2008 J.D. Power Initial Quality Study: Porsche, Honda, Chevrolet among big winners

"Shep" <djsljsrn@capital.net> wrote in message news:1212871515_4344@isp.n...
> Consider most Porsche owners are somewhat fanatical about ownership of
> these cars and hesitate to complain about mundane issues like the rest of
> us might.
I'd guess just the reverse is true. When a car fanatic spends the big
(ultrabig!) bucks for a Porsche, I'd bet he'd head to the dealership if
there was a click in the windshield wiper, or a slightly crooked something
or other that bugged him, whereas joe sixpack would ignore it. I used to be
the roommate of a Porsche owner, and he wanted perfection at all times in
any weather and was not about to put up with any imperfections.

"Nate Nagel" <njnagel@roosters.net> wrote in message
>
> This is why I can't possibly see how J.D. Power surveys are useful in
> determining anything other than initial quality which is what they are
> designed to measure. And I actually am a big believer in Porsches, I just
> don't think that J.D. Power results mean squat to anyone who's going to
> keep their car after the warranty runs out.
>
> nate

Powers has a lot of importance. Look at all the advertising revenue it
generates. It is also very important to know what the best car is for those
that keep them for 3 to 6 months. If, OTOH, you intend to keep your car for
5 or 15 years, it has no meaning at all.

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@> wrote
> JD Powers also has a survey that address longer term
> reliability (3 years). I suspect this is about as long as
> is meaningful. After three years I suspect owner treatment
> of the vehicles becomes a significant factor in
> reliability.

All sort of holes may be poked into conclusions drawn from
any survey.

> I've never had much respect for the CR survey results.
> I've answered them for years, but think doing so is
> largely a waste of times. The survey is far from random

The CR survey is as random as Power's ridiculously useless
survey.

> and they collect too little information to make the broad
> pronouncements given in the magazines.

Based on the numbers surveyed, combined with the number of
years covered, the results are most likely statistically
significant.


> The little circles they display in the magazine are also
> misleading. They over emphasize the difference between
> vehicles.

CR explains precisely what the difference between circle
coloring means.

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@> wrote in message
> I've never had much respect for the CR survey results. I've answered them
> for years, but think doing so is largely a waste of times. The survey is
> far from random and they collect too little information to make the broad
> pronouncements given in the magazines. The little circles they display in
> the magazine are also misleading. They over emphasize the difference
> between vehicles.

Many ears ago I gave up or CR as a reliable source of information. My
personal experience was far different than theirs in many cases and what
they perceived as a problem, I'd perceive as a feature.

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@remove> wrote
> Actually I would say that the Yaris is a perfect example
> of CR bias. Despite having only one years worth of
> questionnaire data, they give it a predicted reliability
> rating of much better than average. How many Yaris owners
> do you figure responded to the 2007 CR survey? In most
> cases CR would say the model was to new to be rated. But
> for a Toyota, they assume it is great.....despite recent
> Camry and Tundra problems.

I think you should check the CR reliability matrices for the
Tundra (for one) in the last few years. IIRC I checked that
not long ago and thought, yup, this particular Toyota model
is no-good.

"mack" <mackerel@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:PeF2k.287$qE5.26@fe107.usenetserver.com...
>
> "Shep" <djsljsrn@capital.net> wrote in message
> news:1212871515_4344@isp.n...
>> Consider most Porsche owners are somewhat fanatical about ownership of
>> these cars and hesitate to complain about mundane issues like the rest of
>> us might.
> I'd guess just the reverse is true. When a car fanatic spends the big
> (ultrabig!) bucks for a Porsche, I'd bet he'd head to the dealership if
> there was a click in the windshield wiper, or a slightly crooked something
> or other that bugged him, whereas joe sixpack would ignore it. I used to
> be the roommate of a Porsche owner, and he wanted perfection at all
> times in any weather and was not about to put up with any imperfections.

Is THAT why you are no longer his roommate?


>
>

In article <1212871515_4344@isp.n>, "Shep" <djsljsrn@capital.net>
wrote:

> Consider most Porsche owners are somewhat fanatical about ownership of these
> cars and hesitate to complain about mundane issues like the rest of us
> might.

That's true of most high end vehicle buyers.
Why admit you made a mistake, when you can easily afford the maintenance.

Several years ago Mercedes owners had enough of their problems and many
went public.