Has vehicle quality reached its peak?
Are the current crop of vehicles, from compact cars to the largest SUVs and trucks, the best consumers can
expect from automakers? That is the question posed (and answered) in the latest Consumer Reports (CR)
according to James Healey of USA Today. (Pictured is CR's 'Fun to Drive' top pick, the Subaru Impreza
WRX/STi.)[More information after the jump.]
According to the CR article, the ‘best’ is 12 problems per 100 vehicles, which is currently achieved by Japanese automakers like Toyota. Domestic vehicles are holding steady at 17 while European models are at 20 to 21 problems per 100. Because the figures have not changed for the past five years, CR and other analysts conclude that quality issues have plateaued. This does not sit well with Ford, for example, which recognizes CR’s influence among consumers.
"We've reached a difficult level to break," says Anne Stevens, Chief Operations Officer of the company’s North and South American operations. "That doesn't mean don't keep trying."
Reasons for this plateau include the increased use of electronics in modern vehicles and how much benefit (aka potential profit) a vehicle is worth versus its total cost to manufacture. According to Jim Hossack of AutoPacific, further refinement and/or improvement by the automakers "would cost the manufacturer more than it's worth. It might not be a technical issue, but a practical, economic limit."
Are today's vehicles the best automakers can make? Or is it just a short pause before the next major leap?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Micah 11:12AM (3/03/2006)
Manufacturing processes will just have to catchup. When it becomes cheaper to build higher quality vehicles they'll start improving their numbers. But, I think R&D at some of the (domestic) makers, might be cut too much to allow development in that area.
Reply
S 11:26AM (3/03/2006)
This is one of the most ignorant things I've ever heard. This article should be added to those lists of stupid quotes, including 'Radio has no future.' - Lord Kelvin, and 'There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.' - Ken Olson.
I guess it's good that Autoblog doesn't editorialize too much, but this entry needs some cynicism.
Obviously there are many reasons quality has "plateaued", but c'mon! Never another improvement? Gah, Idiot!
Reply
avixe 11:32AM (3/03/2006)
It sounds like this plateau is due to cost-benefit analysis, and not because cars never break anymore.
Until my car's indestructible, quit with the self-congratulation and get back to work. A 12% defect rate is hardly something to crow about.
Reply
JohnV 11:47AM (3/03/2006)
Consumer Reports rating and testing automobiles is the equivalent of Evander Holyfield saying he's a professional dancer now that he's been featured on dancing with the stars. The only reason CR is remotely influential on anyones buying decision is because the general public are sheep and generally don't know squat about automobiles. Anyone in the auto biz or even remotely passionate about it does NOT read their dribble. PERIOD.
Reply
Dave 11:50AM (3/03/2006)
It's not the electronics that is the issue. It's the SOFTWARE!!!
Any bugs might give you another quality problem but catching them all is very difficult. Especially as you add more software lines and more equipment under the control of software.
Then you have bad software design (iDrive) compounding that issue. It might be considered a problem by the consumer...but it might just be a WAD, working as designed.
And finally, lets take a computer whiz kid programmer, and stick him in front of an automobile and tell him to program things for it. He might be great and understand the automobile, but he also might just be a computer whiz kid with little or no understanding how his work might change the auto...for the worse.
Ugh...software programmers making my car more like my computer. No thanks!
Reply
Brian 11:53AM (3/03/2006)
12% defect rate? Hardly!
There are thousands of components assembled together to create an automobile, and we are seeing 12 defects per 100 cars.
If we assume exactly 1000 components per car, that works out to a 0.012% defect rate. Which isn't too bad, is it?
There are industries which produce objects with 0.000005% defect rates, but you have to pay for such things. Which is exactly the point of the article. Can the automakers really justify increasing the cost of the car by X to achieve higher quality?
Reply
Gunnar Heinrich 11:57AM (3/03/2006)
I hope not.
There seems to be two things that are happening in the auto industry. The quality of economy cars has risen dramatically and the quality of luxury cars has declined.
I speak in terms of materials used and the visual thought and care of design.
Cases in point-
Subarus these days are simply amazing compared to the tin cans they were in the 1980s.
That said, I think Mercedes-Benz has compromised on materials - they now use many plastics that look and feel of a low grade caliber in their whole lineup from C-Class to S-Class.
The Japanese are taking over all segments - I think Lexus, scary to write, makes the better made car than Benz today.
http://www.automobilesdeluxe.blogspot.com
Reply
Lithous 12:11PM (3/03/2006)
Quality is at it's peak!
And no more patents will be issued either!
And anyone with a high school education knows that space travel is impossible. (Action/reaction in a vacuum, not possible.)
Reply
klaatu 12:14PM (3/03/2006)
I think that once Toyota (and Honda and Subaru) can work out how to get "Japan domestic production" quality out of their American, Canadian and Mexican plants, we'll see their quality match that of the (Japanese produced) Prius, which is one of the most technically complex cars built (with HUGE software requirements).
How about 3 problems per 100 cars (PRIUS II 2004-2006)?
Perhaps we'll even see non-hybrid Toyotas with 2 problems per 100 cars, and it'll be time for the Prius plant to play "catch us if you can, boys".
I don't think Toyota, Honda, Subaru nor Hyundai or Kia will "give up" on improving quality and reducing costs at the same time. Look at Toyota cutting the price of their V6 engines (made in America) in 1/2! Point taken?
Plateaus are just that - not a portent of disaster. It happens in sports sometimes, too.
If the British workers (who were once renowned for making REALLY CRAP cars with terrible electrics, not to mention continually going on strike over the least possible provocation) can produce the most reliable 2006 car sold in the UK (the Toyota Avensis), I'm betting their "cousins across the pond" can do equally well in plants here.
I have confidence in American workers (just no longer have confidence in GM or Ford management or the UAW).
Reply
Cameron 12:31PM (3/03/2006)
IT would be foolish to assume that there will never be an improvement in the quality of automobiles. We may have reached a plateau (which I don't entirely believe), but the industry will not stagnate forever. This is just like when good ole Billy Gates said that nobody would ever need more than 1Mb of RAM.
Reply
Aki 12:53PM (3/03/2006)
Can cars be more reliable than they are right now? Of course. Now, *would* they do that? No, because manufacturers intentionally engineer parts to fail after a certain number of years.
"The Japanese are taking over all segments - I think Lexus, scary to write, makes the better made car than Benz today."
True, but man they're as fun as watching paint dry. Designs have been getting better since they have their own design division (finally), but all they still do is rip off BMW or Mercedes.
Reply
Michael Karesh 2:10PM (3/03/2006)
This is the rate for "serious problems" in "first year" cars.
At least two things are unclear:
1. What counts as a "serious problem?" I discuss this further in my critique of CR: http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/shortcomings.php.
My understanding is that CR's survey leaves it somewhat up to the respondent what counts as "serious," opening the door for bias. My own research asks more precisely defined questions.
2. How old are the cars? CR's survey is in the spring. So aside from early intro 2005s, the cars were at most six or seven months old, and often far less than that. To get the 12/100 rate, are they extrapolating out to a full year? Or is this for the average car that responded, which will vary by when the model year reached dealers and when particular respondents bought cars? Or do they adjust for the overall average age of about three months? Based on the information they provide, I have no idea.
Beyond these issues, people increasingly define reliability as having no problems for the first 5, 6, even 7 years of ownership, not just a low problem rate in the first 90 days. This is why JD Power's 90-day IQS is increasingly irrevelant, and even the 3-year VDS is marginal for many people.
Reply
Ben 2:41PM (3/03/2006)
Since 80% of the technology to appear in the next 10 years has not been developed yet, no, quality for cars has NOT reached its peak.
To think there's any finality to anything is moronic.
Reply
Greg B. 2:51PM (3/03/2006)
So we have people comparing something clearly subject to diminishing returns and cost/benefit with bogus quotes from a favorite punching bag (hint: no one can find a source for that quote and the Intel 8088 could not address more than 1MB or RAM, a hardware limitation. Hmm).
Ahh, and someone thinks their ABS must be programmed by a spiky-haired 22 year-old...I guess you don't know any actual, professional software engineers or have a clue about the processes that go into making software for these kinds of applications.
Meanwhile, before someone whips out another snappy quote, lets consider some actually relevent situations from the real world:
In air travel, speeds reached 500+ MPH in 50's. They've barely budged, not because it can't be done, but because it makes no economic sense to fly people faster.
Also, let's consider speed of cars. $20,000 could get you a car capable of going 150 MPH, but what about 200, 250, 300? See the problem. Eventually it costs $20K just to go 1 MPH faster.
It's the same with quality. At some point, the cost of another improvement outweighs the benefit. That doesn't mean that quality will not improve, but it does mean that consumers should probably not expect it to improve noticeably.
Reply
Cameron 3:36PM (3/03/2006)
Correction - the quote should actually be 640k, not 1Mb...meh. Not that it matters, since I can't find a source for ya.
Reply
Neil 4:05PM (3/03/2006)
Regarding air travel... you're right, look at the Sonic Cruiser, buyers didn't have a viable business case for it, so it didn't get developed.
However, product improvement come about plenty often, such as the Boeing 787, through a tremendous change in technology it reduces the acquisition cost of the product, reduces maintenance costs, and reduces operating cost. All due to game-changing shifts in MANUFACTURING process and technology. Similarly, I believe improvements in automotive manufacturing process technology will eventually result in higher quality cars because it will reduce the cost of implementing quality enhancements that already exist but haven't met the cost/benefit requirements necessary for implementation.
Reply
J-Man 4:45PM (3/03/2006)
>> Consumer Reports rating and testing automobiles is the equivalent of Evander Holyfield saying he's a professional dancer now that he's been featured on dancing with the stars. The only reason CR is remotely influential on anyones buying decision is because the general public are sheep and generally don't know squat about automobiles. Anyone in the auto biz or even remotely passionate about it does NOT read their dribble. PERIOD.
Reply
JMan 4:52PM (3/03/2006)
'doh...mispost.
Given the plethora of car manufacturer influenced, enthusist magazines on the market that only focus on performance and styling, CR is FAR more reliable in providing unbiased information to the general public. Just where else are consumers supposed to get REAL WORLD information about cars?
It isn't like the average consumer is going to go to engineering school to obtain information on how their car works or spend thousands of dollars obtaining the tools necessary to fix a modern automobile. What about women? No chauvinism intended, but they tend to not get involved in things like fixing cars. Sorry, but your comment is the equivalent of expecting average consumers to go out and fix their own televisions, put together their own computers, and or perform minor surgery on themselves. YOU state that "anybody in auto biz or is remotely passionate"...well there you have it. Like 99% of America, I am not in the car business...but even as an enthusiast, I can appreciate CR's information. To discard it as mere "dribble" leads many to believe that it is this exact close-mindedness that has allowed American car companies to fall behind in quality and pride.
Reply
iQuack 6:49PM (3/03/2006)
Cars are better now than they've ever been, but to suggest some kind of plateau is ridiculous. There's plenty of opportunity to improve as follows:
Should be NO such thing as a flat tire--TOTALLY flat-free tires should have been invented by now;
Permanent lubrication. It's been done for suspensions and it's time to eliminate oil changes, too. Some cars already have 10 year coolant, so why not oil, too?
Dent-resistant body panels. OK, Saturn's been there and done that, but all cars should enjoy a ding-proof life by now;
Dead battery protection--maybe a warning on the dashboard that the battery is weak and should be replaced before it goes dead unexpectedly.
Truth is, the technology and/or the cost of making more perfect cars isn't marketable yet, but clearly, there's still plenty to be done.
Reply
Waves 7:35PM (3/03/2006)
Greg B.
You should know air speeds haven't increased because they don't want planes to go over the speed barrier and make a sonic boom which happens at about 760 mph. My dad works on Jet Engines and they try to get their top speed as close to that speed, speeds are rated at .96 the speed of sound. The concord flew much faster, but it had a sonic boom and could only be used over the ocean.
I do think every companies goal is to make their issues 0 per 100. Every car maker has a quality department, whose full time job is to drop that number. It better drop or people aren't doing their job.
Reply