Have Bad Cars Gone Extinct? 672
Hugh Pickens writes "AP reports that global competition is squeezing lemons out of the market and forcing automakers to improve the quality and reliability of their vehicles. With few exceptions, cars are so close on reliability that it's getting harder for companies to charge a premium. 'We don't have total clunkers like we used to,' says Dave Sargent, automotive vice president with J.D. Power. In 1998, J.D. Power and Associates found an industry average of 278 problems per 100 vehicles, but this year, the number fell to 132. In 1998, the most reliable car had 92 problems per 100 vehicles, while the least reliable had 517, a gap of 425. This year the gap closed to 284 problems. It wasn't always like this. In the 1990s, Honda and Toyota dominated in quality, especially in the key American market for small and midsize cars. Around 2006, General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler were heading into financial trouble and shifted research dollars from trucks to cars after years of neglect and spent more on engineering and parts to close the gap. Meanwhile Toyota's reputation was tarnished by a series of safety recalls, and Honda played conservative with new models that looked similar to the old ones. Now it's 'very hard to find products that aren't good anymore,' says Jeremy Anwyl, CEO of the Edmunds.com automotive website. 'In safety, performance and quality, the differences just don't have material impact.'"
ask a mechanic (Score:5, Insightful)
if bad cars have gone extinct. take a seat, it will be a while before he's done laughing.
Re: (Score:3)
why would i go to this mechanic person? the last 8 years i bought a new toyota or honda an average of once every 2 years and the only thing i've done was change the oil and rotate the tires at the dealership. a monkey could do these things.
going forward it's going to be once every 3.5 years for a new car, but still why should i go to this mechanic person? in my experience my cars work like they should every day
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
because water leaks into electronic modules, wires wear out, animals crawl into weird places, blower resistors melt, plastic bits break, murphy's law takes full effect. now your experience sounds wonderful, but from the cars i have seen it is not representative unfortunately.
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:4, Interesting)
animals crawl into weird places
And some of them eat soy-based insulation off of wiring. Yes, I've had that happen before. Really, who thought we needed biodegradable wire insulation? And in automobiles, which don't exactly get buried in landfills.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, but none of those things is indicative of a bad design, just bad luck.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Subsequently, in my attempt to be humorous for you, I ended up asking a friend, "what do you think the mathematical symbol for chipmunk would be."
It turns out it's even funnier out of context.
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:4, Informative)
40-50k on an oil change? That's not new.
My little brother was maintenance supervisor for a resort city Avis facility in the 80s. He got a Dodge something-or-other in for a bad headlight or something, and found that it had not had scheduled maintenance, including oil changes, for 35k. He put it on the retention list - the list that says 'sell this lemon'.
He also got in a Toyota Corolla with over 40k on it, no oil change. He said it came in for a 'sticky door'. Had a stuffed toy in the hinge. Sold that one too.
But he changes the oil in his cars and motorcycles more frequently than the book says. Just because.
Re: (Score:3)
The GP isn't saying you shouldn't change the oil, just that you could _probably_ get away with it. And it's true. Doesn't mean it's smart.
Re: (Score:3)
I go about 10k on synthetic. When a turbo something-or-other blew on my car (under warranty), the first thing the dealership demanded was a service history. I told them I don't keep that stuff and it was none of their business anyway, and they refused to replace the warrantied part...until my lawyer called them.
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:5, Interesting)
Yep exactly.
When I started driving in the early 1990s, if you had, say, a 7 year old car, you'd pretty much expect to have trouble starting it on a cold/wet day. You'd allow 20 minutes extra in the morning for fiddling with the choke and spraying the engine with WD-40. That's just how cars were.
Nowadays, if you buy something that old, even a low-status brand, it'll start every time, barring some serious fault.
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:5, Interesting)
This is where I have a problem with the fine article (or summary at least). Sure, there may be less problems over the life of the car, which todays seems to be not anymore than about 10 years. Where back in the 50's thru the 70s you commonly heard about the 30 year car. There seems to be a different in long term quality of the vehicles.
I had a old 1981 Honda Accord, which other than routine maintenance (oil changes, brakes, tires, clutch, spark plugs, battery, etc.) there were no breakdowns at all that prevented me from getting to a destination. I had this vehicle for 20 years, and when I did get rid of it, I saw it on the road for another 4+ years delivering pizza. I don't think any car today would be able to do that.
And the thing was, I was up north in Saskatchewan, Canada, where -40c was a typical winter (and at times colder). Never once did I ever have problems starting due to the cold - even if the block heater wasn't plugged in. And to boot, that vehicle was great in the snow. It would go where 4x4s would get stuck. I don't know what it was, but that vehicle was great, and I was sad when I had to get rid of it (had a new baby on the way, and wanted something with 4 doors).
So when they say most reliable, I would bet that it's not over a long life of a car... considering the life of a car today is about 10 years. The more complex cars get, the more that can go wrong with them. I'd take that 81 Honda again, in a second, over a lot of the cars today.
Re: (Score:3)
Realize there are different measures of quality. Once upon a time, as this article attests, most cars would develop some sort of issue that would have to be fixed. If you got the right kind of car and got a little lucky, maybe you never needed to get repairs, but often you had to get work done before 50-70,000 miles. Now, most cars will get the first 100,000 miles without significant issues.
You are talking about longevity, that is if a car made to last 100,000 or 200,000 or 500,000. I once read that Japanes
Re: (Score:3)
So when they say most reliable, I would bet that it's not over a long life of a car... considering the life of a car today is about 10 years. The more complex cars get, the more that can go wrong with them.
I'm not sure where you get that idea - I have a 2003 Honda (bought in 2002), and I fully expect that it'll be going strong in another 10 years. It runs great, the only things I've had to replace are normal wear items & one electronic module. Even that, it ran in limp home mode so I've never been stranded. Modern cars really are well made - I had planned to sell this one when it hit 10 years, but now I'm planning to keep it indefinitely.
Still wouldn't trust a Chrysler, though.
Re: (Score:3)
Where back in the 50's thru the 70s you commonly heard about the 30 year car. There seems to be a different in long term quality of the vehicles.
I know it is natural to look back to a time when you were younger, when your knees weren't stiff when you woke up, and your cock was, and imagine everything was better, but it's not true..
In the 70's (much less the 50's ) a car that could make it to 150k miles with no major engine work was the virtually unheard of. Now , the consumer feels ripped off if they
Re: (Score:3)
In the US, the efficiencies involved in car manufacture and distribution are amazing. You're really paying for steel and workers' healthcare when you buy a car, and that's about it. Industrial automation makes actual assembly almost a rounding er
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:5, Insightful)
ALL CARS are junk, says the guy with one of the biggest pieces of shit cars every manufactured.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't believe that all cars are junk, sorry. I work on my own cars so I get a good feel for what was and wasn't designed well, not just from the standpoint of maintenance but actually from a design standpoint. I've always had cheap cars and it's been a learning process so I've gone through tens of them.
Right now I have a 1992 Ford F250 with the 7.3, with an ATS turbo kit added. I also have a 1982 300SD. And sitting in the driveway is a 2000 Astro.
The Astro is total crap. Everything about it is wrong.
The F
Re: (Score:3)
I think I'd have to go back to the mid-60s Ford and Chevy 3/4 ton trucks to remember fooling around with a choke. Or the farm tractors and semi rigs. I can't remember fooling around with a choke on a passenger car after the mid-70s.
Clearly you are speaking about manual chokes, which went out of style in the mid-60s as you recall. I can assure you though, every carbureted car you've ever owned has some kind of choke. If it's not a manually adjusted one, it's an electric or exhaust-heated one. The original po
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm afraid it was way too late for them to keep me as a customer.
I'd like to point out that brand loyalty can be just as naive as nationalism in a buying decision. Maytag was considered unsurpassed in quality for most of it's existence, but if you bought one in the ten year period of 1996-2006, you'd just as likely have a pile of junk. Toyota hasn't fallen as far as Maytag, but there's no sense in pretending that they are the pinnacle of reliability anymore (I say this as the owner of two Toyotas, so I'm not hating).
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:5, Interesting)
going forward it's going to be once every 3.5 years for a new car
Such a waste. Look at the cars Cuba is running. They haven't gotten much of anything since the embargo but their cars keep on ticking.
I have a 14 year old VW Jetta TDI. It is nearing 300,000 mi and still gets 40 driven hard and 50+ if driven gently. Still has 550 psi compression across all 4 cylinders. (Read, that's a good thing). Mechanics wear out it's not always design it's just physics. I've had to replace numerous body parts on the suspension and I'm nearing my 30th oil change but it's still going and I don't see replacing it anytime in the near future.
Let me guess, you buy new clothes every year if they need replacing or not. "Just in case".
Or I suppose a computer analogy: "Nothing ever goes wrong with my computers. I just replace them every month". (And given the design lifespans of Car:Computer::3.5 years:1 month is about right.
Re: (Score:3)
Clement weather also helps the longevity of a car. I always heard that cars in the American Southwest and other places with similar climates tend to last longer. Certainly in terms of the rust and corrosion you see from road salt. I know Cuba isn't as dry, but I'm sure it helps. Of course, then there's the whole "can't buy another" thing you mentioned.
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:5, Insightful)
Holy shit what's wrong with you!? And I thought buying a new car once every 5 years was bad...
Re: (Score:3)
why would i go to this mechanic person? the last 8 years i bought a new toyota or honda an average of once every 2 years
Because I keep a car at least 10 years and in that time you're bound to need new brake pads, new CV joints and a few other bits and pieces. I'm not willing to waste my money on a new car every two years when today's cars easily last at least 10 if maintained.
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:4, Insightful)
why would i go to this mechanic person?
You are getting rid of them before most long-term maintenance is even necessary. You could probably not do _anything_ to a modern car for two years and get away with it. Those cars could last 10, 15 or 20 years if properly maintained, but it requires a skilled mechanic to do the proper maintenance because after 100,000 miles or so there are major components that must be replaced.
I just replaced a car that was almost 14 years old and I was sorely disappointed that I had to because I felt it should have lasted another 5 or 10 years. It was a 1999 Honda Odyssey, and was generally trouble-free and in good shape, but the transmission was going, which is a well-known problem for those cars from that time period, and the logical choice was to replace it rather than replace the transmission, at cost of twice or three times the value of the car, and risk having another similar failure in another year or two, because based on our research, that was a distinct possibility.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Toyota even gives you guides on their website for performing a few standard maintenance tasks: once others would just direct you to the dealer ship for. I know based on Haynes availability I'm more likely getting a Toyota car. Instead of buying another Jeep Patriot. There is no Haynes available for it at all, and doing anything means I need to hope someone posted a good guide on the Jeep forums (unofficial) that didn't disappear. It's a decent car (no problems mechanically), but has some interior issues: ca
Honda Odyssey used an Accord drivetrain... (Score:3)
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:5, Funny)
Re:ask a mechanic (Score:4, Funny)
Really? I asked 10 mechanics, and I got 14 different answers.
Probably because two were from Harvard.
News to me (Score:5, Insightful)
The author has obviously not driven a GM vehicle lately. Let me count the problems with my two year old Pontiac...
Re:News to me (Score:5, Funny)
Re:News to me (Score:5, Funny)
wouldn't "If life gives you lemons, open a GM dealership". make more sense?
Re: (Score:3)
...GM and Ford have both been improving (Ford much more than the former), but Chrysler has done so poorly that they were bought out by a company who hasn't been in the US since the 80's because they didn't want to spend the time and money dealing with the new emissions standards... Oh, and the fact that Chrysler's four differing divisions almost monopolized the bottom of JD Power and Ass
Re:News to me (Score:4)
Maybe that's part of the reason Pontiac is out of business, for all intent and purposes now. None of the GM divisions have been tops for initial quality, with Cadillac and Pontiac being particularly bad. I'm an old fart, and everyone knows that old farts don't change brands. I've drove GM products for 30 years, including my "05 2500HD work truck, but now I drive a Hyundai Sontata Limited 2.0T back and forth for work. More power, better fuel economy, better quality construction, better everything. The Malibu and Impala (it is sized between the two) don't compare and cost more. This is my 2nd Hyundai, 6 months old with 15k miles, and have no regrets.
I put 30k-40k miles per year and the GMs from 2005 and back start falling apart under that stress when they hit 100k. The engines hold up great, the electronics and cosmetic parts start falling off like dead skin.
Re:News to me (Score:5, Insightful)
None of the GM divisions have been tops for initial quality
With the exception of the now defunct Saturn. I'm convinced they gave Saturn the axe because it made all the other divisions look bad. Love my indestructible Saturn commuter car...
Re:News to me (Score:5, Informative)
I'm convinced they gave Saturn the axe because it made all the other divisions look bad.
No, they gave it the axe for two reasons:
1) Americans started buying ridiculously oversized SUV's. And so GM, in all its wisdom, decided to put EVERYTHING into its SUV's because hey, that trend is never going to end, right?
2) Saturns were all made in a non-union plant, and the unions were pushing back.
Re:News to me (Score:5, Informative)
No, they gave it the axe for two reasons:
1) Americans started buying ridiculously oversized SUV's. And so GM, in all its wisdom, decided to put EVERYTHING into its SUV's because hey, that trend is never going to end, right?
2) Saturns were all made in a non-union plant, and the unions were pushing back.
As someone who worked for Saturn for almost 9 years, I can tell you this is incorrect. The last union contract negotiated by the workers in Spring Hill went beyond what the UAW had in place with other manufacturers. That's the reason the unions were upset.
The main reason Saturn was killed is due to the fact that it failed to show enough of a profit over its life. GM continually sank money into it while all the other divisions posted a higher percentage of profit over the amount of money invested (basically, it's was like we were being subsidized). And as someone who has owned 5 Saturns, quality had become a major issue starting around 2000. The L Series had major quality issues, the Vue was OK if you got the 6 cylinder engine (which was manufactured by Honda) and skipped the CVT transmission, the Ion was garbage, and the Relay was a re-badged Chevy/GMC mini van with an extra $3,000 added to the sticker price for no reason. I left just after the release of the Aura, so I can't comment beyond that point.
That being said, I loved my SC1, my SL1's, and my SL2's. Cheap and easy to maintain, and other than the timing chain in the twin cams and the alternator, EGR valve and coil packs across all models, they had relatively few problems.
Re:News to me (Score:5, Informative)
GM didn't kill Saturn, the UAW did.
Saturn cars were built differently from normal GM cars. Saturn was based on the idea of cooperation between management and labour: the strict work rules UAW negotiated over decades were done away with. Workers were flexible, and would do any job that needed doing. And instead of working on a long production line, teams were assigned to individual cars to create a sense of ownership. Decisions were made jointly by management and labour representatives, and the workers were given a profit sharing scheme.
Then the UAW leadership changed, and the new guard lobbied and fought to get rid of the cooperative environment and replace it with a standard GM production line. Not because it was ultimately better for the employees, but because it was a threat to the union: the success of Saturn undermined the union's culture of militancy and 'us-vs-them.' Profit and decision sharing was a definite no-no.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:News to me (Score:5, Insightful)
You're clearly not from the Motor City. Badges have little meaning - nearly no meaning, really - as it's the *platforms* that are designed by the automakers, with the badges shared among them.
Pontiac was put to pasture because its offerings were redundant to those from Chevy, Buick and Saturn. Even then, Saturn got the axe for the same reason. The end result was a healthier portfolio of platforms upon which various GM makes could be engineered, tuned and packaged.
This, however, is the insight few folks realize: The automakers each have a cache of core engineers with talent and capabilities that vary wildly. The executives move their most talented engineers to the platforms that need success most, and their lesser engineers to the platforms that need it least. So, Ford F-150 and Chrysler minivan engineers are the best of their respective companies for a time, and fleet car platforms get the chaff. When the fleet car platforms suffer to the degree they need triage (Chrysler 200, Dodge Durango, Ford Focus), the best engineers are shifted here to perform some one-off miracles.
From here, it sounds like the trim engineers assigned to the aging GMs you had were running in "maintenance" or "cost reduction" mode. Shame for them to lose you, as it's clear to me the star teams were on call for the recent launch of the Cruze and Sonic.
Hard as it was for GM to eliminate and consolidate (trust me, I know, I lived off Pontiac's teat for the last decade), it was the right thing to do.
The new farts know what the old farts don't: Follow the star engineers' platforms for great reliability success!
Re:News to me (Score:5, Interesting)
If the Cruze and the Sonic are the best Chevy can do, then they are doomed. Neither are class leaders, Consumer Reports hasn't sung their praises either. Car and Driver was shocked that the Sonic didn't completely suck http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2012-chevrolet-sonic-ltz-turbo-comparison-test-car-and-driver-page-6 [caranddriver.com] but the version they said was almost as good as the competition cost a few grand more. (this is one of the better reviews)
They also say the Cruze doesn't hold a candle to the Hyundai Elantra (honestly, Hyundai really hit a home run with the new one) Way more features for less money. http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/11-chevrolet-cruze-and-12-ford-focus-vs-jetta-elantra-and-mazda-3-comparison-test-2011-chevrolet-cruze-lt-page-3 [caranddriver.com]
They are better cars than Chevy has made in a while, but they have a long way to catch up with Asia, particularly at the same price point. Breaks my heart to say that, but the truth hurts sometimes. At least the new Chevrolets are a bit "less ugly" than the last decade, but they still aren't winning any beauty contests either, especially when compared to Ford and Hyundai.
On that note, Ford has really gotten their shit together over the last 5 or 6 years and is producing a good car at a good price. When I bought my last car 6 months ago, I had narrowed it down to Ford and Hyundai. Ironically, part of what sold me on the Hyundai was that the dash layout and interior was more "classic GM" in feel to me, more comfortable. Kept bumping my head getting in and out of the Fords. Didn't hurt that the Hyundai had more power (275hp 2L turbo) and better gas mileage (34 Hwy). I'm averaging 31 in mixed but mainly highway driving. The resale value on Hyundais have also skyrocketed. I put a ton of miles on my Azera over two years, and sold it for almost as much as I had bought it for when it was 1 year old.
Re: (Score:3)
Ecotec IS a great engine. I already said that. Unfortunately, they put it in a shitty frame with shitty electronics and shitty cosmetic parts. The engine won't die. All the other parts just start falling off.
Re: (Score:3)
None of the GM divisions have been tops for initial quality, with Cadillac and Pontiac being particularly ba
wrong
Cadilac and Buick have both ranked high in recent surveys
Re: (Score:3)
Yup GM cars are still crap.
It's why this UAW kid whos daddy worked and died at GM and used to be a die hard GM/Pontiac fan will never ever buy another GM vehicle again in my life.
I have a relative with the ugly as hell Chevy minivan called the Traverse that has had the same problems as the 1998-2004 years did. Wheel bearings that do not last, electrical problems, and flat out lousy gas mileage.
Yeah, if you want reliable it's still a wise choice to avoid GM.
Re:News to me (Score:4, Informative)
Anecdotal poster is anecdotal.
Reliability ratings are based on a huge sample size of any given vehicle. Statistically if you build enough cars some are bound to be lemons (and hence why we have lemon laws). So one person with a bad Pontiac doesn't mean all Pontiacs are bad. Also what Pontiac did you buy and why did you buy one when you knew they were shutting down that brand? Sounds like sour grapes on what you thought was going to be a knock-out deal.
On topic though, when I was growing up in the 90's I saw stranded cars all the time, broken down on the highway and byways. Now in the last 5-6 years I see one maybe once a week. It's not statistical, just anecdotal, but as a general sampling it does seem to support that cars break less often compared to their older designed counterparts.
Re: (Score:3)
At least here in IL, you can lose your license for abandoning a vehicle. Or at least can't renew it until you pay all the fees. If you have to pay no matter what, there's
Re: (Score:3)
How your comment got rated insightful, I do not know. Your own anecdotal experiences prove nothing statistically, though like other highly emotional things, there is little I can say that will dissuade you that your own experiences say anything about the reliability of a make, or even model of car.
Speaking as someone who drives GM vehicles every day and has no more or no fewer problems than the average for any other brand, I say that neither your experience or mine, taken individually, is statistically sig
Re:News to me (Score:5, Insightful)
You are correct, it is two years old and not a new car. However, if you are only basing reliability on one year or whatever you define as a new car period then you sir (and the author) are fools.
Also, reading the article it becomes apparent that what he is actually referring to is that new models are more reliable. I don't see any mention of a brand new Chevy Malibu (the same car as my G6) being reliable. Maybe now the new designs are coming out that are built worth a damn.
Re: (Score:3)
However, if you are only basing reliability on one year or whatever you define as a new car period then you sir (and the author) are fools.
J.D. Power conducts multiple surveys: an Initial Quality survey, measuring problems people have with new cars (i.e. initial defects that manifest within the first few months), and a Dependability survey, which looks at problems with 3-year-old cars. There might be a longer-term reliability survey too, I can't recall. There's really no way to measure the long-term reliability of cars until they've actually been around for a while, though. They haven't yet developed a time machine to use for the Future Reliab
Re:News to me (Score:5, Informative)
I agree with the GP. I don't expect a car less than 3 years old to break down. Reliability should not even be measured at anything less than 50,000 miles. It's hard to claim that GM is on par with Toyota when it comes to quality when GM's fall apart at 75,000 miles and Toyotas are still going strong at 150,000 miles. *Initial* quality, maybe, that that's not what I would call reliability.
As for not having a time machine, well, that's the price that domestic automakers pay for forcing crap down our throats for the past 30 years. Reliability takes time to judge. You can't build trust by saying, "All our new cars won't break down before 50,000 miles". You build trust by building a car that lasts 10 years with no problems. And yes, it takes that long to build trust.
In my personal experience, I've had eight cars in my life time:
1) 1980 Ford Thunderbird: This thing was falling apart when I bought it at 40,000 miles. I would have to fill it up with oil before I left the house and all of the oil would lead out within 30 miles. Wheel bearings went out. Alternator went out. Water pump went out. In replacing the water pump, a bolt that was only made for this car sheared off in the block of the engine. The bolt was, and I'm not kidding, $70 to replace as it was a dealership only item. I drilled the old bolt out myself. Oh, and it was not unusual to have parts simply fall off this car while on the road. For example, as I was leaving my neighborhood, the grill fell off. I had to stop the car and go back and pick it up. This thing would only start when it wanted to and flat out died in bad neighborhoods more than once. I sold the car for $100 before it hit 60,000 miles.
2) 1986 Jeep "SporTruck": I had to replace the transmission three times before 75,000 miles. A clutch lever broke at one point requiring some welding. The driver side external mirror simply fell off one day for no apparent reason. The lever that worked the lights broke, causing me to have to hold it in place by putting my hand behind the dash to turn the head lights out. The parking break would release on its own, causing the truck to roll away after being parked at random times.
3) Toyota truck (don't know the year): Bought this truck for $500 at 100,000 miles. I drove it until 250,000 miles and had to replace the water pump at one point. Sold it for $700. The guy paid $700 at the advice of a mechanic who looked at the truck and said, "it's ugly and the seats are torn, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. You should easily get another 100,000 miles out of it".
4) 2000 Isuzu Rodeo (leased new): Put 75,000 miles in 3.5 years in the area around Michigan (snow, salt, etc). No problems. This was a company car that I gave back when the job was done.
5) 1998 Ford Explorer, Eddie Baur edition: At 70,000 miles, while trading it in for my wife's minivan, it caught on fire. We had just signed the paper work and got $2000 for it. (this thing was so rare that it didn't show up on any of the books. It was a V-8, 4WD, and every mechanic we took it to said it didn't exist)
5) 1996 Toyota Avalon: Bought for $500 at 75,000 miles. Traded in at 150,000 miles for $1000. The cup holder broke.
6) 2008 Scion TC: Bought new for $18000. Drove for 2 years. Put 60,000 miles on it. Traded it in for $13000 because it hurt my back to drive a standard in traffic. No problems.
7) 2006 Toyota Tacoma: Current vehicle. Purchased used at 40,000 miles. Currently has 60,000 with no problems. Toyota financing cut my interest rate to buy the extended warranty. It costs me $0.03 a month to have a 100,000 mile bumper to bumper warranty. I have not had to use it yet.
This is why I don't judge quality before a car is 3 years old. I'm sure you will understand why I'm reluctant to buy American again. I'll trust American cars when they last on average 150000 miles with no problems other than wiper blades, brake pads and tires.
Re:News to me (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
You're missing a couple of things. It isn't "one data point" but personal observation. Personal experience almost always trumps someone else's observations, even if the someone else is an expert in the field. The other is anger -- once you feel a person or company has ripped you off you're not likely to buy anything else from them.
My ten year old Sony TV is the last Sony ANYTHING I'll ever buy, after being bitten by XCP. I don't care how they change, I can never trust them again.
Hyperbole (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course lemons exist.
Lots of them. Its just that, now reliable cars number quite a bit.
but there still exist a set of people who think money can be saved by skimping on QC practices.
Its more of a mindset issue.
Other than that, if you have ever been part of a JD power survey, you would know what it actually is.
Here is an interesting link
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/indian-car-scene/41820-my-experience-jd-power-quality-survey.html [team-bhp.com]
So another question is.. are the right questions being answered?
Re:Hyperbole (Score:4, Insightful)
There are, will be, and always will be quality control issues as manufacturers try to race each other to the bottom on cutting corners and therefore costs. Recall, not long ago, that brand new Chevy Sonics were leaving the factory missing brake pads. (The Chevy Sonic itself, a rebadged second-generation Aveo/Daewoo Kalos that is already notorious for having a laughably flimsy "new, revolutionary!" type of paint job, and is also a proven unreliable engine and drivetrain platform.)
Until very recently, the Dodge Neon/PT Cruiser combo was probably the single lowest quality modern production automobile ever produced, and it is a boon to motorists everywhere that the entire platform finally aged enough that it got the ax. Now, at least, you are less likely to be behind one of these things when it decides to blow its head off into the stratosphere and grind to a shuddering halt on the road ten feet in front of you.
Lousy cars are still out there, even brand spanking new ones. The only problem is, so many platforms are changing, being reinvented, or dropped in favor of completely new ones coming out that we don't know where they all are yet. The manufacturers, of course, all have their glossy print marketing machines going full tilt to convince you how wonderful ALL of their shiny new cars are, with their fancy new technology and brand new engine designs and computers and whatnot. Yes, gone are the days of flooding engines and sawdust in the transmission and all that 1950's bullshit, but new cars with their new technology can and will develop new types of problems that people are only just starting to discover. That's the price you pay for driving a fabulously complicated mass-produced piece of equipment every day in all types of conditions. Stuff will break. Some stuff will have unforeseen flaws, and break frequently. The only difference between now and cars of yesteryear is the parts that will produce lemons will be different (I predict lots of electronics/electrical problems, transmission issues for the zooty new million-speed automatics and CVT's, and the sudden availability of turbochargers demonstrating to American numbskulls that such things are not maintenance-free), and every time some issue pops up somebody will try to sue somebody else over it.
Re:Hyperbole (Score:5, Informative)
I predict lots of ... transmission issues for the zooty new million-speed automatics and CVT's
Continuously variable transmissions have been around decades now, with simple designs existing reliably in many tractors and not so simple designs that have broke down and not panned out in the past.
Nissan's unique design in the Toroidal/Roller-based CVT has been around for 20 years now and has consistently proved reliable in a number of models. You don't often hear of Nissan transmissions failing before 150k.
Only Problem My Car Has... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Only Problem My Car Has... (Score:5, Informative)
The Market doesn't work worth a damn when external costs (not paid for by the user) are not included in market price. For gasoline the big one now for the USA is what we pay in military costs to keep the oil flowing out of the Middle East -- there should be a $2 surcharge on every gallon just for that. Gasoline's other externalities are mostly environmental -- although I will say that emissions at the tailpipe (other than CO2) in the in newish cars are now so low as to not be much of a problem in most areas -- but the "free market" didn't put those clean engines in the cars, regulations did. Those regulations are there so that I, as a breathing person, don't have to pay the costs of you building your refinery upwind without including the equipment to keep your emissions out of the air in my lungs. Fix the problem of externalities and I'll be all for the free market.
Re: (Score:3)
Reliability ratings aren't reliable anyway... (Score:5, Interesting)
Back then the general feeling was that Asian cars were better quality but based on this I always wondered how much was reality and how much unconscious bias.
Re:Reliability ratings aren't reliable anyway... (Score:5, Interesting)
Aside from bias there's also expectations.
I really didn't care much about my commuter car, as long as it passes smog check and gets me to work cheaply in stop and go traffic, I just don't care. The plastic dash parts rattle together when its below 10 degrees (F) out. Also the clearcoat is failing on the non-functional spoiler after only 14 years of exposure. Somehow I got a bit of scotch tape on the instrument cluster and I can see everything OK it just looks a little dirty. Maybe I should, but I Just Don't Care.
The caddy and vette buyers believe they're getting the cream of the crop, so they scream in agony if there is a speck of dust in the car. Thats a different type of bias. I know for a fact that caddy and vette complaint rates are thru the roof. They are almost certainly "about as good" as my car, those brands just attract whiners, therefore you hear more whining.
I suspect you're seeing something of the sort in this story. If you corrected for the demographics of the buyers the difference would probably disappear.
The third reason why you see the "problem" is I'm sure mitsu spent more money on advertising than eagle, obviously advertising supported media is going to do their best to claim the mitsu is better. The car market is about as bad as the video game "magazine and website" market this way. The review score is a direct simple function of advertising budget, nothing more.
Re: (Score:3)
A lot of it was bias. Honda somehow had a reputation for good cars and(while this is anecdotal) my family owned two civics while they were supposedly one of the best cars out there for reliability...
Overall our chev cavaliers ran better, and longer without major problems. There were more minor problems(brake pads, calipers) but the transmission and engine etc never went... while the transmission on the civics was about as reliable as a just-out-of rehab crackhead at a drug dealers house with a pile of coke
Re: (Score:3)
Brakes are wear items just like tires. Wearing out is HOW BRAKES WORK!
Considering brake job cost and frequency the same as transmission repair or internal engine part replacement is wrong-headed. EGR valves, radiators, and oil sludging are signs of bad design or hard service, but brake wear is just wear.
And yes, there are many cars out there that, by design, suffer from brake pedal pulsing too quickly due to inadequate rotors. Sometimes you can buy better replacements, sometimes not.
Re: (Score:3)
I think everybody knows this, but it never seems to stop folks from derping away about "My 1997 pontiac had a transmission problem, so all GM cars from now until the end of time are crap"
The data is pretty clear, cars, especially sub 30k cars are becoming commoditized, virtual appliances on wheels. This is a good thing, and not unexpected given the homogenization of the overall automotive supplier bas
Thankfully... (Score:4, Funny)
Probably because all the cars are the same... (Score:5, Informative)
.. at least underneath.
I don't know how it is like in the US, but in Europe almost all the car manufacturers have consolidated. Cars are a commodity now. The cars from many different brands (e.g. VW, Audi, Skoda) all have the same chassis and parts. They all have the same body shape (more or less). Usually the only difference is in the body panels, the interior trim and the badge at the front.
As such you can pretty much buy any of the above cars, and you'll find that they all have similar reliability. For many people cars are just a method of getting from A-B, so overall the above is good news for them. They can pick based on things like warranty, extras included, financing options, etc.... while the cars are more or less the same.
For example, once upon a time in the west, Skoda's were considered lemons, now they are basically rebadged VW's with reliability to match. Now they are known as VW reliable cars, without the price tag and some extras that the VW's may have.
Not my thing personally, I prefer my cars unique, so I buy old cars built before the consolidation, but for the majority of people, it is a benefit.
Re: (Score:3)
The Biggest Loss (Score:4, Insightful)
is the fact that most new cars are very difficult for the owner to repair themselves, given that many are highly integrated with computer systems. Shade-tree mechanics are going to disappear.
That and the fact that every new car seems to be built on the principle that repair costs are no obstacle, so if a car gets hit, its highly damaged, extremely expensive to repair, and much more likely to be a write off - meaning you need to buy a replacement.
Re:The Biggest Loss (Score:5, Interesting)
That and the fact that every new car seems to be built on the principle that repair costs are no obstacle...
Compared to people repair/replacement costs, yes. Modern cars deform so "badly" in accidents by design in order to absorb as much of the impact energy as possible so that energy isn't absorbed by your bones and squishy bits.
Personally I would rather have to make a car insurance claim than a life insurance one.
Re:The Biggest Loss (Score:4, Insightful)
is the fact that most new cars are very difficult for the owner to repair themselves, given that many are highly integrated with computer systems. Shade-tree mechanics are going to disappear.
Tired meme. I've been hearing continuously and forcefully since I started helping my dad change the oil on his car... in the 80s... Let it die.
The funniest part is people going on and on about how expensive ODB-II scanner are... first of all yes in 1998 they were thousands of dollars, but I bought one half a decade or so ago, pretty full featured too, for something like 3 tanks of gas (and I drive a small car, for a SUV its probably more like one tank). Seriously, they cost less than an old fashioned PDA, figure less than a hundred bucks and you're good.
Secondly autozone will loan you one in exchange for a drivers license with the assumption that whatever you need to replace, you'll buy from them upon return, so if you can push-pull-drag the thing to the lot if it barely runs at all, or have one friend in the whole world who will give you a lift, its free.
Thirdly most failure modes don't require a scanner unless you're an idiot. Battery is dead, no lights no start no voltage, I'm not stupid enough to scan it, I put in a new battery. Same for coolant leaks, oil leaks, cracked hoses, suspension/tire/brake probs, blah blah blah. You do need a scanner for some more obscure emissions problems. If you are stupid and/or don't know how to google, sometimes the only way to test a sensor is a scanner.. a scanner is the Fastest way, thats how I figured out my 12 year old O2 sensor had gone out. If the rusty 5 year old muffler rattles when you floor it, only a idiot hooks up a scanner instead of replacing the rusted out muffler. Brakes make horrific scraping sound? I don't think a scanner helps you figure out the brake pads are toast (and after that scraping, the disks too)
Re:The Biggest Loss (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not a mechanic by trade (though, admittedly I grew up with a family who races professionally) but I will take a modern car to work on over something 10+ years old any day. In fact, one of my "toy" cars is a 1988 Mazda. It's had an entire drivetrain from a 2001 GM product swapped into it, and that has in turn had even more modern electronic controls put into it.
My 2007 Infiniti is just as easy to work on as my 1987 Renault GTA was, and it's a damn sight easier to keep running well. Obviously electric/hybrid cars require a different skill set from ICE cars, but that's simply a matter of learning what to do.
BTW, many of the freelance mechanics I know are much more skilled than the average monkey at a dealership, the dealership simply has more books and specialized tools. Those are all available to the shade tree guys too, just call your Mac/Snap-On dealer.
I'm confused by this fear of technology on... Slashdot. Really guys? Come on.
Re: (Score:3)
"is the fact that most new cars are very difficult for the owner to repair themselves, given that many are highly integrated with computer systems. Shade-tree mechanics are going to disappear."
No, their knowledge base has changed. Code scanners are easy to use and general mechanic work is not more difficult. I'm a mechanic.
"That and the fact that every new car seems to be built on the principle that repair costs are no obstacle, so if a car gets hit, its highly damaged, extremely expensive to repair, and mu
Re: (Score:3)
I honestly would not be surprised if cars start coming out with sealed up hoods and a "Warranty Void if Removed" sticker on the seam within 10 years.
I have great memories from when I was a kid helping my dad work on his various cars over the years. Such a shame...I open the hood of my car today and I don't even know wear to begin, it's such a tangled mess of shit everywhere. My dad used to be able to damn near stand inside the engine compartment back in those days...
Seriously, cars are not that different than they were. You just need to update your knowledge, just like at your job. I used to be pretty good with Windows 95, but that knowledge is largely useless to me now. That doesn't mean I can't work on computers.
You young people don't remember the horrors (Score:5, Insightful)
Of being stranded on the side of I95 in the dead of summer with steam pouring out of the hood of a behemoth Ford.
Re:You young people don't remember the horrors (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You young people don't remember the horrors (Score:5, Funny)
J D Power versus Edmunds (Score:3, Interesting)
What I would suggest from my own reading of the J D Power surveys is that the gap at the top is much narrower, with a number of high quality manufacturers including the Germans, the Japanese and a few others fighting over quite small differences. If you buy a Merc, a VW (even if it is called a Skoda), a Porsche, a BMW, a Toyota or a Honda, you're unlikely to complain. Buy a recent Korean car and the same is likely to be true. And then you get into the long tail (I may have missed some good ones, I agree).
A modern clunker is better than an old clunker, true, but the customer dissatisfaction is going to be just as great. It's all relative. In the early 80s many American cars were...well, they got traded in after a year and the next owner was the QA and rectification department. But people accepted it. When a lock fell out of the door of my boss's car - sorry, Chrysler- he just said "Well, it's 11 months old, not worth fixing". Twenty years on, a lock broke on a colleague's ten year old Merc and he complained that German engineering wasn't what it was.
i beg to differ (Score:3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4orHdycJl4 [youtube.com]
renault authorised service centers don't even acknowledge it as a problem. in fact, one of their mechanics tried to pass it off as a feature.
i am at a loss for words
Don't Confuse Initial Quality with Reliability (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a big difference between "initial quality" reports and long term (5, 10, 15 year) reliability, though there is probably some correlation due to overall manufacturing control at the factory. Initial quality tells you if something was built correctly, for the most part. Long term reliability has more to do with the design and specifications of the car and its components. You can have a cheap car (or camera, or toy, etc.) that works fine out of the box and breaks in a short time due to cheap materials. Or you could have one built of high quality materials with fine tolerances that lasts effectively forever.
No. The opposite is true. (Score:4, Informative)
I work in the car industry. That means I am a hell of a lot more qualified than most
of you people to make an informed comment on the current state of the art in new
cars.
Cars now are junk, even very expensive cars. The "product cheapening department"
has found new ways to lower the production costs for cars, and this will come back
to haunt anyone who owns a car for more than a couple of years. Since only the wealthy or
the stupid buy new cars every couple of years, this means a lot of people are going to get
screwed by how the new cars are being built.
Such things as plastic intake manifolds, wiring which is as small as possible in gauge in order to
save copper, and even thinner body sheet metal all mean the cars you can buy today are more
of a disposable item than cars built a decade or more previously. Argue against this if you like,
but you will be wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
Such things as plastic intake manifolds, wiring which is as small as possible in gauge in order to
save copper, and even thinner body sheet metal all mean the cars you can buy today are more
of a disposable item than cars built a decade or more previously. Argue against this if you like,
but you will be wrong.
Plastic intake manifolds have been in use for years and have caused surprisingly few problems. Wiring has been going down in gauge all along, and has always been as small as possible for the current carrying capacity, that's what fuses are for. And foreign cars have been made of thinner sheet metal for years in order to make them lighter. The metal is harder, so it is just as strong. It is harder to repair, but nobody does metal finishing on anything built since the seventies anyway, because the steel has a
Re: (Score:3)
Nice. So 20 years ago, cars were built to last 30 years. 10 years ago, cars were built to last 20 years. 5 years ago cars were built to last 15 years. Today cars are built to last 10 years. We're going to be in for a big surprise in a decade or so when all of our cars fail at once.
Re:No. The opposite is true. (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm a mechanic who deals with these things often.
All those are old news. "Thin" sheet metal only matters if it rusts, and rust devoured old school sheet metal easily enough.
I've worked with plastic manifolds. So what? If well-designed, they do fine. You can't honk down on the hardware like on a cast iron intake, so don't do that.
Small wires and connectors are a bit fiddly, but again no big deal. Different connector tools aren't expensive.
I've been involved with rebuilding a lot of salvage vehicles from two or more organ donors, and don't find it intimidating. These are often "gut rehabs" where a burn job gets a complete dash and wiring and interior swap, and they are done with relatively basic equipment.
Vehicles now often last for very high mileage if well-maintained. Some design choices suck, which (Vega engines, Pinto bodies) has been the case since cars existed.
Extinct ? Just hibernating. (Score:3)
Have Bad Cars Gone Extinct?
Nah, they're just hibernating. Once the car industry settles down again to only 2 to 3 major players, they'll be back.
J.D. Power and Associates?!?!?! (Score:3)
Only because the low-end doesn't come to the USA (Score:3)
If they sold Tata, Lada, ZAZ, Geely, Chery, etc in the USA this story would never have been written.
Yet design problems are rampant (Score:3)
Re:Is this a rule? (Score:5, Insightful)
Go to any taxi rank in Germany (where almost all taxis are Mercedes). You won't have any trouble at all finding one with over 500,000 km on the clock.
Re: (Score:3)
Or Iraq.
Those Mercedes taxis and dumptrucks were from the 60s and are still running just fine. Obviously with some ingenuity and crafty upkeep but still.
Re:Is this a rule? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Is this a rule? (Score:5, Interesting)
My 1982 Mercedes W123 has almost 500000km* and not only that, for the last 12 or so years, it has been modified to run on LPG (because it is cheaper) and I stil use LPG when I want to go somewhere more than a few km away (I can only switch the fuel source to "LPG" if the engine has warmed up**).
* probably already reached it, but the odometer has been replaced and the mechanic did not bother setting it to the same number as the old one.
** The process is like this (completely manual system):
1. If the engine is cold, switch on gasoline, start the engine.
2. When it has almost reached ~40C, turn off gasoline, drive (or wait) until the gasoline that is still in the carburetor is used up - I can usually go up to 1km on that.
3. Switch on LPG.
The body had some rust, but i had the car patched up. Also, it seems that I will need to replace all the door seals and the back window seal (I already replaced the front window seal) as 30 year old rubber is not known for its ability to keep water out.
Re: (Score:3)
I have been driving LPG for years and never knew the carburator had to be emptied before switching to LPG. The controll
Re: (Score:3)
I have a 1982 300SD, which is a USA-only W126 with the OM617.951 5-cylinder turbo diesel. It has a fairly early but quite good Bosch Jetronic injection pump and glow system, and a Garrett Airesearch T3-pattern turbo. I have over 250,000 miles. The vehicle recently began leaking oil so I've been fiddling with it but in general it's in very good shape, and it performs very very well. About to fill it up with Delo 400; I've replaced the oil pressure sender and actually the whole turbocharger because the turbo
Mercedes -- warning! (Score:3)
If you're going to discuss Mercedes' vehicles it's important to distinguish between cars built 20 years ago, and Mercedes cars built today. None of the cars built today will ever make it 90 days without going back in for service. They're one of the LEAST reliable vehicles on the road. If you like service room free coffee, buy a Mercedes. (I learned my lesson, and talked to everybody else who also learned THEIR lesson.) Shitty, shitty vehicles today. They can't even keep th
Re:Wait, what? (Score:5, Insightful)
The big news is not that the absolute reliability of the best-in-class has changed that much, though it has improved a touch; but that the average quality of the junk has increased quite sharply, narrowing the reliability gap considerably.
Re: (Score:3)
You know we have computer vision systems for that sort of thing, I have a friend who does computer vision systems that analyze millions of items an hour for minor defects.
Re:Toyota is slipping... (Score:4, Informative)