J.D. Power Dependability results are out
Lexus tops 12th straight year, Mercury jumps to 2ndThe results are in for J.D. Power & Associates Vehicle Dependability Study and the research firm is reporting that the gap in long-term quality between luxury and high-volume vehicles has been cut in half over the last four years. J.D. estimates that the gap has narrowed from an average of 31 problems per 100 vehicles in its 2003 survey to just 15 in the most recent survey.
Though Lexus retained the top spot for the 12th straight year, other less luxurious nameplates are certainly gaining ground. Mercury, for instance, jumped six spots into the number two position, while Buick is right behind in third. Cadillac, another luxury automaker, secured the fourth spot, while Toyota rounds out the top five.
Some automakers took a major hit in this year's dependability study, not the least of which is Porsche, which fell from the no. 2 spot all the way to no. 22. Land Rover, which was no. 36 on last year's list, fell that final ranking to dead last at no. 37 with 438 ppv.
The segment rankings were dominated by Japanese models, with Toyota and Lexus both leading four segments and Honda three.
Follow this link for a more detailed analysis of the new rankings by Automotive News, or follow the jump for the complete results.
[Source: J.D. Power & Associates, Automotive News]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Dr. Woo 3:19PM (8/09/2006)
Hey, check out Cadillac!
And has this always been called a "Dependability Study?"
Reply
Kevin 3:21PM (8/09/2006)
It's gotta be said - way to go Ford!
Mercury - 2nd
Jaguar - 8th
Lincoln - 11th
Ford - 12th
Reply
Presto 3:21PM (8/09/2006)
Wasn't Hyundai real high on this list last year? Did they just fall off?
Reply
Michael Karesh 3:22PM (8/09/2006)
I like the VDS, which studies three-year-old cars, much better than the IQS. Good showing by domestic brands that sell to old people.
Two caveats with the VDS:
1. Old people report fewer problems, so brands that have older customers get a boost; no easy way around this one, it affects every quality and reliability study. Maybe I should ask birth year...
2. Third year isn't exactly long term. What I hear more and more is that people want to know how well a car holds up in years 5-8. Why is this important? Two words for you: resale value.
J.D. Power's VDS used to track five-year-old cars, but manufacturers weren't interested in buying this info because cars that old had often already been redesigned, and thus there was little to learn from a product improvement standpoint.
First-year cars often hurt. The Cadillac showing is the biggest surprise, because it includes the then-new CTS. Porsche's score got hammered by the new Cayenne, and I suspect that Saab's score is the result of the first-year new 9-3. BMW could get hit hard next year by the 2004 5-Series.
My general take on J.D. Power, though I'm okay with the VDS:
http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/jdpower.php
My issues with the 90-day IQS:
http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/IQS2006.php
Reply
Aaron 3:24PM (8/09/2006)
Why is Oldsmobile on there? Didn't they stop selling cars a couple years ago??
Reply
bernie 3:26PM (8/09/2006)
The only thing dependable about Toyota in 2006 is the fact that your car has a 100% chance of being recalled. Does dependability mean "it's falling apart but it still runs," or "it has a lot of little things wrong with it, but nothing I had to go to the shop for?" Dependability should mean "am I still delighted with the car after five years?" My daughter's 2003 Corolla would do well on the first two, but badly on the last... she's sick of it. It starts every day, but it makes noises and doesn't feel tight at all. My son's 1997 Altima drives like a new car at 170,000 miles.
Reply
Gooch 3:30PM (8/09/2006)
"Old people report fewer problems, so brands that have older customers get a boost; no easy way around this one, it affects every quality and reliability study."
That would favor Lexus, Toyota, Buick, Lincoln, Ford and Cadillac,
It would hurt Scion, Nissan, Honda, Infiniti, Acura, Hyundai, Mini
Makes sense to me, given these results!
Reply
Doc Lucas 3:33PM (8/09/2006)
"Old people report fewer problems". Just curious Michael, is that a scientific fact, an educated guess, speculation, or something you made up on the spot?
Here's some speculation, and a little generalization... "old people" complain plenty. They also have the time, the buying power (clout), and the wits to get dealerships to fix what's not right on their vehicles.
Reply
menice 3:40PM (8/09/2006)
last year wasn't it
1.toyota
2.someone else
3.someone else
4.honda/hyundai tie
I am begining to question every stupid survey JD does
Reply
robino 3:40PM (8/09/2006)
Two to three year dependability means nothing to me. I have always kept my vehicles 5 to 6 years and often pass them onto my kids. The only thing that matters to me is how dependable the vehicle is after the warranty has run out. Remember, JD Powers works for the manufacturers and they care about the three year dependability because it helps them gauge how much it is going to cost them in warranty to fix their screw-ups.
Mercury? Haven't seen one of those in awhile - could someone please post pictures.
Reply
Kevin 3:44PM (8/09/2006)
Karesh and Gooch -
The average age of a Mini buyer is 43.
The average age of a Ford buyer is 45.
So do you think the age difference of two years was enough to put Mini in 29th place and Ford in 12th?
Reply
DJ 3:45PM (8/09/2006)
Hmmmm, isn't there a commercial with "Ask Dr. Z." in which he displays a JD Powers trophy for the minivan with the highest Initial Quality Score???? Then why don't I see any Chrysler vans listed in the long term assessment??? Oh, that's right....BECAUSE THEY TURN TO ABSOLUTE PIECES OF SH*T after the first 90 days!
Reply
antrow 3:50PM (8/09/2006)
Oh Saab, 2nd to last, how could this be? I remember when I purchased my 2002 9-5 it was rated highly by JD powers. Whaaat Happpen?
Reply
Presto 3:51PM (8/09/2006)
#2 Kevin,
I think you forgot Land Rover in your congratulatory remarks for Ford. You might not have seen it on the list, just look towards the bottom.
Reply
Bob-o 3:52PM (8/09/2006)
Since when was an SC430 sporty?
Reply
Kevin 3:59PM (8/09/2006)
Presto -
I'm sorry, this is the Internet and I'm allowed to use incomplete information to support my assertions. ;-)
I see Ford does have some brands below average, but they had a very strong showing overall, which I think is to be commended - especially in light of the overall negative comments so common here in Autoblog comments.
This study shows that Ford is doing better than the general public gives them credit for.
Reply
Fabulo 4:06PM (8/09/2006)
Mmm... Kevin, yes this is the internet, where do you get your 'average' age for Ford and Mini buyers?
I'm not sure what average age means here. It's not a very relevant number. Do you have the median age?
Reply
Kevin 4:13PM (8/09/2006)
I forgot to save the source when I copied the information, but if I remember correctly, it was a Forbes article using Wards information.
The average industry buyer is 46. No median was listed.
Reply
Richard Warren 4:17PM (8/09/2006)
Of interest: From top to bottom best 1.4 problems per car Worst 4.4 problems per car. The average is only 2.3 per car.
Sort of difficult to find the POS between them, Import or Domestic, that is if you believe ole JD.
It's interesting also that 6 of the top 13 are domestics. Hmmmmmmm
Reply
shrinkydinx 4:18PM (8/09/2006)
i find this data completely worthless.
ive had two problems with my car in the year ive owned it: the ashtray got stuck once and one of my key fobs stopped working.
this would put my car welllll below the "industry average," no? but i certainly wouldnt want to have based a huge purchase such as a car on the fact that i would have to make two five minute trips to the dealer...
Reply