Bias Against Domestic Cars

"larry moe 'n curly" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Derek Gee wrote:
>> "larry moe 'n curly" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> > So why hasn't CR shown any bias when they've tested American and
>> > Japanese twins, like the Toyota Matrix and Pontiac Vibe or the Toyota
>> > Corolla and Geo Prizm?
>>
>> They have. Look back through the archives at their ratings for the Ford
>> Probe and Mazda 626. They were built in the same US plant, using largely
>> the same parts, yet the Mazda was always given the higher reliability
>> rating. This was one of the first clues that I had that something was
>> wrong
>> at CR.
>
> Please explain. Here are the reliability ratings of the 626 and
> Probe:
>
> http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2580/...1e3833c8_o.jpg

What do you mean please explain? Can't you read? Look at the '89
4-cylinders for instance. The Ford's have extra black dots (or other lower
ratings) the Mazda 626 doesn't. (Cooling, electrical, A/C, clutch,
integrity, paint-trim) Why is the Ford version rated worse? They were made
in the same plant with the same platform parts.

CR did rate the Mazda auto-trans worse, which is also wrong, being the same
unit as the Ford.

Derek

Derek Gee wrote:
> "larry moe 'n curly" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Derek Gee wrote:
>>> "Andrew Rossmann" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> CR only reports what their annual survey says. If there is any bias,
>>>> it's in the subscribers.
>>> There's always bias in humans, but a better survey would do a better job
>>> in
>>> trying to design it out of the polling. The JD Power data seems better
>>> quality.
>> JD Powers is worse and has shown more bias in favor of luxury cars and
>> cars favored by senior citizens, whether or not those vehicles were
>> reliable (Lincoln) or not (Jaguar before Ford bought them).
>
> Not so. They have a much more accurate survey questionaire than the CR one.

How is the JD Power survey more accurate? Has there been a study on
this? It may look better on paper, but it may not better in real life.

Jeff

Derek Gee wrote:
> "larry moe 'n curly" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Derek Gee wrote:
>>> "larry moe 'n curly" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> So why hasn't CR shown any bias when they've tested American and
>>>> Japanese twins, like the Toyota Matrix and Pontiac Vibe or the Toyota
>>>> Corolla and Geo Prizm?
>>> They have. Look back through the archives at their ratings for the Ford
>>> Probe and Mazda 626. They were built in the same US plant, using largely
>>> the same parts, yet the Mazda was always given the higher reliability
>>> rating. This was one of the first clues that I had that something was
>>> wrong
>>> at CR.
>> Please explain. Here are the reliability ratings of the 626 and
>> Probe:
>>
>> http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2580/...1e3833c8_o.jpg
>
> What do you mean please explain? Can't you read? Look at the '89
> 4-cylinders for instance. The Ford's have extra black dots (or other lower
> ratings) the Mazda 626 doesn't. (Cooling, electrical, A/C, clutch,
> integrity, paint-trim) Why is the Ford version rated worse? They were made
> in the same plant with the same platform parts.
>
> CR did rate the Mazda auto-trans worse, which is also wrong, being the same
> unit as the Ford.
>
> Derek

It could be the expectations of the cars. In addition, a different group
of people might be more likely to buy Mazdas than Fords, leading to
different responses.

Jeff

> wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:28:30 -0500, "Derek Gee"
> > wrote:
>
>>"hls" > wrote in message
om...
>>>
>>> "Derek Gee" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> They have. Look back through the archives at their ratings for the
>>>> Ford
>>>> Probe and Mazda 626. They were built in the same US plant, using
>>>> largely
>>>> the same parts, yet the Mazda was always given the higher reliability
>>>> rating. This was one of the first clues that I had that something was
>>>> wrong at CR.
>>>>
>>>> Derek
>>>
>>> Just a point...."largely the same parts" may not be the same as
>>> equivalent
>>> vehicles.
>>
>>The only differences were the outer skins. They were the same platform
>>underneath.
>>
>>> I am not defending CR.. I have held them up to doubt many times on other
>>> types
>>> of products, where they clearly had no idea what they were talking
>>> about.
>>
>>I've always worried about a company that reviews toasters rating
>>sophisticated devices, particularly consumer electronics and automobiles.
>>But they do have the advantage of being advertisement free...
>>
>>Derek
>>
>
> The same "platform" does not mean the same floorpan, or even
> necessarily the same wheelbase or track. It means it shares a
> "layout".

Not so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_platform

D

"dr_jeff" > wrote in message
...
> Derek Gee wrote:
>> "larry moe 'n curly" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> Derek Gee wrote:
>>>> "Andrew Rossmann" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> CR only reports what their annual survey says. If there is any bias,
>>>>> it's in the subscribers.
>>>> There's always bias in humans, but a better survey would do a better
>>>> job in
>>>> trying to design it out of the polling. The JD Power data seems better
>>>> quality.
>>> JD Powers is worse and has shown more bias in favor of luxury cars and
>>> cars favored by senior citizens, whether or not those vehicles were
>>> reliable (Lincoln) or not (Jaguar before Ford bought them).
>>
>> Not so. They have a much more accurate survey questionaire than the CR
>> one.
>
> How is the JD Power survey more accurate? Has there been a study on this?
> It may look better on paper, but it may not better in real life.

From what I've been able to gather about the IQS and VDS surveys, it's a 44
point questionaire with specific questions about stuff like handling,
braking, seats, audio systems etc. It's better than just asking which
areas did you have a "problem" with and asking the user to check a single
box.

Here's some very specific criticism of the CR methodology I recently ran
across:

http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/shortcomings.php

http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/cr_survey.php

http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/newdots.php

http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/anomalies.php



Derek

Derek Gee wrote:
> "dr_jeff" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Derek Gee wrote:
>>> "larry moe 'n curly" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Derek Gee wrote:
>>>>> "Andrew Rossmann" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>> CR only reports what their annual survey says. If there is any bias,
>>>>>> it's in the subscribers.
>>>>> There's always bias in humans, but a better survey would do a better
>>>>> job in
>>>>> trying to design it out of the polling. The JD Power data seems better
>>>>> quality.
>>>> JD Powers is worse and has shown more bias in favor of luxury cars and
>>>> cars favored by senior citizens, whether or not those vehicles were
>>>> reliable (Lincoln) or not (Jaguar before Ford bought them).
>>> Not so. They have a much more accurate survey questionaire than the CR
>>> one.
>> How is the JD Power survey more accurate? Has there been a study on this?
>> It may look better on paper, but it may not better in real life.
>
> From what I've been able to gather about the IQS and VDS surveys, it's a 44
> point questionaire with specific questions about stuff like handling,
> braking, seats, audio systems etc. It's better than just asking which
> areas did you have a "problem" with and asking the user to check a single
> box.
>
> Here's some very specific criticism of the CR methodology I recently ran
> across:
>
> http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/shortcomings.php
>
> http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/cr_survey.php
>
> http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/newdots.php
>
> http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/anomalies.php
>
>
>
> Derek
>
>

The website is a competitor to CR for car data. How reliable do you
think its criticisms are?

Derek Gee wrote:

> "larry moe 'n curly" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> There's always bias in humans, but a better survey would do a better job
> in trying to design it out of the polling. The JD Power data seems better
> quality.
>
> > JD Powers is worse and has shown more bias in favor of luxury cars and
> > cars favored by senior citizens, whether or not those vehicles were
> > reliable (Lincoln) or not (Jaguar before Ford bought them).
>
> Not so. They have a much more accurate survey questionaire than the CR one.

Show me. I've gotten the CR survey a couple of times, and it
basically asked if I had any problems in the past year in any of the
areas listed in their car reliability survey tables. What does JD
Powers ask? A Mar. 2004 US News magazine article said they lump too
many aspects of the cars together:

"One gripe: In the new car quality survey, a car's basic
attributes, gas mileage, and the placement of cup holders,
for example, are lumped in with problems like rattles, buzzes,
and broken equipment."

And the fact that JD Powers has rated Cadillac and pre-Ford Jaguar
high in reliability proves that something's been seriously wrong with
their surveys.

> Also, don't forget that the quality of the dealership can go a long way
> toward how 'reliable' you think your car is.
>
> > Then I'd expect luxury car brands to fare better because of their
> > dealerships, so why have Cadlllac and Rolls-Royce long fared so poorly
> > in reliability ratings?
>
> Where have you seen any published reliability data on RR? They aren't in
> any published survey I've ever seen.

RR is pretty famous for bad quality, and I even heard an owner
complain about his to my boss. Name a British car that isn't
unreliable. And how do you explain Jaguar's high ranking in the
Powers' surveys? You know Jaguar, the brand so bad that when Ford
took over the company, one of its ads touted a brand-new wiring
harness? Then there's the Powers' quality award given to the horrible
cable TV company here. Really, you need to demonstrate that Powers
has any credibility at all, especially when their sources of revenue
are a mystery or could be from the very industries whose products and
services they rank.

> > And Toyota's brand with the highest reliability is budget Scion, not luxury Lexus.
>
> Wrong, Scion is WAY below industry average in the 2009 JD Power
> Dependability study!

> http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/new...df/2009043.pdf

Wrong, Scion is WAY above industry average in the more trustworthy,
non-sellout 2009 Consumer Reports reliability survey:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2557/...13ca4784_o.gif

Why shouldn't Scion score high when they have only three models, two
of them based on the Toyota Yaris, which is rated high in reliability
(Yet Consumer Reports doesn't recommend it because it scores too
poorly in performance).

C. E. White wrote:
>
> "Andrew Rossmann" > wrote in
> message ...
>
> > CR only reports what their annual survey says. If there is any bias,
> > it's in the subscribers.
>
> I don't completely agree with this. The CR survey is very simplistic.
> A lot of the questions depend on the responder making value
> judgements. These judgements are based on the experience / beliefs /
> opinions of the reponders.

I don't believe subjectivity affects the reliability ratings much
because CR also asks owners if they'd buy the same vehicle again, and
some vehicles where the owners overwhelmingly answer yes are ranked
among the least reliable. IOW the very same people who love their
cars admit that their cars have been troublesome, the Chevy Corvette
being a prime example.

Derek Gee wrote:

> "larry moe 'n curly" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > So why hasn't CR shown any bias when they've tested American and
> > Japanese twins, like the Toyota Matrix and Pontiac Vibe or the Toyota
> > Corolla and Geo Prizm?
>
> They have. Look back through the archives at their ratings for the Ford
> Probe and Mazda 626. They were built in the same US plant, using largely
> the same parts, yet the Mazda was always given the higher reliability
> rating. This was one of the first clues that I had that something was
> wrong at CR.
>
> > Please explain. Here are the reliability ratings of the 626 and
> > Probe:
> >
> > http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2580/...1e3833c8_o.jpg
>
> What do you mean please explain? Can't you read? Look at the '89
> 4-cylinders for instance. The Ford's have extra black dots (or other lower
> ratings) the Mazda 626 doesn't. (Cooling, electrical, A/C, clutch,
> integrity, paint-trim) Why is the Ford version rated worse? They were made
> in the same plant with the same platform parts.

Can't you read? For some components, the 626 rated worse than the
Probe.

> CR did rate the Mazda auto-trans worse, which is also wrong, being the same
> unit as the Ford.

Why the difference then? I'm going to blame small survey samples,
which tend to lead to wider variations in averages -- notice the * in
some spots, indicating insufficient data.

You're not doing a Robert McNamara on statistics, are you?

On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:28:39 -0800 (PST), "larry moe 'n curly"
> wrote:

>
>
>C. E. White wrote:
>>
>> "Andrew Rossmann" > wrote in
>> message ...
>>
>> > CR only reports what their annual survey says. If there is any bias,
>> > it's in the subscribers.
>>
>> I don't completely agree with this. The CR survey is very simplistic.
>> A lot of the questions depend on the responder making value
>> judgements. These judgements are based on the experience / beliefs /
>> opinions of the reponders.
>
>I don't believe subjectivity affects the reliability ratings much
>because CR also asks owners if they'd buy the same vehicle again, and
>some vehicles where the owners overwhelmingly answer yes are ranked
>among the least reliable. IOW the very same people who love their
>cars admit that their cars have been troublesome, the Chevy Corvette
>being a prime example.


You need to remember too, the JD Power report is not so much about
reliability as "initial quality " - at least that's the report most
often referred to. That means what the car was like when first
purchased - has little to do with what you had 6 months later. A new
Caddy is a sight to behold, and for the first couple weeks you may be
"in heaven" - from the experience of several friends, that turns to a
minimum of "purgatory" within 6 months.