Ford takes most honors in JDPowers Initial Quality Survey 2007

[eddiehaskell]

Sorry to rain on your parade Eddie, but the 2004 VDS graphic you show above represents 2001 Hyundai's, and how they were holding up in 2004!

 

Obviously. The point is - a great showing in the IQS can be totally negated by the VDS. When people look at these surveys to see which brands offer the best quality, which survey do you think they are going to look at....long term or initial quality? Which survey do you believe affects perception more? My money is on the VDS.

 

Regardless, as I said before, the '07 IQS scores are VERY close together for most brands. It'll be interesting to see how things stack up in 2010 when they release the VDS for these vehicles.

 

As for the Hyundai results you posted, I doubt VERY, VERY, VERY seriously that Hyundai will rank alongside Toyota and Honda in the VDS later this year. Heck, It'll eat my hat if they do!!!

Edited June 7, 2007 by eddiehaskell

[White99GT]

The rankings are so close - I'll need to see the long term survey to make any definitive statements about quality. Initial quality has been known to vary drastically from the long term survey.

 

Does anyone remember Hyundai from a few years back?

 

2004 Initial quality: http://money.cnn.com/2004/04/28/pf/autos/powerqualitysurvey/

 

And then, here is the 2004 Vehicle dependability survey:

Notice Hyundai in the bottom 6.

 

More misinformation from Edward. :wacko:

[pcsario]

Complacency, a BON trademark.

 

Ford barely outscored Hyundai and Kia on quality and everyone is proud of such a huge coup.

Edited June 7, 2007 by pcsario

[BlackHorse]

Complacency, a BON trademark.

 

Ford barely outscored Hyundai and Kia on quality and everyone is proud of such a huge coup.

 

Of course this is the comment we all expected from pc. Mister "Oh I love Ford. I want Ford to do well. I'm a big Ford supporter." until of course he opens his mouth and then it's comments like this. Thanks once again pcsario for demonstrating your true colors and purpose here mister Ford lover. Let's all be sure to pass on pcsarios point that it's all just complacency to Mark Fields who also seemed pretty proud of the IQS survey. Because you know, he comes to BON all the time too so that must be where he got it. You're so full of it man. lol

Edited June 7, 2007 by BlackHorse

[Noah Harbinger]

Obviously. The point is - a great showing in the IQS can be totally negated by the VDS. When people look at these surveys to see which brands offer the best quality, which survey do you think they are going to look at....long term or initial quality? Which survey do you believe affects perception more? My money is on the VDS.

 

Regardless, as I said before, the '07 IQS scores are VERY close together for most brands. It'll be interesting to see how things stack up in 2010 when they release the VDS for these vehicles.

 

As for the Hyundai results you posted, I doubt VERY, VERY, VERY seriously that Hyundai will rank alongside Toyota and Honda in the VDS later this year. Heck, It'll eat my hat if they do!!!

 

I doubt they'll be top too, but the point stands: Hyundai demonstrated that improvements in IQS are correlated with improvements in the VDS for the same model year vehicles. Improving from a tie for last to middle-of-the-pack in 2 years is a major accomplishment.

 

/owns a Hyundai from before they started improving

//don't ask about its repair history

[ZanatWork]

Complacency, a BON trademark.

 

Ford barely outscored Hyundai and Kia on quality and everyone is proud of such a huge coup.

 

 

Spin, the lone weapon of the negatard.

 

 

Accuses Ford of complacency for barely beating the Koreans...and fails to mention to huge leap upward by same.

 

So obvious, so funny, but so sad at the same time.

[grbeck]

At this point, any good news regarding Ford is a blessing, but I have to agree with pcsario - it's way too early to break out the champagne. This is ONE survey, and it is for the first 90 days of ownership.

 

So far the early indications are showing that Ford's drive for better quality is paying dividends (as even the results from Consumer Reports and mkaresh point in this direction).

 

But given the habit of the Detroit car makers to declare "mission accomplished" way too early in the game, I'd say it's too early for celebration. Ford still has LOTS of work to do. They had better not be breaking out the champagne at the Glass House.

[RichardJensen]

Ford still has LOTS of work to do. They had better not be breaking out the champagne at the Glass House.

 

Frankly, I think they should. The results from CU and JD Power validate the rigorous approach to initial quality implemented by Padilla et al.

 

They need to continue to maintain the discipline that they've put in place (batch & hold launches, no product release until 5 days of glitch-free builds, etc.)

 

Ford's improved showing in the last 2 JD Power VDS reports, if duplicated this year (although in all fairness, Mercury will probably not improve on their 2nd place showing from last year), signals that efforts to get on top of long term quality factors (design defects and QC for supplier sourced products) are also bearing fruit.

 

But seriously, this validates programs IN PLACE at Ford, and that's cause for celebration.

[ZanatWork]

At this point, any good news regarding Ford is a blessing, but I have to agree with pcsario - it's way too early to break out the champagne. This is ONE survey, and it is for the first 90 days of ownership.

 

So far the early indications are showing that Ford's drive for better quality is paying dividends (as even the results from Consumer Reports and mkaresh point in this direction).

 

But given the habit of the Detroit car makers to declare "mission accomplished" way too early in the game, I'd say it's too early for celebration. Ford still has LOTS of work to do. They had better not be breaking out the champagne at the Glass House.

 

Wow.

 

The quality scores-for both initial and 3-year-have been trending upward for years now...according to JDP and Strategic Vision. Even CR is giving Ford increased props, and they're accused on every auto site of being import fetishists of the 1st degree.

 

This isn't something that happened "just now", or reverses a trend...indeed, this shows a healthy trend Ford must fight very hard to keep up.

 

This SHOULD be celebrated, and used to kick off the advertisements for the Taurus, Sable, Focus, and updated F-150. Ford needs to make a LOT of noise about this, as the media won't likely want to write success stories to offset years of doom articles.

[NickF1011]

Nice to see Chevy win that one with Ford right behind.

 

 

I think it's worth noting that the highest quality pickup was the Silverado CLASSIC Heavy Duty, meaning the outgoing model that isn't being sold anymore. Looks like the new Sierra was the 2nd runner-up though, so the new Silverado probably isn't too far behind. But doesn't that sort of make the F-150 the current leader in the segment by default? :happy feet:

[MKII]

What has struck me today is the amount of Non-Auto people that are talking about this.

 

On the way to work at the Coffee shop the talk was all about this.

 

The buzz at work is the same. Here at the office many know I bleed Ford blue (the 5 fords we drive might be a tip off) I was surprised it was brought up by the Rice lovers. Hard for them to take some medicine for a change.

 

That's the ticket. Getting Ford back on the consumers Radar :beerchug:

[grbeck]

Frankly, I think they should. The results from CU and JD Power validate the rigorous approach to initial quality implemented by Padilla et al.

 

They need to continue to maintain the discipline that they've put in place (batch & hold launches, no product release until 5 days of glitch-free builds, etc.)

 

Ford's improved showing in the last 2 JD Power VDS reports, if duplicated this year (although in all fairness, Mercury will probably not improve on their 2nd place showing from last year), signals that efforts to get on top of long term quality factors (design defects and QC for supplier sourced products) are also bearing fruit.

 

But seriously, this validates programs IN PLACE at Ford, and that's cause for celebration.

 

They can celebrate when the results are consistently good across the line. There are still too many low-scoring models in the lineup - at least according to Consumer Reports.

 

People who are looking at an Explorer - which doesn't score too well in Consumer Reports' surveys - aren't going to take comfort in the fact that quality programs are boosting the scores of OTHER Ford vehicles.

 

And please note that while Consumer Reports has praised the Fusion/Milan/MKZ, it still ranks Ford's total score (i.e., for its entire lineup) below that of Honda and Toyota, although ahead of the domestic competition.

 

Ranking first among the domestics isn't good enough anymore.

 

So hold the champagne until Ford, as a whole, consistently BEATS the full lineups of Honda and Toyota in LONG-TERM reliability.

Edited June 7, 2007 by grbeck

[ds91776]

Consider this though. For 2008 Ford brand will have the following "recommended" models from CR:

 

-Focus

-Fusion

-Taurus

-Escape (has been very reliable for years but lack of ESC nixed it..thank you 08 update)

-Taurus X

 

-Hopefully Edge (based on Fusion results it should at least get a white circle)

-Hopefully Mustang will get back up where it belongs

-09 Flex should do just as well or better than Taurus/X

 

So the only models that need improvement are

 

-F150 (being redesigned for 09)

-Explorer (being redesigned for 2010)

- Sport Trac

-Expedition

 

So really, Ford has a great chance to get all of their products recommended by CR (or the vast majority) by 2010, even Toyota doesn't have all of their models recommended.

 

If the Edge is reliable then all of Ford's sedans and crossovers will be recommended,a huge achievement for Ford and a great sign.

[Meelaan]

Consider this though. For 2008 Ford brand will have the following "recommended" models from CR:

 

-Focus

-Fusion

-Taurus

-Escape (has been very reliable for years but lack of ESC nixed it..thank you 08 update)

-Taurus X

 

-Hopefully Edge (based on Fusion results it should at least get a white circle)

-Hopefully Mustang will get back up where it belongs

-09 Flex should do just as well or better than Taurus/X

 

So the only models that need improvement are

 

-F150 (being redesigned for 09)

-Explorer (being redesigned for 2010)

- Sport Trac

-Expedition

 

So really, Ford has a great chance to get all of their products recommended by CR (or the vast majority) by 2010, even Toyota doesn't have all of their models recommended.

 

If the Edge is reliable then all of Ford's sedans and crossovers will be recommended,a huge achievement for Ford and a great sign.

 

I like your analysis, but I'm concerned that even with these vastly improved products, the public perception of Ford will maintain. I fear this because of Ford's generally "blah" advertising efforts. Thus, the next step is to work on the marketing of these fine products. It's like when nAbraham came down the mountain with the ten commandments: Fantastic! But if no one knows about it, what's it worth?

 

I don't know how many people bought Fords because of American Idol or 24, but wouldn't it be nice for Ford to have a campaign on par with at least Chevy's? What if Lincoln had a real consistent campaign like Cadillac's? I'm impressed with both of their efforts, and even though they're not 100% perfect, they're far more substantial than Ford's. The advertising for the Edge has just been pathetic, and although the Fusion comparison ads are great, your comparing an AWD car against FWD cars... of course the Fusion will kick butt.

 

I recommend a celebrity spokesperson and a damn good song. The ads I've been seeing just make me think "OLD MOVES."

[RichardJensen]

They can celebrate when the results are consistently good across the line. There are still too many low-scoring models in the lineup - at least according to Consumer Reports.

I agree with ds19776. With the exception of the F150 (trucks used hard tend to score lower), Ford's ongoing efforts to makeover their lineup will yield results as each product is brought in line with Ford's new standards.

 

Significantly, while the Expy and Explorer are new, the plants they're built in haven't been refitted with new equipment, and therefore some of the QC monitoring hardware hasn't been installed (as it has at OAC, CAP, HMO).

 

This is a milestone worth celebrating, hardly the end of the road.

[Deanh]

They can celebrate when the results are consistently good across the line. There are still too many low-scoring models in the lineup - at least according to Consumer Reports.

 

People who are looking at an Explorer - which doesn't score too well in Consumer Reports' surveys - aren't going to take comfort in the fact that quality programs are boosting the scores of OTHER Ford vehicles.

 

And please note that while Consumer Reports has praised the Fusion/Milan/MKZ, it still ranks Ford's total score (i.e., for its entire lineup) below that of Honda and Toyota, although ahead of the domestic competition.

 

Ranking first among the domestics isn't good enough anymore.

 

So hold the champagne until Ford, as a whole, consistently BEATS the full lineups of Honda and Toyota in LONG-TERM reliability.

agree with the overall concept....but anyone that takes consumer reports seriously deserves a Tundra with bad camshaft....

Edited June 7, 2007 by Deanh

[BlackHorse]

agree with the overall concept....but anyone that takes consumer reports seriously deserves a Tundra with bad camshaft....

 

You might want to run that by Mulally who took a large portion of his design and engineering staff to the CR testing grounds and basically told them to "shut up, sit down and pay attention" while the CR guys went to town on what's wrong with Ford vehicles. Apparently Mulally takes them very seriously.

Edited June 8, 2007 by BlackHorse

[smok]

agree with the overall concept....but anyone that takes consumer reports seriously deserves a Tundra with bad camshaft....

 

What????

 

Consumer Reports is huge when people consider vehicle purchase. Mullaly was right when he took the engineers to CR and told them to shut up and take notes, instead of trying to justify the shortcomings of the vehicles...You don't work at Ford, do you? Hope not.

[BlackHorse]

My father won't, absolutely won't, buy a new vehicle until he runs it past consumer reports. To many people it is that important.

[grbeck]

I agree with ds19776. With the exception of the F150 (trucks used hard tend to score lower), Ford's ongoing efforts to makeover their lineup will yield results as each product is brought in line with Ford's new standards.

 

Significantly, while the Expy and Explorer are new, the plants they're built in haven't been refitted with new equipment, and therefore some of the QC monitoring hardware hasn't been installed (as it has at OAC, CAP, HMO).

 

This is a milestone worth celebrating, hardly the end of the road.

 

The bigger question is why weren't those plants refitted with the new equipment when those models were redesigned? Those vehicles are bearing the Ford name and still sell in relatively large numbers.

 

Ford cannot afford to have subpar vehicles out there right now. Excuses such as this won't fly anymore...not in today's brutally competitive market.

[grbeck]

agree with the overall concept....but anyone that takes consumer reports seriously deserves a Tundra with bad camshaft....

 

We have a 2005 Focus sedan (47,000 miles) and 2003 Accord EX sedan (four cylinder with 77,000 miles), and so far our experiences with the cars have, with one exception, matched the reliability ratings for those vehicles in Consumer Reports.

 

That one exception is with the Focus - it received a black dot for transmission problems, and so far, we haven't had any problems in this area (knock on wood).

[SVT_MAN]

We have a 2005 Focus sedan (47,000 miles) and 2003 Accord EX sedan (four cylinder with 77,000 miles), and so far our experiences with the cars have, with one exception, matched the reliability ratings for those vehicles in Consumer Reports.

 

That one exception is with the Focus - it received a black dot for transmission problems, and so far, we haven't had any problems in this area (knock on wood).

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but do you by chance drive like a "bat out of hell"?

 

My friend from school has a Focus and she has told me her Focus has had a lot of problems. I don't know if it has or not. I do know that she drives it really daintily and it only has 76,000 miles on it.

 

My brother-in-law, on the other hand, has the same model year Focus. It has 125,000 miles on it, and he has had ZERO problems with it. That car amazes me because the guy is absolutely HARD on a car. I mean, we're talking, he goes way beyond oil changes, doesn't change fluids like ever, and he just plain drives the car HARD. He had a point at 115,000 miles where he thought his transmission was going bad. It was shifting jerkily and sometimse it was running rough. It turned out that he never did the maintenance on his car .. never. He didn't even get his spark plugs changed since he bought the car with 12,000 miles. Let alone a transmission flush. Crazy.

 

So basically I've come to the conclusion that to get the most out of your Focus, drive it like you stole it :happy feet: :happy feet: :happy feet: W00T, that gets a dancing chili pepper, or whatever that is. We need a dancing banana.

Edited June 8, 2007 by SVT_MAN

[Mark B. Morrow]

Spin, the lone weapon of the negatard.

Accuses Ford of complacency for barely beating the Koreans...and fails to mention to huge leap upward by same.

 

So obvious, so funny, but so sad at the same time.

 

 

Great Avatar Zan. I guess I picked a bad week to stop sniffing glue!

[RichardJensen]

The bigger question is why weren't those plants refitted with the new equipment when those models were redesigned? Those vehicles are bearing the Ford name and still sell in relatively large numbers.

 

Ford cannot afford to have subpar vehicles out there right now. Excuses such as this won't fly anymore...not in today's brutally competitive market.

Same reason why the arena in the city I live in has a 30 year old scoreboard and 20 year old 'video' boards that look like lite-brites.

 

Nobody knows if they're going to keep the building or tear it down, ergo spending money on it seems a bit of an iffy proposition.

 

Frankly, when you have no fiduciary responsibilities, it's easy to say stuff like 'excuses such as this won't fly anymore', it's another thing to say, "Hey, let's drop a few hundred mill into MTP. Sure, we may end up bulldozing all that equipment in a few years, but what the heck, you only live once!"

[grbeck]

Same reason why the arena in the city I live in has a 30 year old scoreboard and 20 year old 'video' boards that look like lite-brites.

 

Nobody knows if they're going to keep the building or tear it down, ergo spending money on it seems a bit of an iffy proposition.

 

Frankly, when you have no fiduciary responsibilities, it's easy to say stuff like 'excuses such as this won't fly anymore', it's another thing to say, "Hey, let's drop a few hundred mill into MTP. Sure, we may end up bulldozing all that equipment in a few years, but what the heck, you only live once!"

 

Those vehicles bear the Ford badge. If they are problematic, the potential exists to turn off customers...who will be more than happy to spread the word. Which is what has been happening over the past decade.

 

It doesn't matter whether I have any fiduciary responsibilities. The brutal truth is, excuses like this won't fly anymore. My fiduciary responsibilities - or lack thereof - are irrelevant.

Edited June 8, 2007 by grbeck