When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
How can Fiat be at the bottom? They basically have only one model and they can't get it right?
I like a lot of products coming out of FCA, but have to say from personal experience very very dissapointed overall with reliability. My friend works at a large car lot where they get all manners of FCA products and he has taken his fair share home that I have driven, thus far I have been very unimpressed with them. Many tranmission, fit and finish issues, engine problems...etc. A relative owns a 2011 JGC limited with the 5.7 and MANY issues, a friend has a 2015 Jeep cherokee trailhawk and also many many issues.
The problem with FCA is that they took on too much too fast, italian/american engines on a german platform, with german/american built transmissions. New engines, new transmissions, new platforms, new technology, and new ownership. Volvo is the same deal pretty much.
I could argue that Kia/Hyundai also made drastic changed in 2010/2011 but they mostly stuck with what they know and every iteration makes small but very incremental changes. They focus on a few things at a time and improve them. Now you have Kias with 8 speed automatics and V8's...etc. Good for them.
Ranking the brands and showing their most and least reliable cars
By Consumer Reports
October 19, 2017
There was much movement among car brands as we scrutinized this year’s car reliability data to see how the numbers compared with our 2016 survey findings.
Our brand-level rankings are based on the average Predicted Reliability Score for each brand’s model lineup.
Perennially lagging Chrysler is the biggest mover this year, jumping up 10 places, based on just two models: the below-average 300 sedan and the new Pacifica, which was average. Although Chrysler remains in the lower half of all brands, that represents a huge improvement. The other FCA brands, including Jeep, Ram, and Dodge, also improved.
Also moving up the reliability spectrum were Volkswagen, up six spots, and Subaru, up five spots to rank sixth overall, despite the below-average redesigned Impreza. Three brands dropped significantly: Acura, Mazda, and Cadillac. All of them have limited model lineups, so if just one or two models drop in reliability, it can magnify the impact across the brand.
Excluding Volvo, other European brands have performed well. Most GM brands have dropped. Ford moved up slightly, and Lincoln dropped.
Our Predicted Reliability Score is set on a 0-to-100 point scale, with the average rating falling between 41 and 60 points. Better-than-average ratings or worse-than-average ratings fall on either side of that range.
Click through the brand or model names below for more details.
Honda’s premium brand makes cars and SUVs positioned above the mainstream but below Lexus and the European luxury competitors. The engines and transmissions combine to provide good power and fuel economy. Ride and handling are sound but they aren’t standout qualities. Reliability, once a strength, is now average, mostly due to problems with the new transmissions and infotainment systems in its sedans, particularly the TLX. Acura’s controls and touch screens tend to be annoying and unintuitive. The MDX and RDX SUVs, and the TLX sedan, scored well in our tests. But we were entirely unimpressed with the ILX and RLX sedans.
Bah! CR will NEVER be accurate! It's especially obvious with brands like Acura and Tesla etc., that aren't major brands. CR's sample size for these brands are too small for the + or -3% industry standard measure of accuracy. I have nothing but disdain for CR. This guy is way, way more accurate, IMHO. https://www.truedelta.com/
Bah! CR will NEVER be accurate! It's especially obvious with brands like Acura and Tesla etc., that aren't major brands. CR's sample size for these brands are too small for the + or -3% industry standard measure of accuracy. I have nothing but disdain for CR. This guy is way, way more accurate, IMHO. https://www.truedelta.com/
Consumer Reports is wrong when they placed Acura at #19 and Tesla at #21, but True Delta is right (i.e. "way more accurate") when placing Acura at #16 and Tesla at #28 (dead last). And both CR and TD have Toyota and Lexus in the top 2 and Kia at #3.
So it's confirmed. Kia (and Hyundai at #7 per TD) is way more reliable than Acura.
Consumer Reports is wrong when they placed Acura at #19 and Tesla at #21, but True Delta is right (i.e. "way more accurate") when placing Acura at #16 and Tesla at #28 (dead last). And both CR and TD have Toyota and Lexus in the top 2 and Kia at #3.
So it's confirmed. Kia (and Hyundai at #7 per TD) is way more reliable than Acura.
Seems like that site has a relative paucity of data from a suspect population sample. This is all they feel they know for 2016-2017 models: 1 Lexus model? 1 Buick? 1 Dodge?
Color me unimpressed and unconvinced of this data set's superiority.
Acura has had its score of transmission problems but I've had no problems with exception to a bad oil control ring with 3 Acura's so I've stuck with them. However, if they don't come up with something other than the TLX once I hand down the TL, I'll probably be jumping ship. But it won't be because of reliability.
Maybe the source of that table (CR?) has this info, but I'd like to know what "reliability" represents. Major and minor flaws? Example - would a turbo failure on Lincoln LS count the same as a window roller motor burning out on a Lexus? Because that's certainly not apples to apples. How big is their sample size? What about long term reliability? Some cars may have minor issues in the beginning but the major components last a long time.
I dunno. I think reliability is a hard thing to measure. I've always looked at customer complaints on a specific model I'm interested in before I buy used. It's so dependent on model moreso than brand. There are BMW's that are super solid like the E30's that are still running since 1988 but then you have Toyota's that are total crap like the 1MZ-FE from the early 2000's which were sludge factories. Both of those go against what you would think were the norm but again, model vs. make. Acura is a good example. TSX (super solid - K24 lasts forever. No transmission problems) vs. 2nd gen TL (transmission dies before 50K miles). Big differences within the same brand.
The problem with these lists is that the definition of what constitutes an "issue" or "problem" is not consistent or revealed. Same for what warranted the visit to the dealer. If 20 out of 100 Audis had an "issue" because of catastrophic engine failure, I'd like to know that more so than 80% reliability. On the flip side, if 50 out of 100 Hondas went in for a loose door seal, that's quite a lot better than 50% reliability. On the surface, it would seem that the Audi is quite a lot more reliable than the Honda but in reality, it's quite different.
^ My point exactly. If they're going to make such a comparison, I think different issues need to be weighted based on their cost and severity (convenience vs. stranded on the side of the road).
The problem with these lists is that the definition of what constitutes an "issue" or "problem" is not consistent or revealed. Same for what warranted the visit to the dealer. If 20 out of 100 Audis had an "issue" because of catastrophic engine failure, I'd like to know that more so than 80% reliability. On the flip side, if 50 out of 100 Hondas went in for a loose door seal, that's quite a lot better than 50% reliability. On the surface, it would seem that the Audi is quite a lot more reliable than the Honda but in reality, it's quite different.
Another problem is people like me. I got their questionnaire, meh, trash. Now, if I had issues, they'd get an earful, but hey, I knew what I was buying.
it was purely hypothetical, read the rest of my post.
Got it, I misunderstood.
That said, I don't care if the problems are weighted. If the consistent reliability and design quality is there, it is evident in the data. Unless you are buying an Alfa, for the most part your car's issues will not involve being stranded and towed.
The problem with these lists is that the definition of what constitutes an "issue" or "problem" is not consistent or revealed. Same for what warranted the visit to the dealer. If 20 out of 100 Audis had an "issue" because of catastrophic engine failure, I'd like to know that more so than 80% reliability. On the flip side, if 50 out of 100 Hondas went in for a loose door seal, that's quite a lot better than 50% reliability. On the surface, it would seem that the Audi is quite a lot more reliable than the Honda but in reality, it's quite different.
Audi has come a very long way, but I just don't see or hear of many 200k or 300k Audi's out there.
That's very common with most Honda's and many Acura's. The only Audi I know of reaching 250k was my old boss's 5000 Diesel which he maintained.
Audi has come a very long way, but I just don't see or hear of many 200k or 300k Audi's out there.
That's very common with most Honda's and many Acura's. The only Audi I know of reaching 250k was my old boss's 5000 Diesel which he maintained.
I also think it's an entirely different demographic. A premium German buyer is typically fairly well off. They are also likely getting a new car every few years... and not b/c the one they have has had issues, but b/c that is what they do. I can't tell you how many times a friend of ours will show up in a new A6 or something even though they had a perfectly good one. When asked why they got a new car? Oh, well, Audi did a refresh and I wanted a new one. That's it. No problems with the old one, they just wanted the newer looking one so they traded in theirs with like 45k (or less) on the clock just b/c they wanted the refreshed model.
On the flip side, many people buy Hondas to drive them forever b/c they do not spend a lot on cars, nor do they upgrade as frequently or frivolously.
PS - I'm not talking about car forum members, but the general population.
Last edited by juniorbean; 10-25-2017 at 09:50 AM.
I also think it's an entirely different demographic. A premium German buyer is typically fairly well off. They are also likely getting a new car every few years... and not b/c the one they have has had issues, but b/c that is what they do. I can't tell you how many times a friend of ours will show up in a new A6 or something even though they had a perfectly good one. When asked why they got a new car? Oh, well, Audi did a refresh and I wanted a new one. That's it. No problems with the old one, they just wanted the newer looking one so they traded in theirs with like 45k (or less) on the clock just b/c they wanted the refreshed model.
On the flip side, many people buy Hondas to drive them forever b/c they do not spend a lot on cars, nor do they upgrade as frequently or frivolously.
PS - I'm not talking about car forum members, but the general population.
True and while I agree with some of that, I still find it odd that C.R. Reliability would put Audi ahead of Honda since most Audi's I've seen start to become repair intensive after ~100k miles.
That many not fall in line with the metrics that C.R. is looking for reliability but it seems stange to claim Audi are more reliable than Honda with C.R. criteria.
Still haven't seen Audi's get to 100k, but there seems to be some aura at C.R. when it comes to Audi. 200k Honda's and Toyota's? Surprises no one I know.
My wife's 2003 Pilot is 297k miles and still running very well with no major problems.
True and while I agree with some of that, I still find it odd that C.R. Reliability would put Audi ahead of Honda since most Audi's I've seen start to become repair intensive after ~100k miles.
That many not fall in line with the metrics that C.R. is looking for reliability but it seems stange to claim Audi are more reliable than Honda with C.R. criteria.
Still haven't seen Audi's get to 100k, but there seems to be some aura at C.R. when it comes to Audi. 200k Honda's and Toyota's? Surprises no one I know.
My wife's 2003 Pilot is 297k miles and still running very well with no major problems.
It's a fair assessment to say that - German cars can make it to high mileage, but at a higher cost.
While it took quite a few dollars to get the maintenance up to snuff, my 16 year old S4 at 131,000 miles had the original clutch, turbos, transmission, and engine ... and I haven't treated it nice, ever.
I may eat my words later but, I'm not super worried about throwing double the horsepower at my car once it's complete (unopened motor / trans)
What happens to all these Audi and german cars after their affluent owners upgrade after 45k miles? Don't other people buy them and drive them to 200k miles?
What happens to all these Audi and german cars after their affluent owners upgrade after 45k miles? Don't other people buy them and drive them to 200k miles?
I don't know where they go. I see more older Mercedes around than say BMWs and more than both of them than Audi.
A late 90s Audi is a unicorn these days. I can't remember the last time I saw an early 90s Audi.
What happens to all these Audi and german cars after their affluent owners upgrade after 45k miles? Don't other people buy them and drive them to 200k miles?
I think you get people who don't want to buy new scooping them up, driving them for a few years, then doing the same thing again. That's what we do.
Then you also get people like me who get all nostalgic and pic up a 14 year-old M3 with 135k on the clock. Since I have joined several FB groups and forums about the M3 I've been running into a lot of higher mileage models. So they're out there for sure.
Originally Posted by charliemike
I don't know where they go. I see more older Mercedes around than say BMWs and more than both of them than Audi.
A late 90s Audi is a unicorn these days. I can't remember the last time I saw an early 90s Audi.
Agreed. I'll see quite a few older Mercedes. Even BMW... but old Audis are rare. I think it speaks to how Audis were built in the 90s... I think they just all died out But over the last 10 years or so all of the Germans have come a long way and are putting out great stuff that also lasts. Yes, maintenance is going to cost more, but if you keep them up to date, you'll get mileage out of them for sure...
Still haven't seen Audi's get to 100k, but there seems to be some aura at C.R. when it comes to Audi.
Traded in our A4 just under 100k. The A6 was near 115k. Both were in great shape so they looked newer, but they had the mileage on them. They're out there for sure... likely a lot more than you think...
I think you get people who don't want to buy new scooping them up, driving them for a few years, then doing the same thing again. That's what we do.
Then you also get people like me who get all nostalgic and pic up a 14 year-old M3 with 135k on the clock. Since I have joined several FB groups and forums about the M3 I've been running into a lot of higher mileage models. So they're out there for sure.
Agreed. I'll see quite a few older Mercedes. Even BMW... but old Audis are rare. I think it speaks to how Audis were built in the 90s... I think they just all died out But over the last 10 years or so all of the Germans have come a long way and are putting out great stuff that also lasts. Yes, maintenance is going to cost more, but if you keep them up to date, you'll get mileage out of them for sure...
Yeah I mentioned this above. Seeing old M5 and M3 with high mileage makes sense.
But where are the 200K A4 and 200K a6 going? Special german junk yards?
That said, I don't care if the problems are weighted. If the consistent reliability and design quality is there, it is evident in the data. Unless you are buying an Alfa, for the most part your car's issues will not involve being stranded and towed.
Disagree, the way things are measured is far more important than the measurements themselves. I wouldn't give two shits that every Honda needed to go in to get an infotainment update to address a soft button that wasn't working (would reflect as 0% reliability if you aggregate everything) but I absolutely would care if 50% of another car needed to go in because it was stranding people with a blown motor due to a busted oil pump (would reflect as 50% reliability if you aggregate everything). Those are two VERY different things and should be reflected as such.
It's a fair assessment to say that - German cars can make it to high mileage, but at a higher cost.
While it took quite a few dollars to get the maintenance up to snuff, my 16 year old S4 at 131,000 miles had the original clutch, turbos, transmission, and engine ... and I haven't treated it nice, ever.
I may eat my words later but, I'm not super worried about throwing double the horsepower at my car once it's complete (unopened motor / trans)
I'll agree with this. I offloaded my E46 at 129k and 10 years old and it was still on its original clutch, engine, and transmission. The downside was that it took a hell of a lot of work and money to make that statement true.
Disagree, the way things are measured is far more important than the measurements themselves. I wouldn't give two shits that every Honda needed to go in to get an infotainment update to address a soft button that wasn't working (would reflect as 0% reliability if you aggregate everything) but I absolutely would care if 50% of another car needed to go in because it was stranding people with a blown motor due to a busted oil pump (would reflect as 50% reliability if you aggregate everything). Those are two VERY different things and should be reflected as such.
No vehicle is going to have such a uniform distribution of defects.
If a weighting system is used, you would still quibble with any result that doesn’t jive with your own confirmation bias.
No vehicle is going to have such a uniform distribution of defects.
If a weighting system is used, you would still quibble with any result that doesn’t jive with your own confirmation bias.
It's simply an exaggerated example that shows the flaws with the current system. It wouldn't be so stark if a weighting system was used across the board.
It doesn't matter what method is used, people will still take different looks at it in order to prove to themselves that their favorite make is best. My point at this is that the method of measuring the data is misleading.
It's simply an exaggerated example that shows the flaws with the current system.
Also known as a fallacy -- specifically reductio ad absurdum.
It wouldn't be so stark if a weighting system was used across the board.
It doesn't matter what method is used, people will still take different looks at it in order to prove to themselves that their favorite make is best. My point at this is that the method of measuring the data is misleading.
All methods of measuring data have their limitations. Some limitations are a result of the method of collecting data -- what questions are asked, for instance. It's up to the compilers to understand and list the limitations, and up to the consumers to read and understand them.
I am perfectly fine with entertainment system errors being lumped with engine failures resulting in tows. I don't want to take my car to the dealer for any reason outside of normal maintenance. I don't want a poorly designed car, I don't want a poorly executed design, and I don't want a poorly built car. Therefore I find the data sets to be useful. If someone were to apply weights it'd smack to me of artificial, subjective tampering with objective data to change the conclusion.
Traded in our A4 just under 100k. The A6 was near 115k. Both were in great shape so they looked newer, but they had the mileage on them. They're out there for sure... likely a lot more than you think...
My bad, I meant to say 200k mile Audi's. I did a search in cars.com and found a few 200k Audi's for sale.
10-29-2016, 01:57 PM
Big differences within the same brand.
Audi has come a very long way, but I just don't see or hear of many 200k or 300k Audi's out there.
200k Honda's and Toyota's? Surprises no one I know.
But over the last 10 years or so all of the Germans have come a long way and are putting out great stuff that also lasts. Yes, maintenance is going to cost more, but if you keep them up to date, you'll get mileage out of them for sure...
