Frday discussion: New car reviews, JD Power, etc

[notfarnow]

Over on a local arts & music forum, a guy was asking for advice about buying a new car. Many chimed in to talk about their experiences, and I tried to offer helpful advice.

In the ongoing conversation, I noticed that many people go to resources like Consumer Reports for advice on buying cars, and take those reviews seriously.


I’ve always felt that Consumer Reports (and other similar publications’) reviews are great for things like microwaves and electric toothbrushes, but they fall flat on their faces when it comes to reviewing cars. They seem to approach buying a car the same way they approach buying a toaster: as though it’s just another consumer product that we cycle every 5 years. In fairness, that really is how many people buy and own cars… what’s the average time people keep a new car? Something like seven years, if I recall correctly. So for those buyers who lease/buy a new car every few years, maybe these reviews are ideal.

But what about the people who want to own a car for 10+ years? I think these reviews can really lead them astray.

Here’s an example that was posted in the thread that sparked my observations:

(Ratings: Predicted Reliability, Owner Satisfaction, Accident Avoidance, Crash Protection, and Overall MPG)

Right off the bat, I’m surprised to see the Kia rank so much higher than the Yaris. (It’s even more expensive!) In all sections except “accident avoidance” and fuel mileage, the Kia is rated as “N/A”. Now, many of you know what a stellar record CR has with testing “accident avoidance”. Both Suzuki and Isuzu successfully sued them for false statements, and I vaguely recall something similar with the Dodge Omni. But I digress. With these two lone ratings, the Kia scores better than the Yaris.

To me, this is baffling. It seems to me like all the categories are equally weighted. This means things like options and “owner satisfaction” (whatever that means) could allow a car like the like a Kia Rio (which is… well, crappy) to get a better review than a Yaris (which is… well, a Toyota). As “car guys”, if someone wanted to buy a car to keep for 10+ years, would you recommend a Kia Rio over a Toyota Corrola? I don’t think so. Our common experience tells us that the Kia is a piece of crap that’ll probably be fine for 5 years but will live day-by-day after that. The Toyota will live for as long as you keep the rust worm away, provided you give it a fresh timing belt every few years. To that end, it would seem that quality and reliability should trump options… and perhaps even mpg and purchase price.

But then where do car buyers get info about quality? JD Powers Initial Quality surveys?


I actually like seeing these surveys, mostly because I have some nasty biases they reinforce. That aside, I’m not sure how useful they are. For one thing, by rating the manufacturers instead of the individual models, it doesn’t arm consumers with any information that is directly related to a particular car they’re interested in. Furthermore, this meas that if a manufacturer has some niggly issues with a new model, it can affect their overall rating. Look at Mazda. What did they do wrong in ’07… put a bad makeup mirror in all the Miatas?

In the Initial Quality survey, the cars are surveyed over their first 90 days. What are people going back to the dealer for in the first 90 days? I’d imagine it’s niggly issues like fit & finish, electrical gremlins (*cough* VW) and figuring out the radio presets. I guess it gives an indication of how the cars are screwed together, but it’s not like it will predict whether a model will be prone to projectile committing its transmission at 100k.

Furthermore, if there ARE serious issues in those first 90 days, are they all considered equal in these surveys? If a stops in after work for a headlight bulb, is it counted the same as a car that comes in on a flatbed with its pistons hanging out the oilpan?

Anyway, sorry for the long post. I’ve always found this stuff interesting and I’m curious to know what you guys think about this stuff.

If I was going to put it as a question, I guess it would be this:

Do you think there are GOOD surveys or reviews out there? If a family member or friend was looking to buy a new car, and asked you for some helpful resources, what would you recommend?

[onewhippedpuppy]

It's a very interesting topic. I've read that the biggest fallacy in these surveys is that they report the occurances, not the severity of complaints. So a loose panel in your Honda ranks the same as a broken transmission in your Chevy. Also, it doesn't take into account consumer expectations. Do you have the same standards for a $15k Chevy Aveo as you do a $60k BMW 5-series? Of course not. The more expensive the car, the more likely you are to expect perfection and nitpick small issues. Where as the Aveo owner might just ignore the small rattle in his dash.

My favorite way to find out about cars is simple consumer reviews. Not just a survey, but a written review with numerical rankings. You can read through them, key on the low ones, and see exactly why the consumer rated it as they did. It's also a great way to spot failure trends. Edmunds is great for this, there's normally a large number of consumer reviews for most cars.

[HardDrive]

I don't see how the severity of the complaint is relevant.

For a new car under warranty, an engine light or a blown transmission translate into the same thing for the consumer: wasted time and a trip to the dealer.

The expectations issue, however, is quite valid. There is no question that part of the reason Mercedes took such a beating in recent years was the lofty expectation people had of the car. A rattle in Kia has less of an impact than a rattle in $60,000 MB.

[teenerted1]

i love the coment "brakes without ABS, ABS option hard to find"

if you dont have ABS i think the option would be IMPOSIBLE to find?

[notfarnow]

Originally Posted by HardDrive

I don't see how the severity of the complaint is relevant.
For a new car under warranty, an engine light or a blow transmission translate into the same thing for the consumer: wasted time and a trip to the dealer.

The expectations issue, however, is quite valid. There is no question that part of the reason Mercedes took such a beating in recent years was the lofty expectation people had of the car. A rattle in Kia has less of an impact than a rattle in $60,000 MB.

I have an obnoxious rattle in my e300d right now, so I can't argue with that.

However, what I'm saying is that for someone who wants to keep a car for 10 years, it IS important to know whether the problems are rattles from loose trim, or mechanical failures. If you're using the surveys to get a sense of what to expect long-term, their value is questionable.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally Posted by HardDrive

I don't see how the severity of the complaint is relevant.

My wife's Cadillac SRX has a clunky transfer case, due to the early models having too much gear lash. Crappy local dealers won't fix it because the car still drives, and there isn't a TSB. I'm getting rid of the SRX because it's an annoying trait, and I'm concerned that the transfer case might eventually grenade. Other reasons as well.

If I had taken it in for a rattle, Consumer Reports or JD Power would catalog it as an unscheduled repair, same as this. But to me, it's a BIG difference. Right now, 10 rattles = 10 transmissions. It should be weighted based on severity.

[silverc4s]

One survey that might be useful is that of 2 to 4 year old models available as used vehicles. I find that the most desireable new cars are also next to impossible to pick up as good used cars, as owners tend to hang onto them till 100K + miles, a crash, or some other undesireable event takes place...