Last post on Nov 25, 2013 at 11:27 AM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Lexus GS 430, Acura RL, BMW 5 Series, Volvo S80, Audi A6, Infiniti M35, Infiniti M45, Mercedes-Benz E-Class, Cadillac STS, Sedan
#2267 of 10348 Re: cdnpinhead [cmybimmergo]
May 18, 2005 (4:55 pm)
You realize that if stupidity were a crime, 98% of the world would be locked up.
This is very true. The funny part is that the police here couldn't believe what their radar was telling them. They actually went to a Honda dealer to confirm that the particular bike he was riding could actually do 160mph. They didn't have a clue.
He got a 1 year suspension of his license and 30 days in jail for that little stunt. I'll try see if I can find the story.
I agree that the IQS really doesn't speak much about long-term reliability/durability, but still I'm shocked to see Acura barely clear the average. It must be those stories on other forums about the RL's awd system locking up. Mercedes' improvement here should, and I say should equal some improvement in 2008 when the 2005 cars are looked at in the dependability study. Fingers crossed.
#2268 of 10348 J.D. Powerless
May 18, 2005 (5:44 pm)
Why does the media make such a fuss about J.D. Power reliability surveys? Ninety days, indeed. Ridiculous. Absurd. The best reliability data come from Consumers Union annual survey of tens of thousands of car owners across the country. Both in terms of sophisticated statistical analysis and sheer comprehensiveness, they have no equal.
(P.S. about The RL. If you read that problems board, you'll see that there have been innumerable electronics glitches and gremlins that have plagued the car since its launch).
#2269 of 10348 Re: liferules, cmybimmergo [lexusguy]
May 18, 2005 (5:45 pm)
Wouldn't it though? Just think of all those EMPTY roads to drive...sigh. LOL
merc1, what these guys don't realize is that stupidity is not macho; it's just stupid. (But it makes for great press.)
#2270 of 10348 Re: J.D. Powerless [bartalk3]
May 18, 2005 (5:52 pm)
"Why does the media make such a fuss about J.D. Power reliability surveys? Ninety days, indeed. Ridiculous. Absurd. The best reliability data come from Consumers Union annual survey of tens of thousands of car owners across the country"
You do realize that JD Powers surveys and Consumer Reports surveys come to similar conclusions on a consistent basis?
May 18, 2005 (7:38 pm)
Yeah it is strange, it appears that Acura is slipping lately. CR obviously has no data on the '05 RL yet, but the '04 Acura TL's ratings aren't that great. The RL is significantly more complicated electronically than the TL, and then there's that whole untested AWD system thrown into the mix. It doesnt bode well for the RL's reliability.
#2272 of 10348 Re: J.D. Powerless [bartalk3]
May 18, 2005 (8:49 pm)
The first 90 days of ownership applies to the J. D. Power Initial Quality Survey, NOT the Reliability Survey. Agree with you on the Consumers Union (Consumers Report) reliability data.
May 18, 2005 (8:58 pm)
The Initial Quality Survey (IQS) is mostly about fit and finish. Is everything put together right, aligned, and rattle free initially? There are occasional complaints in the first 90 days about more serious issues, but its mostly about fit and finish.
The Vehicle Dependability Study (VDS) on the other hand is about the reliability of 3 year old vehicles. This is about how well vehicles hold up over the course of a typical lease.
Both surveys give good information that rivals CR, but if you confuse the two surveys all you get is garbage. Some people should not use information without adult supervision.
#2274 of 10348 Re: JD Powers [cybersol]
May 19, 2005 (3:24 am)
Some people should not use information without adult supervision.
Some people should not use this information at all.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
May 19, 2005 (7:44 am)
Okay, let's break this down a bit....
First of all, JD Power (and CR) deserve credit for bringing quality to the forefront. No question about that. But JD Power is also a profit center, pure and simple. Although it pretends to be an independent group of researchers in white lab coats, their revenue comes from selling its logo and rankings to companies who choose to use it in their marketing/advertising. Their methodology can change yearly to fit their agenda to sell their name and present themselves as quality "experts." McGraw Hill's recent acquisition of JD Power was purely designed to maximize M-H's bottom line revenues.
CR is slightly more pure since they accept no advertising or sell their name. But they certainly have their political and profit-driven agenda. IMO, neither is a true non-profit, and both are driven to maximize revenues. Thre's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but you have to filter their results with those realities in mind.
Interesting that JDP's #1 ranking entry luxury car is the long-in-the-tooth IS300/Sportcross. Sales for the 2005 IS300 are down -50%, and this entry level model currently represents only 4% of total Lexus sales for 2005. It's been bit of a dog for Lexus, and the new model is at least 2 years late. The Lexus website still shows the Sportcross, but I think it's next to impossible to find one today, since they have basically bombed in the marketplace. I don't deny their stellar quality, but it's interesting to me to see JD Power wave a huge quality award for a car that has basically been ignored by the market for 1-2 years, and is on its deathbed. Makes you also wonder if their quality rankings are truly apples to apples, given the huge differences in sales volume within the models listed. Their # 2 ranking car is the X-Type, and volumes have already been written about this car's problems. Makes me question JD Powers' credibility and methodology.
I also think it's loopy to rank factories based on these quality ratings. To slam a factory for poor quality, because they happen to build a poorly designed car, is disingenous and puts the blame in the wrong place. Is it really relevant to give factory A a gold medal, factory B a silver, etc., based on problems reported in the first 90 days of ownership by people who bothered to participate in a survey, or attend an evening focus group in exchange for a free dinner?
These rankings always have some element of "garbage in, garbage out."
#2276 of 10348 Re: JD Power [cstiles]
May 19, 2005 (8:05 am)
I agree completely with you on JD Power. They are a marketing organization, and their surveys are not completely disinterested and independent. I seem to recall that at one point, anyway, they only listed those models that ranked "above average" and omitted those ranked in the lower half. The reason: not to offend anybody. That compromises their integrity, in my view.
CR, on the other hand, IS truly independent. They are not dependent on pleasing any manufacturers. Their revenue comes from reader subscriptions, not from the companies whose products they test. They do make money (which pays their employees, pays for their research facilities, and finances their publications), but they are as non-profit as you can get, i.e., their primary purpose is not to make money but to evaluate products and report their results to the public. They've been doing that since 1936. Their politcal agenda, if they have one, is consumer protection. In a world of advertising hype and rampant conflicts of interest, they are about as trustworthy as you can get.