I see your point. You're saying that reliability is the tendancy that things will not go wrong in a car outside of scheduled maintenance. Agreed. I was trying to illustrate, however, that we might be able to define reliability as the infrequency of events that prevent a car from achieving it's design purpose. If we look at that definition, then we must look at what these cars have been on the lift for. Engine peripherals or navigation glitches? Drivetrain or voice-activated climate control? Are navigation and climate control essential to a car's performace? Not in general, but on the flip-side, as I think you were getting at, both are essential to the BMW. That's what I meant by "The Ultimate Living Room That Doubles As A Driving Machine. There's more to Bimmer than the car." All in all, agreed.
But I think that since "car buying is such an individual process," as you correctly assert, one cannot compare cars that command entirely different buyer demographics. Why? Because reliability is so subjective among different groups. For example, someone who buys a Focus may not care if one light is out. I know because I see lots of Focuses with one little thing wrong. Is this acceptable to a BMW owner? Not likely... it will have to get fixed. Also, a Focus driver is less likely to worry if the engine idles a little funny... while a BMW owner will have it on the lift in a heartbeat. I'm making admittedly gross generalizations here, but I'm making a point. It is entirely plausible that BMWs are on the lift 5 times more Focuses because their owners demand top-notch performance... and perhaps unrealistically? Give a 740 to a Ford driver and you'll see how little that thing gets worked on. "Nav not working? Fine, I know my way. Voice-control over cabin systems not responding? Fine, I'll reach over and turn on the A/C myself." Different buyers, different expetations of reliability.
But you're right about the Lexus. That's a testament to superior Japanese manufacturing. There's really no way to look at it. EDIT: No other way to look at it.
So.... why wasn't it included? My final question about that information from the show: why do you think they didn't compare the 745iL to a Lincoln Towncar, and then perhaps specify a Japanese counterpart, like the Lexus LS430? This certainly would be a better match up, and easily more comparable. Why didn't they do that? Because it would SHAME the American product. The Lincoln wouldn't have a glimmer of reliability next to either competitor. Solution? Make the argument that American econo cars are better than European luxury cars and do not specify whether the Japanese offering was econo- or luxury-designed. They essentially dodge a bullet that way. That's a little problematic, don't you think?
I'm only asking that when we see stuff like that, that we question why the study was performed that way. The fact is you can make statistics say whatever you want, i.e. 20% of college students are binge drinkers. You'll think, "Wow! All those college kids are party animals!" but you're wrong because you aren't SEEING that 80% of college students are not binge drinkers. Any marketing exec or researcher will tell you that you can use supposedly infalliable facts to support whatever the hell you want. Some of you will say, "That's like the Bible." And I'll reply, "Yeah, it's like everything. That's why laws of logic exist. BS is too easily disguised as truth and hearsay is too often seen as common knowledge."
I blame college. If I didn't have this education, I could live with myself after answering "Fuk yea, Ni$$an ownz j00. w00t!" Sorry for the inconvenience.
