How Well Do Cars Hold Up....True Delta Says:

Status
Not open for further replies.
If valid information (and I have no reason to doubt it), MB tends to take a beating on reliability so it was a surprise to see them appear at No. 6.
 
It's the number of owners reporting. So Scion (for example) has only two owners who gave information to them to create the data points from. Not enough, obviously, to actually put that brand into the reliable or unreliable category.

In contrast we have Honda at 81 ... probably enough to get some confidence in the rating for that brand alone.
 
That's what I thought, kind of renders the entire thing useless. With all the different models and powertrain combos, not to mention not knowing what caused the repair visit.
 
Using only two responses to draw a conclusion in a study is a joke. They should have at least set a threshold of 30, or 40 respondents before reporting results for a particular brand. Sample field is too small to draw any type of conclusion. I give this study two thumbs down!!
 
Originally Posted By: dishdude
That's what I thought, kind of renders the entire thing useless. With all the different models and powertrain combos, not to mention not knowing what caused the repair visit.

No, its the number of model years counted. So Scion only had 2 years of a model with enough data to report on, which I think is a bit misleading, but also Scion only had like 2 drivetrains between all its models so I guess it means something.
Like he says though, brand reliability isn't really a useful metric for buying a used car... You are buying a single model. Brand reliability could be an indicator of how reliable a new model should be, but its no guarantee...
 
I think the cost to own is more important than the number of times it needs repair. If a Honda is say 10% more likely to need repairs but those repairs cost 1/3 of what the Lexus costs than the Honda is the winner in my opinion. And by experience the Lexus probably is 3x more expensive to fix. Parts cost a fortune for Lexus!
 
And there are cars they won't rate because they don't have enough data.

My 1999 Grand Marquis is not rated. Apparently not enough respondents.

But my other four cars are reported every quarter.

Originally Posted By: KGMtech
It belong to TrueDelta. The only way the TD info gets better is when more people join and log their data.

Go join!
 
Originally Posted By: Speak2Mountain
MB is bolstered by its older cars. Its newer cars were somewhat less reliable, but still yeah...big shock.


It's kinda the other way around, their older cars are less reliable, their newer ones are better. But you should still stay away from a first year model. Their really old cars may have been more reliable, but the date range on this one is 2003-2018.
 
True Delta. LOL

Somehow I got on that guy's email list about 10 years ago and hoo boy. I got sick and tired of him pestering me to provide free information to him so he could take that and use it to make money for himself.

While some real-world data is much appreciated, all of his data is given to him on somewhat of an honor system as far as what has been done, how much it cost, etc.
 
Originally Posted By: thooks
True Delta. LOL

Somehow I got on that guy's email list about 10 years ago and hoo boy. I got sick and tired of him pestering me to provide free information to him so he could take that and use it to make money for himself.

While some real-world data is much appreciated, all of his data is given to him on somewhat of an honor system as far as what has been done, how much it cost, etc.


That's no different than any other owner-input based review system like Consumer Reports, except here you don't have to be a subscriber. It's a few questions once a quarter, I am not seeing as how that's a big deal
21.gif
 
All this is based on polls which we all know are 100% reliable. (NO)

Just look at online ratings. It’s a huge scam with paid posters to place favorable ratings and reviews.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top