Posted on 06/19/2002 6:31:07 PM PDT by wallcrawlr
Every week I get letters or e-mails from readers. Many tell me that they will never buy another Detroit car because of quality problems and the treatment they receive when they try to get the problems solved. Perhaps it has something to do with the readership of my column, but I get the most complaints from owners of cars from DaimlerChrysler (nyse: DCX - news - people ) and General Motors (nyse: GM - news - people ), particularly the Cadillac division of GM.
On paper, the domestic brands of GM, Ford Motor (nyse: F - news - people ) and Chrysler still hold about 47% of all sales of passenger cars in the U.S. (this figure excludes pickups, sport utilities and minivans). But after you pull out the rental cars, the business-fleet cars, and the cars sold at a big discount to employees of the auto companies and suppliers, I would guess that Detroit's share is only 40%. This means that 60% of the real retail sales of passenger cars went to foreign nameplates. Today, of course, many of those foreign-branded cars are built in the U.S.
I think quality has lots to do with American's preference for passenger cars other than those from Detroit. Of course there are other factors, such as styling, design, interiors, performance, handling and resale value. But I am sure all those angry folks also count. That's why stories on studies of quality are important.
Nevertheless, you get some surprises.
Would you believe that most Japanese car makes have below-average quality? Or that some of the vehicles with the worst quality show the best sales gains? Or that Ford Motor's quality is improving faster that that of General Motors, although GM gets all the credit in the press for a great leap forward?
I'm looking at the new Initial Quality Study by J.D. Power and Associates, the quality gurus. The Power results come from questionnaires sent to 65,000 buyers or lessees of 2002 models; the survey tabulates problems (defects) in the first 90 days of ownership.
| Passenger Cars With Highest J.D. Power Rankings | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
As you might guess, Toyota Motor (nyse: TM - news - people ) and Honda Motor (nyse: HMC - news - people ) come in No. 1 and No. 2 in the rankings by manufacturer. These two companies are the "gold standard." Toyota has a score of 107 defects per 100 vehicles in the first 90 days of ownership. Honda has 113 defects. The industry average is 133.
Every company shows improvement over last year except for the following three: Nissan Motor (nasdaq: NSANY - news - people ), which has many new products; Isuzu; and Daewoo, which is bankrupt in Korea and was just bought by a GM-led group.
My biggest surprises:
Except for Honda and Toyota, all the other Japanese companies were below the average of 133 defects in initial quality. Mitsubishi shows 147 defects; Nissan, 152; Subaru, 157; Isuzu, 195; and Suzuki, a horrendous 210, which places it second from last.
GM, Ford and Chrysler topped all the Japanese companies except for Toyota and Honda.
Mercedes-Benz fell in the rankings. Among the rankings by nameplate, Lexus was first with 88 defects per 100 vehicles; Acura and Infiniti next, with 107 each. Mercedes was way down at 14th, with 128 defects. Cadillac had 116 defects; Buick, 119; and Lincoln, 121.
Quality and sales don't necessarily relate. The worst for quality was Korean Kia with 212 defects. Kia sales are up 23% this year. Hyundai of Korea was sixth from the bottom, with 156 defects; its sales are up 16% from a year ago. But Toyota and Honda's combined sales are about even with last year.
J.D. Power says that the long-term direction is most important here, and Hyundai has had the biggest improvement of any company over five years. I'm not sure why that affects a buyer, though. Who wants to hear: "The quality of our cars isn't very good but it's lots better than it was five years ago"?
GM held a big news conference to herald its showing and got great stories in the newspapers. Yet GM as a company ranked No. 5--behind Toyota, Honda, BMW and Porsche, and its improvement over the prior year was actually smaller than Ford Motor's improvement.
J.D. Power people say that GM deserves much credit because its quality gains have been consistent since 1998, and much better than Ford's over that period.
One more point: GM trucks are hot sellers this year, yet among the truck segments (meaning the fewest defects rating by truck model), GM didn't win one first place. Except for one category won by Ford, Toyota took first place in the truck segments.
| Light Trucks With Highest J.D. Power Rankings | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Note that Ford's Thunderbird came in first in quality among entry-level luxury cars. Just about every car magazine testing the T-Bird complained about quality, such as a shaking cowl. Maybe Ford corrected the problem on the early models, or maybe the owners were so happy waving to admiring pedestrians that they didn't pay attention to shakes and rattles. That happens.
I also didn't expect the strong showing of the Chevy Malibu. Frankly, I didn't think anyone bought a Malibu; I thought it was all fleet business.
Conclusions:
Low prices and nice-looking vehicles can be more important than a quality rating.
The initial quality of most cars is pretty close and, on average, improving. The average is 133 defects per 100 vehicles; five years ago it was 176 defects.
While a top quality ranking doesn't necessarily turn a vehicle into a bestseller, it is worth noting that Toyota's high rankings and its expanding line of trucks virtually guarantee that it will be an even bigger force in the truck market in years to come.
Overall, this year's scores were a 10% improvement over last year, and from the figures it would seem that the American cars really match most of the foreign cars in this quality test. But I still get those letters. There is a lot of bad feeling out there, and it's going to take a while before it goes away, a long while.
I've driven Jeep Grand Cherokee's since 96, very good all around SUV, took me all over field roads in the worst weather.
Recently bought a BMW X-5, six cylinder. What a dream to drive and a real screamer (115 on hwy with room to spare). Don't know about heavy winter snows, but should be good. Two leftover SUV's for the kids, quick, call O'Reilly and turn me in for greedy fuel consumption.
My current car is a 97 Nissan Maxima. OUTSTANDING in reliability. I have not had a single problem, except for a minor leak in a master cylinder which I opted to replace. The mechanic said I could have gone for a long time with the tiny leak but I decided to have it replaced.
Amazing...my next car will be a Nissan.
--Boris
Drive a 200k Camry or Corolla and any other vehicle of the same mileage and you can tell.
I thought I was in areobics class driving the thing, and that was on a Sraight Road!
Seriously, in spite of Toyota's caving in to ShakeDown Jesse (anyone got the update on that news item?) I wouldn't give the money to the Ford 'The Muslims are our Friends' Foundation!
I drive a Lexus BTW...
One has 147,000 and the other 106,000. If I adopted you I would also get the repair bills?
I drove one prior to BMW and didn't like it either. Almost got another Jeep but then drove the BMW........miles apart. I was gonna try a Lexus and Acura but impulse buying sucked me up.
Sorry, kids already have that duty and more. Decent offer though. LOL
Except for Honda and Toyota, all the other Japanese companies were below the average of 133 defects in initial quality. Mitsubishi shows 147 defects; Nissan, 152; Subaru, 157; Isuzu, 195; and Suzuki, a horrendous 210, which places it second from last.
This is a surprising slip in quality. I wonder if there is a correlation between 'built in the U.S.' and the poor numbers?
I have the BMW X-5 3.0, also. My wife has the BMW 5 series sedan. Both 2001's. Great cars, to say the least.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.