Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
General Motors discussions
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Exactly my point as to why many Japanese (as well as British) wouldn't consider them in the first place. However, if it's tough to set up the dealer network to sell one there, they aren't being offered the opportunity to even SHOP for one.
If they can't shop for one, how would GM get any feedback as to their likes/dislikes about the auto.
GM has owned Holden for many years. Holdens are LHD. does Holden have a dealer network in Japan??
You really need to understand what is needed for a scientific statistical analysis of a problem.
I'm not sure why people on this board can't understand this. Statistics 101 will tell you that in order for a survey to be meaningful, it must be conducted using a random sampling. CR does not conduct random sampling. JD Powers does. Ignorance is bliss I guess.
The only way I would consider CR legitimate is if ALL their income was derived by grants and donations from companies they do not rate products from. Otherwise their integrity is suspect.
The 3 trucks I've had get 17 mpg with V8(silv ext cab 4x4), get 25 mpg with V6 (Sonoma ext cab 2wd) and got 20 mpg with i4 (S-10 reg cab 2wd). That's why I never dismiss a larger engine for mileage reasons. I have heard of i4 S-10's getting 27 mpg but mine never reached 21. Every review I read said my 3.8L would get 23 mpg at most, but I bought it anyway and average 27.5 in mixed driving. Another reason not to get too picky about whether EPA is 30 or 34 or take anybody's rating as what I will get.
It takes 285 weeks at $3.50 a week of gas savings from 4 more mpg to make up for a $1000 rebate. That's a long time.
Our gas price fluctuates a lot. For the Indy 500 it got up to $3.55 for a month. A couple weeks ago it was 2.49 on E.side. Today is 2.66.
Why doesn't CR just open their sampling to all people, and not just subscribers???
The could study the sales and trends of cars that are sold in Japan, just like everyone else. Ford manages to sell (a few) Explorers in Japan, and even does special JDM-only models. Some of the smallest Opels have been sold in Japan through Subaru and Suzuki dealers in past years.
GM has owned Holden for many years. Holdens are LHD. does Holden have a dealer network in Japan??
Until a few years ago, Holden didn't have any meaningful export business outside of New Zealand and South Africa. That's changing now, and I would imagine that the specialty dealers who sell CTSes in Japan also offer the big RWD Holdens to those who are wealthy enough to afford them.
You can never get 1,000,000 people to agree on anything.
It was the bottom line. So for now, no GM, unless I get some money some day to get a used Vette -- like the those C5 gen. looks wise - have yet to test drive one.
Loren
You can never get 1,000,000 people to agree on anything.
Sorry, that's not a random sample. This is not about getting people to agree on anything, its about proper survey methods that will yield meaningful results.
I'm not sure why you put CR in such high regard.
link title
link title
Results? Buick just joined Lexus at the top of JD Powers 3 year dependibility study. While doing that they also got a recommended buy from a "top consumer publication".
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gm- news/viewpressreldetail.do?domain=2&docid=38378
Buick Century/Regal also bested all midsize cars including Camry/Accord
Midsize ratings
http://www.jdpower.com/util/ratings/results.aspx?study_id=215&vertical=Autos&v1=- Midsize%20Car
Some amazing bits of info in the midsize chart. Nissan Altima is really bad. As is the Intrepid and mazda 6.
Camry and Accord have exactly the same score. average of 4 dots. Century/ Regal have average of 5 dots
That's right. But, you also cannot know how good 2007 GM vehicles are compared to Honda and Toyota when all will be 3,4,5,6, etc years old. You have to wait and see what the data will show in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, etc. "
no you dont. CR rates cars starting after the first year based on user responses. If a 2007 camry gets a good rating and you believe that its reliable based on that there is no reason to disregard the results if a domestic does well after its first model year. Year one reliability isnt a guarantee that the car will be reliable in 10 years no matter what the brand.
Again, why are you spending so much time talking about 1997 MY vehicles? I thought we were discussing the quality and competence of today's vehicles. 10 years ago I would be inclined to believe that domestic cars werent as good as imports and if you look at the lack of domestics CR recommended back then it would confirm that. Today however CR recommends lots of domestic vehicles, especially Fords. The main problem with CR ratings now is that they typically rank domestic cars 15-20 points lower than ANY import (including the newer Hyundais) so even though their quality is OK the cars still look bad in CR's overall ratings. Who is going to buy a reliable car with a 65 road test score when the average Toyota scores 90 points? CR makes sure that no one gets the impression that domestic cars are approaching import cars, even if quality is largely similar. CR says "sure you could get a reliable domestic, but why buy a crappy reliable car when you could buy a perfect Toyota or Honda".
The other thing about CR is that price isnt even a factor in their rankings. What kind of consumer magazine doesnt consider price when ranking a product? Its insane, as are people who blindly defend CR.
Then again since your opinion is not relevant to the current GM offensive since you'll buy them no matter what, the point is moot. "
My bad, GM cars are still cheaper on average. You are wrong either way and you havent given us any reason to believe otherwise. Saying things like "the enclave isnt a luxury SUV so it doesnt compare to the RX350" isnt going to cut it. When in doubt (or wrong), always make up excuses.
You can never get 1,000,000 people to agree on anything. "
you need to look up random in the dictionary. Your statement is 100% incorrect. CR is largely polling the same people over and over again and most of those people drive the cars CR recommends. I cant think of any import lovers that do not quote CR as soon as the issue of auto quality comes up. CR is the #1 enemy as far as the Big 3 can be concerned. People with imports will ignore problems they've had or their friends/family have had if CR says otherwise. I know of too many import car problems to believe CR's results. bAsically, according to CR no Honda or Toyota products have problems- ever. That is BS. Just read some of the comments on the camry in the consumer ratings section here at Edmunds. amazingly the 2007 camry came out of CR's survey with flying colors. You mean to tell me no CR readers had a camry with a bad tranny or any of the other problems?
Also, how can the Sable be more reliable than a Taurus?
How can the Mazda 6 be rated two stars when it has basically the same powertrain as a Taurus (duratec) and Fusion (in other studies I've seen) which are generally rated good. Granted, we don't know which engines the survey is based on, I guess we'd have to assume all powertrain packages are in the results.
Bottom line, I'd take a two star Altima over a 5 star Century/Regal all day long, even if I had to push it to get fixed occasionally. There is a reason why the Century/Regal ave been replaced.
I checked out those links posted earlier and they really spell out some interesting stuff about CR. I didnt know they had been sued so many times for misrepresenting products. I wish GM would sue them.
How can the Mazda 6 be rated two stars when it has basically the same powertrain as a Taurus (duratec) and Fusion (in other studies I've seen) which are generally rated good. Granted, we don't know which engines the survey is based on, I guess we'd have to assume all powertrain packages are in the results.
Bottom line, I'd take a two star Altima over a 5 star Century/Regal all day long, even if I had to push it to get fixed occasionally. There is a reason why the Century/Regal ave been replaced. "
Stop making excuses. JD Power gets random results and list problems per 100 vehicles. CR doesnt do either.
The 6 is not the same as the Taurus, they only share an engine. They arent on the same platform. What are you talking about?
The century/regal were replaced by the Lacrosse and if I'm not mistaken CR (which you trust I'm sure) ranks the Lacrosse as better than average in reliability. The fact that the century isnt made any more doesnt mean JD POwer's results arent valid. In addition the current W platform cars share many components with the reliable Regal/Century.
Advanced VW powertrains? Are you serious? The Passat referenced in those results had a iron block 190hp V6. Hardly cutting edge, in fact it was one of the weakest V6s on the market. The current Malibu was making 200 when it came out in 2003.
please explain how you can reject JD power results when people here have clearly explained the benefits of their testing methods vs CR? Basically you are saying you will disregard them because you dont like what they are saying.
YOu are not understanding, this is not initial quality- its quality after 3 years. The century was being made in 2004.
I've never used CU as a sole reason to purchase a product. But, over the years I've owned a lot of vehicles and the areas I've had issues with matched up with CUs ratings. Good and bad. Except, for the trans in my Suburban. CU gives it a 1/2 red and mine died at 45k.
Regardless, I don't think CU has anything to do with what's right and wrong with GM. No doubt GM is on a better path. The new vehicles (except for a few) are huge improvements. The key is, can GM keep the product fresh. They can't let the latest offerings grow old on the vine for the next 5 years.
I was only talking about the powertrains. The Taurus and 6 shared the duratec (the 6 was tuned a little different). I just found it odd that they'd be so different.
Advanced VW powertrains? Are you serious? The Passat referenced in those results had a iron block 190hp V6. Hardly cutting edge, in fact it was one of the weakest V6s on the market. The current Malibu was making 200 when it came out in 2003.
How do you know the results aren't based on the 1.8 20v Turbo 4cyl in the passat. Certainly, you'd agree its more advanced than the 4cyl or pushrod v6 in the Malibu. Even the 2.8 narrow angle v6 in the Passat is still a more advanced design. My point more than anything is everyone bashes VW's reliability and JD showed that the Passat was avg overall and in the powertrain area.
please explain how you can reject JD power results when people here have clearly explained the benefits of their testing methods vs CR? Basically you are saying you will disregard them because you dont like what they are saying.
If you read what I said (god you like to put words in peoples mouths) was I don't put much stock in either CU's or JDs reports.
And if you do some footwork, you can still find a Century or Regal at your Buick dealer (though GM wishes that weren't so). :P
So, as sample size increases, then confidence levels go up?
The graph is found near the bottom of the press release - click to get a bigger version. What it says is that for model year 2004, Buick tied Lexus for best. Cadillac is third.
Wonder to what extent Japanese American citizens purchase GM vs Japanese brands.
I have seen the CR questionaire regarding autos and there were no questions in it asking whether or not you believed in their methods. It would be interesting to analyze and compare the questions/questionaires of both Consumer Reports and JD Power. How are they similar and what are the differences.
For example. Searay and Bayliner only use Mercruiser. Searay got a 4 and Bayliner a 2. Makes no since to me, and would be useless. You can't tell me, the Mercruiser in a Bayliner is less reliable than the one in a Searay, when Mercruiser owns both Searay and Bayliner and the engines are all GM. The only difference can be the type of mercruiser drive. Which, my first hand knowledge tells me they are all decently reliable.
So the difference has to be the poeple doing the reporting. I.E. the end user. Two diffent groups of people (Searay owners are more educated and higher earners than those of Bayliner) reporting on basically the same thing have completely different results.
Ironically, the more expensive the boat line the higher scores they earned in the engine category. The engines are all the same. Interesting. I guess their is no way to get an unbiased result when asking the owners about a product.
Don't know, but I had a Chineese and a Korean roomate in college, they both drove chevys.
The Consumer Reports results may also be showing the differences in care that their subscribers give to various makes.
But, is sample that CR gets "representative"? Think that your point would be valid if Consumer Reports was a Car and Driver or Road and Track type magazine. That is, its subsribers and readers were a universe of "only" auto enthusiasts. But, that is not the case.
The universe of CR readers is "consumers" across all states in the US (don't know if they send questionaires to foreign country subcribers). And, while that universe would include auto enthusiasts, its mostly average people that are merely interested in learning about and making informed decisions about buying products. Do not think that vast majority of CR readers have any agendas.
With diversity of subscribers across States of the US, sample is representative of total population.
That is a valid point. In my experience Bayliners are not as well cared for as a higher end boat.
Interestingly (whether true or not I can't verify), my sister's ex boyfriend had been a service manager at a Lexus dealership and at a Cadillac dealership. He told me that Lexus owner's rarely batted an eye at recommended services where Cadillac owners often would try to put things off or avoid them all together until something broke.
top ratings for GM:
Buick Lucerne V8 (but not the DTS)
Chevrolet Malibu 4-cyl
Some at GM may have issues with CR but they are not the enemy. GM engineers work with CR to improve their products. About 8 years ago GM picked the JD Power database to be their source for quality/reliability data to score their products. As can be now seen they did very well for most of their products that are new since that time and all are improving per the JD Power numbers. The range of problems per hundred are getting tighter and tighter. Number 1 in a segment is not a great distance from number 5, they are grouping together. If you are an OEM you can get the actual quantitative score and individual problem data from JD Power, that is why they did not pick CR.
This is 3 year old data so you have to look at 3 year old vehicles. I guess you could say that car is not sold new anymore but you can pretty much say that for most vehicles since the lifecyle is 5-6 years now. You could do what CR does and just assume that a new model will have the same reliability as the previous model. And, in most cases that is a correct assumption. The LaCrosse is at the top for initial quality and therefore should be at the top for long term reliability.
Also, how can the Sable be more reliable than a Taurus?
How can a LaCrosse have better quality than a Grand Prix (actually they are very close)?
The quantitative data is given to the OEM's. You can disregard the data if you like. If you feel 3 is just as good as 2 dots you are probably right. Not much difference in reliability anymore.
Every mfr has a huge potential amount of data about part and system failures, problems, defects of various types. That is the service departments of their dealer networks. Would hope that GM, as well as other mfrs, have methods and systems in place to fully exploit this information. This type of info is "specific" and actionable if analyzed for failure modes, corrective actions and need to make improvements.
The bottomline is, if I like the car/truck, I'm going to buy it regardless of the ratings from JD/CU. The only thing I find pretty usefull from CU is the road test info for fuel economy etc. It seems to me anyway, they use a consistent road course to determine fuel economy. My results have been about the same as CUs reports.
I don't doubt that JD can give better quatitative data to the OEMs, but it looks to me that CU can give a wider range of info (performance numbers etc) to me, the end user. Whether it is relevant or can be relied upon or not will endlessly be debated.
I would say bingo. It is hard to be unbiased. If you love something it is hard to say something bad about it. If you hate something you can find all kinds of dirt to kick up.
As I have said many times, the data shows that reliability should no longer be a huge factor in purchasing decisions. Sure, lexus/Buick (the best) are twice as reliable as Saab/VW(at the bottom) (1.5 vs.3) but it still is only about 2-3 problems in 3 years no matter what you buy.
This is probably true. I used to have a '98 Ford SVT Contour that I absolutely loved. It gave me nothing but problems but I just loved everything about the car. How is sounded, felt, the ride, acceleration, braking, etc. It was a fun car to drive. I haven't had anything like it since. As far a reliability it was horrible. But I was still satisfied with the car.
True for vehicles under warranty but that used to be 3 years. Also nowadays most of the problems (as reported by CR and JD) never see the dealership or service stations. They bother the owner but not enough to go to the dealer. On my Envoy the side panel on my seat is loose because I sat on the edge of the seat hard. It pretty much looks OK but I would not bother to take it in just for that problem. But I would check the box if it was sent in.
I spent a lot of time going over the JD data and we really went after the issues to resolve them. That is why about 6 years ago the Century bested the Accord/Camry for IQS. The warranty data gave good info but nowhere near the data JD supplied. Of course the CR data was next to worthless for problem identification.
An awful lot of truth there for all of us. I am sure that if they were able to disguise a fleet of cars so that you really didn't know what make and model any of them were and had you rate them on how you liked them that there would be a lot of surprises in there.
We all have prejudices that are based on perceptions we had at one point or another. They may or may not be currently relevant but we make our decisions on them all the time.
Makes a lot of the posts in here silly but we're having fun so what the heck...
1487 Where did you get your data from on the 07 Camry reliability rating in Consumer Reports? The 4 cyl Camry was only rated average reliability whereas the V6 Camry was rated above average in reliability and the Ford Fusion/Mecury Milan was rated higher(excellent reliability)than the 07 Camry in reliabiality so so much for the bias that you are talking about.
You mean excuses like that's not a big difference in my book or I don't consider a bad ABS module a big deal? Get real. You're ridiculous.
I'm just glad that as an import fanboy (at 39 years old) that my opinion is so much more important the the current offensive.
Loren
I would never buy a German Car I mean VW's are nice when you sit in them but you after you drive them for 50K they start to fall apart.I don't trust a German Car over the long haul.
"American cars today are as reliable as "reliable" Japanses cars of a few years back but CR moves the bar up each year so that the same low problem rate that got you a red circle 10 years ago gets your a clear circle now."
Well maybe because the bar keeps on moving up.
CR'a reliability ratings for 04 Century, 04 Accord(V6) and 04 Camry(V6.)
Century: above average reliability
Accord(V6):Execellent reliability
Camry(V6): excellent reliability
So, the reliability between those 3 cars is pretty close in CR.
"Some amazing bits of info in the midsize chart. Nissan Altima is really bad. As is the Intrepid and mazda 6."
Yeah but the 04 model Altima had a shortened 04 model year because the 05 mid-cycle refreshed Altima's came out in March 04 I think. Still CR ranks the 04 Altima(4cyl) average in reliability for the 04 model year and the V6 04 model above average in reliability as opposed to JD's mediorce reliability rating of the 04 Altima.
The 04 Mazda 6(the 4 cyl only listed in their charts) had an average reliability rating.
The 04 Intrepid got an average reliability rating in CR.