Prev: Total Farce
Next: Toyota drags down new-vehicle quality average; Ford leads Detroit3 gains, J.D. Power says
From: Ed White on 20 Jun 2010 12:29
On Jun 19, 5:05 pm, "Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2(a)lycos,com> wrote:
> It is 117 complaints per HUNDRED CARS, not per car, or 0.117%, up from
> 0.108% that is only .009%, less than one tenth of a percent.

117 defects per 100 cars would be an average of 1.17 defects per car.
Not sure where you are getting the 0.117%. Seems to me the defect rate
will be 117%. A failure rate of one defect per car would be a defect
rate of 100% - right?

Ed
From: Derek Gee on 20 Jun 2010 23:02
"dr_jeff" <utz(a)msu.edu> wrote in message
news:BqydnfsimcxP2oPRnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d(a)giganews.com...
> One problem with the JD Powers and Assoc. survey is that it combines all
> problems. So, if there a problem with a loose screw in the dashboard or
> the engine caught fire and the car is trashed, the problems are weighted
> equally. Another problem with the survey is that these are owner reported
> problems. So the owners of a particular brand or model of car might be
> less likely to report a problem than owners of another brand or model.
> Finally, this is only during the first 90 days of ownership. So if a car's
> brakes completely fail, resulting in a wreck that destroys the car is not
> reported at all.

What do you mean by the last sentence? If the brakes fail within the first
90 days, it's going to be reported. Why would think it wouldn't?

Problems outside of the IQS 90 days, would be covered by the JD Power
Vehicle Dependability Study which would be three years from the current
model year. (e.g. the 2010 survey covered problems with the 2007 model year
vehicles)

Derek


From: Kevin Bottorff on 20 Jun 2010 23:35
dr_jeff <utz(a)msu.edu> wrote in
news:JdSdnYHLZ_m52obRnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com:

> Dave D wrote:
>> "dr_jeff" <utz(a)msu.edu> wrote in message
>> news:pfSdnW3IC5egM4fRnZ2dnUVZ_hmdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>> The problems that may show up early on are the best indicator of
>>>> overall build quality, but the fact remains ALL vehicles fall
>>>> within the 2% failure range for ALL manufactured products,
>>> Bull. Not ALL manufactured products have a "2% failure range." If I
>>> am incorrect, prove it.
>>
>> NO! You made the claim - ergo you provide the evidence to support
>> your rebuttal
>
> Did you notice I did? There is a failure rate of 108 per 100 cars or
> 108% failure rate.


your math is pathetic. that is a little over one per car, which is
just over 1% KB


>
>>> If every manufactured product had a 2% failure range, then the space
>>> shuttle would never have gotten off the ground, because it is made
>>> from hundreds of thousands of components. Buildings would be falling
>>> down all the time, because girders would be breaking during
>>> construction.
>> Comparing the space shuttle and buildings to automobiles is apples
>> and oranges therefore, a worthless comparison.
>
> Not when the OP said that *ALL* manufactured good have a 2% failure
> rate.
>
>>> If you were correct, then the average number of defects would be
>>> about 2 per 100 cars, not 100 to 200 per 100 cars, as it is.
>>>
>>> This has been pointed out to you in the past. And you still don't
>>> understand that 100 problems per 100 vehicles is a not a 2% failure
>>> rate.
>>>
>>>> that is why they all have a warranty, even Rolls Royce.
>>>> Differences of 1% are meaningless. EVERY manufacturer is making
>>>> great cars today.
>>> Maybe they all make some good cars, but not all cars are great.
>>
>> How very true. Not all cars are even moderately acceptable
>>>> The only REAL difference among them is style and price.
>>> Really?
>>>
>>>> My advise, when people ask for my advise because of my experience
>>>> in building, selling, and servicing vehicles, is to test drive
>>>> those three or more that best suits your needs, then get a total
>>>> DRIVE HOME PRICE including selling price, dealer add-ons and
>>>> financing costs, if you must finance, from at least TWO dealers of
>>>> the top two or three models you choose then buy your vehicle from
>>>> the dealer nearest you home that gives you the best price and has
>>>> the lowest shop rate.
>>>>
>>>> It never made sense to me when I was in retail, why some people are
>>>> willing to pay 20% to 30% more for some of our brands because they
>>>> thought they were "better."
>>> Gee buying something better for 20% or 30% more is a good idea, if
>>> it is better. I paid a lot more for my Apples than I would have for
>>> HP's or Dells, but I got better computers. I definitely got a better
>>> buy with more more expensive Apple than had I bought a cheaper HP or
>>> Dell.
>> This is an opinion not a proven nor proveable fact.
>
> Correct. Except that because I work better with my Apple than a Dell,
> it is a lot of money that is well spent.
>
>>>> Thinking you will not get one of the 2%, is foolish at best.
>>> What 2%? Just about all cars have defects, with defects around 100
>>> per 100 vehicles.
>>>
>>> You didn't know what you were talking about before.
>>>
>>> And you don't know what you're talking about now.
>>
>> And you do?!!!!!!!! Since when? That would be a major change!!!
>> DaveD
>>
>>
>

From: C. E. White on 21 Jun 2010 07:22

"dr_jeff" <utz(a)msu.edu> wrote in message
news:BqydnfsimcxP2oPRnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d(a)giganews.com...

> One problem with the JD Powers and Assoc. survey is that it combines all
> problems. So, if there a problem with a loose screw in the dashboard or
> the engine caught fire and the car is trashed, the problems are weighted
> equally. Another problem with the survey is that these are owner reported
> problems. So the owners of a particular brand or model of car might be
> less likely to report a problem than owners of another brand or model.
> Finally, this is only during the first 90 days of ownership. So if a car's
> brakes completely fail, resulting in a wreck that destroys the car is not
> reported at all.
>
> Jeff

I actually filled out one of these surveys for my Nissan Frontier. They
asked a lot of questions. What they put in the press releases is just a
teaser. JD Power makes money by selling the results to companies, not by
giving away the information. Too bad they don't share more of the
information with the public - but then if they gave a way the good stuff,
how would they make money.

Ed


From: Clive on 21 Jun 2010 21:37
In message <08ydnQ8EnOV474LRnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net>, jim beam
<me(a)privacy.net> writes
>have you ever encountered the exploding chinese capacitor problem in
>electronics? to the consumer, there is no difference in initial
>quality. but a few months down the road, when they literally go
>"BANG", you'll discover why the initial quality, which was prima facie
>perfectly adequate, was in fact no indicator of subsequent performance.
>same for cars, "initial build quality" makes no differentiation
>between one vehicle with cheapo chinese bearings [for example] and
>another with quality american.
Those final two words were an oxymoron.
--
Clive

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Total Farce
Next: Toyota drags down new-vehicle quality average; Ford leads Detroit3 gains, J.D. Power says