2006 JD Power Initial Quality Survey

[iateyourcheese]

I don't put much stock into the initial quality ratings, but it's still interesting to ponder. It really impresses me how these rankings change so much year-to-year. Last year BMW and Buick were near the top, but now both are below average.

2006 Initial quality. BMW you suck. Have there been problems with the e90?
http://www.jdpa.com/corporate/news/r...df/2006082.pdf

Here's the 2005 data for comparison. BMW and Buick did well.
http://www.jdpa.com/news/releases/pr...asp?ID=2005069

Well at least VW is consistent. I guess someone has to beat Isuzu.

EDIT: Hmmm... from this article http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/07/Auto..._iqs/index.htm

This year's scores are not comparable to those of previous years because this year, for the first time, J.D. Power considered design flaws that bother consumers as well as actual defects. Had the ranking been based on defects alone, Lexus would have ranked first and Porsche second.

"In the eyes of consumers, design flaws can have as much of an impact on their perceptions of quality as can a defect," said Joe Ivers, executive director of quality and customer satisfaction research for J.D. Power and Associates. "Yet, many manufacturers have tended to address quality solely on the plant floor without considering design factors."

Vehicle brands can vary widely in the two quality measures.

"For example, BMW vehicles have among the fewest defects and malfunctions, along with Toyota," said Ivers. "But BMW approaches controls and displays in a way that creates some problems for customers, leading to more design-related problems overall than Toyota incurs."

BMW ranked well below average in the survey with 142 problems per 100 vehicles.

A BMW spokesman attributed the large number of design-related issues to the amount of advanced technology in the company's vehicles.

So the flawed designs of BMW are reliable. That makes me feel better.

[BahnBaum]

Hyundai above Toyota and Honda.

Alex

[lupinsea]

Initial quality is good, but I'm not jut buying a car to drive for 3 or 6 months. I'd like to know more about long-term reliability history. Some times that's not possible, especially for new models, and of course, seeing how the cars stack up basically out of the factory has it's place. But I don't put a huge amount of stock in the initial quality surveys.

[Plaz]

Originally Posted by lupinsea

Initial quality is good, but I'm not jut buying a car to drive for 3 or 6 months.

What are you, some kind of freak?

[lupinsea]

Originally Posted by Plaz

What are you, some kind of freak?

um . . .

I think so . . . I drive a Jeep afte all. To give you an example, in our recent club news letter outlining the latest club run:

Originally Posted by club news letter

Everyone got rained on and everyone had a ball! At Rimrock Irvin drove up a tree then rolled 2-3 times. So much for the brand new body he had just put on.

Ron broke down on the Mill Creek trail and had to have his drive shaft field welded. After the first repair, and only a short distance further he slid in the mud hit a tree, left the trail and also rolled over. Parts had to be brought in and it took a repair party until 4:30 AM to get his rig back to camp.

And, yes I consider this fun.

[Rob]

Hyundai and Jaguar are WAY up there. Wow. The Pontiac Grand Prix was given a top spot and the Chrysler Town and Country beat out both Toyota and Honda in the Minivan category (and so did the GMC and Dodge version). Unbelievable.

Too bad nobody will pay attention to it unless they pick out the parts that support their preconceptions.

[iateyourcheese]

Originally Posted by lupinsea

Initial quality is good, but I'm not jut buying a car to drive for 3 or 6 months. I'd like to know more about long-term reliability history. Some times that's not possible, especially for new models, and of course, seeing how the cars stack up basically out of the factory has it's place. But I don't put a huge amount of stock in the initial quality surveys.

I absolutely agree. The 3 to 6 month data is interesting, but just a blip on my radar when it comes purchase time. Heck, they rate the 7 series as having the second best initial quality in the large luxury category.

Anyone know what they mean by "design flaws that bother consumers"? Are these things that buyers go back to the dealer and say, "my i-Drive doesn't work" when in reality they're just an average 6er owner? Or are there surveys sent by JD Power asking buyers what they think?

[iateyourcheese]

Originally Posted by BahnBaum

Hyundai above Toyota and Honda.

I assume because feature packed cars have more problems than a sturdy, but not ground breaking design.

[lemming]

just confirms what some of us were saying.

there are the obvious (toyota) but the not so obvious (many GM products) that seem to do pretty well in initial quality studies.