Reliability?

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
You get a similar affect with internet amplification.

If X manufacture has an issue with a small percentage of vehicles, than a few of those owners get [censored] off and start posting everywhere about it. Before you know it the problem is way over blown and the vast majority of owners who never have an issue never even know about it.

The Toyota sludge thing people get all worked up about on this site is a perfect example of that. It probably affected less than 1% of their motors but not if you follow this site. I still see a large number of those vehicles on the road to this day and they are 15 years old now...

The reality is that all modern vehicles are more or less pretty much the same and more or less pretty reliable. Some have more issues tha others due to their nature, ie a BMW 750IL will experience more issues than say a Civic because it has many times the systems to fail, and the systems it has are more advanced and less tried and true. But generally if you compare like models, lets say mid sized 4 door sedans, they are all about the same and they will all yield similar cost per mile over their service life.

Trucks are a great area for this as well, all the big three are pretty much the same. You could do far worse than to simply buy whichever will give you the best deal at the time.


You nailed it here. Internet Amplification indeed. You seldom hear from the owners who are simply driving and don't care...

 

[eljefino]

If you find a model enthusiast forum they'll generally have a tech problems, hop ups, stereo, etc subforums. If the owners are happy with the underpinnings they're spending money on bling. If they hate the cars and want to trade them, there's that too. If all the posts seem like they were written by 4th graders you know the target demos.

 

[Dave Sherman]

I've often wondered how reliable the CR reliability reports are. They can't seem to explain why reliability data for a Pontiac Vibe don't match a Toyota Matrix, even though it's really the same car. On the other hand, Chevrolet Celebrity seemed to match a Pontiac 6000. Toyota/GM bias maybe?

 

[Tdbo]

Originally Posted By: MCompact
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
You can read my opinion of what fine bird-cage liner Consumer Reports data makes all over this forum, but I'll summarize briefly:

Their data set is deeply and profoundly flawed by self-selection. The people who report data back to CR are not a normal distribution ("normal" in both the vernacular and rigorous mathematical senses) of the range of consumer satisfaction or of vehicle problem rates. They self-polarize into two groups: 1) those that have been burned and want to rip a particular model/manufacturer/dealer a new one, 2) fanatics of a model/manufacturer who love to crow about how it can do no wrong.


The whole range of information around the mean of the distribution is depleted because people who have near-average experiences with their vehicles and don't have any particular emotional investment in a brand simply don't have any reason to report. The tails of the distribution are excessively weighted. The result: nonsense conclusions.


And secondly, the WHOLE set of people reporting data are a tainted dataset before they even start "skewing" themselves into a modal distribution as described above. They're people who don't necessarily do a lot of reserarch, but rely on CR to do it and then they accept the results. Otherwise, they wouldn't SUBSCRIBE, they'd just buy a copy (or look online) when they come to a particular buying decision, as well as checking other resources. But no, they use it so consistently that they are predisposed to have faith in CR, so there's a feedback loop where previous CR reports are tainting the current evaluations.




You nailed it.



to the wall.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8


You nailed it here. Internet Amplification indeed. You seldom hear from the owners who are simply driving and don't care...


Then there's "internet feedback noise," which is also pretty common.

That's where you hear loud and strident condemnation of vehicles that a person has never actually owned, but they read that "brandX has terrible reliability" on the 'net, so they have to repeat it as often as possible. Just like a hot mic squealing in a concert hall PA system...

 

[stephen9666]

Originally Posted By: Dave Sherman
I've often wondered how reliable the CR reliability reports are. They can't seem to explain why reliability data for a Pontiac Vibe don't match a Toyota Matrix, even though it's really the same car. On the other hand, Chevrolet Celebrity seemed to match a Pontiac 6000. Toyota/GM bias maybe?


I see some people keep making these claims, but they seem to be making them based on inaccurate assumptions or inaccurate information.

The reliability scores for the Matrix and Vibe are almost identical. CR is well aware that they're the same vehicle.

Here's what they say about the Vibe:
Quote:
The Pontiac Vibe and its twin, the Toyota Matrix, are tall wagons based on the Toyota Corolla. The Vibe’s compact dimensions, versatile interior, and good fuel economy make it a handy, nimble, economical runabout. However, a flawed driving position and a boomy engine detract. The Vibe is the only vehicle in this group available with all-wheel-drive. It has been very reliable.

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Then there's "internet feedback noise," which is also pretty common.

That's where you hear loud and strident condemnation of vehicles that a person has never actually owned, but they read that "brandX has terrible reliability" on the 'net, so they have to repeat it as often as possible. Just like a hot mic squealing in a concert hall PA system...


Exactly; triple or quadruple hearsay- all from schmucks who in most cases haven't even sat in the car that they are slamming.