Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

An Open Letter To Chrysler About It's Reputation



  • Just make up a story?

    Nobody ever does that on Edmunds.

    Would they?
  • I bought nothing but Chrysler from 89 to 98. I now own GM. There are three main reasons I switched to GM:
    1. 97 Neon - Very poor quality
    2. Chrysler customer service has the "we have your money so don't bother us" attitude.
    3. I want to buy from an American company right now.
    I am very happy with my GM products. It is just too bad that the loss of one person's business will not hurt Chrysler. Looking at the numbers, I must not be the only one.
  • mopar67mopar67 Posts: 728
    1. How can Consumer Reports rate a 1990 Dodge Spirit V-6 ( a Mitsubishi v-6) "better than average" in both body hardware and integrity while rating the same 1990 Dodge Spirit 4 cyl (a chrysler engine) as merely "average" in the same categories? Both these cars came down the same assembly line, same paint, same hardware, same assembly workers. DO v-6 owners stay off gravel roads? Do 4 cycl owners hit the RR tracks at speeds higher 35 mph? How can one take their "reliability" ratings seriously when you have such a descrepancy as that on virtually the SAME vehicle? Source: 1992 Buying Guide Issue page 174, available at your local library.

    2. Detroit brings out a totally new design, CR tests it, and says in the reliability projection, "no data, new model" Toyota brings out the Tundra, a totally new vehicle and says reliabilty, like OTHER Toyotas, will be "better than average"? Is CR clairvoyant on Japanese made vehicles? Are they so sure of what MIGHT happen to the Tundra in terms of reliability?

    3. I have seen the CR "reliability" survey. Pray tell, give me a pure 100% ironclad definition of "serious" problem with say, the engine. Define for me what consitutes a "serious" problem with body hardware or integrity. (these are CR categories by the way)
    You ask 100 people with the same vehicle, same problem, and at least half will say "serious" half will say, "not serious" In other words, CR is letting the survey takers, (statistical sample?) DEFINE WHAT IS SERIOUS AND WHAT ISN'T.

    4. CR gets responses from an uncontrolled environment, then "standardizes" the data to "reflect differences between models and age" What exactly does this mean? Have they ever shared those definitions with the readers?

    5. CR tallys approximately 900,000+ questionaires, yet nearly 17 million vehicles were sold in calendar year 2000. Do the math, does that represent a fair sampling of all the vehicles sold in any given year?

    Let me know.
This discussion has been closed.