articToyota Crashes In Reliability Rankings

[drederick]

I still don't like CR or their ratings of cars or ANYTHING for that matter - but this one is too funny for those that think it is 'The Source' for all car reliability ratings.....

Articsteve any thoughts?

Link: http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/16/auto...ce=yahoo_quote


Toyota Crashes In Reliability Rankings


Automaker slips to fifth from first place.


Some versions of Camry, Tundra and Lexus GS no longer recommended.

By Peter Valdes-Dapena, CNNMoney.com - October 16 2007: 12:01 PM EDT


NEW YORK, CNNMoney.com -- The Toyota brand has lost its top position for iron-clad reliability, according to an influential Consumer Reports survey released Tuesday.

The survey dropped Toyota from first to fifth place - behind Honda, Acura, Scion and Subaru - in average vehicle reliability. The rankings are based on average predicted reliability for all models sold under a given brand.

2007 Toyota Camry: Because of poor predicted reliability, V6-powered versions of the Toyota Camry are no longer recommended by Consumer Reports.

Brands made by Toyota Motor Co. and Honda Motor Co. still dominate the rankings: Scion is Toyota's low-priced car brand and Acura is Honda's luxury car brand.

Consumer Reports said it no longer recommends V6 versions of Toyota's Camry or V8 versions of its Tundra pick-up because of poor reliability.

In the past, because Toyota products have so consistently proved reliable, the magazine would assume at least average reliability for Toyota's brand new cars, without waiting for survey data from owners.

But from now on, the magazine will wait for a full year of reliability survey data to come in before it recommends a Toyota product - as it does with most other manufacturers.

Manufacturers were not immediately available for comment.

Toyota recently passed Ford in sales and is now the second best-selling car company in the United States behind General Motors.

Domestic manufacturers General Motors (Charts, Fortune 500), Ford (Charts, Fortune 500) and Chrysler continued to improve in the Consumer Reports reliability rankings. But only Buick, GM's near-luxury brand ranked number 10, made into the top ten.

Among individual models, GM's closely related GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook SUVs earned a Consumer Reports recommendation based on their first full year of data. The Dodge Charger also earned a recommendation after its reliability showed substantial improvement from previous years.

[UmroAyyar]

I am not surprised. The newer models are not what made Toyota. Time to consolidate the gains.

[Mitlov]

Broken link.  Here's the good one:

http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/16/autos/cr_reliability/index.htm?postversion=2007101612

EDIT:

In the past, because Toyota products have so consistently proved reliable, the magazine would assume at least average reliability for Toyota's brand new cars, without waiting for survey data from owners.

Does anyone else think that this is BAD methodology?

[stodge]

Broken link.  Here's the good one:

http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/16/autos/cr_reliability/index.htm?postversion=2007101612

EDIT:

In the past, because Toyota products have so consistently proved reliable, the magazine would assume at least average reliability for Toyota's brand new cars, without waiting for survey data from owners.

Does anyone else think that this is BAD methodology?

I do. I want reliability ratings based on hard facts, not assumptions based on past performance.

[UmroAyyar]

Its like investing in mutual funds, follow the performance at your peril at times.

Predicted Reliability is a concept like that. To make it meaningful Predicted would have to go or don't rate first year models until a year has passed atleast.

[Wolfe]

I still don't like CR or their ratings of cars or ANYTHING for that matter - but this one is too funny for those that think it is 'The Source' for all car reliability ratings.....

Articsteve any thoughts?

You don't like CR but you'll use their information when it suits your argument.  At least all your axes will be sharp.

[Mitlov]

Its like investing in mutual funds, follow the performance at your peril at times.

Predicted Reliability is a concept like that. To make it meaningful Predicted would have to go or don't rate first year models until a year has passed atleast.

Then that's what they should do.  Or at least they should have a big disclaimer saying "this rating is not based upon surveys, but instead upon our general feelings about this company."  There's no way to know from reading CR whether the rating for a relatively-new model is based upon survey data or CR's general sentiments about the company.  I had always assumed that, if they published reliability data, it was based upon the surveys that they pride themselves on.  Silly me.

[Snowman]

This is no big surprise.

[drederick]

I still don't like CR or their ratings of cars or ANYTHING for that matter - but this one is too funny for those that think it is 'The Source' for all car reliability ratings.....

Articsteve any thoughts?

You don't like CR but you'll use their information when it suits your argument.  At least all your axes will be sharp.

Go thru any of my previous posts and you'll find plenty of why I don't like CR for anything, least of all car ratings

but it is just funny to see how CR is admiting its bias - especially towards Toyota products.

The following exerpt from the article proves it...

"In the past, because Toyota products have so consistently proved reliable, the magazine would assume at least average reliability for Toyota's brand new cars, without waiting for survey data from owners.

But from now on, the magazine will wait for a full year of reliability survey data to come in before it recommends a Toyota product - as it does with most other manufacturers."

I just love it when something held up by artic(insertname here) to blast away at auto manufacturers other than articToyota is now showing its true colours.

[airbalancer]

This should be a good show

[UmroAyyar]

drederick, personal vendetta is the least of anyone's concern here. You downgrade your opinion when the highlight of your thread is your acrimony towards artic.

Artic has his opinion, you have your opinion. Keeping personal acrimony away from the relevant topic adds value to the discussion.

However if you wish to discuss consumer reports' methodology which has taken an interesting twist, is more appropriate.

[Snowman]

I still don't like CR or their ratings of cars or ANYTHING for that matter - but this one is too funny for those that think it is 'The Source' for all car reliability ratings.....

Articsteve any thoughts?

You don't like CR but you'll use their information when it suits your argument.  At least all your axes will be sharp.

Go thru any of my previous posts and you'll find plenty of why I don't like CR for anything, least of all car ratings

but it is just funny to see how CR is admiting its bias - especially towards Toyota products.

The following exerpt from the article proves it...

"In the past, because Toyota products have so consistently proved reliable, the magazine would assume at least average reliability for Toyota's brand new cars, without waiting for survey data from owners.

But from now on, the magazine will wait for a full year of reliability survey data to come in before it recommends a Toyota product - as it does with most other manufacturers."

I just love it when something held up by artic(insertname here) to blast away at auto manufacturers other than articToyota is now showing its true colours.

  Welcome back Derrick, We have missed your very insightful posts.

[Snowman]

[Mitlov]

Mitsubishi does quite well on that chart.  I've always thought it was interesting, and a bit curious, how they're sometimes raked over the coals for perceived reliability on this forum.

[/tangent]

[UmroAyyar]

I don't have a subscription, this is from the Consumer Reprots' online blog.

Excerpts from. http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2007/10/car-reliability.html

"The four-cylinder and hybrid versions of the Camry and hybrid, rear-drive version of the GS scored above average in reliability and will continue to be Recommended. Despite these problems, Toyota (including Lexus and Scion) still ranks third in reliability among all automakers, behind only Honda and Subaru. Still, because of these findings, CR will no longer recommend any new or redesigned Toyota-built models without reliability data on a specific design. Previously, new and redesigned Toyota models were recommended because of the automaker's excellent track record, even if CR didn't have sufficient reliability data on the new model. If Toyota returns to its previous record of outstanding overall reliability, CR may resume this practice. Typically, CR will only recommend a vehicle if the magazine has at least one year of reliability data for that specific model."

As mentioned in previous posts, if CR typically doesn't recommend first year models, don't recommend it for any manufacturer. They're hinting at resuming the Predicted Reliability practice, if they do, they should specify clearly that its Predicted Reliability Recommendation, shouldn't be in their main recommendation list.

"Findings are based on responses on almost 1.3 million vehicles owned or leased by subscribers to Consumer Reports or ConsumerReports.org. The survey was conducted in the spring of 2007 by Consumer Reports' National Survey Research Center and covered model years 1998 to 2007."

I take CR's survey as Owner satisfaction. If the owner's badmouth their own vehicles, it weighs a lot.

[sirAQUAMAN64]

I have no issue with how CR has ranked Toyota's new models as 'Recommended'. Nearly every time I've read that, they indicate it's based on Toyota's historically high ratings and known reliability of the engine/transmission/platform in another of Toyota's models. And most of the time they're right.

At least they honoured up and have made a change. They're learned it won't always be the case and have acted on that knowledge.

[UmroAyyar]

I have no issue with how CR has ranked Toyota's new models as 'Recommended'. Nearly every time I've read that, they indicate it's based on Toyota's historically high ratings and known reliability of the engine/transmission/platform in another of Toyota's models. And most of the time they're right.

At least they honoured up and have made a change. They're learned it won't always be the case and have acted on that knowledge.

  (the thought slipped my mind )

[Mitlov]

My real problem with the practice was that it was brand-specific, not engine-specific or platform-specific.  I have no problem with them predicting that the Scion xD will be reliable because it uses a Yaris platform (reliable) and a Corolla engine (reliable).

I have a problem, though, when they make assumptions about Tundra reliability based on a reputation earned by Corollas and four-cylinder Camrys.  That's just bias, not reasonable extrapolation from existing data.

[drederick]

drederick, personal vendetta is the least of anyone's concern here. You downgrade your opinion when the highlight of your thread is your acrimony towards artic.

Artic has his opinion, you have your opinion. Keeping personal acrimony away from the relevant topic adds value to the discussion.

However if you wish to discuss consumer reports' methodology which has taken an interesting twist, is more appropriate.

I agree 100% and will 'try' to keep my posts 'sanitized' LOL

[Wolfe]

Mitsubishi does quite well on that chart.  I've always thought it was interesting, and a bit curious, how they're sometimes raked over the coals for perceived reliability on this forum.

[/tangent]

IMO the key word in your post is 'perceived.' You have to remember Mitsubishi has only been selling their cars here in Canada since about 2003 or so and their dealership network is minuscule. I also recall reading some comments on the internet (possibly on this site, though I don't remember exactly) questioning whether Mitsu would stick around in Canada. IIRC Mitsubishi Canada actually went so far as to state publicly that they intend to stay in Canada for the long term as a result of this speculation. I think some of the uncertainty surrounding the company in Canada has affected the perception of their cars' reliability.

The fact that the lineup of cars that they initially brought when they set up shop here was quite dull (no EVO) and bland probably didn't help perceptions either.