Newest JD Power 3 year reliability puts VW near bottom again

[Tin Man]

Details at http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2007130

Sigh.

TM

 

[Tin Man]

In their segments:

The VW Jetta was along with the Kia Spectra the worst!

Of course, as usual, they fail to simply mention that the average reliability gets better. Here is the 2004 one for comparison overall:

In 3 years, Volkswagen went from 386 problems to 298 per 100 vehicles surveyed!

That is quite a difference, and VW will NOT get credit for it by the way this will be published in general media headlines.

TM

 

[TornadoRed]

In 3 years, Volkswagen went from 386 problems to 298 per 100 vehicles surveyed!

That is quite a difference, and VW will NOT get credit for it by the way this will be published in general media headlines.

But the industry average dropped from 269 to 216 problems per 100.

216 problems would have been good enough to put VW in the top 10 in 2004. Apparently VWs are getting better, the same as everyone else.

 

[Blue_Hen_TDI]

C'mon Wolfsburg. If Buick can make #1 on the list...

 

[jrivers804]

But what sorts of problems are we talking about? I remember some of the older VWs, trim pieces, squeeks, windows, in other words "pesky" little problems as opposed to stand you because of a major problem. The other thing is these are surveys and seem to me quite subjective. In other words they don't put me off something I want, for two reasons. One, I have had no "real" problems with the various VWs I've owned over the years and second I don't think their methodology is at all sound.

 

[ibanix]

Really, are you surprised? Just read the forums here:

* PD engines dying for not using the right oil
* Turbos failing
* Windows stuck down
* Intake clogged

etc etc

 

[Blue_Hen_TDI]

To answer the question on J.D. Power methodology, a squeaky dash counts the same as a blown engine. It's one problem reported by a customer.

Your response is what I would expect from a more savy audience like TDI Club. We are the types who research an issue and take care of it ourselves. Soccer mom America does not do this. A squeaky dash has the same impact on them as a blown engine. It means two trips to the dealership: one to drop off their car and pick up a loaner; another to drop off the loaner and pick up their car. To them, owning a VW might mean 10 days lost from work for this during the warranty period, while for a Buick or Lexus it might mean two or less. Which car do you think they will buy? There's a reason VW loses a $Billion a year here.

 

[Tin Man]

But what sorts of problems are we talking about? I remember some of the older VW's, trim pieces, squeaks, windows, in other words "pesky" little problems as opposed to stand you because of a major problem. The other thing is these are surveys and seem to me quite subjective. In other words they don't put me off something I want, for two reasons. One, I have had no "real" problems with the various VW's I've owned over the years and second I don't think their methodology is at all sound.

The video accompanying the press release seems to give you a feel for what they are talking about, which are problems that require warranty work by the dealer. So, in a word, the quality defects are what car owners feel are problems.

TM

 

[06SpiceRedTDI]

They don't show where Buick is in the 100k to 200k mile reliability. After the 3 years it is time to throw away the Buick

 

[weedeater]

It's interesting to see who's moved up (MB, Hyundai) versus who's moved down (Infiniti, Saab)

 

[Blue_Hen_TDI]

It's interesting to see who's moved up (MB, Hyundai) versus who's moved down (Infiniti, Saab)

Suzuki will move ahead of VW in quality when hell freez.... in 2007!

 

[lbhskier37]

They don't show where Buick is in the 100k to 200k mile reliability. After the 3 years it is time to throw away the Buick

My 200k miles 1992 buick regal must be the exception. Where I live I see more old buicks in the late 80s to mid 90s running fine than pretty much any other brand.

 

[Vipervnm]

They don't show where Buick is in the 100k to 200k mile reliability. After the 3 years it is time to throw away the Buick

Dude, you're waaay off on that one. Buicks last forever. We had a '79 Riviera with a 302 that is STILL running to this day as a delivery vehicle for a local autoparts store. Not to mention the dozen of early 90's and older Buicks I see on the road every day. Rarely do I ever see a Lexus anywhere near 10 years old. I know this is a VW forum, but please be a little less biased.

 

[BanzaiRider]

I'm not sure if Volkswagen realizes the good fortune they have with a most of their owners. VW customer base is almost more of a fan base than a customer base! A lot of people know and realize that VW are less reliable than Honda and Toyota but they "love" driving their VW so they keep buying it.

I used to be a VW "fan" but my last two Golf (year 2000) gave me too much grief so I finally gave in and bought a Honda CRV. I don't love the CRV, I like it, I used to "love" my Golf. The CRV is 5 years now and I've had no problems whatsoever with it, can't say that of any VW I've owned.

If VW were to improve their reliability to the level of Honda/Toyota while keeping the comfort and driving experience they currently provide, I think they would not be able to produce enough for the demand. However thinking that these surveys are BS and thinking that it's not true that VW cars are less reliable then most is also, in my opinion, the reaction of a fan, not the reaction of a client.

I'm still dreaming about the new Sportwagen TDI and the new Tiguan TDI, maybe by the time they finally come to NA I'll be ready again to become a fan and will take a risk by leaving aside my boring Honda for the more enjoyable (but frustrating) life of owning yet again a VW!!!

Hope I didn't bore you too much!

 

[Vipervnm]

I used to be a VW "fan" but my last two Golf (year 2000) gave me too much grief so I finally gave in and bought a Honda CRV. I don't love the CRV, I like it, I used to "love" my Golf. The CRV is 5 years now and I've had no problems whatsoever with it, can't say that of any VW I've owned.

Hondas aren't that different than any other car out there. The reliability of Hondas is not exemplary. My personal experience with family member's CRV, Accords, and Odyssey (transmission, and sliding doors kept openning!!) put them ALL at around 120,000 miles until a whole mess of problems start happening. Most notably is the transmission on my Dad's 99 Accord Coupe. He bragged for 6 years about how great and reliable that car was until he was stuck with damn near $4,000 in repair estimates at nearly 120,000 highway miles. Needless to say, he doesn't drive a Honda anymore but a JEEP Liberty CRD. My mom's 1990 Dodge Grand Caravan lasted till 135,000 city/highway before it started to give way. Honda . Toyota is hardly better. The Corolla is a tin can junkbox. I can't even tell you how many of those I've had to work on that had stuck piston rings and burned through nearly 2.5 quarts of oil in less than 3,000 miles, bad wheel bearings, starter motors, blah blah blah. OK, rant over.

BTW, I'm not a VW fan. I bought mine strictly because of the fuel economy. I've grown to like it quite a bit, but I'm still as skeptical as ever considering how much I hear about the problems of many others.

Buick earned that top position and I can't wait until Cadillac joins them up there! VW has quite a ways to go.

 

[Blue_Hen_TDI]

To pile on to the Honda comments, I have never owned a car with thinner sheet metal than a Honda CR-V (my wife's). That thing gets a ding in it when you sneeze near it it seems.

 

[PDJetta]

And Nissan is near the bottom and Buick is on top? My exe's '96 unmaintained Maxima has over 250,000 miles on it.

What gives? I don't think this "reliabilty" reflects the true reliability over say 10 years.

My (current and hopefully last) wife's 01 Buick has had a few problems, leaky lower intake manifold gaskets being the most serious ($1200 shop job/$300 and an entire weekend if you do it yourself).

Note that this is for 2004 models being rated, only 3 years old!

--Nate

 

[PDJetta]

Really, are you surprised? Just read the forums here:

* PD engines dying for not using the right oil
* Turbos failing
* Windows stuck down
* Intake clogged

etc etc

AND failed intank lift pumps (mine bit the dust at 46,000 miles!)

--Nate

 

[Tin Man]

Gee, lets all believe that isolated anecdotal component failures actually resemble "data." Not.

However flawed, the real data support the JD Power findings a lot better than what is reported on message boards. The plural of anecdote is not data.

TM

 

[TornadoRed]

Note that this is for 2004 models being rated, only 3 years old!

From the JD Powers website:

"Each year, the J.D. Power and Associates Vehicle Dependability Study (VDS) surveys original owners of three-year-old vehicles about problems they have experienced in the prior 12 months. Our VDS is different from the J.D. Power and Associates 2004 Initial Quality Study (IQS), which measures quality after the first 90 days of ownership when the vehicle is new. Rather, VDS surveys original owners of three-year-old vehicles about problems experienced during the year leading up to the survey."

When I responded earlier, I guess I was thinking they were comparing 2007 models with 2004 models... not true. Just 2004 models at two different points in time.

 

[BanzaiRider]

Hondas aren't that different than any other car out there. The reliability of Hondas is not exemplary. My personal experience with family member's CRV, Accords, and Odyssey (transmission, and sliding doors kept openning!!) put them ALL at around 120,000 miles until a whole mess of problems start happening. Most notably is the transmission on my Dad's 99 Accord Coupe. He bragged for 6 years about how great and reliable that car was until he was stuck with damn near $4,000 in repair estimates at nearly 120,000 highway miles. Needless to say, he doesn't drive a Honda anymore but a JEEP Liberty CRD. My mom's 1990 Dodge Grand Caravan lasted till 135,000 city/highway before it started to give way. Honda . Toyota is hardly better. The Corolla is a tin can junkbox. I can't even tell you how many of those I've had to work on that had stuck piston rings and burned through nearly 2.5 quarts of oil in less than 3,000 miles, bad wheel bearings, starter motors, blah blah blah. OK, rant over.

BTW, I'm not a VW fan. I bought mine strictly because of the fuel economy. I've grown to like it quite a bit, but I'm still as skeptical as ever considering how much I hear about the problems of many others.

Buick earned that top position and I can't wait until Cadillac joins them up there! VW has quite a ways to go.

Don't forget that this JD Power survey as well as most of what I was referring to in my comments are related to the first 3 years of ownership, so about 40k not 120k! So yes, you might be right saying that Honda and Toyota are not better then VW in terms of long term durability but for short term I think the JD Power survey nails it pretty well. Also, a lot of people change their cars every 3-4 years so the short term reliability is extremely important for companies if they want to keep their customer base. I wish VW would understand this one because their cars are always more pleasant to drive than the comparable Honda/Toyota model!

 

[no-blue-screen]

Let's not forget that our cars are very high tech...more gadgets=more things to break=more reports of problems. I wouldn't buy a buick...and my wife's chevy uplander will be the last GM product I ever buy...period...compplete junk.

 

[mavapa]

Whatever you might think about the survey, it is a realistic guide to consumer behavior in the US. I doubt that most people who buy a new car keep it more than 100,000 miles. Many of the forum members might, but forum members can buy only so many new cars. For the rest, the manufacturers have to rely on a "typical" buyer.
And whatever you might think of VW's attributes, the only reason I bought a new (in 2001) one was to get the diesel engine and 50 mpg. It's a nice car, and I like many of its qualities, but when it came down to buying a car, the engine sold it for me. If Honda, Toyota or Nissan had offered a car with similar mileage, it might have happened differently.

 

[Vipervnm]

So yes, you might be right saying that Honda and Toyota are not better then VW in terms of long term durability but for short term I think the JD Power survey nails it pretty well.

I just want to point out again that I was comparing them to the other companies that I'm personally familiar with and the popular opinion that Toyotas and Hondas last far longer than anything else, not just VW. I happen to have a VW right now, but I didn't 1.5 years ago. I'm not suddenly on a bandwagon and blind to any deficiencies in my current mode of transportation. In other words, I don't consider it the standard against which I measure all other companies. If I had an extra 10k to spend on a car I'd be driving a Cadillac CTS right now and never would have had the pleasure of meeting you lot.

That being said, I haven't had a single mechanical problem in the first 35,000 miles and I hope that's the case for the next 35,000.

 

[Vipervnm]

Let's not forget that our cars are very high tech...more gadgets=more things to break=more reports of problems. I wouldn't buy a buick...and my wife's chevy uplander will be the last GM product I ever buy...period...compplete junk.

I agree about the Uplander. I had that as a rental when two of my continentals blew out on the highway a few miles apart from each other. I put the spare on drove a few more miles and then...rumble rumble rumble. The Uplander was complete garbage based on interior appearance alone. The carpet was nowhere near tight and flat on the floor, cheap, cheap. That being said, I doubt there's anything on our cars that's more high tech than what's on the Lincoln MKZ or the Buick Lucerne. You should go check them out. You'd be surprised. I wish my seats were air conditioned, damn leatherette sure gets hot and sticky...

 

[Tin Man]

The best service I have ever seen has been at Buick dealers and Honda dealers. The Buicks can be rationalized as comfortable medium sized cruisers, not European sporty small cars. For what they are, they probably do a very good job. I just wouldn't get one for their lack of orthopedic seating. Too soft for me and not tall enough for my back. Also, 20 mpg doesn't excite me.

TM

 

[lbhskier37]

The best service I have ever seen has been at Buick dealers and Honda dealers. The Buicks can be rationalized as comfortable medium sized cruisers, not European sporty small cars. For what they are, they probably do a very good job. I just wouldn't get one for their lack of orthopedic seating. Too soft for me and not tall enough for my back. Also, 20 mpg doesn't excite me.

TM

Lacrosse is rated at 30mpg highway, pretty good for a car its size. 3800 V6 is a good engine. 200hp and 230ft-lb torque. If driving for good mileage on the highway it should easily get low to mid 30s.

 

[Tin Man]

Lacrosse is rated at 30mpg highway, pretty good for a car its size. 3800 V6 is a good engine. 200hp and 230ft-lb torque. If driving for good mileage on the highway it should easily get low to mid 30s.

I kind of doubt I would get much above 25 mpg on the highway, but maybe if I went the speed limit on a flat road... in the summer, on non-reformulated gas, well, maybe.

TM

 

[lbhskier37]

I kind of doubt I would get much above 25 mpg on the highway, but maybe if I went the speed limit on a flat road... in the summer, on non-reformulated gas, well, maybe.

TM

My Regal with the 3100 V6 was rated at 29 and I can consistantly get 32mpg on the highway driving about 60-65, and thats with 170k on the engine. Those GM V6s with all their torque usually have a very tall overdrive, if you drive without mashing on it, its easy to get what they are rated for or more. In the winter my mileage goes down to about 28. Right now I am putting on close to 500 miles a week, so I have plenty of numbers to put an average together. I know they are nowhere near a TDI (which is why I am saving for one) but those GM V6s can hold their own with the Japanese cars. (and blows away the less powerful 2.5L gasser-hog Jetta)

 

[Tin Man]

Yeah, GM has quietly produced gasoline engines that have better fuel economy than equivalent rival Ford engines. They seem to have been doing this since the 1970's.

TM