The Current State of the US Auto Market

uplanderguy

I remember reading about many a survey where the import car ranked higher in satisfaction that the domestic, but it was exactly opposite for the dealer rankings. I do remember hearing again and again about a 'take it or leave it' attitude at dealers of hotter-selling models. My friend has a Toyota Tacoma he likes, but he always felt the Toyota dealer wouldn't budge an inch on anything service-related.

circlew

At least the GM CEO gets it...some die-hards never admit it.

imidazol97

Car complaints from NHSTA weighted for number of cars and years on the road.

The 2013 Projected Car Complaint Ratings

COMPLAINT INDEX RATIO

Hyundai Velostar 17,354

Toyota Prius 14,817

Volkswagen Beetle 10,683

Dodge Journey 10,241

Infiniti M 10,172

Jeep Wrangler 9,473

Hyundai Sonata 8,769

Volkswagen Routan 8,554

Nissan Quest 8,333

Nissan Leaf 8,195

Ford Focus 8,126

Chevrolet Volt 8,035

Kia Sorento 7,268

BMW 5 Series 6,986

Jaguar XF 6,842

Hyundai Azera 6,523

Volkswagen Golf 5,730

Ford Explorer 5,652

Ford Fiesta 5,464

Audi A3 5,277

Mr_Shiftright

Those are safety complaints counted off submitted complaint forms, however, not reliability complaints. So you can have a very lousy safe car. Or a very reliable dangerous car.

I'd like to see something like which automaker buys back the most lemons.

imidazol97

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
Those are safety complaints counted off submitted complaint forms, however, not reliability complaints.

The data compiled from a book reference is as valid to me, to me, as the CR convenience survey blended with the "opinion" of the "unbiased" staff of CR.

I noted there were 3 entries in that list from KiaHyunda. Kind of a high representation.

circlew

Not merely "not Crappy" Products....

Barra’s mantra, as she explained recently at a Fortune conference, is simple: “No more crappy cars.” GM’s bankruptcy, she said, gave her the kind of cover needed to eliminate the bureaucratic and organizational obstacles that get in the way of quality. “You had the emotion and attention of everybody — we’ve got to do things differently,” she said. “If we’re going to compete in a segment in any market, we’re going to go to win.” She has streamlined the design process in an organization that is some 30,000 strong. (How many engineers does it take to design a car? Too many, in GM’s case; Barra sent 20 senior engineering execs packing, according to Automotive News.) At the same time, according to Barclays analyst Brian A. Johnson, she is re-establishing an engineering culture at GM.

What GM needs now is great products, not merely “not crappy” ones. GM has had its share of wins — think of the Chevy Silverado and Cruze — but its next task is to build cars that consumers crave — and pay full price for. GM’s incentive spending per car last month was $3,325, according to Barclays, 47% higher than last year.

The company line used to be: blame the Japanese, blame OPEC, blame insufficiently patriotic Americans, blame CAFE, blame pension burdens, blame the winds of fashion…all the while churning out unreliable, segment-trailing garbage. I’m absolutely tickled to see that the truth about GM cars of the past can not only be admitted at GM, but rewarded instead of being met with exile or execution. I hope everyone in leadership feels the same way she does. This is the GM we need.

stever

Re "2013 Projected Car Complaint Ratings", the problem there is that anyone can file a complaint at the NHTSA and call it a safety complaint. What we need to know is whether the compilers are throwing out the complaints about dead CD players or bad gas mileage.

One reason VWs scored poorly in 2012 was because of "interior hardware". Does that mean that the lettering wearing off a radio knob counts as a safety hazard or what? (usatoday.com)

uplanderguy

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
I mean, can you picture the head of BMW saying this out loud?

I don't think admitting things is necessarily a Teutonic trait. In the U.S. we are the greatest at giving everybody else much-wider berth than we give ourselves.

Mr_Shiftright

I think BMW's smashing success and GM's past failures rather puts that argument to rest. One would have to presume that all BMW buyers these last 30 years, and all the automakers who copied BMW styling and driving dynamics, are fools---this just doesn't seem likely to me.

Mr_Shiftright

@Stever@Edmunds said:
Re "2013 Projected Car Complaint Ratings", the problem there is that anyone can file a complaint at the NHTSA and call it a safety complaint. What we need to know is whether the compilers are throwing out the complaints about dead CD players or bad gas mileage.

One reason VWs scored poorly in 2012 was because of "interior hardware". Does that mean that the lettering wearing off a radio knob counts as a safety hazard or what? (usatoday.com)

It's simply not "hard enough" data for me to pay attention to. I'd like to see which automakers were forced to buy back the most lemons--because that would represent unresolved problems--which reflects lack of customer service.

circlew

Here's some data to pay attention to:

Investors in General Motors (GM) have suffered a lot this year–and it just keeps getting worse.

There’s been the worries about the discounts on General Motors trucks, its disappointing earnings and stinky sales. And no matter how hard the analysts try to explain it away, the bad news sent General Motors’ shares into a slump: Its dropped 14% this year, compared to a 3% dip in Ford Motor (F), a 5% decline in Toyota Motor (TM) and an 11% fall in Honda Motor (HMC).

And the news just keeps getting worse. Today, General Motors recalled nearly 780,000 cars from 2007 because a heavy key chain or a “jarring event” could cause the ignition to turn off, a problem that might have contributed to 22 crashes and six deaths.

Any wonder, then, that General Motors is leading auto stocks lower this morning? Shares of General Motors have dropped 1.8% to $34.92 at 10:58 a.m., while Ford has dipped 0.1% to $14.99, Toyota has fallen 1.5% to $115.83 and Honda Motor is off 1.3% at $36.73.

uplanderguy

As bad as that recall is in numbers (and it is bad, no doubt), it's one-third the number of cars recalled by Toyota this month. That's not spin, that's fact.

berri

Well, the new Chevy SS NASCAR pace car caught fire already

imidazol97

@uplanderguy said:
As bad as that recall is in numbers (and it is bad, no doubt), it's one-third the number of cars recalled by Toyota this month. That's not spin, that's fact.

The recall states it's wear from heavy things on the key ring wearing the moving parts. Long ago on my Ford, I learned to have one key ring with minimum other keys for the car. I actually carry two key rings with this car keys on them and other keys on one. I hook the end of the key set over the shifter lever on the column so it's not swinging while driving and wearing the parts inside the ignition lock.

In the recall notice I read, the warning is to remove the extra junk until the cylinder can be replaced.

uplanderguy

I believe it will be expanded to later years...just my guess. That part has been replaced (for free, post-bankrupcy believe-it-or-not! LOL) on both my '08 and '09, just as a precaution for the key not being stuck in the ignition.

On a recent board about this recall, someone posted that their '11 Taurus had this same issue as the recall. He says he just got rid of the car.

suydam

One more reason to love no key at all.

Mr_Shiftright

NHTSA offers a good analysis of what recalls do, and do not, mean:

_"The NHTSA cautioned that the numbers don’t factor in how many cars an automaker might sell in the U.S. annually, so the largest manufacturers tend to top the list each year. The agency also said its report is not an analysis on the overall quality of a particular car company.
Toyota and Honda models, for example, tend to top the recommended ratings in magazines such as Consumer Reports.
Recalls tend to vary by automaker based on how quickly a company might push new technology into its fleet, its tolerance of risk compared with other manufacturers and other factors, the NHTSA said.
“Recalls are not necessarily a bad thing. They can represent a manufacturer that is proactive about addressing a vehicle issue,” said Karl Brauer, an analyst with auto information company Kelley Blue Book.
Consumer-oriented ratings don’t just look at the design or functionality of a car, but also consider an owner’s experience, Brauer said.
“If there is a problem and it is not addressed after you purchase a car, you are going to be less happy than with a company that addresses the problem,” he said"
_

Mr_Shiftright

BINGO! Unaddressed problems damage a car company, not ones that are publicized and taken care of.

imidazol97

BINGO! Unaddressed problems damage a car company, not ones that are publicized and taken care of.

I heard a lemon law attorney advertisement about Volvo's and BMW's and a third brand having problems with oil use. Are there unaddressed problems with other companies here that haven't been admitted by the manufacturers? He was saying to keep all records for visits to dealer to use for a Lemon Law suit.

Mr_Shiftright

I'm sure there are many such problems that automakers hope will just 'go away" as the problematic cars age and the newer versions of it get engineering re-dos.

I have no idea when/why automakers decide to do a voluntary recall, when they dig their heels in and wait for the government to force them, or when they just put their fingers in their ears and go LALALALA until you go away.

I don't know what triggers these various actions but it's a fascinating thing to think about.

For instance, is THIS (below) one of those?

http://forums.edmunds.com/discussion/14979/chevrolet/traverse/chevy-traverse-stabilitrak-traction-control-problems#latest

Do 10 or so complaints in one forum constitute evidence of a defect, or is it random bad luck, isolated to only this one forum?

circlew

The "Big 3" put their fingers in their ears and went LALALALA until their customers went away and then went bankrupt. Hope they learned that doesn't work.

Love my push button start on the Optima SX....'Look Ma, no key ring!'.

greg128

@circlew said:

Any wonder, then, that General Motors is leading auto stocks lower this morning? Shares of General Motors have dropped 1.8% to $34.92 at 10:58 a.m., while Ford has dipped 0.1% to $14.99, Toyota has fallen 1.5% to $115.83 and Honda Motor is off 1.3% at $36.73.

Once again I feel compelled to bring to light some facts into the conversation.

Over the last 3 months to 1 year in fact GM stock has outperformed Honda & Toyota:

GM: 5 day: -0.44% 1 mo.: -8.7% 3 mo.: -7.3% 6 mo.: +4% 1 yr.: +29%

Toyota: 5 day: -1.9% 1 mo. -3.6% 3 mo.: -10% 6 mo.: -9.6% 1 yr.: +12%

Honda: 5 day: +0.55% 1 mo.: -8% 3mo.: -10.7% 6 mo.: -1.8% 1 yr.: -2%

uplanderguy

Talk about recall performance--Toyota was fined for their lack of response. What a short memory some posters have. Greg, good luck talking reason here....as Paul Simon says, "the man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest."

Mr_Shiftright

Toyota's recalls don't make GM's cars better. That's the kind of data a GM CEO should disregard.

uplanderguy

No, but in a discussion of recalls, huge Toyota recalls shouldn't be ignored. Why are they here?

Mr_Shiftright

Read my former post (just a quote--I didn't write it) about why recalls matter less than we think and what they actually do and don't mean. It's not what happens, it's what gets fixed that counts is the short answer.

tlong

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
Read my former post (just a quote--I didn't write it) about why recalls matter less than we think and what they actually do and don't mean. It's not what happens, it's what gets fixed that counts is the short answer.

MrShift, this is what some of us have been saying for a long time. Good to see some other support on the true meaning of recalls.

greg128

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
Read my former post (just a quote--I didn't write it) about why recalls matter less than we think and what they actually do and don't mean. It's not what happens, it's what gets fixed that counts is the short answer.

You probably mean like when 2005 & 2006 Toyota Tacoma owners with dangerously rusting frames have to resort to threatening to post on Toyota's official Facebook page to get them replaced like the 1995-2000 (buybacks) and 2001-2004 (Re-frames) Tacoma owners.

circlew

Just a reminder that long-term dependability trumps short-term blips:

**The quality of General Motors vehicles is getting better but consumers still tend to believe cars from Toyota and Honda are more reliable, according to independent research. And that’s a serious problem the Detroit maker is struggling to overcome, particularly along the East and West Coasts where GM lags well behind its import rivals.

Despite the success in winning third party endorsements for its quality, customers are still skeptical about the reliability and durability of GM products, GM still trails in the perception of the customers contacted through J.D. Power’s surveys, Lesnau cautioned.

The maker is also continuing to feel the impact of having taken a bailout to survive its 2009 bankruptcy. At the time, some political pundits went so far as to call for a boycott of what they dubbed “Government Motors.”**

uplanderguy

It's unfortunate, but people believe what they want to believe, and perception lags reality. Also, circlew confirms what I've believed that GM is still hurting from the bailout stigma.

tlong

@greg128 said:

Greg, Toyota has obviously made mistakes and I don't like them much for that very reason. How come you don't post anything about some of the GM mistakes over the years?

tlong

@uplanderguy said:
It's unfortunate, but people believe what they want to believe, and perception lags reality. Also, circlew confirms what I've believed that GM is still hurting from the bailout stigma.

Uplander, you are correct, but of course GM also had the benefit of a lag in perception when they had been a leader and then continued to sell huge numbers of vehicles even while the quality suffered. So they reaped the benefits in those years, and now pay the price even though their quality is way up now.

uplanderguy

tlong, as I've mentioned before, there are 50 posts here about GM errors for one about Toyota. Why rehash the same old stuff? One illustrious poster here was still talking about the 1971 (!) Chevy motor mount recall when all of Toyota's relatively recent recalls were happening. 1971!

I think we've all got to know, that's pretty ridiculous.

greg128

@tlong said:

How come you don't post anything about some of the GM mistakes over the years?

There is no shortage of those posters on this forum. Of course GM has made huge mistakes in the past but much of the criticism today is unfair to my mind. I think their products are competitive with any manufacturer and I find it unfortunate that many would not consider them at all. GroupThink says they are inferior to "pick your brand" In my experience they are at least as good and in many ways better. Whenever I experience the annoying high reving drone of a
Honda product at speed I understand why I like my GM vehicles and why they still sell very well. I for one like a nice smooth quiet ride.

stever

It's about time for an updated story/survey like this one about brand loyalty and repeat buyers from Polk, via the WSJ.

GM was right in the mix along with Toyota; Ford holds a pretty good lead over both for repeat owners. A lot of brands were unfortunately missing (Chrysler notably, but also Nissan).

Seems like repeat buyers would be a real good test of how competitive an automaker is, although the lag time in swapping cars can be long.

Also notable is how the Polk survey differs from an Experian one in 2012 as reported in Forbes. Cars With The Most Brand-Loyal Buyers

Mr_Shiftright

But.....what else would you expect consumers to believe when the CEO of GM says "no more crappy cars"? Either the CEO is lying or she just re-affirmed that consumers' perception as, in fact, a very unpleasant reality. Who better than she should know?

I don't think buyers give a darn about "bailouts" from 5 years ago (can Americans even remember where they were 5 years ago?) and if Tesla stock is any indication, nor do they care about how many recalls a company has had.

What the CEO of GM should have said, IMO, is "no more crappy service".

tlong

@uplanderguy said:
tlong, as I've mentioned before, there are 50 posts here about GM errors for one about Toyota. Why rehash the same old stuff? One illustrious poster here was still talking about the 1971 (!) Chevy motor mount recall when all of Toyota's relatively recent recalls were happening. 1971!

I think we've all got to know, that's pretty ridiculous.

I'd say you are mostly correct; however one reason it is still important as it was the start of a set of behaviors that lasted pretty much through bankruptcy - when a company has mediocrity (or worse) in its DNA, always criticizing the competitors and making excuses for its own sorry products, then citing that old history is relevant if it shows part of a pattern that might still exist.

I do agree that GM has substantially gone past those events, and clearly an issue in the 70's isn't going to be particularly relevant today. What's important in say, the last 5-10 years is whether the vehicles are better/competitive, and whether the 5-10 year old vehicles are aging better than in the past. For those of us who drive our vehicles long miles (>100K), that becomes really important. Not so important if you're changing cars every 3 years or so.

tlong

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
But.....what else would you expect consumers to believe when the CEO of GM says "no more crappy cars"? Either the CEO is lying or she just re-affirmed that consumers' perception as, in fact, a very unpleasant reality. Who better than she should know?

I don't think buyers give a darn about "bailouts" from 5 years ago (can Americans even remember where they were 5 years ago?) and if Tesla stock is any indication, nor do they care about how many recalls a company has had.

What the CEO of GM should have said, IMO, is "no more crappy service".

Service is certainly important, but I think it's a bit different than say, Apple. For a car, you can go to another dealer or even to an independent mechanic. The cost of the product is also a lot higher. So relatively speaking, service is somewhat less important, and the actual product is somewhat more important. The consequences of a bad product can cost much more time and money with a car than with an iPod or computer.

The only brand that I really perceive as having significant service issues is VW - their dealer service has a poor reputation. For other makes, the only other service-related stereotypes I have is that if it's German, it's going to be really expensive. But I don't perceive that their service is worse (with the VW exception). For other mainstream makes, I don't have sense that say, Honda is better than Ford, or GM is better than Toyota, etc. I fell the differences in service are more a reflection of the individual dealers than the brand itself. That's why I feel, for cars, that "no more crappy products" is more important than service.

stickguy

The CEO (so company) has control over making a better product, but service is primarily at the dealer level, and that they have a lot less control over. But, at least if you don't like your dealer, you can always go to another one.

based on my unscientific research today (I went to the car show), the newest GM products are major improvements, at least stylistically and interiors, over the outgoing models (Malibu, Impala). Can't speak to driving experience, but they seem to be well designed and screwed together. That of course will bear itself out over time. But it is a start.

Chrysler (the new 200) looks to be on the same path, from what I could see of the concept on display. Fiats, those were horrible.

uplanderguy

Tlong, you might find it surprising that I have driven three GM entry-level products more than 100K miles, one other for 93K, and one other for 94K. All were reliable and inexpensive to maintain...with initial purchase costs low. Excellent dealer service. And none of the cars were worn-out at the time of trade. I'm not much of a "perception" person...thankfully. I think buying expensive new cars is foolish, but that's MHO only. I'd much-rather spend money on a collector car.

imidazol97

@tlong said: I'd say you are mostly correct; however one reason it is still important as it was the start of a set of behaviors that lasted pretty much through bankruptcy - when a company has mediocrity (or worse) in its DNA, always criticizing the competitors and making excuses for its own sorry products, then citing that old history is relevant if it shows part of a pattern that might still exist.

Nor do GM's recalls or long ago problems don't make the other vehicles better.
To cite Mr.Shift:

@MrShift@Edmunds said:
Toyota's recalls don't make GM's cars better. That's the kind of data a GM CEO should disregard.

Nor does continual rehashing of old history by some about GM's problems make the 'perfect' set of vehicles better.

• Talking about the past as "when a company has mediocrity in its DNA" doesn't make the "perfect" set of vehicles better.

• Talking about others "always criticizing the competitors and making excuses for their own sorry products... "(See Note 1) doesn't make the "perfect" set of vehicles any better.

It sounds like a whining vindictive wife sitting in marriage counseling pointing fingers at her husband for being the problem in their household because it's in his DNA, so she can harass him more over some perceived problem in her mind.

Note 1. Start listing all the complaints by owners about various problems with many other brands from VCM, oil use, transmissions not covered under warranty by Honda in Odysseys, oil sludge history, anomalous unintended idiopathic acceleration not explained by the floor mats and accelerator potentiometers, and many other failures overlooked by the owners who consider a fix under warranty in some cases meaning the transmission problems never occurred. Oh, and how are the CVT's doing? I just read about Nissan's problems. And I don't even start with the Germans and the Koreans.

Mr_Shiftright

Here's another market trend where I think Ford has the jump on GM:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/02/16/ford-world-suv-shift-from-cars/5497343/

imidazol97

That means the Envoy is right on task. The Equinox is smaller than some suv's.

Mr_Shiftright

you mean the Encore? Not bad. The Escape has more gizmos and a better engine, but Ford reliability in this model has been less than stellar. The Cherokee seems to be everyone's favorite in this class of compact SUVs, but reliability ratings are just awful.

suydam

Not the Subaru Forester or RAV4? I see a lot of those my way and I live in the Midwest.

stickguy

The rav4 is kind of a mess IMO. But the Forester, that is really well done. Was checking it out at the car show, and nice job on the latest version.

tlong

@uplanderguy said:
Tlong, you might find it surprising that I have driven three GM entry-level products more than 100K miles, one other for 93K, and one other for 94K. All were reliable and inexpensive to maintain...with initial purchase costs low. Excellent dealer service. And none of the cars were worn-out at the time of trade. I'm not much of a "perception" person...thankfully. I think buying expensive new cars is foolish, but that's MHO only. I'd much-rather spend money on a collector car.

Uplander, it's great that you've had such good experiences.

Yes, it is definitely more cost effective to buy used. It's really down to how much disposable income a person has, and how important that newer car experience is to any given person.

I think that when we talk about reliability, cars these days are all pretty darn good. If one make has say, 10% big issues (say, engine/tranny/other $$$) and another make has 5% big issues, then of course even people who buy the first make will mostly feel they had really reliable cars. It really boils down to the statistics - while buyer of car A will usually say they had good cars, there would still be twice as many people out there ranting about how car A or brand A sucks, versus car/brand B. So for word-of-mouth, the percentages would be important, even if most people have good experiences.

tlong

@imidazol97 said:

Hi Imid,

I can't really follow the first part of your post there. I know it made sense to you!
We can agree to disagree. Again, your opinion and mine really won't matter in the big scheme of things. It's what the public perceives, which is of supreme importance to any manufacturer. Some combination of product, dealers, advertising, and word of mouth will mix together to create the reality that society "knows" about all of these brands...

Mr_Shiftright

I think the credibility of the reporting sources matters more in buyers' decisions than the amount of noise generated pro or con by the reporting sources. We see this same phenomenon in news reporting. The news sources with the biggest audiences are not by any means the most credible. When CR slams a car, or praises one, that hurts or helps a lot more than when USA Today does IMO.

uplanderguy

I buy new, except have bought used for my two daughters' cars. I just don't buy expensive new cars.