Last post on Feb 14, 2013 at 6:24 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives
What is this discussion about?
#30314 of 32000 Re: 3 years isn't enough [ateixeira]
Jan 09, 2013 (6:36 am)
I guess I thought it was 'reported problems', including mechanical things in their individual charts. Are you saying that mechanical reliability does not factor into the Power numbers? Extremely hard to believe, as you know. BTW, a broken cup holder would be 'interior hardware' on the CR survey.
#30316 of 32000 Re: 3 years isn't enough [uplanderguy]
Jan 09, 2013 (7:05 am)
I guess I thought it was 'reported problems', including mechanical things in their individual charts.
JD Powers measures problems as "things gone wrong." It can be a defect or a design issue in the view of the person reporting the problem.
Ford was dinged for Sync. Hummer was dinged for poor fuel economy. Porsche was dinged for dusty brake pads. All of these were reported as "problems" by JD Power although they all worked as designed.
#30317 of 32000 Re: 3 years isn't enough [robr2]
Jan 09, 2013 (7:19 am)
CR reports 'things gone wrong' as well. Somehow I do not believe that 'poor fuel economy' for Hummer ended up in Powers' three-year reliability survey. I don't believe you believe that either.
#30318 of 32000 Re: Malibu gets some bad marks [xrunner2]
Jan 09, 2013 (7:30 am)
Saw that episode as well. Gotta say that I am in the minority because I think the new one looks better than the outgoing one... Looked good in red.
#30319 of 32000 Re: 3 years isn't enough [uplanderguy]
Jan 09, 2013 (7:49 am)
I think a better analogy would be that CR reports "things that break" (although too much orange peel in the paint or a mis-aligned interior piece technically isn't "broken") while JD Powers reports "things that people gripe about".
Unfortunately, "things that people gripe about" is awfully vague. If I complain about my Ram riding rough, or my Malibu having a cramped back seat, or my Hyundai getting crappy mileage, unfortunately those get ranked right in there with engine failures, fuel tank leaks, cars stalling out, etc.
#30321 of 32000 Re: 3 years isn't enough [uplanderguy]
Jan 09, 2013 (8:42 am)
From your link...
J.D. Power and Associates offers the following tips for consumers regarding vehicle dependability:
Consumer perceptions of vehicle quality and dependability are often based on historical experiences or anecdotes and may be out of line with the current reality. Consumers should gather as much information as they can on the latest models from a variety of sources to make an informed decision.
That's a good reason why readers should regard reliability rankings with some suspicion, as they're really an attempt to quantify things that aren't easily quantifiable.
#30322 of 32000 Re: 3 years isn't enough [uplanderguy]
Jan 09, 2013 (8:54 am)
It's part of their Initial Quality Survey:
"Raffi Festekjian, J. D. Power’s director of automotive product research, explains that the IQS was designed to capture “things gone wrong” with a vehicle. Each one is called a “problem,” and it can be “either a fault in the assembly of the vehicle or a design issue.” A fault might be a poorly assembled door panel or a loose electrical connection, while a design issue is something that a customer doesn’t like—a multifunction cruise-control stalk, for example—even though the item is performing exactly as intended."
#30323 of 32000 Re: 3 years isn't enough [robr2]
Jan 09, 2013 (9:08 am)
From your link...
Part of the disconnect stems from most people’s tendency to equate quality with an absence of defects. Back in the Eighties, when Japanese carmakers were grabbing market share from domestic companies on the strength of their superior assembly quality, many of us thought of automotive quality primarily in those terms. But Webster’s concise definition of quality is “the degree of excellence which a thing possesses.” And the J.D. Power IQS has always taken this broader view.
This is exactly what I was referring to when I stated the surveys attempt to quantify things not easily, or in some cases at all possible to quantify.
Can someone define quantitatively a "great tasting steak" in a manner in which the general population would agree 100%? We can certainly define and quantify proper steak preparation and cooking methodology, but taste is subjective.
More from the link...
In a different vein, Porsche has struggled with brake-pad choice because of the IQS. The pads that deliver the best fade resistance and wet-braking performance are also those that generate more wheel-soiling, IQS-complaint–generating dust.
One hopes that the customers who complain about the brake dust in the IQS are somewhat offset by those who praise the brakes in Power’s Automotive Performance, Execution, and Layout (APEAL) study, which is designed to capture “things gone right” about a vehicle. It’s attached to the IQS questionnaire, so it draws from the same population of respondents.
Unfortunately, the results of the APEAL study don’t get the play the IQS does, suggesting that moves toward the lowest-common-denominator solutions to reduce design “problems” will continue. When a large majority of IQS-reported problems were defects, the survey was a powerful force in the drive toward automotive quality. But the gap between defects and design problems is closing. “In 2011,” according to Festekjian, “there were still slightly more defects than design problems, but it’s getting closer every year.”