A new study by Warranty Direct in the UK claims Honda makes vehicles that are the least-susceptible to damage from potholes. According to the company, only 1.4 percent of Honda owners submit a warranty claim for repair due to pothole damage. Compare that figure with the 12.2 percent of Chrysler owners who submit claims – the American automaker found itself the least resilient to pothole damage alongside luxury makes like Land Rover, Jaguar, Mercedes-Benz and BMW. Surprisingly enough, Smart actually landed itself in second place for the number of claims submitted as a result of pothole damage.

Economical brands like Toyota, Hyundai, Nissan and Kia all fare well against rough pavement, however. We're not surprised by the outcome. Luxury vehicles are more likely to be equipped with low-profile tires and large, expensive wheels that can easily be bent or broken under the right circumstances. Budget vehicles, meanwhile, make due with meaty sidewalls and sturdy steel wheels. Head over to What Car for the full rankings.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 43 Comments
      Hemihead90
      • 3 Years Ago
      Well of course Smart cars are gonna be the second least resilient against potholes. Hitting a pothole in one of those is like driving off a small cliff.
      MJC
      • 3 Years Ago
      That's not a surprise. Hondas are generally lightweight. Good quality runs and light car equal less pothole damage.
      Swordman
      • 3 Years Ago
      Landrovers damaged by potholes?! Lol
        Myself
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Swordman
        they're crap overall and their owners think they're invinicible.
      EChid
      • 3 Years Ago
      I love it. Any article featuring good news for Honda and the readers come up with: a) but American trucks are better! b) if they are so good why do they bother with service departments c) Brits don't KNOW cars since they made Rovers d) this must be a paid advertisement e) its just cause Honda owners don't care about their cars like BMW owners do. Do you people hear yourselves?
      JRBEINGINEER
      • 3 Years Ago
      Dear Autoblog Knuckleheads: This is something up with which I can no longer put. Or, as Popeye said, “That’s all I can stands – I can’t stands no more!” You repeatedly use the phrase, “…make due…” You don’t “make due” with something, you “make do” with it.
      Leather Bear
      • 3 Years Ago
      This is undoubtedly directly related to tire aspect ratio; the shorter the sidewall, the increased likelihood of rim damage from a pothole. Except for models like Civic Type-R and a few of the recent Opel-based Buicks, from what I've gleaned from the British automotive press, the typical Honda drivers' demographics in the UK are pretty close to the typical Buick drivers' in the US (the usual pensioner / senior citizen stereotype). Those drivers are not likely to pop for the same pricey +1/+2/+3 rim packages with 50/45/40 (or lower) aspect ratio tires that owners of "premium" marques usually do. A Honda Civic with standard rims and 55 or 60 aspect ratio tires will suffer less damage from a given pothole than a BMW with 19s and 45 a/r tires. Not to mention, the typical UK Honda driver (see paragraph above) is going to be encountering that pothole at a much lower speed than the one in the BMW.
      50 AKA Ferrari
      • 3 Years Ago
      Damn not even a pothole can kill it!
      ack154
      • 3 Years Ago
      Am I the only one confused by submitting a "warranty claim" for pothole damage? Surely that would be an insurance thing... no?
      Michael
      • 3 Years Ago
      Lies, dad hit a pothole in his Civic Ex, the sidewalls on the honda spec bridgestone tires are so spongy that upon impact the tire was pinched and the rim was bent. He took it to the dealership to show the egg ont eh side of the tire, not knowing the rim had been damaged, and the dealer said that it was the 10th case that month where Civics had been brought in with like damage. I don't fault the car as much as I do the tires, and that goes for any manufacturer.
      Dayv
      • 3 Years Ago
      I wonder how much of this is because luxury car owners are more likely to file a claim over minor pothole damage. Owners of inexpensive cars tend to pay less to repair them, both because the parts are cheaper and they can't shell out as much, and will often carry a larger deductible on their policy as well. Those factors add up to less insurance claims, regardless of the damage frequency.
      Walt
      • 3 Years Ago
      This story isn't even worth the electrons to display it on my screen. You want a real story from Warranty Direct? I got your story - right here! "CHEVROLET IS THE MOST RELIABLE CAR MAKER" According to the latest survey, Chevrolets typically break down less frequently than any rival, while the typical repair bill runs to £195.14 – beating second-placed Fiat by more than £40. Warranty Direct even logs the average time a car is off the road for repairs, with Chevrolet coming in at 1.41 days – second-placed Suzuki notches up 1.67 days. Warranty Direct’s Duncan McClure-Fisher comments: “Honda has held the top spot in our Index for many months, so for Chevrolet to knock them off their perch is a major coup. We don’t hold as many policies on Chevrolets as Hondas, but the data we have clearly shows that Chevrolets are trustworthy vehicles.” The latest Warranty Direct Reliability Index top 10 of manufacturers: Chevrolet Honda Suzuki Toyota Hyundai Lexus Subaru Skoda Kia Smart http://www.autotrader.co.uk/articles/2011/04/cars/toyota/chevrolet-is-most-reliable-car-maker Did your hate for all things domestic auto keep you from running a real automotive success story?
        bh
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Walt
        "Domestic autos"? In Europe, Chevrolet is just a badge that replaced Daewoo; a growing number of cars are sold in both the U.S. and Britain (Cruze and Sonic/Aveo for now, though with different powertrains), but the Chevrolets in that study were more likely of Korean origin. That's nothing against the achievement, but it's a little disingenuous (or perhaps just mistaken) to call that a win for the "domestics."
        gtv4rudy
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Walt
        Are you joking Walt ? I like Chevy as much as anybody but please be realistic
      huffmans05
      • 3 Years Ago
      The article is just another (probably paid) ad for Honda. If they (and other imports) are so great, why do they keep their service dept's open ? ? ? ? I'd put any Ford or Chevy truck (and yes a Dodge) against these cars AND their truck counterparts. We have to quit giving our $ $ $ to other countries and still expect to be a country here.
        EChid
        • 3 Years Ago
        @huffmans05
        More twaddle. Any number of sources DO pit these models together and find the Japanese cars (usually, not always) better, especially in longevity. Trucks are a relatively unimportant market in Europe, but few argue with the quality of NA trucks in NA. Give your money to a product diserving of it (this is how capitalism works), not based on protectionism and misinformed anti-foreign sentiments.
    • Load More Comments