Asian brands are tops in reliability, but Ford is coming close

[MarkFive]

Survey

[chiefstang]

Survey

I love how Cr consistently rates Ford trucks as having the best reliability of any half ton/three quarter ton, etc.., but doesn't recommend them.

 

 

Look, trucks get worked harder than cars, so they are gonna break more. I get that, why don't they? There are going to be more problems reported on vehicles taking the regular beatings that trucks do.

 

That being said, shouldn't the most reliable trucks in each segment be recommended? Instead they just continue to not recommend anything?

 

Guys that buy trucks would like to know which truck in each class lasts the longest. They're not interested in the reliability when compared to the Scion.

 

I get tired of reading that the F-Series has "consistently better" reliabilty than all the other trucks in their segment, but we don't recommend it.

 

We don't recommend trucks.

[dsime653]

Ford, Lincoln and Mercury - which all had average reliability. Lincoln ranked 11th, just behind Kia.

 

Interesting...shows how far Lincoln has fallen...

[sonofford]

deleted

Edited October 27, 2008 by RichardJensen

[atomaro]

deleted

 

 

Or, more correctly, that the poll is worthless.

Edited October 27, 2008 by RichardJensen

[battyr]

The Kia's tested will have only a few features so they have little to go wrong. The cars are tested over a short period of time so that durability is not tested. The Lincoln is has more features so there is more things to go wrong. Note that a V-8 has twice as many Valves, pistons, seals, and bearings as a 4 cylinder. A V-8 might be more durable, but has twice the chance of being defective out of the box. The owners of Lincolns have higher expectations than that of Kia. They are more likely to complain about little things that are not perfect.

[battyr]

Ford and Lincoln quality is being hurt by truck quality. When Lincoln drops their SUVs and Trucks they may have quality better than the average Japanese maker. The new F-150 may raise Ford quality to equal Toyota and Honda.

[sonofford]

Or, more correctly, that the poll is worthless.

 

It's not worthless. It's just not the last word on reliability, any more than JD Power is.

[chiefstang]

The Kia's tested will have only a few features so they have little to go wrong. The cars are tested over a short period of time so that durability is not tested. The Lincoln is has more features so there is more things to go wrong. Note that a V-8 has twice as many Valves, pistons, seals, and bearings as a 4 cylinder. A V-8 might be more durable, but has twice the chance of being defective out of the box. The owners of Lincolns have higher expectations than that of Kia. They are more likely to complain about little things that are not perfect.

Yeah, but Lexus scored in at the top, and they have just as many bells and whistles as Lincoln.

[Ovaltine]

The Kia's tested will have only a few features so they have little to go wrong. The cars are tested over a short period of time so that durability is not tested.

 

.....The owners of Lincolns have higher expectations than that of Kia. They are more likely to complain about little things that are not perfect.

 

BTY:

 

If you read any automotive magazines (or just go to Google), it's usually noted that the standard feature content on Hyundais and Kias is usually higher than comparable other makes. The reason for this is usually attributed to the fact that (assumedly) Korean car company's are compensating perceived shortcomings to increase the attractiveness of their vehicles.

 

In any case, the point is that Korean cars are usually NOT lacking complex standard features. (i.e. My 2004.5 Spectra came with 4-way discs and side curtain airbags standard back in 2004. A long list of other standard features that the Neon, Focus, etc. didn't have were also included).

 

So that information refutes your first claim.

 

 

Secondly, after having worked for a market-research firm that did quality surveys for one of the Big 3 back in the '80s, I learned the following from our PhD stats analyst:

 

a.) Younger and less affluent people are usually MUCH more vocal about the problems they experience with their cars due to the fact that they usually only have one vehicle to drive, and the inconvenience of taking it in for repairs is magnified.

 

b.) Older and more affluent people are LESS likely to complain on their surveys due to the fact they have other vehicles at home to fall back on when their luxury marques have problems. Thus, the inconvenience factor is greatly lowered, which is reflected positively on the surveys.

 

That's strike 2.

 

 

I'm not saying that Consumer Report's survey isn't flawed in some fashion, BUT... the two assertions above (IMHO) do not explain the differences that we're seeing.

 

 

As I've said on here for years, DON'T underestimate the ability of the Koreans to improve their product.

 

 

-Ovaltine

Edited October 24, 2008 by Ovaltine

[dsime653]

deleted

Edited October 27, 2008 by RichardJensen

[Ovaltine]

deleted

 

Actually I think that the domestics turned the corner a while back, and quality, design, and available features have been on a major upswing. As with the Korean situation, perception usually lags reality by a significant amount.

 

What's a bummer is this $#%^@ market downturn happening just when the domestics needed capital to continue the process/trend. Sooner than later the lack of $$$ and human resources is going to negatively start affecting the product.

 

I'm actually pleased to see that the press coverage points to Ford being able to potentially withstand all of this better than both GM and Chrysler due to improved management and improved vehicle mix (aka: European Fords).

 

The only reason I replied to the Kia post is to keep people focused on the increasing competition that the Koreans pose towards the domestics. Four years ago when I started posting about how good my Spectra was, people scoffed and ridiculed the assertions in my posts. I think the message (and facts) have gotten through, since that happens a WHOLE lot less these days.

 

-Ovaltine

Edited October 27, 2008 by RichardJensen

[MGallun]

meh on the kia shit... bought a 2004 kia optima lx v6... and well, its a tard and a giant POS... thank god for the warranty, i will say this, the local kia dealer rocks, car breaks down, take it in and out in 1 day no charge, now thats cool shit.

 

but...blah.. it drives nice, dont car for the capt chair seating making me feel like iam in the sky driving, the v6 has good pick up and go, but gets worse gas mileage than my fusion v6, go figure.. all 4 rims are metalic\machined and are flaking... the fenders and doors are very slim and flimsy, heck the gas door is freaking plastic, last winter in the freezing cold i broke it was so cold, again, nice warranty they put me one on for free lol. the interior fake wood grain is pealing, alot of the cloth along the doors is coming unthreaded..

 

so, you know in 1992 i bought hyndai scoupe and it was a tard, so i was like koreans suck, but started hearing they improved and so on so early this year i bought this 2004 optima with 40k on it.. and well, my impression is.. well, they are still tards...

 

maybe i will try again in another 10 years.. we will see.

[RichardJensen]

1) As crappy as the Koreans were 8 years ago, the turnaround speaks to the fact that quality is a result of processes and not ethnic origin (the old 'Japanese are conformists, they do better' argument is flawed as, culturally, the Koreans are quite different from the Japanese).

 

2) The Hyundai Genesis is a joke. It's the Hyundai Phaeton. People will laugh at you for buying it. And its styling is so derivative of the S-Class (especially the grille) that I'm surprised Mercedes hasn't sued.

 

3) I would question the size of the sample for the CU reliability data on the Korean makes. I expect it's much smaller than the public at large due to CU readers being more conservative in buying choices than the rest of the US public. By the same token, I would expect that the percentage of Camries and Accords owned is significantly larger than the public at large.

[dsime653]

deleted

Edited October 27, 2008 by RichardJensen

[packardbob]

I used to care about what CR published and in fact I used to put a quite a bit of stock in their "research." In compiling statistics a few of the major factors of accuracy is the sample size (the larger the sample size the more accurate the data should be) and the demographics of the sample. There are more factors involved in compiling statistics, but these are what killed CR for me. I learned that their sample size is their subscribers. Now, Im not sure if this ruins their data, but there are better ways of collecting data than just using their subscribers. Take some TGR studies for example, they use actual data from dealerships to compile the number of warranty claims for each brand of car. Maybe it's just me, but TGR seems a bit more accurate than CR subscribers.

[dsime653]

deleted

Edited October 27, 2008 by RichardJensen

[RichardJensen]

dsime653 is P71

Edited October 27, 2008 by RichardJensen

[MarkFive]

Phaeton routinely got better reviews than the A8.

Which one is still on sale?

 

Wasn't the Phaeton's biggest issue price? When it came out it was over $65,000 (and could reach over $100,000).

 

Few people attributed that kind of price point to a Volkswagen and sales never took off.

Edited October 24, 2008 by MarkFive

[papilgee4evaeva]

Wasn't the Phaeton's biggest issue price? When it came out it was over $65,000 (and could reach over $100,000).

 

Few people attributed that kind of price point to a Volkswagen and sales never took off.

 

Hence our lack of enthusiasm for the Genesis. Although it may be a better idea as a halo than a serious player.

[MarkFive]

Hence our lack of enthusiasm for the Genesis. Although it may be a better idea as a halo than a serious player.

 

Here in Canada the Genesis starts at $37,995. Its around the same price as the Veracruz and a top of the line Sante Fe.

 

You never had them in the States, but the first car Hyundai imported into Canada was a 5-door hatch called the Pony. It was almost as bad as a Lada which was being imported at the same time. These cars made Yugo's look good.

 

Hyundai has improved itself by leaps and bounds in a relatively short time.

Edited October 24, 2008 by MarkFive

[BORG]

Ford also has a fairly large product porftofolio so it's even more challenging for them to rank high overall. Only Toyota brand even comes close to the size of Ford brand. If you crunch the numbers, Ford's results are even more admirable than the smaller brands above it.

 

I for one have never considered Lincoln a quality brand and have always been baffled by it's high rankings in the past. Occasionally I've had a trouble free Lincoln, but most of them have had made far more warranty visits than my Dad and his Fords have. In fact, my Dad has owned 12 Fords since 1980 and none of them have ever given him any problem or gone back to the dealership for warranty work. He works them hard, putting 100K on each one every 3-4 years.

 

The MKX I have now has been the most trouble free Lincoln I've ever had, good sign! In fact, no problems at all, no squeaks, rattles, buzzes, faulty sensors, nadda!!! But I still have 2 more years with it and will reserve final judgment until it's over. The MKZ had major problems in its 2nd year with me, although was fine in its 1st year.

 

The difference with my Lincoln experience is excellent customer service at my dealership, and all problems have been resolved each and every time. So essentially, the problems are an inconvenience but minimal and I still LOVE my Lincolns and would never give them up.

Edited October 24, 2008 by BORG

[Ovaltine]

meh on the kia shit... bought a 2004 kia optima lx v6... and well, its a tard and a giant POS... thank god for the warranty, i will say this, the local kia dealer rocks, car breaks down, take it in and out in 1 day no charge, now thats cool shit.

 

so, you know in 1992 i bought hyndai scoupe and it was a tard, so i was like koreans suck, but started hearing they improved and so on so early this year i bought this 2004 optima with 40k on it.. and well, my impression is.. well, they are still tards...

 

maybe i will try again in another 10 years.. we will see.

 

Your Kia Optima was a totally different car/platform than the 2006.5-2009 model that would be included on the CR review. I wouldn't have touched a 2004 prev-gen Spectra with a 10 foot pole. THAT'S how much better the 2004.5 (based on the Hyundai Elantra) was over the previous pre-Hyundai designed Sephia/Spectra.

 

Here's a graphical exhibit of the differences....

 

Your 2004 Kia Optima

 

 

 

 

 

2009 Kia Optima

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not saying that the current Optima makes any great breakthroughs in design, BUT.... you can definitely see the rapid increase in design and appeal. And the quality numbers are starting to make themselves known too.

 

It will be interesting to see where the Optima (and other Kia's) go from here, as illustrated by the next-gen Spectra that will be available early next year:

 

 

 

-Ovaltine

Edited October 25, 2008 by Ovaltine

[battyr]

BTY:

 

If you read any automotive magazines (or just go to Google), it's usually noted that the standard feature content on Hyundais and Kias is usually higher than comparable other makes. The reason for this is usually attributed to the fact that (assumedly) Korean car company's are compensating perceived shortcomings to increase the attractiveness of their vehicles.

 

In any case, the point is that Korean cars are usually NOT lacking complex standard features. (i.e. My 2004.5 Spectra came with 4-way discs and side curtain airbags standard back in 2004. A long list of other standard features that the Neon, Focus, etc. didn't have were also included).

 

So that information refutes your first claim.

 

 

Secondly, after having worked for a market-research firm that did quality surveys for one of the Big 3 back in the '80s, I learned the following from our PhD stats analyst:

 

a.) Younger and less affluent people are usually MUCH more vocal about the problems they experience with their cars due to the fact that they usually only have one vehicle to drive, and the inconvenience of taking it in for repairs is magnified.

 

b.) Older and more affluent people are LESS likely to complain on their surveys due to the fact they have other vehicles at home to fall back on when their luxury marques have problems. Thus, the inconvenience factor is greatly lowered, which is reflected positively on the surveys.

 

That's strike 2.

 

 

I'm not saying that Consumer Report's survey isn't flawed in some fashion, BUT... the two assertions above (IMHO) do not explain the differences that we're seeing.

 

 

As I've said on here for years, DON'T underestimate the ability of the Koreans to improve their product.

 

 

-Ovaltine

 

The Kia might have more standard features than a Focus. This only gives it less build complexity. In the case of the Focus, you can order a vehicle with few standard features or you can option them up. This makes the build process very complicated and adds to the chances of errors. This is something that Ford has to fix in their cars. You can not say that the Kia with a 4 cylinder is more complex than a Lincoln with a V-8, a 6 speed automatic and 4WD. The Lincoln would also have a lot of things that the consumer does not see that are required to improves fuel efficiency.

 

It might be true that some Lincoln buyers are older and are less vocal about problems, but you can't say this is the case for all Lincoln buyers. I would thinks anyone who buys a Lincoln LT or Navigator will be different than the typical Town Car buyer and typical Kia buyer.

[chiefstang]

deleted

Missed you, P...

Edited October 27, 2008 by RichardJensen