S-Class, and S-Class was defined as a larger luxury sedan. However, there isn’t a class difference between the likes of Mercedes S-Class and CT6, or Continental.
There is a very big difference between the perceived/actual luxury, technology, and engineering between the Mercedes S-Class and the CT6/Continental.
The CT6 and The Continental may be at the top of each manufacturer’s range but that doesn’t mean they are equivalent to or compete with the S-Class.
You really should spend some time in each. It’s not even close. In fact the Hyundai Genesis G80 (not the bigger one, the normal one) has better material quality inside (the parts you touch and interact with for the entire drive) than the CT6.
Which makes sense since the G80 is gunning for that sort of competitor and being a newbie, they can’t rest on any laurels and glory days of old.
They still do don’t they, I’ve seen the Rolls Royce coupe called a sub-compact or something like that, purely judged on the interior cubic feet.
Ford has really dropped the ball with MyFordTouch and the Powershift transmission. Fortunately it looks like they fixed one of those things. I certainly don’t want to encounter any issues with the DCT in my Focus, which has not had any problems yet.
I have Microsoft Sync on my 2012 Ford Escape. It has never worked correctly since day one with the car. It’s such a distraction, I stopped using the system.
I can see why customers get frustrated and trash the brand in the CR surveys.
Do they still use the dry clutch transmission in the US? It has been replaced by a torque converter automatic for cars sold in Australia
Yes, stateside the DCT is still used in the Fiesta and Focus.
I tend to buy what I like, but I do appreciate CR’s efforts to survey a fairly large base of owners with regard to reliability. No survey can account for the experience of owning an unusually unreliable Toyota (nor an unusually reliable FCA product, for that matter), but for some fortunate reason all of the vehicles I’ve owned have been rather trouble-free, and I’ve been buying them since 1980.
What I do like – and again I don’t use it as an absolute – is CR’s Owner Satisfaction Index, which measures answers to the question, “All things being considered, would you purchase this vehicle again?” Because CR pushes its subscribers to respond to the survey, the hope is that it lessens to self-selectors who tend to have extremely bad or good experiences. Also, reliability is one thing, but the satisfaction question tends to take into account all of the aspects of the ownership experience, even if it is subjective. From this, you see that some unreliable vehicles are loved by their owners (Jeep Wrangler) while some reliable ones aren’t (certain Nissans and Hyundais).
But again, I tend to buy what I like, and drive it for years. Your mileage may vary (YMMV).
Shocked with poor rating for Honda Civic & Tesla & Ford Mustang. Not shocked VW, Dodge/Fiat at bottom of pile. Cadillac/Lincoln not surprised of poor ratings due to too many computers. Shocked at Volvo XC90 low, as they were the original safety oriented vehicle (must be too many computers as well). Thought Ford Fiesta & Focus would heve faired better (losers), Ford sucking with cars.
I have enough doubts about the reliability of smart phones & desktop systems, let alone those in dashboards. I meet very few developers who give a rip about reliability & fault tolerance.
Bingo! My work is in the technology field. This stuff is so buggy and glitchy it isn’t even funny. For no reason at all a web page will crash causing the entire computer to lock right up. For no reason the wireless connection will drop on random workstations or mobile devices while remaining steady on others. Some of it is random stuff. Some of it is mistakes made on the network or programming. Some is just the usual buggy operating system or a bad update gone wrong. We just had a WIndows 10 update that made the user lose there drive mappings to other servers. Didn’t happen on all devices but a good many. And they are al identical laptops with identical images so go figure.
The XC 90, if I recall correctly, does have a relatively tiny, hard-working engine in a large, heavy platform. Not sure if that’s the cause of its poor ratings now, but it’s a potential issue down the road.
The previous Gen XC90 had lots of issues too. Volvo has been hit or miss since the early 2000’s. Current xc90’s have lots of electrical issues and water leak issues around the hatch and sunroof. Haven’t heard of many engine troubles yet.
Although CR definitely does an invaluable service with these surveys, they do have some issues. Cars that seem reliable early on – like the Volt, which got excellent rankings the first year – really nosedive in later surveys, so it pays to be careful. And some models, like the 911, pinball between reliable/recommended and not, so it’s difficult to make an informed decision. Not that I’d turn down a 911 if you offered one to me, though.
I agree that this is an issue with CR. I see it the other way too, where new cars may start off to be very reliable, but as they age they become problematic. The problem with cars like the Porsche 911 may related to a small sample size. Although I know CR will not rate really small samples, I would suspect those that are just over the threshold may not produce as reliable results.
The stats Paul posted here are pretty general (ie one general rating of a car), in some of the CR special car editions, they at least break them down by category so you can see where the problem area’s are (although it never really specifies what the problems are). If I am buying a car, I try to look in it’s past too to see how well it’s held up over time, especially if I know that they share common parts such as an engine or drivetrain. But I also don’t rely solely on CR, True Delta is another great resource, arguably better in some ways since you can see the exact problem the cars are having, but it seems there are fewer people aware of True Delta. I am also unsure of how their sample sizes compare to CR.
Yeah when you match up the used car reliability with the new car stats sometimes you see huge swings. Also some times you see huge swings year to year on cars with no changes so the data isn’t perfect.
Any thoughts on what caused the Focus & Fiesta to do so poorly? On first impression they seem like pretty basic vehicles without a lot of cutting-edge systems to cause trouble. I’d heard of door-latch recalls, but what else could cause such dismal ratings?
Probably the very-troublesome “automatic” (DCT) gearbox.
Aussie “Auto Expert” James Cardogan called the Fiesta & Focus “lemons”? for their transmission⚙ troubles. BTW I assume he means the stick as he mentioned the clutch system.
No, the automatic is a dual-clutch transmission, like VW’s DSG.
Transmissions and in previous year infotainment drove it down.
Consumer Report for long time has its institutional preference toward Toyota products. Toyota products are general getting very good rating, but Toyota also does not disappoint its customer with the cars and truck with very good reliability (short and long term). I think its approach to design, production and quality control is much better than other. My unscientific survey shows its simple and low end products actually performs better, and its main stream products like Camry and Collora are not as good as they were. I know someone with a 2005 Yaris sedan with the mileage close to 400K miles with just regular maintenance — he changed 5 time belts and water pumps. However, the globalization its production also take its toll on the well known reliability. If you look at the product lines in US, they are not very technology advance at all, they prefer to sell its cars with old and proved technology rather than advance one in US. The real irony here is it is viewed as unreliable and unsafe cars in China, the world largest auto market. My Chinese friends and relatives laugh at me that Toyota is the most reliable cars in US. Its Chinese products have various issues, the well-known one is one of its car models (I forgot what model was) had the quality issue with from axles, they were often broken off while driving.
It appears that the lowest score of all belongs to the Cadillac Escalade. They give the Escalade a score of 3 of a possible 100.
What horrors condemn the Escalade to a score of 3? Even the maligned Fiat 500 managed to score 30,
It’s based on the Yukon and Tahoe which do OK my guess would be CUE ( touchscreen) is dragging it down.
And does a harder to use Cue system or a lag in response on the touch screen mean the Escalade is totally unreliable junk. Judging by its popularity, repeat customers and questioning various owners of the current model I think not.
Am encouraged by Mazda’s 3 landing the third spot although – mine being the EU spec with the 2L, 165 hp engine and not your 2.3L, 184 hp version – I don’t know whether I can take it as more than a general indication. My mileage (8500 Km) is in any case too low to make any conclusions, but I was surprised to discover my front and rear suspension needed alignment just recently – this is regarded as a consumable so no warranty after 6000 Km (darn), but I can see the point – drive over bad bumps or manhole covers (which unfortunately we do have here, believe it or not) and it can get out of alignment. Let’s see what happens by next year’s service.
Buicks are more reliable than Hondas. So says both the CR and J.D.Powers surveys for the last few years. But it takes a long time for reputation to catch up to reality….
How times changes things.
My former daily driver was a 1977 Cadillac Coupe DeVille. All original, with 260.000 miles on it when I sold it. The engine (425) was whispering quiet still. Dead reliable else, had to change the cruise control electronic box. Today I drive a 93 Grand Cherokee 4.0 with 220.000 miles on it. The engines rattles like there is no tomorrow, but it’s fairly reliable and starts every day in the cold.
Then I’ll see that the Cadillac Escelade (who may be the nearest comparable Cadillac to the 77) got a rating of 3 (!) of 100?
I’ve had, and still have, many old american cars, both as summer cars and daily drivers. Never had any major problems even with high mileage 30 years old cars. That is about to change I think. Even the GM truck series got low ratings? Why, are the cars so bad? Or?
They say that 41-60 is average (kind of like the clear dot of years past). 21-40 is worse than average (like the half black dot) and 1-20 is much worse than average (solid black dot). And they weighted issues, so a defective door seal is not as bad as a defective transmission.
The Escalade apparently is having issues with its transmission and its 4WD system. Since those are relatively major systems I suppose it’s given more weight than a cigarette lighter not working for example.
Note that even “average” these days is darn good. So “much worse than average” can still be a LOT better than average or excellent of years gone by.
What would be very interesting is if they dug out some old cars from 20 or 30 years ago that got the top rating at the time and re-rated it based on today’s criteria and yardsticks to see where it would measure up today.
We’ve considered trading our 2003 Ranger lately, despite having low miles. It’s stranded us because of stupid little crap a lot in the last five months, including the fuel pump, idle air control, various suspension parts, and a disintegrating brake rotor. We know that she never got any maintenance from the previous owner (his mom) and realize there’s some catchup to be played, but it’s getting frustrating. And yet…. It seems that every time I research getting something new, a scary recall or other problem crops up. We were really liking the Wrangler, yet now we read that the airbag/seatbelt sensors up front just don’t work on most 2016s (182,000 last I heard). I feel like cars are like video games now: released before they worked most of the bugs out. Our 94 Lincoln hearse has been more reliable than any car I’ve owned in over ten years, yet it was also the cheapest at $3k.
Which illustrates why one needs to use reliability surveys as only one part of their research when shopping for a new vehicle.
Once you get past a certain point of reasonable reliability, other factors need to be considered, such as features, how much you enjoy driving/owning the vehicle, and purchase price. Survey results will tell you how many owners out of 100, 1,000 or 10,000 will experience certain issues, but at the end of the day, any make and model will be reliable for some owners, and some makes and models will be reliable for any owner.
I disagree with some of the steps that CR took and agree with a few others.
First, the idea of making a predictive reliability estimate for vehicles that are early in their model cycle, or have yet to be released, is just plain wrong. If you don’t have real world data, or valuable information as to why a given design has a specific weakness, you don’t make a prediction. It’s that simple.
Second, I do think CR’s reliability ranking from 0 to 100 is a far better way of differentiating reliability between vehicles. The study I have co-developed over the last four years has done this since day one. and, perhaps, I know now why I was flown up to Colchester, Connecticut to meet a few of their people earlier this year.
http://longtermqualityindex.com/
Finally, you can’t simply publish findings without giving folks some basic sampling information that tells the reader how many data samples (vehicles in this specific case) were used to draw that conclusion.
Here’s an example of a vehicle with a small vehicle count.
http://longtermqualityindex.com/vehicles/Toyota_Venza.html
… and here’s one that’s quite large.
http://longtermqualityindex.com/vehicles/Toyota_Venza.html
There are some models that just don’t have enough data for you to draw any intelligent conclusion. The data just isn’t there. This is especially true for most cars that are three years old or newer. Most cars of this age simply don’t have major powertrain issues unless the customer has neglected, modified, or abused the vehicle. Feel free to come to a dealer auction down here in Atlanta and I’ll be happy to show you thousands of 2013 and newer vehicles that we call ‘lemmings’ for a reason. They are not too different during the early going. It’s time that tells the tale.
If you ever wondered how a vehicle could be recommended one year in a CR press release and then given a mark of shame a few years later, it has everything to do with offering advice with data that is incomplete in the early going. One of the reasons why I decided to create a graph that shows the reliability on a year-by-year basis is that most models follow a reliability trend; especially within a specific generation, and don’t necessarily drop off unless there is an enormous quality issue that always comes about through a redesign.
Here are a few unique cases of when this happens. Keep in mind, the defect spike that happened from 2005 thru 2007 only came about when those vehicles had already hit the 80k to 120k mileage level.
http://longtermqualityindex.com/vehicles/Nissan_Xterra.html
http://longtermqualityindex.com/vehicles/Nissan_Pathfinder.html
http://longtermqualityindex.com/vehicles/Nissan_Frontier.html
I think issuing alerts about serious issues with used vehicles is far more important than predicting reliability for brand new models which, frankly, can’t be done unless you have unique tools and resources that clearly show why that’s taking place.
I don’t think it’s a stretch though to “predict” that a car maker that has produced generally reliable cars over the years (backed up with one’s own data) is likely to produce a new model that will also have good reliability just like it’s not a stretch to assume that a new model from a company that has historically produced crappy cars will continue to do so.
Over time those predictions may be proven wrong as that new model begins to generate actual data and then the whole cycle updates itself.
I would believe a prediction that the 2025 Toyota 4Runner will be a generally more reliable vehicle than the 2025 Jeep Grand Cherokee. The prediction could turn out to be wrong but based on today’s available data I’d be more likely to put money on that than the other way around.
Their “predictions” seem to follow the same patterns as their actual data and they are making it clear that it’s merely a prediction.
It bit CR a few times with Toyota’s 8-9 years ago. I believe the 2008 Tundra was the first one I don’t remember the next one.
They pulled the Camry for either 2007 or 2008 or both years from there ratings due to transmission and other issues, especially V6 models
I looked at some of the stuff at your website. You have not been at this very long. J D Power has been doing evaluations for quite some time. I have been surveyed more than once by them. I think that their long term durability studies are useful, although they only cover the first three years, which does not say what the next three years will bring. But Buick has been at the top, along with Lexus, for quite some time. Cadillac was near the top, below Buick, and now has fallen to just over the industry average. This kind of tells me that maybe I should look at the new LaCross, which is all new, new platform (updated version of the epsilon II, but not called an epsilon III).
Your site does not rate Buick very high, while this new stuff from Consumers Reports has put Buick right up there with the best. This made the national news.
I live in the EU and whereas we don’t have any Buick regularly imported, many of the current models share platforms and other components with Opels, and I can confirm Opel has upped its game during the last few years in so far as reliability is concerned, so it’s a GM-wide thing. I really hope someone at the top finally understood how important reliability is.
The new Opel/Holden Epsilom platform has arrived downunder heavily disguised to promote the replacement for the Aussie built cars hopefully Opel is better than some of its previous efforts that wore local badging.
Bryce I can only judge from what I hear through the grapevine and/or my acquaintances – a work colleague has had a diesel Insignia which he even got chipped for more power and the car is now 5 years old with more than 100,000 Km – no problems whatever, and he does not spare it on the Autobahn. If they can transpose this to Aussie and NZ spec cars, you’re laughing.
I can understand the FCA product scoring. Not one person I have questioned in recent memory has said there Jeep or Dodge or Chrysler has been without ills. There are currently 2 Jeeps and one 200 sitting on the side of my local dealer with 9 speed transmissions getting replaced. A 2015 Ram pickup rental actually had an engine that was ticking when warm, numerous interior rattles and a passenger side power mirror that quit working. Sitting in a couple of new 200’s I picked out several lapses in quality control. One had the passenger visor mirror dangling down with loose screws and another had poor panel fitment. And these were brand spanking new cars with plastic still on the carpet and steering wheels!