silberma wrote:Many of the items expressed here are opinions and not facts. If you would bother to investigate car reliability over the years you would find that reliability on the average has in fact improved vastly over the years.
Hmmm. A little argumentative, not quite knowing what I'm basing this on, eh?
Reliability may well have improved. Not vastly (we subscribe to and participate in a number of data collection tools for this very reason, so that we can discuss, intelligently, the state of reliability). Even the reports can't agree (I saw 147 PP100
here, but that's academic).
Also, "reliability" is a nebulous term. Did your car leave you stranded on the side of the road, spewing fluids or smoke? Or did your check engine light come on, necessitating a trip to the dealer? The difference, from a datapoints approach, is nil. They both represent a "failure" in the eye of the consumer, and the exact same "-1" datapoint.
silberma wrote:Car shoppers today are less likely to end up with a lemon.
Agreed, 100%. Even the cheapest turd on the market is a
good car, capable of 100k trouble-free miles. You're spot-on with that whole line of reasoning.
However, we've got 15 years of data (yep, the forums have been around that long, and I've been at the helm) that contain both anecdotal and statistical data on "lemons" that still exist - for example, the CVT fiasco that necessitated Nissan replacing a great many of them, and offering a 130k extended warranty to the rest. The 'melting' dashboard issues that plagued the Altimas of 09-13. The list goes on.
This isn't about lemons. That's where you're missing the point, and it's certainly excusable (and understandable).
A car need NOT be a "lemon" (by definition) for a simple insurance policy to make sense - AND, by 'making sense,'
all it is required to do is provide peace of mind. It need not necessarily pay for itself. So, by definition, there's really
no way to deny that the people who buy an EW are getting what they wanted.
A CVT replacement (sans warranty) is $2600. An AC compressor is $1600. An ECM / BCM replacement is $1100. The infotainment system in a new M is $2600. Those are the types of issues that send high-end cars to salvage yards or auctions long before their time.
silberma wrote:In the past five years, global competition has forced automakers to improve the quality and reliability of their vehicles -- everything from inexpensive mini-cars to decked-out luxury SUVs.
Nope.
First off, "Global competition" isn't new, and it hasn't changed significantly since Korea became a serious player in the market in the early 90's.
Global competition has forced automakers to do
one thing, and one thing only: Reduce costs. In reducing costs, they've turned to unprecedented levels of parts and component production in third-world countries. Again, when you dismantle some 09+ vehicles, you can confidently discuss this matter. I have. The number of 'one-time-use-only' cheap Chinese / Taiwanese components in the cars that I (and the other members here) have 'reverse-engineered'

is higher than ever.
Let's not ignore the fact that several of my staff here are employed BY the manufacturer. Engineers, designers, assembly guys... I trust what they share FAR more than anyone else. They sit in the meetings. They perform the testing. They design the tests that stress components to failure, and document same. They know what the acceptable failure rates are. They roll their eyes and gnash their teeth at the seemingly-ridiculous shortcuts that their employers make, sometimes to save a fraction of a cent per unit.
'Planned obsolescence' is alive and well in 2015.
Good discussion - This is fun!
