You are here: Forums Sedans Luxury Performance Sedans

Luxury Performance Sedans

10006 messages,  Last post on Nov 26, 2009 at 6:59 AM

You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

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

#7676 of 10006 Re: The dead horse beaten again [lansdownemike] by markcincinnati Jul 04, 2006 (5:50 am)
Replying to: lansdownemike (Jul 03, 2006 6:27 am) You are most likely correct -- car enthusiasts often do disrespect CR's auto reliability numbers.   Also likely to be correct -- if you buy your car based on CR's numbers you may not be quite as "enthusiastic" about cars.   And, either position, as far as I am concerned is OK.   But, "can he/she cook?"   In the scheme of things, cars and mates are overwhelmingly chosen for emotional reasons first and practical reasons secondarily (or maybe the practical is tertiary, indeed that may be even more on the mark.)   These are Luxury Performance vehicles that we argue, preen and wax poetic about.   I'd wager a heavy weight (the heaviest?) is given to the styling of the objects of one's desire we discuss here.   CR is, for some, of value -- and if you buy a car that is not the most attractive and fun that you would have bought otherwise because CR said it was in the bottom quartile of reliability. . .good (for you.)   CR is, for others, without value -- and they often buy a car that is the most attractive and fun or most fun and attractive (whatever) without regard to a score bestowed upon it by CR.   It takes all types. There are mail-order brides, there's love at first sight, there's the courtship of Eddie's father too. There's even unrequited love.   Most of us [here at least] are passionate about our cars and buying cars for these folks is mostly a right brain affair.   LPS cars are luxurious and offer at least a nod to performance. Using a ranking to acquire them probably does not occur to those who lust for the luxury and performance in a car that catches their eyes and steals their hearts.   Doing so is perfectly acceptable, however.   When I read posts that rank a car that I would (or wouldn't have) regardless of CR's rankings, it just (for me) decreases my enthusiasm for anything they say.   I know some cars are ranked higher than others -- I want whatever it is that I am driving to be more reliable (don't we all?), but cars, friends and spouses simply cannot be neatly evaluated by circles with black innards, dots or red innards and dots.   One of the folks I work with was in the market -- she was looking at a Cadillac CTS. She asked me to help her pick some other "comparable" cars to consider.   To make a long story short, she wanted the CTS and short of a free car from Audi or BMW or Infiniti, she was going to go for it (in Blue, no less.) She trotted out her CR, and of course the Infiniti was the best of the bunch -- the Cadillac was just OK.   "I really like her," was said about the Cadillac.   I knew it was over right then and there.   Three test drives and a weekend later, she pulled in with her new Cadillac.   It was not logical -- it seldom is.   She is happy.   I submit that most folks buy cars cause they are, to them, "cool."   It's all about the big "L."
#7677 of 10006 Re: german [lexusguy] by calhon Jul 04, 2006 (12:12 pm)
Replying to: lexusguy (Jul 03, 2006 7:37 am) The 2007 S80 is a totally new model none of which have been delivered to customers. Therefore, any reasonable comments regarding it's expected reliability must be based on the brand's history. You are making such predictions while denying any interest in brand reliability. Never mind the fact that you initiated and continue to use comparisons between Volvo, BMW, Audi and Mercedes for that express purpose.   I agree with you that one cannot be sure that the S40 marks a turning point in Volvo's model launches. However, there is more to that than the reliability data, such as changes in processes and dynamics.   There were two points to my previous post. First, you don't get to make up your own "facts". The second and more important point is about the correct use and interpretation of reliability data, and what the current data shows.   I used the IQS data simply to illustrate the dangers of purely relative data such as rankings. I'm not arguing about which, if any, data should be used. The last line of the post refers to the total disconnect between what the reliability data actually shows and what so many people believe. Replies to this message: lexusguy (Jul 04, 2006 3:11 pm) calhon (Jul 04, 2006 8:23 pm) cdnpinhead (Jul 04, 2006 8:48 pm) and 5 more...
#7679 of 10006 Re: german [calhon] by lexusguy Jul 04, 2006 (3:11 pm)
Replying to: calhon (Jul 04, 2006 12:12 pm) The 2007 S80 is a totally new model none of which have been delivered to customers. Therefore, any reasonable comments regarding it's expected reliability must be based on the brand's history. You are making such predictions while denying any interest in brand reliability.   I agree that you need to look at the history of a brand's cars for a totally new model. Using a single number or rank though for an entire brand is not very useful. "Volvo is ranked X, Mercedes is ranked Y" is largely useless information, as is CR's "predicted" score. Despite the "average" predicted rating, owners of '05 S40s reported many more problems in specific areas than owners of '05 A4s and C classes.   If I were going to buy a new S80 for myself, I would not pay any attention to what Volvo's overall rank in IQS is. I would look at other recently introduced Volvos, such as the S40. Cars that have been in production for a long time, such as the S60, will have had the bugs worked out by now. They'll improve Volvo's "average" rank for the year, but the data on an S60 thats been in production since 2001 is not useful unless you're going to buy an S60. What CR is actually useful for is that it shows what areas owners reported problems in. Engine or transmission problems are definitely worse than electrical problems. It would be nice if, rather than "2-5%" of owners equaling a half red dot, CR just said "3.8% of owners reported electical issues", but its still much more useful information than some "PP100" score for an entire brand. Replies to this message: calhon (Jul 04, 2006 8:23 pm) cdnpinhead (Jul 04, 2006 8:48 pm) markcincinnati (Jul 05, 2006 4:23 am) lexusguy (Jul 05, 2006 5:48 am) and 3 more...
#7682 of 10006 Re: german [lexusguy] by calhon Jul 04, 2006 (8:23 pm)
Replying to: lexusguy (Jul 04, 2006 3:11 pm) Using a single number or rank though for an entire brand is not very useful. "Volvo is ranked X, Mercedes is ranked Y" is largely useless information, as is CR's "predicted" score.   I agree with you on brand rankings, and the absolute differences behind them are fairly small in any case.   Despite the "average" predicted rating, owners of '05 S40s reported many more problems in specific areas than owners of '05 A4s and C classes.   I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. The "average" rating is a weighted combination of the problems in all areas for the model. (Engine and transmission problems weigh more heavily in the calculation than electrical problems, for example.) The S40 and the A4 got the same rating, which means the A4 had more problems in other specific areas. As for the C-Class, it's rating was lower, so it had more problems overall, despite being in production since 2001.   What CR is actually useful for is that it shows what areas owners reported problems in. Engine or transmission problems are definitely worse than electrical problems. It would be nice if, rather than "2-5%" of owners equaling a half red dot, CR just said "3.8% of owners reported electical issues",   Good luck with that! You clearly haven't been keeping up.   As of the 2005 survey (the current data) those little colored dots no longer have fixed ranges. The half-red dot used to mean 2-5%. Now, it just means less problems than the clear but more than the solid red dot. Furthermore, each dot doesn't have the same range in each of the problem areas, or in the same problem area for different years. Now everything is relative to the hidden averages for each year.   See, we're right back to my point about not being able to tell how much better/worse a thing is from purely relative data. You're absolutely (pun intended) correct that it would be better if CR just said "3.8% of owners reported electical issues". Similarly, it would be much better if CR provided the actual overall problem rate/probability for each model, rather than percentages below/above some unspecified average, or yet another little colored dot. Replies to this message: cdnpinhead (Jul 04, 2006 8:48 pm) markcincinnati (Jul 05, 2006 4:23 am) lexusguy (Jul 05, 2006 5:48 am) calhon (Jul 05, 2006 10:51 am) and 2 more...
#7683 of 10006 Re: german [calhon] by cdnpinhead Jul 04, 2006 (8:48 pm)
Replying to: calhon (Jul 04, 2006 8:23 pm) Hang in there. I'm with you, though it appears several aren't.   Perhaps the reason CR doesn't share real data is because, for many "specialty" vehicles the sample is far too small to be statistically valid. As I've alluded to earlier, filling out the survey form is a "bring your lunch" event, and the predisposition of people who are willing to fill out the thing may not be toward "impractical" vehicles.   I'm not holding my breath, but it'd be great to have the Annual Auto Issue tell the reader the total number of respondents, the number for each vehicle rated and (as you suggested) the percentage of those who experienced each category of "problem."   What constitutes a problem isn't defined either. As an example, an electrical failure that leaves the car immobile is a much bigger deal than one that leaves the sunshade immobile. Whether CR or, more importantly, the people who fill out the survey, share that opinion is anyone's guess.   Then there's the possibility, as with any self-selected polling population, that people are far more likely to participate if they have a beef than if they're satisfied.   The CR data is possibly of some value for Accords, Camrys, Impalas & Altimas (among others sold in the millions) because the sample is probably large enough to be valid. For the others, who knows?   But, other than being a time-consuming survey completed by a self-selected group, the results of which are vague at best, what's not to like? Replies to this message: markcincinnati (Jul 05, 2006 4:23 am) lexusguy (Jul 05, 2006 5:48 am) calhon (Jul 05, 2006 10:51 am) lexusguy (Jul 05, 2006 1:44 pm) and 1 more...
#7684 of 10006 Re: german [cdnpinhead] by markcincinnati Jul 05, 2006 (4:23 am)
Replying to: cdnpinhead (Jul 04, 2006 8:48 pm) We post the number of cars sold every month here (BTW they are out, as I'm sure most of us know already) -- so, why not post the number who participated in a survey "voluntarily" as a percentage of the total and then roll out the reliability numbers?   These days, with BMW [for instance] selling between 35-45,000 5 series, it would be amusing and maybe even significant to know what the issues were and then spit out a calculated percentage.   The best source of this data would be the manufacturer's themselves who certainly keep records (at least for 50,000 miles for most of these cars here in LPS land.)   Probably won't happen unless it would be to counter the vague and perhaps statistically insignificant rankings CR provides.   Of course, CR seems to be hell bent on making its results harder and harder to interpret in any meaningful way -- perhaps the best thing is to keep quiet if you are a mfgr.
#7685 of 10006 CR is interested in selling CR by sfcharlie Jul 05, 2006 (5:24 am)
Part of the problem (and emotion) associated with CR and JDP is what we consumers have brought to the relationship with them -- namely, the usual wish to find another individual or group whose agenda is nothing other than our best interests.    The prime directive -- from genes to magazines -- is survival and proliferation. CR does that by conveying "we have all the information you need to know exactly which car you should buy". Any method of gathering data or reporting it that subverts that agenda ain't gonna happen.

You are here: Forums Sedans Luxury Performance Sedans