Buick quality up--again--and beats Toyota!

[Reatta Man]

From the story on www.thecarconnection.com:

<span style="font-weight: bold">Power: Initial Quality All-Time High</span>

2004 J.D. Power survey: pleasant surprises ? and unexpected disappointments.

New car quality has hit an all-time high, with all but a handful of manufacturers making significant gains in the 2004 J.D. Power Initial Quality Survey.

The oft-quoted annual report, released today, delivers some unexpected surprises, showing how difficult it's become for any carmaker to dominate the quality charts anymore. Undoubtedly the biggest shocker comes from Korea. Long the industry laggard, Hyundai has soared past the traditional quality leader, Toyota. <span style="font-weight: bold">And even the Japanese automaker's premium brand is now getting some stiff competition - from Buick.</span>

<span style="font-weight: bold">What went wrong, Japan?</span>

The IQS is a measure of what can be called "things gone wrong." That can include major problems, such as a blown engine, as well as more minor matters, including poorly placed cupholders. The survey counts up the number of problems participating owners experienced during the first 90 days of ownership, grouping them into nine separate categories. The final figure is calculated in terms of problems per 100 vehicles, or PP100s. Like golf, this contest goes to the lowest score.

Yet the Japanese do not dominate like they have in the past. Some key manufacturers tumbled. Nissan slipped 11 percent, driving it down to the lower tier of the 36 manufacturers Power ranked. Then there's Toyota, the company that first taught the industry the concept of initial quality. In the 2003 survey, the flagship Toyota brand actually suffered a seven-percent decline. It recovers in 2004, its initial quality gaining 14 percent, to 104 problems per 100 vehicles. (NOTE BUICK'S SCORE OF 100 PROBLEMS PER CAR LISTED BELOW--JOE)

Luxury makers regularly outscore mainstream brands, as one might expect. With a score of 87 this year, Lexus has again proven the brand to beat on the IQS, but several of its competitors are edging closer. Cadillac delivers a count of 93 problems per 100. And with several specific products, another General Motors division nudges even closer to Lexus territory. <span style="font-weight: bold">The Buick Century, which Walters described as "one of the best models in the industry," comes in with 63 PP100.</span>

<span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">2004 IQS Results:</span></span>

Lexus 87

Cadillac 93

Jaguar 98

Honda 99

<span style="font-weight: bold">Buick 100</span>

Mercury 100

Hyundai 102

Infiniti 104

Toyota 104

Mercedes-Benz 106

Audi 109

BMW 109

Oldsmobile 110

Volvo 113

Acura 117

Chevrolet 119

<span style="font-weight: bold">IND. AVERAGE 119</span>

Chrysler 120

Dodge 121

Lincoln 121

Pontiac 122

Subaru 123

Cheers to the Tri-shiled fans and owners!

[Centurion]

Reatta Man, this is very good news. Yes, J.D. Powers sells its survey results for advertising purposes, so it has been suggested that there is a potential for bias. (Lexus seems to utilize the survey results consistently in its advertising; I do not recall that other manufacturers do so.) Still, the results are consistent overall with other industry surveys.

This report follows closely on the heels of the J.D. Powers long-term dependability survey, which tracks reliability data for models that are three years old. Here is the ranking of the top 5 nameplates:

1) Lexus

2) Buick

3) Infiniti

4) Lincoln

5) Cadillac

Here is a link to the complete survey results. Other forums that focus on new and upcoming cars are railing about the way in which the press presents the story to emphasize Toyota and Honda quality. Many of the articles do not show the performance of the individual nameplates.

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Savinganddebt/Saveonacar/P87322.asp?GT1=3584

Obviously, the above results are great news for Buick. And very bad news for Mercedes-Benz, which has been ranking poorly in both Consumer Reports and J.D. Powers surveys. This survey shows that M-B reliability is on par with its beleagured Mitsubishi unit!

[Reatta Man]

I started seeing Mercedes slip in quality with their new SUV they were making in the state, in North Carolina, I think. At first, I just attributed it to start-up problems similar to any new model.

Since then, they have put a LOT of money into Chrysler, and in some ways it is showing, even though there are TONS of problems with the new 300. However, this survey seems to suggest that the M-B problems are not just a blip, but more of a long term trend.

By the way, how would you like to have spent $50K-$80K on a Land Rover and see it ranked at the bottom. From these numbers, you can buy a Kia for $8K and get fewer headaches than with a Land Rover. (By the way, I did have my nose stuck properly up in the air and stretch out the pronounciation when I say "Land Rover," as one should, of course! NOT!)

That has GOT to tick off some guy who just paid $70K for his M-B Statusmobile, to find out it is ranked WAAAAY behind a $20K Buick Century. Add to that is the long term effects of Buick building the Lesabre in the Detroit-Hamtramack plant along with a couple of Cadillac models. With the attention GM is paying to improving the quality of the Cadillac brand, it seems a lot of it is also raising the cache of Buick--as it should be.

Congratulations to the men and women at Buick who design and build them. You've come a looong way since the dark days of the 1980's.

Joe

[NTX5467]

From what local auto historian Ed Wallace has said in times past, there have been many more issues with Mercedes quality than we hear about on this side of the water--and this was even before they spent money on SMART or Chrysler. Seems that you had to read the German papers to find this information about how many Mercedes vehicles had to have plant rechecks before they could be shipped.

GM has been making steady improvements in many areas over the past years. Steady improvements in the quality of vendor items plus assembly and engineering processes are key area where progress has been made. Buick has usually tended to be up near the top of the JDP surveys on reliability and quality for many years but not as high as they are now, yet everyone's making steady improvements too so it's a moveable target that must be compensated for.

And then there's the demographics of the customer base of the respective vehicles. For example, in one survey a Plymouth Breeze scored higher than the very similar Dodge Stratus--same car, same assembly line, slightly different customer base, but usually a more basic vehicle than the Dodge. This could be a somewhat significant side issue in the total realm of surveys that cannot be factored into the numbers, just as how long a particular model of vehicle has been in production in its current configuration. Numbers might be numbers, but interpretation can be talked about.

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

[Dave@Moon]

It's been my experience that <span style="font-style: italic">Consumer Reports</span> is the only really reliable survey of car quality. It is <span style="font-style: italic">certainly</span> the <span style="font-style: italic">only</span> survey that tracks cars beyond the first year (the J.D. Powers Initial Quality survey is of 30 day old cars, their longest term survey is for cars at 1 year!).

The good news is that <span style="font-style: italic">CR's</span> survey results mimic what this survey purported to report. Buick is today an impressively reliable car, thank God! Now if they only made a hybrid drive station wagon.

<span style="font-style: italic">CR</span> also has been tracking the steady deterioration of European car reliabilility, including Mercedes. BMW, Audi, Volvo, and others are similarly declining in quality (as measured in incidence of repair), especially over the last 5 years. Unfortunately those cars in this country are rarely purchased for any kind of practical concerns.

[Reatta Man]

Dave,

I have found that Consumer Reports tends to skew their reporting, often against American cars. The problem seems to be that they only survey THEIR members; not the general public that bought new cars in a particular year. Anyone that works in statistics will tell you that if you preselect your survey audience, you will change the survey results.

You can see this in CR when you match their survey reports vs. their recommendations. For example, I've seen their data show a Chevrolet model offered in a 4 cylinder and 6 cylinder version, and the 4 cylinder will have below average ratings for something totally unrelated to the engine selection, such as the paint. The 6 cylinder version will have a totally different rating for the same year and the same item. Does anyone really believe that two cars moving down an assembly line, one will ultimately get a 4 and the other a 6 engine, will get different quality paint jobs? Nah.....

Conversely, a Toyota or Nissan will have a transmission, brakes or electrical area rate below or well below average, yet the car is still on their "Recommended Buy" list, while a Ford or GM product with all average or above ratings will be on their "Not Recommended" list. Go figure.

I think the JDP ratings are more accurate because they rely partially on actual repair data, vs. totally on an owner's "perception" of quality.

That perception is often skewed as well. An owner of a foreign car will take it in for a 30,000 mile service and get "a couple of little things fixed" while it is in the shop for routine service. Yet, the owner of an American car will have a similar small item break at the same time and mileage interval and think "typical American junk." Often, perception is very, very much in the eye of the beholder, and that perception is their reality.

Just one more example of perceptions and reality. My wife works in a Reserve military medical unit. Most of the people in the unit are very affluent and can buy whatever they like, based upon their income level in private medical practice. They often come in bragging about their new Nissan or Toyota, yet when they all group up to go to lunch, they "volunteer" her Park Avenue Ultra without even asking. She suspects it is because of the ample room and great ride in the Buick. Once in the car, they marvel at how well it is made, but when she urges them to look at a Buick, they often respond that they can't afford a Buick, or they would never own an American car. So, their perception is that they can't afford a $20K Century or a $25K Lesabre, but they will drop $27K for a V-6 Honda Accord (made in Ohio, by the way) or $30K for a Nissan SUV. Wow.

Oh well. People never cease to amaze me.

Joe

[Centurion]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's been my experience that Consumer Reports is the only really reliable survey of car quality. It is certainly the only survey that tracks cars beyond the first year (the J.D. Powers Initial Quality survey is of 30 day old cars, their longest term survey is for cars at 1 year!).

</div></div>

Actually, the J.D. Powers long-term dependability survey I cited above is for three-year old cars.

Here is some additional information, including each of the top ten nameplates with the number of defects per 100 vehicles:

Top Ten Nameplates

Lexus 162 PP100

Buick 187 PP100

Infiniti 189 PP100

Lincoln 194 PP100

Cadillac 196 PP100

Honda 209 PP100

Acura 212 PP100

Toyota 216 PP100

Mercury 224 PP100

Porsche 240 PP100

[55PackardGuy]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">An owner of a foreign car will take it in for a 30,000 mile service and get "a couple of little things fixed" while it is in the shop for routine service. Yet, the owner of an American car will have a similar small item break at the same time and mileage interval and think "typical American junk." Often, perception is very, very much in the eye of the beholder, and that perception is their reality.</div></div>

Amen to that. It's quite amazing how forgiving people can be of a car that is the "correct" thing to buy. And when it comes time to talk about what they've had to do to it and what it's cost, how selective their memories become.

[Dave@Moon]

There must be a <span style="font-style: italic">very</span> select sub-group of fortunate Toyota drivers out there that are the only ones who would talk to me over the past 30 years. And Mazda. And Subaru. And Honda. And....

[NTX5467]

Back when I was really believing the "unbiased" orientation of CU, I remember seeing some of the same things Reatta was mentioning about how one version of the same vehicle from the same plant got low ratings yet another one with something just slightly different would do better, in a non-related area such as paint, squeeks/rattles, etc.

JDP has many surveys they do. The Initial Quality survey, The Desireability survey, and the Long Term Reliability survey (which is the one mentioned for 2001 cars). Knowing how far GM and Buick have come in those areas since 2001, there's no reason for the newer vehicles to NOT be great vehicles in so many respects.

Many people tend to put some "weight" in what Edmunds says too. The first time I came across them was in the new car price books they used to publish in the '70s. Those guides seemed to be the most accurate from what I could tell back then. In more recent times, they host chat rooms, do tests and evaluations, and have "opinions" on many automotive things.

At one time, I was highly interested in Oldsmobile Intrigues. The Oldsmobile that only had "Oldsmobile" on it in one place--the right hand back up light lens. I was reading all of the magazine articles I could on them and found a review that Edmunds had done for one in their fleet, back in '98 or so. They "hated" that car for some reason and there were few favorable comments about it in their logbook or in their comments about it. They talked bad about any dealers they took it to in LA and just how it was not "up to Honda standards". One staffer was needing a car to head to his family on the east coast and he asked about using the Intrigue. Everyone told him he ought to take the Honda instead, but he persisted and took the Intrigue (probably as it would hold all of the family luggage and baby things!). HIS entries in the logbook were highly favorable on the whole car, including the fuel economy of the (Buick) 3800 V-6.

In re-reading all of their rants, I finally determined that "corporate" had them under the gun to get an Intrigue in their fleet for a long-term test. It was something they did not want to do (they'd rather have a Honda or something Japanese, it seemed, if THEY were going to drive it), yet they had to find one and quick. The one they bought was a color they didn't like AND it had the optional spoiler on the back, which they didn't like either. Hence, that car's future with them was doomed from the outset. They didn't want it to start with and it didn't get any favorable comments from them as a result.

In a comparison test of "family cars" that Car and Driver did a few years ago, the GM cars (Impala, Regal, etc.) plus an Intrepid 2.7L V-6 were rated lower in most every area they were graded in. The poor Intrepid, with the 2.7L V-6 was ridiculed for being so slow(??). The GM cars were mentioned as being "dated" with "ancient" motors. Yet the Honda was chosen for it's refinement and better value. Most of the editors in that test were younger people who probably never had been on a family vacation where rear seat leg room AND trunk space were prized commodoties!

Many times, the buying public is somewhat fickle. They'll take on over an American car as being spacious, comfortable, luxurious, and having great trunk space, yet their world can only be "right" if they have on their "Honda/Toyota colored glasses". Their perception by others is an operative situation, it seems. With their purchase of those nameplates, they've joined a "select" group that will not admit to the extra money they pay for that priviledge in added "by the book" maintenance or how much it cost them to replace a lost ignition key (where the whole security system must be replaced!), for example, yet they'll gripe over a $25.00 GM "chip" key as being too much. They'll never talk about how little leg room's in the back seat or how thin the cushion is back there either, or that the rear seat has to fold down to have decent cargo carrying capacity. Sometimes I really wonder if the people with those cars really "tell the truth" on their surveys?

I might be a little "old fashioned", but to me a "family car" should hold 4-5 people in decent comfort and have a trunk big enough to support that 2 week family vacation that was so "American" back in the more affluent times of the 20th Century. In that criteria, GM has some of the best vehicles on the market, without having to get into the SUV category.

If lease residuals ever start taking a dump with Honda/Toyota/Lexus vehicles, "sales" of those cars will markedly decrease, I suspect. But that's a whole 'nuther situation.

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

[Reatta Man]

NTX,

Here, here! You nailed that one!

Your example of replacing a $25 chip key in a Buick (the same key that gets me a $30-40 discount every six months on my insurance) reminds me of a story a shop owner told me. He had a Lexus owner loose her keys. Toyota (you know, the people who make Lexus?) told her that the keys are matched to the security system, and the car's primary ECM, and they couldn't get the code. So, she had to buy a new set of keys that had been matched to a new ECM--to the tune of $1400!!! Yep, one thousand, four hundred dollars for loosing her keys! OH WHAT A FEELING, TOYOTA!!!

I also agree with the observations about the thin padding, and lack of room. I'm 6'2", and can't comfortably fit in most new compact and mid-sized cars, so I have been dealing with this lack of room for years.

When you dig into the mindset of most new designers, they design interiors to fit what is called the 95th percentile, which means they want 95% of their audience to fit in the car, and they basically write off the other 5%. Guess that means I'm in the top 5% of my demographic group?

As for slamming the Olds Intrigue, go figure. The auto intelligencia have elevated German and Japanese cars to their own Ivory Tower for so long they can't look at American iron objectively. And, like the mainstream media's reporting bias on all things political, they influence their audience after a while. I liked the observation about the "ancient" motor, yet Ward's Automotive calls the 3.8 Buick V-6 "one of the 10 best engines IN THE LAST 100 YEARS." Hmmm...what does Wards know that Edmunds doesn't? Wards goes by actual repair and longevity data, while Edmunds grades based upon "perceptions."

Oh well, when people get tired of their Toyota or Nissan $600-$750 "service" at every 15,000 mile interval, they will wake up. Or, maybe when they hear enough comments about a Buick Lesabre or Regal with the 3800 engine getting 30 MPG on a road trip, they will see the light.

Joe

[Guest Skyking]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There must be a <span style="font-style: italic">very</span> select sub-group of fortunate Toyota drivers out there that are the only ones who would talk to me over the past 30 years. And Mazda. And Subaru. And Honda. And.... </div></div>

I often wonder why everytime I pass a service station that specializes in foreign cars, the lot seems to be full of these cars.....

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I often wonder why everytime I pass a service station that specializes in foreign cars, the lot seems to be full of these cars..... </div></div>

Now I know why you're such a Dubya fan!

[Guest Skyking]

Now I know why you're such a Dubya fan!

lol!!

[Reatta Man]

Guilty! Flush the Johns.

Go watch this parody on George and John. Hillarious! Be patient, though; it is a 3.7MB file; takes a looong time to load, but oh, is it worth it!

www.jibjab.com