JD Powers 2012 Dependability Study

[polarbear]

A few surprises here.

http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/JDPAContent/CorpComm/News/content/Releases/charts/2012008-1.jpg

And a few relevant comments:

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.

Historically, initial quality has been a good indicator of likely long-term dependability. If a model has high levels of quality when new, it is more likely to be dependable over the long term.

Vehicle dependability is at an all-time high and resale values are also very high by historical standards. If your vehicle has been properly maintained and is in good working condition, it may be worth more than you think if you are considering trading it in.

and this zinger:

there are several brands that have performed very well in dependability during the past several years but still face challenges with customer perceptions of their reliability. In particular, during the past four years, models from Buick, Cadillac, Ford, Hyundai and Lincoln have achieved consistently strong levels of dependability, but still have relatively high proportions of new-vehicle buyers expressing reliability concerns.

Translation- perception doesn't always equal reality.

To the individual segments:

Although there are no awards in their respective segments due to an insufficient number of award-eligible models, or insufficient market share of award-eligible models in the segment, these models also perform particularly well: Ford Mustang, GMC Yukon and Porsche 911.

http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/JDPAContent/CorpComm/News/content/Releases/charts/2012008-2.jpg

http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/JDPAContent/CorpComm/News/content/Releases/charts/2012008-3.jpg

Finally, overall reliability of all makes is at an all-time high since this study was first done in 1990.

J.D. Power and Associates (http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/news/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2012008)

[Iron Chef]

I never pay attention to this J.D. Power shit. I am so friggin' tired of these quality mongers trying to convince the public that cars designed and built by humans should be defect free. I buy what I want.

I get quality surveys all the damn time. Usually, it's preceeded by a letter from the Chevy dealer I had work done at that I should mark the survey with all 100's or all "completely satisfieds" and if I wasn't to contact the dealership. One letter I received from the service writer actually stated that his job and what he was paid depends upon him getting all positive scores on the review. WHAT???

Then they said they'll give me a free oil change for a favorable review. It's worth $100 to me so you think I'm not going to take advantage of it?

Yeah...this review stuff works really well. :rofl:

[Burro (He/Haw)]

I never pay attention to this J.D. Power shit.
I do, for the simple reason it's good to have SOMEONE minding the store.

trying to convince the public that cars designed and built by humans should be defect free.
It's not about defect free, it's about who has the least. Useful information in my estimation.

I buy what I want.
As do we all. But when your vacillating between a couple choices, these things can come in handy at times.

Regardless, I find the info interesting

[Iron Chef]

I do, for the simple reason it's good to have SOMEONE minding the store.


It's not about defect free, it's about who has the least. Useful information in my estimation.


As do we all. But when your vacillating between a couple choices, these things can come in handy at times.

Regardless, I find the info interesting

Yeah...but the public perceives it as defect free. Anyway...the info is OK...nothing against PBear or the post, I just don't put much stock in it. They rank Chrysler dead last in quality and the last two new vehicles I purchased have been Chryslers. Some of the best vehicles I've ever owned. :dunno:

[polarbear]

I never pay attention to this J.D. Power shit. I am so friggin' tired of these quality mongers trying to convince the public that cars designed and built by humans should be defect free. I buy what I want.

I get quality surveys all the damn time. Usually, it's preceeded by a letter from the Chevy dealer I had work done at that I should mark the survey with all 100's or all "completely satisfieds" and if I wasn't to contact the dealership. One letter I received from the service writer actually stated that his job and what he was paid depends upon him getting all positive scores on the review. WHAT???

Then they said they'll give me a free oil change for a favorable review. It's worth $100 to me so you think I'm not going to take advantage of it?

Yeah...this review stuff works really well. :rofl:

This data doesn't come from manufacturers surveys. They are simply documenting average number of unscheduled trips to the service department per 100 vehicles. While I wouldn't buy a car solely based on the results, I think it's a good guide to what makes/models to avoid.

*Land Rover and Saab were included in the survey, but not listed because of insufficient data.

[polarbear]

Yeah...but the public perceives it as defect free. Anyway...the info is OK...nothing against PBear or the post, I just don't put much stock in it. They rank Chrysler dead last in quality and the last two new vehicles I purchased have been Chryslers. Some of the best vehicles I've ever owned. :dunno:

Which takes us right back to JD Powers initial comments. The buying public bases much of their perceptions of quality and reliability on anecdotal evidence and hearsay, rather than what's actually going on with the particular make. One good example is that Ford, as a manufacturer, is currently building a more reliable car than Honda- and has for a few years. That's not the public's perception of the two brands, but it's been documented for three years now.

[carlton_fritz]

JD Power is right in line with Consumer Reports for being like those Supermarket rags reporting about the woman that had alien Elvis love child at age 4, and it had 2 heads. Weekly World News comes to mind.

[MrPeabody]

I never gave JD Powers surveys much thought until I bought my "05 Corvette and received one of their surveys. It made sense to me to rate every aspect of the car as high as possible in order to help enhance the resale value of a car that I had 50K tied up in. Since then I have never given any credence to the accuracy of their surveys.

I agree with Polar Bear that most people's opinions of cars are related to anecdotal experiences of themselves and a small circle of friends. Add in delusional thinking and believing anything the salesman says. What we commonly call drinking the kool-aid here. I had a Honda Insight owner on the lot once that was absolutely convinced he was getting 100 mpg. There's no point in arguing with or even listening to people who are this delusional.


JD Powers customer surveys - GIGO

[lspencer534]

I think they're somewhat useful, but I wish they wouldn't do this:

"The study measures problems experienced during the past 12 months by original owners of three-year-old (2009 model-year) vehicles."

Does that translate to the same quality for a 2010, 2011, and 2012 model? Seems somewhat logical, but you can't say for sure. I'd feel better if they measured quality for the current model year (or at least the prior year); after all, the 2012 models have been out for almost 9 months. Then, follow up with testing it as a 3-year-old car.

[Zed16]

Yeah...but the public perceives it as defect free. Anyway...the info is OK...nothing against PBear or the post, I just don't put much stock in it. They rank Chrysler dead last in quality and the last two new vehicles I purchased have been Chryslers. Some of the best vehicles I've ever owned. :dunno:

Perception is Reality
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength


(apologies to George Orwell)

[polarbear]

I think they're somewhat useful, but I wish they wouldn't do this:

"The study measures problems experienced during the past 12 months by original owners of three-year-old (2009 model-year) vehicles."

Does that translate to the same quality for a 2010, 2011, and 2012 model? Seems somewhat logical, but you can't say for sure. I'd feel better if they measured quality for the current model year (or at least the prior year); after all, the 2012 models have been out for almost 9 months. Then, follow up with testing it as a 3-year-old car.

That may not translate into drawing conclusions on other model years. One example, look what happened to Jaguar's reliability in a few short years. Ditto BMW and Mopar.

I think trends bear watching though. Example- how Ford has improved over the past five years. Ditto Hyundai. Or how some makes have slipped from previously stellar rankings over a period of years (cough... cough... BMW). Or how some makes steadfastly stay on the bottom tier (VW, for example).

What is interesting is how the 3 yr dependability study can vary from the intitial quality survey. Toyota and Honda, amongst others, generally score higher on the initial quality survey than they do in the 3yr dependability survey. I guess the Kool Aide hasn't worn off yet. :)

[lspencer534]

That may not translate into drawing conclusions on other model years. One example, look what happened to Jaguar's reliability in a few short years. Ditto BMW and Mopar.

I think trends bear watching though. Example- how Ford has improved over the past five years. Ditto Hyundai. Or how some makes have slipped from previously stellar rankings over a period of years (cough... cough... BMW). Or how some makes steadfastly stay on the bottom tier (VW, for example).

What is interesting is how the 3 yr dependability study can vary from the intitial quality survey. Toyota and Honda, amongst others, generally score higher on the initial quality survey than they do in the 3yr dependability survey. I guess the Kool Aide hasn't worn off yet. :)

Agree. It's particularly interesting about the models that are always on the bottom. Land Rover, e.g. Yet, you see a fair amount of them on the road. No way would I own one! And up until a few years ago, they were downright dangerous in their lack of acceleration.

[NB2K]

J.D. Power surveys are lightyears ahead of anything else the industry uses to objectively measure quality.

They don't provide incentives to the responders.

Their surveys are a tool to use when evaluating new cars, but certainly not the only tool...


The only thing certain is that Range Rovers still suck.

[NB2K]

That may not translate into drawing conclusions on other model years. One example, look what happened to Jaguar's reliability in a few short years. Ditto BMW and Mopar.

I think trends bear watching though. Example- how Ford has improved over the past five years. Ditto Hyundai. Or how some makes have slipped from previously stellar rankings over a period of years (cough... cough... BMW). Or how some makes steadfastly stay on the bottom tier (VW, for example).

What is interesting is how the 3 yr dependability study can vary from the intitial quality survey. Toyota and Honda, amongst others, generally score higher on the initial quality survey than they do in the 3yr dependability survey. I guess the Kool Aide hasn't worn off yet. :)

TATA effect.

[dwjz06]

Good to see Cadillac moving up:D:cert: