Car Troubles

[JohnT]

Asher, can you please cite your sources, especially the graph and the second list?

Thanks.

Edit: 2nd list came from Oerdin's article. My bad.

[Asher]

autoinfo.com is the source for the graph and chart.

[Dinner]

Asher the difference between the two lists is simple. One list is the rate for a given manufacturer and the other is for individual brands. Thus GM's figures include all 10 brands it sells, Toyota's includes their 3 brands, and so forth. It's a company wide average which is less realistic because a brand like Caddy or Linclon has next to nothing to due with a Chevy Chavilier so it's better to break it down by brand instead of by holding company.

[JohnT]

If you look at the two charts (the one I provided (1998 cars) and the one that Oerdin (2001 cars) provided), the industry average for defects (problems per 100 vehicles) has declined from 355 to 273.

Asher, the reason why some makes don't show up is that the chart from Oerdin's article shows the PP100 for the corporation as a whole, while the article (and my chart) goes into divisional detail. The article claims that Lexus had 163 pp100, but the Toyota Corporation as a whole averaged 196 pp100.

Confusing as all hell, and again proof that AOL-Time Warner doesn't really care about the quality of their information.

[Asher]

I think it says a lot for the quality of American manufacturers when only one is above average, and even then ever-so-slightly.

I think that alone would prove that American vehicles are still not of high quality compared to Toyota & Honda.

And 3 years old isn't long term IMO, I believe 4+ is longterm and I believe that's when I also said American cars tend to start to fall apart.

See my chart about 5-year old cars.

[JohnT]

I think it says more for global manufacturing processes to realize just how far automobiles have come in quality, regardless of brand/nation, in the last 20 years.

Didja notice that Buick improved their cars by 100 pp100vehicles over the past 3 years, while Lexus had their problems increase over that time period?

And calling a Lexus a "rebranded Toyota" is, well, dumb. Many of the parts and processes are the same, but even by Toyota standards, the difference between Lexus and the other brands are quite amazing. Actually, it's the other way around: the charts indicate that Toyota is using the lessons learned in manufacturing the Lexus and applying it to their cheaper cars:

PP100v

Model - 1998my - 2001my

Lexus - 159 - 169
Toyota - 276 - 201

[Asher]

Lexus is a rebranded Toyota with higher end components with more extensive QA.

The engines are identical to Toyota vehicles for the most part.

The Lexus RX330 and Toyota Highlander V6 have the exact same engine, for example.

[C0ckney]

god this is fasinating :/

anyway, can't you do the work yourself? a fuel injector pump isn't that difficult to replace and ecu more so, but it only took me so long because i didn't really know what i was doing. no idea about the emisions control thing though, never had to work on one of those.

and definatly go to breakers yards for things like an ecu and injector pumps, you're in a city, there's bound to be tons of breakers yards around.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Asher
I think it says a lot for the quality of American manufacturers when only one is above average, and even then ever-so-slightly.

Think about it for a bit. GM sells lots and lots of low end vehicles like the Pontaic Sunfire (or did in 2000 anyway) which were sold for about $8,000 new. How many low end BMWs are out there? The more expensive car is almost always going to have a more expensive, yet more reliable, design. Thus the GM, DC, and Ford corporation ratings are going to have lots more vehicles from all the price ranges and so there corporation ratings are likely to be lower then BMWs.

Is that what the customer really wants to know though? No, he want to know how reliable a buick or a Mercury is not what the amalgamated satistical rating for all 20 brands a company might own. Thus the sats for each brand is the real information.

[Asher]

But the stats for each brand don't tell you anything about the manufacturer's capability.

We were talking about American cars vs Japanese cars, so I fail to see why it's not proper to look at the entire companies? GM vs Toyota vs Honda, etc.

If GM makes crap cars, they make crap cars -- you shouldn't excuse it by saying "look how cheap it is!". The Toyota Echo is dirt cheap too, but reliable as hell.

[Japher]

I believe I could do it myself, but it would probably take some time... time I don't have, as I am just back from vacation and am way behind on my chatting here at poly... uh, I mean I am way behind at work, yeah, that's it...

I looked at the ECU instillation packages, and I think it would take me a couple of days to do... I would rather not do that.

Anyway, I am renting a chevy cavilier while the A-holes arsefuk me... the car is peice of sh!t, but at least it runs...

As soon as it is done I am going to take to another mechanic and get a tune-up and have them inspect the dealer's work... Make sure they didn't insure my return buisness.

[JohnT]

There are far more qualitative differences between a Lexus-Toyota then there are between, say, the Dodge Stratus and Plymouth reliant. If the components are not the same as in their cheaper cars (as you yourself admit), then calling a Lexus a rebranded Toyota is a misnomer at best.

And the fact that they use the same engine doesn't make it the same car. Given that the engine is one of the most difficult and expensive design issues facing new cars, using an old workhorse across makes and models is very common.

[Dinner]

Some brands cost more and thus can buy more expensive parts and spend more on Q & A. It would be entirely artificial to try to break it down by holding company instead of each individual make.

Are we going to tell how good a furniture maker BerkshireHathoway is buy averaging all of there businesses they own or are we going to look at Thomasvilles furniture business? Sure the holding company owns the stock in Thomasville but in the end we should be looking at the quality of the brand (in this case Thomasville) which puts out the end product.

[Asher]

Originally posted by JohnT
And the fact that they use the same engine doesn't make it the same car. Given that the engine is one of the most difficult and expensive design issues facing new cars, using an old workhorse across makes and models is very common.

They have the same chasis, the same engine, and the same system electronics. The Lexus adds things like a rear camera, nicer trim, LCD panel, etc.

The engine is the thing far most likely to affect reliability, so when they're the same across Lexus and Toyota, I think it's fair to call it rebranding. They slightly modify the exterior design to look "different enough", add some trendy things like a reverse camera and LCD display, and double the price.

[Asher]

Another thing not taken into account by JD Powers & Associates is maintenance:

People who buy Lexus' are probably far more likely to make sure their vehicle gets its scheduled maintenance than someone who buys a Kia. Regular maintenance = less problems.