Most reliable new cars

[Bubba1]

This month's Consumer reports contains their annual auto brand/model reliability rankings.
Parenthesis is # of models for the brand, Next number is rank change from last year. a dash means no change. Here they are:

1. scion(2) -
2.Toyota (27) +4
3. Lexus (9) -1
4. Mazda (8) -
5. Subaru (9) +3
6. Honda (11) -1
7. Acura (4) -4
8. Audi (7) +18
9. Infiniti (7) -2
10. Kia (8) +2
11. Cadillac (6) +14
12. GMC (10) +10
13. Nissan (13) -4
14. Mercedes (7) +4
15. Chevrolet (7) +2

^better than average
v average or lower

16. BMW (12) +3
17. Hyundai (10) -6
18. VW (15) -2
19. Jeep (6) -6
20. Volvo (7) -10
21. Buick (5) +3
22. Mini (4) +1
23. Chrysler (4) -8
24. Dodge (6) -3
25. Lincoln (4) -12
26. Ford (25) -7
27. Jaguar (2) -

Some notes:

Japanese brands were dominant again, with Toyota taking the top 3 spots. Inifniti and Nissan did not change all that much, both remaining better than average.

Cadillac was the top domestic brand and made a major leap up the ladder. GMC did very well too.

Ford/Lincoln were the surprise losers this year. CU cited a few problems including newly redesigned Exploders, Fiestas, and Foci. All came out of the gate with an unusually large number of problems, plus the MyFord/MyLincoln electonic infotainment system continues to be big problem.

Jaguar continues its tradition of being at the bottom of reliability despite new ownership

Audi had it's best showing ever.

Top models for each category:

Small car: Imprezza
Family sedan: Camry hybrid (one of Jesda's favorites... j/k)
fuel efficient hatches: Prius C (one of Hitman's favorites....not)
small hatchbacks Scion Xd
Compact Sports Sedan: BMW 328i
Luxury car Audi A7
Sporty cars Nissan 370Z (how 'bout 'dem apples?) huge improvement
Upscale cars: Nissan Maxima (surprised me, but cool)
Coupe/Convertibles Lexus IS C
wagons: Toyota Venza 4 cyl
small SUV: Mazda CX-5
Upscale compact SUV Infiniti EX
Large SUv Toyota Sequoia
Midsize SUV: Toyota FJ
Luxury SUV Lexus RX
Minivan: Toyota Sienna (FWD)
Compact pickup: Toyota Tacoma (4cyl, 2wd)
Full sized pickup: Toyota Tundra (V8, 2wd)

Thoughts? comments?

[frapjap]

Wow for Audi and Caddy! Both have been needing major improvement. Especially Audi.

Tacoma continues to dominate the compact pickup market...

[Jesda]

What model years are covered by this survey, or is it just CR making predictions and talking out of their anuses?

If it's 3 years back like JD Power, that means it covers 2009 models which is when Cadillac was producing the popular and dependable (and long in the tooth) DTS, which would explain their high rank. The 2009 Escalade also had its bugs worked out with the transmission and wind noise and in 2008 the STS was much improved. 2009 would also be the second year for the CTS, again a year when bugs would have been worked out.

2009 would also have been before VW rolled out their new models built in Tennessee.

[Bubba1]

What model years are covered by this survey, or is it just CR making predictions and talking out of their anuses?

.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIVttyxP ... re=related[/youtube]

The results are based on their 2012 Annual auto reliability survey (1.2 million vehicles) as a basis to predict reliability of unchanged models currently on sale new in 2013. Brand new Models or those redesigned for 2013 were excluded.

As far as accuracy, I will quote the article.

"How did we do? 85% of the 2012 models we predicted would have average or better reliability actually do. As for our misses, we find our subscribers can give us a better idea of how a model is after it has been on the market for a couple of years."

to elaborate, one the reasons Ford's numbers dropped so much was because 3 of their more reliable models (Fusion, Edge, MKZ) went thru major redesigns for 2013 and thus were excluded.

[gwoods]

You don't buy a Jaguar for gas mileage or reliability. You buy a Jag for 12.8 @ 113 1/4 miles and front row at the valet.

I bought my XF Supercharged less then 60 days ago and it has spent 8 days at the dealer. 4 for a error they still can't resolve, goes away if I restart the car. 4 for a new electric fan, duct and controller.

[MinisterofDOOM]

You don't buy a Jaguar for gas mileage or reliability. You buy a Jag for 12.8 @ 113 1/4 miles and front row at the valet.

Don't forget the superlightweight aluminum construction, metric tons of torque, beautifully balanced chassis, ridiculously gorgeous sheetmetal, and this sound:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVuGseQ1pk4[/youtube]

[Bubba1]

You don't buy a Jaguar for gas mileage or reliability. You buy a Jag for 12.8 @ 113 1/4 miles and front row at the valet.

True. If we all based our car buying decisions entirely on reliability, there would not be a single Jaguar.

The new Jag is certainly a niche vehicle, but for the premium but not exotic price, there is a reasonable expectation for reliability. What good is admiring it in the valet's front row if there's a significant chance it'll be on a flatbed to get home? One of the reasons they don't sell very well compared to their competition is their below average reliability.

I'm not anti Jag, My dad owned one many years ago and I'd love to have it now (as a weekend toy). But It was the single most unreliable vehicle he ever had. He always told me it was his favorite car to drive...when it ran. Unfortunately that was not often.
He was happy to sell it.

[Jesda]

So instead of using data to make an evaluation, they take a hunch and hope it goes right.


An economist would call it total bullsh*t. Toaster enthusiasts call it God's Guide To Consumerism.

[Bubba1]

So instead of using data to make an evaluation, they take a hunch and hope it goes right.


An economist would call it total bullsh*t. Toaster enthusiasts call it God's Guide To Consumerism.

If you consider tabulating 1.2 million owner's experiences a hunch instead of data, I can understand you feeling that way.

[MinisterofDOOM]

If you consider tabulating 1.2 million owner's experiences a hunch instead of data, I can understand you feeling that way.

I could tabulate twelve billion owners' experiences on last-year's model and it still wouldn't have any bearing on a brand's reliability this year, ESPECIALLY if I'm allowed to pick and choose which models are or are not included without any kind of weighting or compensation for the inequality it creates between sample sets. It's an oversimplification that serves only to mislead, and it's presented in a misleading way. I've always despised Consumer Reports. Quanity has never been the same as quality--in a test sample environment or otherwise.

Sampling only some of a brand's models does NOT reflect the BRAND's reliability. It reflects the reliability of the models sampled.

CR is a joke. Always has been, always will be. It disgusts me that they have achieved such messianic status in the eyes of the average carbuyer. Their guessing game has effects on the marketplace. How'd you like to be a manufacturer who builds one of the 15% of cars CR screwed the pooch on? Oh, sorry we sunk your reputation without legitimate cause. Here's a disclaimer for your hardships.

It's hard enough to keep American carbuyers informed these days without spinebound toiletpaper trying to confuse them even more with poorly-represented, poorly-acquired, poorly-utilized information.

[Bubba1]

If you consider tabulating 1.2 million owner's experiences a hunch instead of data, I can understand you feeling that way.

I could tabulate twelve billion owners' experiences on last-year's model and it still wouldn't have any bearing on a brand's reliability this year, ESPECIALLY if I'm allowed to pick and choose which models are or are not included without any kind of weighting or compensation for the inequality it creates between sample sets. It's an oversimplification that serves only to mislead, and it's presented in a misleading way. I've always despised Consumer Reports. Quanity has never been the same as quality--in a test sample environment or otherwise.

Sampling only some of a brand's models does NOT reflect the BRAND's reliability. It reflects the reliability of the models sampled.

CR is a joke. Always has been, always will be. It disgusts me that they have achieved such messianic status in the eyes of the average carbuyer. Their guessing game has effects on the marketplace. How'd you like to be a manufacturer who builds one of the 15% of cars CR screwed the pooch on? Oh, sorry we sunk your reputation without legitimate cause. Here's a disclaimer for your hardships.

It's hard enough to keep American carbuyers informed these days without spinebound toiletpaper trying to confuse them even more with poorly-represented, poorly-acquired, poorly-utilized information.

They noted their accuracy of their predictions is 85%. Pretty good track record for an institution you call a joke.

But here's the best part about CR. You don't have to buy it. Call me crazy, but before buying a car I'd rather learn the common problem areas cited by literally thousands of owners in CR's annual survey's than whether Car and Driver says it's one tick quicker 0-60 or can take a corner .05 G's better than another car.
I also have a friend on CU's testing staff. He's an engineer and a car guy (fellow HPDE instructor) and he knows what he's talking about.

[MinisterofDOOM]

I also have a friend on CU's testing staff. He's an engineer and a car guy (fellow HPDE instructor) and he knows what he's talking about.

That's great, but it doesn't change anything. I have a friend who works at McDonalds but that doesn't make their burgers taste any better.

[Bubba1]

That's great, but it doesn't change anything. I have a friend who works at McDonalds but that doesn't make their burgers taste any better.

[Jesda]

They noted their accuracy of their predictions is 85%. Pretty good track record for an institution you call a joke.

That's called a hunch. It's about as scientific as creationism.

[gwoods]

[quote="MinisterofDOOM, ridiculously gorgeous sheetmetal, and this sound:
[/quote]

You talking about this sound? and this torque? 70-130



When it breaks its not a big deal Jaguar gives me a XJL to drive.

[Bubba1]

They noted their accuracy of their predictions is 85%. Pretty good track record for an institution you call a joke.

That's called a hunch. It's about as scientific as creationism.

Not really. in most cases, cars change little from model year to model year. So the past can be a fairly good predictor of a model's short term future. So if a Jag model is ranked among the worst for reliability for 3 consecutive years, and Jag was planning no major improvements for the upcoming model year, why is it so unreasonable to predict it will continue it's current pattern of unreliability? What evidence is there to suggest it will suddenly become incredibly reliable?

[Bubba1]

[quote="MinisterofDOOM, ridiculously gorgeous sheetmetal, and this sound:

You talking about this sound? and this torque? 70-130



When it breaks its not a big deal Jaguar gives me a XJL to drive.

[/quote]


Nice that you get an XJL loaner each time it breaks, but what happens when it breaks after the warranty expires?

Jag is clearly a sexy car that stirs passions. And the folks that purchase them do not typically view reliability as important as someone that owns a Toyota. There's nothing wrong with that. But having been raised with a Jag in the garage, I can vouch that's there's nothing like the thrill of driving a Jag and the agony of owning one.

[Jesda]

and Jag was planning no major improvements for the upcoming model year, why is it so unreasonable to predict it will continue it's current pattern of unreliability? What evidence is there to suggest it will suddenly become incredibly reliable?

Because that's -exactly- what happens with most manufacturers. The car remains fundamentally the same while bugs and issues are worked out.

CR is selling hunches, not statistics.

[Bubba1]

Because that's -exactly- what happens with most manufacturers. The car remains fundamentally the same while bugs and issues are worked out.

With an 85% correct prediction rate, it's more than a hunch.

[gwoods]

I would say more educated guesses than hunches.

Another thing not taken into account is the people who buy a more exspensive technological advanced car expect more and complain about things that are non issues. An example that really hurt Jaguar with CR and JD Power was the XF came with a proximity sensor in place of the button to open the glove box door. Holycow did that not work with the average owner. The sensor was looking for a finger swipe not a push so many owners were out smarted by the tech. The frustration resulted in trips to the dealer so complain. The map lights and door handles work the same way with a swipe of your hand not a touch.

There are also some ligit issues, the pinion side of the diff is made from carbon fiber and a few 2010s were not produced correctly and cracked. When Jaguar went to direct injection they changed the gas tank but not the filler neck and some 2009-2010's were a PIA to put gas into.

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/01/firs ... jaguar-xf/
http://blog.caranddriver.com/2011-jagua ... r-changes/

[gwoods]

Nice that you get an XJL loaner each time it breaks, but what happens when it breaks after the warranty expires?

You still get the loaner but your going to be paying for the repairs. My car's in service date is 7/14/2011 so its covered until 7/14/2016 or 50,000 miles. I bought it with 14,538 mile on it and bald tires. I will either trade it or extend the warranty before it goes off. I really like the XJL Supersport and would probably trade my XF on that or the 2013 BMW M5 that is doing 0-60 in 3.7 seconds! Either way around January 2016 its going to be shopping time.

The powertrain is pretty bullet proof. The supercharger is a Eaton 4 lobe TVS model R1900, same supercharger goes in the Corvette ZR-1. The motor is a aluminum quad cam 5.0 V8 that has proved to be reliable and the transmission is the ZF 6hp26 that goes into a lot of other hp cars and has been reliable. Jaguar has a very intrusive torque management system that really limits power to protect the transmission. Its very conservative and currently there is no work around. I'm running a 12.8 @113 stock. My buddy in NJ has exhaust, pulley and tune and he is running a 11.9 @ 120 mph. On a dyno I make 448 hp he makes 480 hp due to the torque managment system limiting power on the dyno.

[MinisterofDOOM]

I would KILL for an XJL Supersport (black on black, of course). It's probably my #1 most lusted-after car at the moment. It's daily-driveable luxury combined with ridiculous performance in a tasteful package. The only car you'd ever need. Why have a sports car and a sedan when you can have a sports car that IS a sedan? Never choose which one you want to drive again. Just drive them both. Every day.

Who needs 461 ft-lb at 2500rpm? I DO DAMMIT.

[gwoods]

My XF SC has 424lbs at 2500... its nice to spin the tires from a 10 mph roll

[dasoupdude]

the pinion side of the diff is made from carbon fiber a

Hot damn.


My friend works in the service department of a Jaguar/ Rover and Aston dealer. Says those XF's don't really have that serious of problems just minor electronic issues and sattelite reciever issues.

[gwoods]

I get this at least once a week, turn it off turn it on it goes away. I plugged in my scanner while it was acting up and there are no pending or stored codes?

[Jesda]

With an 85% correct prediction rate, it's more than a hunch.

It's a hunch, a guess, a prediction, a magic crystal ball, NOT a scientific survey. It's ripe for bias and CR blowing smoke.


It's BS, especially for a publication that pretends to wear white coats while they play with toasters in their "laboratory"

[Bubba1]

With an 85% correct prediction rate, it's more than a hunch.

It's a hunch, a guess, a prediction, a magic crystal ball, NOT a scientific survey. It's ripe for bias and CR blowing smoke.


It's BS, especially for a publication that pretends to wear white coats while they play with toasters in their "laboratory"

Call it a hunch or guess, but my magic crystal ball hints there's an 85%+ chance you're biased against anything CR writes about vehicles. And the last 10 consecutive years of our arguing about it are no indication that your opinion will remain the same this coming year. .

[Jesda]

Call it a hunch or guess, but my magic crystal ball hints there's an 85%+ chance you're biased against anything CR writes about vehicles. And the last 10 consecutive years of our arguing about it are no indication that your opinion will remain the same this coming year. .

But I'm right.

[alphapig]

Call it a hunch or guess, but my magic crystal ball hints there's an 85%+ chance you're biased against anything CR writes about vehicles. And the last 10 consecutive years of our arguing about it are no indication that your opinion will remain the same this coming year. .

But I'm right.

What kind of available data would more accurately show reliability then?

Trips to a repair shop? Perhaps data from dealerships is available, but hardly from every joe-schmoe mechanic

Owner information is probably the best sh*tty information available.

Also, I highly doubt CR asks questions like:
"Was car gud?"
"Was car reliable?"

Consumer data is by far the worst, I agree. But there doesn't seem to be an alternative.