JD POWER 2020 3yr Dependability ranking. The industry's improving

Joined
Nov 11, 2018
Messages
4,125
Location
Chicagoland
Originally Posted by Spktyr
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
Let's see some links to prove your statement.
Done. See above.
Careful, pointing out the shortfalls of their bible Consumer Reports may trigger them because their "personal bias is contrary to facts."
 
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Messages
6,402
Location
KY
Originally Posted by Spktyr
Anyone who thinks that an organization with a track record of decades of dishonesty led by someone as stupid as Joan Claybrook is a good source for reliability information needs their head examined.
St. Joan is also the autocratic dimwit who made the Safety Nazis squeal with joy by mandating the moronic 85 mph speedometers.
 
Joined
Jul 16, 2019
Messages
602
Location
The ATL
Originally Posted by Spktyr
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
Let's see some links to prove your statement.
Done. See above.
Not done. You said they lied about Chrysler and you didn't post anything in reference to that. As for Toyota, they WERE correct to modify how they predict reliability. They did not outright lie for Toyota. Up until that point, they were dead on with Toyota. No one says Toyota is "trouble free". But you're MUCH less likely to get a lemon or problematic vehicle with Toyota/Lexus This isn't a revelation, folks. I've been a subscriber to CR for over 20 years and they are much, much more correct than not. But if one is blinded by brand loyalty fanboism (I'm not. I own cars/trucks by 6 different manufacturers) then CR is the debul.
 
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
125
Location
Dallas
Originally Posted by MCompact
Originally Posted by Spktyr
Anyone who thinks that an organization with a track record of decades of dishonesty led by someone as stupid as Joan Claybrook is a good source for reliability information needs their head examined.
St. Joan is also the autocratic dimwit who made the Safety Nazis squeal with joy by mandating the moronic 85 mph speedometers.
Her most lasting contribution that's still with us is the OBJECTS IN MIRROR MAY BE CLOSER THAN THEY APPEAR label on the convex passenger mirror she mandated.
 
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
125
Location
Dallas
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
Originally Posted by Spktyr
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
Let's see some links to prove your statement.
Done. See above.
Not done. You said they lied about Chrysler and you didn't post anything in reference to that. As for Toyota, they WERE correct to modify how they predict reliability. They did not outright lie for Toyota. Up until that point, they were dead on with Toyota. No one says Toyota is "trouble free". But you're MUCH less likely to get a lemon or problematic vehicle with Toyota/Lexus This isn't a revelation, folks. I've been a subscriber to CR for over 20 years and they are much, much more correct than not. But if one is blinded by brand loyalty fanboism (I'm not. I own cars/trucks by 6 different manufacturers) then CR is the debul.
Links were posted. As I said, a lot of these articles have gone down the memory hole and I don't have time to wait for slow-arsed archive.org to bring up stored copies of the Chrysler debacle. When I get time, I will post said links. And yes, they did lie for Toyota. They said that a vehicle with no predecessor and no track record was reliable and recommended when they had no basis to make that call, while claiming all their recommendations were based on their surveys. Their recommendation was not based on their survey. They lied. Nice to see that you didn't touch the Samurai debacle, where CR personnel were caught on their own tapes rigging the tests.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
3,566
Location
Somewhere
Originally Posted by OilReport99
I don't have the break-down, but I suspect Cummins, Aisin & ZF have something to do with the higher RAM ranking... coffee
And yet they are still below the industry average. Despite building basically the same drivetrains for what, 5 years now?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
5,337
Location
Southeast Texas
Originally Posted by kstanf150
I bet there's not a single poster on here that's included in the 36K nor does anybody on here that knows of a person included in that 36K
Yes, and? So what if it didn't include any BITOG posters? There are 330 million people in the USA.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
2,574
Location
GoVols
Originally Posted by gfh77665
Originally Posted by kstanf150
I bet there's not a single poster on here that's included in the 36K nor does anybody on here that knows of a person included in that 36K
Yes, and? So what if it didn't include any BITOG posters? There are 330 million people in the USA.
So We're you included in the poll 🤔🤔🤔🤔???????? Yes ? No? Didn't think so ! Polls mean nothing
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 11, 2018
Messages
4,125
Location
Chicagoland
Originally Posted by gfh77665
Originally Posted by kstanf150
I bet there's not a single poster on here that's included in the 36K nor does anybody on here that knows of a person included in that 36K
Yes, and? So what if it didn't include any BITOG posters? There are 330 million people in the USA.
The bigger the sample, the more accurate. <0.5% of the population surveyed is a very tiny sample.
 
Joined
Jul 16, 2019
Messages
602
Location
The ATL
Originally Posted by Skippy722
Originally Posted by gfh77665
Originally Posted by kstanf150
I bet there's not a single poster on here that's included in the 36K nor does anybody on here that knows of a person included in that 36K
Yes, and? So what if it didn't include any BITOG posters? There are 330 million people in the USA.
The bigger the sample, the more accurate. <0.5% of the population surveyed is a very tiny sample.
But it's still a sample. What do you want to do, have the manufacturers provide their own ‘reliability' data? LOL
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2018
Messages
4,125
Location
Chicagoland
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
Originally Posted by Skippy722
Originally Posted by gfh77665
Originally Posted by kstanf150
I bet there's not a single poster on here that's included in the 36K nor does anybody on here that knows of a person included in that 36K
Yes, and? So what if it didn't include any BITOG posters? There are 330 million people in the USA.
The bigger the sample, the more accurate. <0.5% of the population surveyed is a very tiny sample.
But it's still a sample. What do you want to do, have the manufacturers provide their own ‘reliability' data? LOL
That's a great way to get skewed data. I want them to break the data down further. Start showing us some common problems for each category. Don't just say "engine cooling: below average" or "exhaust: below average." I want to know if there is a common failure mode, for instance "Engine cooling: below average. Common failure: water pump failure, our data shows an average of X miles" or "Exhaust: below average. Broken exhaust manifold studs causing a ticking sound, average failure X miles." Doesn't fix the small sample size, but it does give us more information. And yes, I'm still salty that my Durango with the 5.7 ate a water pump at 56k miles and had broken exhaust manifold studs.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 29, 2012
Messages
362
Location
Pikes Peak region
Originally Posted by gfh77665
Originally Posted by Skippy722
Knowing JD power had 36,555 responses, and knowing that ~17.2 million vehicles were sold in 2017, JD power is basing their ratings on 0.21% of all vehicles sold. Yeah... that's not even a drop in the bucket. Consumer reports isn't any better.
36K+ is a very good representative sample population. Very good.
Sure it is. In fact on any given day, 36,000 people are in the waiting areas of car service shops or dealers waiting to get their Recall, TSB or failed components fixed or replaced. Out of boredom, most fill out some kind of automotive survey to pass the time. Coincidence ? LOL
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
5,337
Location
Southeast Texas
Fine. If you all want to thoroughly discount data derived from over 36,000 vehicle owners, simply GO AWAY and give no further attention to this thread. Or, are you only happy if you are complaining and trying to shoot holes in something? Get a life.
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
628
Location
Georgia
The study I co-developed now has over 2.5 million vehicles from all over the United States. No awards. No fees from the OEMs. No sponsorship of a specific study. The average visitor to our site now spends over 8 minutes studying the information which is broken down to model years along with different generations so that car shoppers can get a more complete picture of long-term reliability. It's free to the public. Forever. We don't even have cookies or advertisers at our site. We designed it for the consumer... and the stats nerd. Finally, can any BITOG veteran tell me why a small study on the durability of three year old vehicles would have any accuracy to it at all? Anyone? Beuller? http://www.dashboard-light.com/
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
3,566
Location
Somewhere
Originally Posted by macarose
The study I co-developed now has over 2.5 million vehicles from all over the United States
Yeah from the junk dealers send to the auction. And with little insight into what the various issues are, just generic "powertrain", "transmission". and "engine" issues. So how do you determine what issues are what? Something small like a sensor that trips a check engine light is a whole lot different than, say a slipping transmission or an engine missing on 1 or more cylinders. How do you account for that? From what I've seen on your site over a while now, the data is pretty much worthless. The ones with the real data we are all after comes from the manufacturers in the form of warranty claims. They will never release that data.
 
Last edited:

Al

Joined
Jun 8, 2002
Messages
19,296
Location
Elizabethtown, Pa
Originally Posted by BobsArmory
Some peoples heads are going to explode when they see Buick rated above Toyota.....
BC old people drive them putting like 3000 miles per year. No mystery here.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2018
Messages
4,125
Location
Chicagoland
Originally Posted by gfh77665
Fine. If you all want to thoroughly discount data derived from over 36,000 vehicle owners, simply GO AWAY and give no further attention to this thread. Or, are you only happy if you are complaining and trying to shoot holes in something? Get a life.
Maybe if they got data from 36,000 people of one particular model for one particular year it would mean more than 36,000 out of 17,200,000 LOL
Originally Posted by macarose
The study I co-developed now has over 2.5 million vehicles from all over the United States. No awards. No fees from the OEMs. No sponsorship of a specific study. The average visitor to our site now spends over 8 minutes studying the information which is broken down to model years along with different generations so that car shoppers can get a more complete picture of long-term reliability. It's free to the public. Forever. We don't even have cookies or advertisers at our site. We designed it for the consumer... and the stats nerd. Finally, can any BITOG veteran tell me why a small study on the durability of three year old vehicles would have any accuracy to it at all? Anyone? Beuller? http://www.dashboard-light.com/
Data is all over the place on that site... it lumps 2008-2015 Grand Caravans together. I mean yeah... the 8th gen started in 2008, but 2011 saw a new engine and transmission, hugely retuned suspension, even got a pretty significant facelift, and should be in their own category. Then we look at a Toyota RAV4, there are 2 different generations mixed together. And then there is this insanity: [Linked Image]
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
5,337
Location
Southeast Texas
Originally Posted by Skippy722
Maybe if they got data from 36,000 people of one particular model for one particular year it would mean more than 36,000 out of 17,200,000 LOL
Since you and others are so quick to critique something that is FREE to you, don't wait on "they" to do what you want! YOU need to conduct the next study personally, and YOU give us the results from 36,000 people who own one model. Step up Skippy! Get it done and report back!
 
Top