Ford's Namesake Brand Tumbles

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Originally Posted By: JOD


I do think some of the complaints though border on the ridiculous--people are filling out surveys to make their brand look good....errr..to make other brands look bad... Is the owner of one type of car less likely to be truthful than the owner of a different brand of car?



It's not ridiculous at all actually....Owner bias in almost any type of owner survey is a well documented phenomenon. The rose colored glasses that owners can and often do demonstrate in these responses is a well documented reality, not some fiction made up by CR doubters. The bias comes into play even more for brands and models that are historically considered very reliable, and at the other end of the spectrum it's just as bad for those at the bottom of the pile...after a while these "market perceptions" become self perpetuating myths.


Very well said! You beat me to the punch. People do lie on surveys.


Of course they do--the implication though is that people who own one brand of car are more likely to lie than people who own another brand of car.

So are Jeep owners now lying less than before? The criticisms seem to mostly be from people who are mad at how their favorite brand performed.

As I said, I find a lot of the criticisms to be silly, and I say this as someone who does have a lot of reservations about their methods.

If you actually look at their reliability data, they correspond fairly well with the Identifix data, which I think is probably the most rigorous available on used car reliability.
 
That is a good example of the bias you'll see even from CR. A big part of media publications bias against domestics I think is against UAW and by extention the whole automaker. I doubt any major publication owners aren't anti-union. There are other biases afoot one can only speculate on. Biases don't have to make sense or be rational. They usually aren't.
 
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
That is a good example of the bias you'll see even from CR. A big part of media publications bias against domestics I think is against UAW and by extention the whole automaker. I doubt any major publication owners aren't anti-union. There are other biases afoot one can only speculate on. Biases don't have to make sense or be rational. They usually aren't.


You'd be hard-pressed to find an organization that is more pro-union than Consumer's Union, so you comment really makes no sense.

I do agree that the way the data are expressed with respect to the Cruz is absolutely ridiculous, but silly comments like "they're full of it" or conspiracy theories like "they hate the UAW" just detract from the real flaws they exhibit.

ALL 2011 cars are reliable (well, unless you have Mini). The number of repairs reported for the Cruz are probably higher, but I also doubt they're really that significant. The Cruz is also hurt by the fact that there's no rolling average since it's a first-year model. If you actually look at the reliability data though, you can see that on average the car is very reliable (though it's only been out a year--so it should be). All of the individual systems are rated above average or excellent, with 1 or 2 'average'.

This is my main beef with these guys. Rather than try to give some statistical sense of the problem, they just reduce everything to red or black circles, which don't really tell you much.
 
Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
That is a good example of the bias you'll see even from CR. A big part of media publications bias against domestics I think is against UAW and by extention the whole automaker. I doubt any major publication owners aren't anti-union. There are other biases afoot one can only speculate on. Biases don't have to make sense or be rational. They usually aren't.


You'd be hard-pressed to find an organization that is more pro-union than Consumer's Union, so you comment really makes no sense.


How is CU the most pro-union? I didn't realize any consumer advocacy group cared one bit about workers or country of origin. They focus on price and value. Maybe CU is pro working class, but I never noticed it. I still say most of the media definitely isn't. It's not really important what the origin of a bias is only that it exists. I still say the media is biased including CR.

Quote:
I do agree that the way the data are expressed with respect to the Cruz is absolutely ridiculous, but silly comments like "they're full of it" or conspiracy theories like "they hate the UAW" just detract from the real flaws they exhibit.

ALL 2011 cars are reliable (well, unless you have Mini). The number of repairs reported for the Cruz are probably higher, but I also doubt they're really that significant. The Cruz is also hurt by the fact that there's no rolling average since it's a first-year model. If you actually look at the reliability data though, you can see that on average the car is very reliable (though it's only been out a year--so it should be). All of the individual systems are rated above average or excellent, with 1 or 2 'average'.


So why did they give it a poor projection? And their "so-so fuel economy" comment is vague and wacky and I say exhibits bias.



Quote:
This is my main beef with these guys. Rather than try to give some statistical sense of the problem, they just reduce everything to red or black circles, which don't really tell you much.


Totally agree, but also I think reports from consumers that they rely on are not very accurate and have bias. Let's say when the Accords get the programming update to address ring fouling and transmission bearing failure, between the dealer service and CR reliability reports will it even get mentioned. I doubt it.
 
OP: i wonder if thats why my dad got such a blowout deal on a car this week at the ford dealer ? he bought a 04 thats suppose to be around $13,000 and he gave $9,000 for it.. pretty good deal
 
Originally Posted By: JOD
I honestly don't understand the "politically driven" comment with respect to auto rankings though. This seems to be looking for demons that just aren't there, IMO.


Read some of CU's reviews on trucks and SUVS, I think it's often pretty evident.
 
Originally Posted By: JOD
I honestly don't understand the "politically driven" comment with respect to auto rankings though. This seems to be looking for demons that just aren't there, IMO.


REALLY??!!

Just how many on this site alone, as well as the general populace, have sworn that they will "NEVER AGAIN buy a single product from a certain company, under ANY circumstances" concerning a certain domestic nameplated auto maker, and derisively labelled them "Gov******* Motors", all for taking a loan???!!!
mad.gif


Case closed.
 
I agree it doesn't seem right. I don't believe the reported reliability ratings by catergory in the first place and worse is their positive projection and comments. Seems inaccurate and biased to me.
 
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: JOD
I honestly don't understand the "politically driven" comment with respect to auto rankings though. This seems to be looking for demons that just aren't there, IMO.


REALLY??!!

Just how many on this site alone, as well as the general populace, have sworn that they will "NEVER AGAIN buy a single product from a certain company, under ANY circumstances" concerning a certain domestic nameplated auto maker, and derisively labelled them "Gov******* Motors", all for taking a loan???!!!
mad.gif


Case closed.


And also how many have of the other brands with transmission issues, sludged engines, brake noise, and had to do timing belts, valve adjustments, water pumps, radiators, ignition parts proclaim the brand rock solid and more reliable, and if the other brand that needs an intake gasket is junk, junk, junk. Also when you read automotive media it's loaded with weasel wording that demonstrates and creates bias.
 
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Originally Posted By: JOD


I do think some of the complaints though border on the ridiculous--people are filling out surveys to make their brand look good....errr..to make other brands look bad... Is the owner of one type of car less likely to be truthful than the owner of a different brand of car?



It's not ridiculous at all actually....Owner bias in almost any type of owner survey is a well documented phenomenon. The rose colored glasses that owners can and often do demonstrate in these responses is a well documented reality, not some fiction made up by CR doubters. The bias comes into play even more for brands and models that are historically considered very reliable, and at the other end of the spectrum it's just as bad for those at the bottom of the pile...after a while these "market perceptions" become self perpetuating myths.


Very well said! You beat me to the punch. People do lie on surveys.


They also carry on vehement grudges, and seek extreme vengence for percieved wrongs in the past (EVEN the very distant past, at this point).

To the point that they will give a complete 'bye' to a manufacturer who has a MAJOR item/component go wrong, but the sheeple still MUST believe to the "the BEST/GOLD STANDARD", but lambast/rip a new one for a manufacturer who has a small, or almost insignificant problem, but whom the sheeple believe (or more likely are brainwashed to believe by the media, or excessive ad bombardment) HAS TO BE the absolute WORST thing ever.
wink.gif
 
Compared to other reviewing magazines out there including the US car mags (which have always been suspected of payola)
I'd definitely trust Consumer Reports when it comes to the reliability surveys. Again the owners have no agenda and you can bet that if things are not right owners that have the ability to anonymously share their grievances will most certainly do so.
 
With all those surveys guess who's family's Sedans were above the median in would definitely buy again??????

Ford Taurus, Ford Fusion Hybrid(tops), Ford Fusion. Hyundai Sonota/Kia Optima did well along with a few other brands.

Guess who fell below median

Honda Accord(slightly), Nissan Altima, Mazda 6, Chevy Impala/Malibu/

So reported excellent reliability(Nissan/Honda) is not everything clearly for owners. Not sure what agenda is going on.
 
Kinda like the closed-mindedness that leads some to not buy cars from certain companies because of the nationality of the HQ.

Refusing to buy because of government loans is no different than refusing to buy based on nationality. They both have nothing to do with how good the car is, or if it's a good value.


Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: JOD
I honestly don't understand the "politically driven" comment with respect to auto rankings though. This seems to be looking for demons that just aren't there, IMO.


REALLY??!!

Just how many on this site alone, as well as the general populace, have sworn that they will "NEVER AGAIN buy a single product from a certain company, under ANY circumstances" concerning a certain domestic nameplated auto maker, and derisively labelled them "Gov******* Motors", all for taking a loan???!!!
mad.gif


Case closed.
 
Originally Posted By: javacontour
Kinda like the closed-mindedness that leads some to not buy cars from certain companies because of the nationality of the HQ.

Refusing to buy because of government loans is no different than refusing to buy based on nationality. They both have nothing to do with how good the car is, or if it's a good value.


Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: JOD
I honestly don't understand the "politically driven" comment with respect to auto rankings though. This seems to be looking for demons that just aren't there, IMO.





REALLY??!!

Just how many on this site alone, as well as the general populace, have sworn that they will "NEVER AGAIN buy a single product from a certain company, under ANY circumstances" concerning a certain domestic nameplated auto maker, and derisively labelled them "Gov******* Motors", all for taking a loan???!!!
mad.gif


Case closed.


I was addressing/identifying the "politically driven" issue ONLY, as JOD questioned that he does not see how that is ever a bias which prospective buyers use against a given manufacturer.
wink.gif


Nationalistic issues (or buyers holding a bias against companies/nations due to past persecution, or geno/theocracide against their own) are a WHOLE 'NOTHER STORY altogether.
They DO have that 'right', just like the Gadsden Flag wavers have the right to refuse to buy from GM, and the import-ONLY crew has the right to buy ONLY from; Japan, Korea, Germany, etc., even if it does hurt OUR economy, no??
(You can derisively call the above "close-minded" until you're blue in the face, but then do you question ALL of their other beliefs and call them "close-minded" as well if you do not agree with them???!!)
 
We all choose to close our minds for various reasons. I wouldn't consider a Crown Vic or a Town Car because I prefer cars with nimble handling.

I'm sure someone would call me closed minded as I'm missing out on something.

My point is that anyone who complains about how one group or another seems to ignore a certain segment of cars needs to check if they are not doing the same.

I've always said buy what you like and like what you buy. Whatever goes into that decision is fine, just give me the same benefit of doubt and knock it off with the judgmental comments regarding being or not being patriotic, sheeple, Luddite, or others I'm probably forgetting.
 
Originally Posted By: rjundi
Originally Posted By: dishdude
CR is all OPINION! No facts are involved at all.


Reliability ratings/brand rankings cited in the article by Consumer Reports are based on customer reported surveys of problems in the recent model year models.

Its not made up data.


Its not "made up data," but it is data composed entirely of self-selected reported OPINIONS.

Adding insult to injury is the fact (at least the last time I checked) that they don't even let owners clearly distinguish nagging problems with stuff like entertainment systems from serious suspension problems, or failed accessories like alternators from core engine components like timing chains.

I won't quite go so far as to say CR is useless, but its usefulness has some serious caveats.
 
Originally Posted By: javacontour
We all choose to close our minds for various reasons. I wouldn't consider a Crown Vic or a Town Car because I prefer cars with nimble handling.

I'm sure someone would call me closed minded as I'm missing out on something.

My point is that anyone who complains about how one group or another seems to ignore a certain segment of cars needs to check if they are not doing the same.

I've always said buy what you like and like what you buy. Whatever goes into that decision is fine, just give me the same benefit of doubt and knock it off with the judgmental comments regarding being or not being patriotic, sheeple, Luddite, or others I'm probably forgetting.


I agree but the bogus reliabilty claims, bringing up bail outs and unions, bogus claims of "cheap" interior or bogus claims of inferior ride and drive dynamics, bogus claims of there's "no such thing as an American car", economic equivalency etc. is far more common and I'd say much more bogus than the claims some make against foreign. I don't see the equivalency really and if it all ended the domestics would be selling a lot more cars than the other way around.
 
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum


Its not "made up data," but it is data composed entirely of self-selected reported OPINIONS.

Adding insult to injury is the fact (at least the last time I checked) that they don't even let owners clearly distinguish nagging problems with stuff like entertainment systems from serious suspension problems, or failed accessories like alternators from core engine components like timing chains.

I won't quite go so far as to say CR is useless, but its usefulness has some serious caveats.


Agreed for the most part...but sometimes it is in fact made up data...or at least they change the criteria and grading process for certain brands/models when the data is lacking...lol...you cant make this stuff up...GIGO over and over with CR.

CR Chrysler reliability data scarce

Also, I think a lot of people at Suzuki would argue otherwise...the hatchet job they did on Suzuki was almost entirely pure fiction.
 
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum


Its not "made up data," but it is data composed entirely of self-selected reported OPINIONS.

Adding insult to injury is the fact (at least the last time I checked) that they don't even let owners clearly distinguish nagging problems with stuff like entertainment systems from serious suspension problems, or failed accessories like alternators from core engine components like timing chains.

I won't quite go so far as to say CR is useless, but its usefulness has some serious caveats.


Agreed for the most part...but sometimes it is in fact made up data...or at least they change the criteria and grading process for certain brands/models when the data is lacking...lol...you cant make this stuff up...GIGO over and over with CR.

CR Chrysler reliability data scarce

Also, I think a lot of people at Suzuki would argue otherwise...the hatchet job they did on Suzuki was almost entirely pure fiction.


You have to imagine that buyers of domestics don't read CR in high numbers (or other auto media) and probably even less report their positive experiences. Why would they be CR subscribers in good standing when CR is basically telling the subscribers to not buy domestics? I imagine some of the other subscribers and CR staff fill in the info for the domestics
wink.gif
.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top