Jump to content

jsleesma

Member
  • Posts

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jsleesma

  1. But I think the point here is that Nissan was SELLING the CVT once they decided to put it on a vehicle. In other words, they found some BENEFITS that come from a CVT (even if, as I readily admit, it is some stupid made-up problem that only yuppie scum care about) and TOLD people about them in the commercial.

     

    Why doesn't Ford do this? They could start by ADVERTISING that their 3.5l V6 makes its 267hp on regular fuel while Toyota's makes its 268 on premium.

  2. New launches from Ford have consistently placed in the top three on JD Power IQS studies. Similar results have not been achieved by GM and Chrysler. Among the seven vehicles on new architectures Ford has launched since MY 2005 (the Five Hundred, Montego, Freestyle, Mustang, Fusion, Milan, and Zephyr), there has been exactly one recall, concerning gas straps of sub-par quality that could fail after 100k miles.

     

    I think that Richard has pointed out one of the most positive signs for Ford. They really haven't screwed up a launch recently. The effect of the botched launch of the Focus is still being felt by Ford, since it really ruined the image of a great small car. I think that Focuses wouldn't have to be so highly discounted today if the launch had gone off correctly. If Ford could get more $$ per Focus we might even have seen the euro version.

  3. What is the big conspiracy here? All I here is that reviewers are biased in their decisions. Magazines are biased. Corporations are biased. Most of these are American companies. Why are they biased against American cars? I'm not an expert by any means, but I would think that if an American car was the best in it's class, these magazines would say so. Why wouldn't they?

     

    Ford, and the others need to concentrate on consistency and reliability. Not spending all their time finding an "F" name for each model. Also, like someone posted earlier, when you say Camry or Civic, people have known these cars, and their reputation for years. Besides Fords trucks, which have always been class leading, and the Mustang of course, where are Ford's namesake models? Taurus is now Fusion, or 500 which ever. Tempo went to contour, now nothing. Escort to Focus. Come out with products the public wants, and continue to build on them, we need to give ourselves this reputation of quality and reliability. If we build it, people will come.

     

    You are totally right. From the company's perspective, you have to assume your cars aren't as reliable and just kill yourself coming up with better and better ones. You are also right about Ford squandering brands. No more Taurus, Escort, Thunderbird, Probe, etc. Why? Who knows.

     

    But from the consumer perspective, many people aren't buying these cars based on bad data. Everyone keeps saying "They're not as reliable." Well reliability is a question we can answer. We can get the number of each model sold, find out how many problems each had, and come up with HARD DATA about reliability. Its totally possible. What I'm saying is that Consumer Reports does NOT do this. Its not that they are intentionally biased towards imports, its that the method of sampling they use simply cannot give us accurate information on reliability.

     

    I haven't seen JD Power data, but I think that it is much better than Consumer Reports. The problem is that most articles throw CR's data around like it was the gospel truth.

  4. I can agree with the stories--if you had lousy vehicles from GM or Ford, but great ones from Toyota, why would you switch back?

     

    BUT what I HATE hearing about is Consumer Reports and their stupid quality rankings. Check out this blurb:

     

    According to our latest (2005) subscriber survey, Japanese and Korean vehicles still have the fewest problems on average: 12 problems per 100 vehicles. This number, however, has held steady for the newest models since 2002, when they improved from 15 problems per 100 in the previous year. On average, Asian vehicles are by far the most reliable, but their improvement has slowed.

     

    Look at those first words. "According to our SUBSCRIBER SURVEY..." As anyone who has ever done statistical work can tell you a SUBSCRIBER SURVEY CAN NEVER BE ACCURATE. Your sample size is totally unpredictible. Who returns the cards? Who SUBSCRIBES TO YOUR MAGAZINE? All this becomes not truly random, and hence is suspect.

     

    An accurate survey must randomly select people from the entire population who owns that car, and it MUST interview each person selected.

     

    If more import owners subscribe to CR (and I'm SURE that they do) then the sample size for import owners surveyed will be huge--leading, perhaps, to more accurate results. If fewer domestic owners subscribe, the sample size will be small--leading to drastically inaccurate results.

     

    This might not be a problem except that these reliability ratings come down to 6 problems per hundred vehicles. Now, that is quite a few problems, but with such bad data, their results may not be statistically significant at that level. What that means is that the bias in their sample (the fact that only import owners subscribe to CR and, hence, get surveyed) means that they may not be able to tell you anything to that level of accuracy.

     

    Also, this doesn't really explain the difference in perception. Everybody loves VW and other imports (at least where I live in Chicago) but the European cars are up at like 21 problems per 100 (by far the worst). So I wonder whether reliability is really what's causing the drive to imports.

×
×
  • Create New...