J.D. Power 2017 Vehicle Dependability Study

[SubLGT]

http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/2017-vehicle-dependability-study

Quote:
While Lexus and Porsche nameplates lead the industry in vehicle dependability, owners of many high-volume vehicles are also rewarded with excellent long-term quality, according to the J.D. Power 2017 Vehicle Dependability StudySM (VDS), released today.

The study, now in its 28th year, examines problems experienced during the past 12 months by original owners of 2014 model-year vehicles. Overall dependability is determined by the number of problems experienced per 100 vehicles (PP100), with a lower score reflecting higher quality. The study covers 177 specific problems grouped into eight major vehicle categories…

Lexus and Porsche tie to rank highest in vehicle dependability among all nameplates, with a score of 110 PP100. This is the sixth consecutive year of Lexus topping the nameplate rankings in the VDS.

Toyota (123 PP100) follows in the rankings, moving up one rank position from 2016.

Following Toyota in the rankings are Buick (126 PP100) and Mercedes-Benz (131 PP100).

Hyundai (133 PP100) is the most improved nameplate in the study, improving by 25 PP100 from 2016. At sixth position (up from 19th in 2016), this is Hyundai’s best-ever ranking in the VDS.

Other notable improvements include Dodge and Ford, which both improve by 21 PP100 from 2016, and Land Rover, which improves by 20 PP100.

...New to the top 10 list of problems reported in 2017 is battery failure. In fact, 44% more owners report a battery failure this year than in 2016. Batteries are the most frequently replaced component not related to normal wear and tear in 3-year-old vehicles at 6.1%—up 1.3 percentage points from 2016...


The bottom 5 positions are occupied by Ram, Dodge, Infiniti, Jeep, and Fiat

 

[javacontour]

Fiat is quite an outlier compared to the rest of them.

I suspect the high Dodge numbers compared to Ram or Chrysler have to do with offering a warmed over Fiat, the Dart. That certainly can't help the numbers...

 

[OVERKILL]

Two German marques in the top 5, and BMW did better than Chevrolet.... Interesting.

Fiat, Jeep and Nissan's luxury division Infiniti bring up the bottom. Amazing how starkly opposite Infiniti ranks when compared to Lexus, Mercedes and even BMW. In fact, as far as Japanese luxury brands, Lexus is really the only one that stands out

 

[OneEyeJack]

Fiat is doing a good job as the anchor in this list. I think they anchor other reporting agency lists as well.

The most important information in these kinds of listings from groups like JDP and CR is that for the daily driver cars. Owners of these cars really depend on them for surviving economically. The failure of an entertainment device is not as important as the failure of a battery and battery failures are on the rise as reported here in this report by JDP. A local auto battery supplier in the LA area has stated that his sales are up over 25% in the past 5 years. He states that battery failures on new imported cars during the PDI's (pre deliver inspection) at the port of Long Beach are on the rise, as well.

 

[KGMtech]

The build and material quality of my 2013 Maxima is not nearly as good as my 2004 Passat. Far more rattles in the Maxima versus my recollection of the Passat at same age. I really wonder how they let Infinity fail so badly, nice looks, but that's all I guess?

 

[DrRoughneck]

I enjoy that Hyundai beat BMW, Audi, Volvo and Honda very much. Fiat is where I was expecting.

 

[DrRoughneck]

Very interesting link, thanks.
It seems the new Texas-built Toyota Tacoma is plagued with quality issues. It ranks last behind the Honda and Nissan pickups.

 

[Starman2112]

Fix It Again Tony!

You couldn't give me one of those things.

 

[dishdude]

Buick and Chevy beat Honda, and I drive a Jeep and Fiat.

 

[macarose]

First 12 months? That's barely a BITOG oil change with a full synthetic and a Mobil 1 filter.

This study is infinitely better.

http://www.dashboard-light.com/

 

[gregk24]

Ok, get back with me when these vehicles have 200K miles on them. THAT would be a much better dependability study. Having said that I am not surprised FCA is at the bottom.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: gregk24
Ok, get back with me when these vehicles have 200K miles on them. THAT would be a much better dependability study. Having said that I am not surprised FCA is at the bottom.


+1 I take those reports with a grain of salt, or two.

 

[JHZR2]

I really don't get these numbers... They imply that there is (slightly) more than one issue per vehicle, which we have fortunately never encountered.

I know a lot of this is resolution of minor gripes and warranty fixes, versus true long-term reliability, so aim not sure it actually says a lot about the long term outlook or the lifecycle cost of the vehicles.

I wonder what Infiniti did to be so low?!?

 

[horse123]

If I ever needed proof JD is full of it, there it is. Putting Subaru below the industry average. Let me guess, they're including head unit issues and minor oil consumption in a few vehicles?

Literally has not been a more bulletproof set of powertrain/drivertrain components in Subaru's lineup in history.

These "results" are absolutely no indicator of reliability, guarantee it. But I will give them FCA vehicles are probably still the absolute worst pieces of junk you can buy. All the other results are total bull. I even hate Ford and I don't want to defend them really, but I bet they're not THAT low in reliability. Chevy is certainly not top 10, and I'm a huge fan of the Camaro and Silverado.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: gregk24
Ok, get back with me when these vehicles have 200K miles on them. THAT would be a much better dependability study. Having said that I am not surprised FCA is at the bottom.


Technically it is just FIAT at the bottom. Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep (who also didn't rate well) are all listed separately.

 

[edyvw]

So what happens to the cars in first 12 months? Some of these companies might fall down because they have several models that changed and all companies have issues with first year models.

 

[Virtus_Probi]

Originally Posted By: horse123
If I ever needed proof JD is full of it, there it is. Putting Subaru below the industry average. Let me guess, they're including head unit issues and minor oil consumption in a few vehicles?

Literally has not been a more bulletproof set of powertrain/drivertrain components in Subaru's lineup in history.

These "results" are absolutely no indicator of reliability, guarantee it. But I will give them FCA vehicles are probably still the absolute worst pieces of junk you can buy. All the other results are total bull. I even hate Ford and I don't want to defend them really, but I bet they're not THAT low in reliability. Chevy is certainly not top 10, and I'm a huge fan of the Camaro and Silverado.


Is a recall automatically counted as a "problem" in this study?

My 2014 FXT (first year for the redesign) was recalled due to LSPI and carbon buildup issues, and that event might have been during the timeframe of this study (the release refers to "problems experienced during the past 12 months by original owners of 2014 model-year vehicles"). The Forester turbos make up a small portion of Subaru's total sales, but it's going to hurt them if every single 2014 FXT is automatically counted as having a "problem". Electronics connectivity was also a huge problem with that generation of Subarus and my phone has never really hooked up properly with mine...plus, I replaced my battery in less than a year because the OEM unit was such a weak sister.

My impression is that Subaru gets a lot of the big points right and a fair number of the smaller details wrong...I mean, I don't care that much that my phone doesn't hook up well, but that's a turnkey solution that Subaru should be buying from an electronics company that knows what it's doing.

 

[ChristianReske]

Lexus dont sell in Germany, because "it´s Japanese".

No kidding, no Joking....

 

[doitmyself]

One needs to dig much deeper than these oft irrelevant reviews. It is not unusual for a good model to exist in one of the "lowly" brands and a real stinker to exist in one of the highly touted brands. For instance, what good is it to be a Toyota fanboy and own one of the Tacoma rust buckets ( http://www.autoblog.com/2016/11/14/toyota-3-billion-settlement-rusty-truck-frames/ )??

I owned 3 short wheel base Caravans in the past that all had very low cost of ownership. Having a warranty repair for broken plastic seat trim is nothing like having to deal with problematic variable cylinder management nightmares. Cost of insurance, ease/cost of diy repairs, etc. all count as part of the ownership experience. I'm glad that I am not a sheeple

and can think for myself.

 

[Vuflanovsky]

Originally Posted By: macarose
First 12 months? That's barely a BITOG oil change with a full synthetic and a Mobil 1 filter.

This study is infinitely better.

http://www.dashboard-light.com/


The only problem with something like that is their data is a weighted average of vehicles going back 10-15 and more years with information they get from their "partnered" network of auto auctions. How is that relevant to the average daily driver experience if auto auctions typically have a greater number of problem vehicles to begin with??...not to mention folding in "dependability" data from models that haven't been sold in a decade as representative of the particular makes "dependability". Sorry, this one's worse than J.D. Powers.