"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3FC23431.32057E0D@mindspring.com...
>
>
> "Dan J.S." wrote:
>
> > Look at jdpower.com - facts do not lie. 2002 Jeep Wrangler, 2 out of 5
stars
> > for mechanical quality. 2 out of 5 for mechanical reliability. These
numbers
> > do not lie. Jeep is a great name, Chryco managed to turn it into crap. I
> > used to be a jeep fan, until a jeep left me stranded once too many
times.
>
> How do you explain that Buicks show up as nuch more reliable than Pontiacs
or
> Oldsmobiles? These different brands are built by the same poeple in the
same
> factories using mostly the same parts, but they have different reliability
> ratings.
>
> In my opinion, the JD Powers surveys are more a measure of the success of
the
> advertising campaign than of the performance of the vehicles. For example
if you
> comapare a 4Runner, Explorer, and Mountaineer, the Explorer is rated lower
than
> the 4Runner in a couple of categories. However, the Mountaineer is rated
nearly
> the same as a 4Runner - how can that be? The Explorer and Moutaineer are
for all
> practical purposes the same vehicle. A Mountaineer is not any more
reliable than
> an Explorer, yet it was rated the same as the 4Runner and above the
Explorer.
> Clearly the JD Power ratings are nearly meaningless.
>
> Ed
>

Buicks and Lincolns are all premium brands, and there is an extra layer of
QC when putting them together. It's like comparing Toyota and the Lexus
line. Look at how many buicks are put out in 24 men hours and how many
pontiacs. Right now, the average is something like 1.5 pontiacs per 24 hours
vs 1 buick in the same 24 hour period. What I mean is it takes 24 hours to
build one buick and something like 12-14 hours to build one pontiac (all men
hours, actual times are obviously less). It's very similar to Ford and the
Lincoln brands. I am getting these stats from April 2003 AutoWeek magazine.

 

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3FC23431.32057E0D@mindspring.com...
>
>
> "Dan J.S." wrote:
>
> > Look at jdpower.com - facts do not lie. 2002 Jeep Wrangler, 2 out of 5
stars
> > for mechanical quality. 2 out of 5 for mechanical reliability. These
numbers
> > do not lie. Jeep is a great name, Chryco managed to turn it into crap. I
> > used to be a jeep fan, until a jeep left me stranded once too many
times.
>
> How do you explain that Buicks show up as nuch more reliable than Pontiacs
or
> Oldsmobiles? These different brands are built by the same poeple in the
same
> factories using mostly the same parts, but they have different reliability
> ratings.
>
> In my opinion, the JD Powers surveys are more a measure of the success of
the
> advertising campaign than of the performance of the vehicles. For example
if you
> comapare a 4Runner, Explorer, and Mountaineer, the Explorer is rated lower
than
> the 4Runner in a couple of categories. However, the Mountaineer is rated
nearly
> the same as a 4Runner - how can that be? The Explorer and Moutaineer are
for all
> practical purposes the same vehicle. A Mountaineer is not any more
reliable than
> an Explorer, yet it was rated the same as the 4Runner and above the
Explorer.
> Clearly the JD Power ratings are nearly meaningless.
>
> Ed
>

Buicks and Lincolns are all premium brands, and there is an extra layer of
QC when putting them together. It's like comparing Toyota and the Lexus
line. Look at how many buicks are put out in 24 men hours and how many
pontiacs. Right now, the average is something like 1.5 pontiacs per 24 hours
vs 1 buick in the same 24 hour period. What I mean is it takes 24 hours to
build one buick and something like 12-14 hours to build one pontiac (all men
hours, actual times are obviously less). It's very similar to Ford and the
Lincoln brands. I am getting these stats from April 2003 AutoWeek magazine.

 

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3FC23431.32057E0D@mindspring.com...
>
>
> "Dan J.S." wrote:
>
> > Look at jdpower.com - facts do not lie. 2002 Jeep Wrangler, 2 out of 5
stars
> > for mechanical quality. 2 out of 5 for mechanical reliability. These
numbers
> > do not lie. Jeep is a great name, Chryco managed to turn it into crap. I
> > used to be a jeep fan, until a jeep left me stranded once too many
times.
>
> How do you explain that Buicks show up as nuch more reliable than Pontiacs
or
> Oldsmobiles? These different brands are built by the same poeple in the
same
> factories using mostly the same parts, but they have different reliability
> ratings.
>
> In my opinion, the JD Powers surveys are more a measure of the success of
the
> advertising campaign than of the performance of the vehicles. For example
if you
> comapare a 4Runner, Explorer, and Mountaineer, the Explorer is rated lower
than
> the 4Runner in a couple of categories. However, the Mountaineer is rated
nearly
> the same as a 4Runner - how can that be? The Explorer and Moutaineer are
for all
> practical purposes the same vehicle. A Mountaineer is not any more
reliable than
> an Explorer, yet it was rated the same as the 4Runner and above the
Explorer.
> Clearly the JD Power ratings are nearly meaningless.
>
> Ed
>

Buicks and Lincolns are all premium brands, and there is an extra layer of
QC when putting them together. It's like comparing Toyota and the Lexus
line. Look at how many buicks are put out in 24 men hours and how many
pontiacs. Right now, the average is something like 1.5 pontiacs per 24 hours
vs 1 buick in the same 24 hour period. What I mean is it takes 24 hours to
build one buick and something like 12-14 hours to build one pontiac (all men
hours, actual times are obviously less). It's very similar to Ford and the
Lincoln brands. I am getting these stats from April 2003 AutoWeek magazine.

 

I agree "JD Power ratings are nearly meaningless." Just like
Consumer Reports, it doesn't long to figure out which side of their
bread is being buttered.
But there another factor, it's the client, Buick buyer is of a
different class, may only wear a suit, and sees to it the maintenance is
done on schedule, and has their wash and polished regularly. Then
there's me I can jump in a Chevy and beat it apart within a year, and
I've done several times to the company car, but my Fords last, I have
over two hundred thousand on my 89 T-Bird, and near three hundreds on my
'78 Bronco. A Chevy lover may be able to do just the apposite.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

"C. E. White" wrote:
>
> How do you explain that Buicks show up as nuch more reliable than Pontiacs or
> Oldsmobiles? These different brands are built by the same poeple in the same
> factories using mostly the same parts, but they have different reliability
> ratings.
>
> In my opinion, the JD Powers surveys are more a measure of the success of the
> advertising campaign than of the performance of the vehicles. For example if you
> comapare a 4Runner, Explorer, and Mountaineer, the Explorer is rated lower than
> the 4Runner in a couple of categories. However, the Mountaineer is rated nearly
> the same as a 4Runner - how can that be? The Explorer and Moutaineer are for all
> practical purposes the same vehicle. A Mountaineer is not any more reliable than
> an Explorer, yet it was rated the same as the 4Runner and above the Explorer.
> Clearly the JD Power ratings are nearly meaningless.
>
> Ed

 

I agree "JD Power ratings are nearly meaningless." Just like
Consumer Reports, it doesn't long to figure out which side of their
bread is being buttered.
But there another factor, it's the client, Buick buyer is of a
different class, may only wear a suit, and sees to it the maintenance is
done on schedule, and has their wash and polished regularly. Then
there's me I can jump in a Chevy and beat it apart within a year, and
I've done several times to the company car, but my Fords last, I have
over two hundred thousand on my 89 T-Bird, and near three hundreds on my
'78 Bronco. A Chevy lover may be able to do just the apposite.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

"C. E. White" wrote:
>
> How do you explain that Buicks show up as nuch more reliable than Pontiacs or
> Oldsmobiles? These different brands are built by the same poeple in the same
> factories using mostly the same parts, but they have different reliability
> ratings.
>
> In my opinion, the JD Powers surveys are more a measure of the success of the
> advertising campaign than of the performance of the vehicles. For example if you
> comapare a 4Runner, Explorer, and Mountaineer, the Explorer is rated lower than
> the 4Runner in a couple of categories. However, the Mountaineer is rated nearly
> the same as a 4Runner - how can that be? The Explorer and Moutaineer are for all
> practical purposes the same vehicle. A Mountaineer is not any more reliable than
> an Explorer, yet it was rated the same as the 4Runner and above the Explorer.
> Clearly the JD Power ratings are nearly meaningless.
>
> Ed

 

I agree "JD Power ratings are nearly meaningless." Just like
Consumer Reports, it doesn't long to figure out which side of their
bread is being buttered.
But there another factor, it's the client, Buick buyer is of a
different class, may only wear a suit, and sees to it the maintenance is
done on schedule, and has their wash and polished regularly. Then
there's me I can jump in a Chevy and beat it apart within a year, and
I've done several times to the company car, but my Fords last, I have
over two hundred thousand on my 89 T-Bird, and near three hundreds on my
'78 Bronco. A Chevy lover may be able to do just the apposite.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

"C. E. White" wrote:
>
> How do you explain that Buicks show up as nuch more reliable than Pontiacs or
> Oldsmobiles? These different brands are built by the same poeple in the same
> factories using mostly the same parts, but they have different reliability
> ratings.
>
> In my opinion, the JD Powers surveys are more a measure of the success of the
> advertising campaign than of the performance of the vehicles. For example if you
> comapare a 4Runner, Explorer, and Mountaineer, the Explorer is rated lower than
> the 4Runner in a couple of categories. However, the Mountaineer is rated nearly
> the same as a 4Runner - how can that be? The Explorer and Moutaineer are for all
> practical purposes the same vehicle. A Mountaineer is not any more reliable than
> an Explorer, yet it was rated the same as the 4Runner and above the Explorer.
> Clearly the JD Power ratings are nearly meaningless.
>
> Ed

 

"Dan J.S." wrote:

> Let's look at reliability. Look at jdpower.com and compare long term
> reliability tests of 4 runner vs. explorer. vs jeep grand cherokee. Toyota
> always comes up on top. Also, I have friends that racked over half a million
> miles on their 4 runners. This is something American made SUVs just do not
> do. I think the original poster would be better of spending a little more to
> get better quality.

I have never driven any car 500,000 miles and find it hard to believe
that a 4Runner has been driven that many miles. However I did once try
to get a Toyota to 80,000 miles. It was a miserable expensive disaster.
Oh what a feeling. My SO did manage to get a Camry over 300,000 miles,
but it was a rolling pieces of oil spewing junk when she replaced it.

> Don't get me wrong, Ford's F150 is a fairly reliable truck, and Ford is
> trying hard to gain. However, current Jeeps and Chrysler products are
> spinning their wheels.

Ed

 

"Dan J.S." wrote:

> Let's look at reliability. Look at jdpower.com and compare long term
> reliability tests of 4 runner vs. explorer. vs jeep grand cherokee. Toyota
> always comes up on top. Also, I have friends that racked over half a million
> miles on their 4 runners. This is something American made SUVs just do not
> do. I think the original poster would be better of spending a little more to
> get better quality.

I have never driven any car 500,000 miles and find it hard to believe
that a 4Runner has been driven that many miles. However I did once try
to get a Toyota to 80,000 miles. It was a miserable expensive disaster.
Oh what a feeling. My SO did manage to get a Camry over 300,000 miles,
but it was a rolling pieces of oil spewing junk when she replaced it.

> Don't get me wrong, Ford's F150 is a fairly reliable truck, and Ford is
> trying hard to gain. However, current Jeeps and Chrysler products are
> spinning their wheels.

Ed

 

"Dan J.S." wrote:

> Let's look at reliability. Look at jdpower.com and compare long term
> reliability tests of 4 runner vs. explorer. vs jeep grand cherokee. Toyota
> always comes up on top. Also, I have friends that racked over half a million
> miles on their 4 runners. This is something American made SUVs just do not
> do. I think the original poster would be better of spending a little more to
> get better quality.

I have never driven any car 500,000 miles and find it hard to believe
that a 4Runner has been driven that many miles. However I did once try
to get a Toyota to 80,000 miles. It was a miserable expensive disaster.
Oh what a feeling. My SO did manage to get a Camry over 300,000 miles,
but it was a rolling pieces of oil spewing junk when she replaced it.

> Don't get me wrong, Ford's F150 is a fairly reliable truck, and Ford is
> trying hard to gain. However, current Jeeps and Chrysler products are
> spinning their wheels.

Ed

 

"Dan J.S." wrote:
>
> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:3FC23431.32057E0D@mindspring.com...
> >
> >
> > "Dan J.S." wrote:
> >
> > > Look at jdpower.com - facts do not lie. 2002 Jeep Wrangler, 2 out of 5
> stars
> > > for mechanical quality. 2 out of 5 for mechanical reliability. These
> numbers
> > > do not lie. Jeep is a great name, Chryco managed to turn it into crap. I
> > > used to be a jeep fan, until a jeep left me stranded once too many
> times.
> >
> > How do you explain that Buicks show up as nuch more reliable than Pontiacs
> or
> > Oldsmobiles? These different brands are built by the same poeple in the
> same
> > factories using mostly the same parts, but they have different reliability
> > ratings.
> >
> > In my opinion, the JD Powers surveys are more a measure of the success of
> the
> > advertising campaign than of the performance of the vehicles. For example
> if you
> > comapare a 4Runner, Explorer, and Mountaineer, the Explorer is rated lower
> than
> > the 4Runner in a couple of categories. However, the Mountaineer is rated
> nearly
> > the same as a 4Runner - how can that be? The Explorer and Moutaineer are
> for all
> > practical purposes the same vehicle. A Mountaineer is not any more
> reliable than
> > an Explorer, yet it was rated the same as the 4Runner and above the
> Explorer.
> > Clearly the JD Power ratings are nearly meaningless.
> >
> > Ed
> >
>
> Buicks and Lincolns are all premium brands, and there is an extra layer of
> QC when putting them together. It's like comparing Toyota and the Lexus
> line. Look at how many buicks are put out in 24 men hours and how many
> pontiacs. Right now, the average is something like 1.5 pontiacs per 24 hours
> vs 1 buick in the same 24 hour period. What I mean is it takes 24 hours to
> build one buick and something like 12-14 hours to build one pontiac (all men
> hours, actual times are obviously less). It's very similar to Ford and the
> Lincoln brands. I am getting these stats from April 2003 AutoWeek magazine.

Several models are built at the same time in the same factory by the
same people. All the parts are virtually the same (engines,
transmissions, suspension). For instance, the Orion Assembly Plant
builds Pontiac Bonnevilles, Buick LaSabres, Buick Park Avenues, and
Oldsmobile Aurora concurrently. There is no way they are spending 50%
more time on the Buicks than on the Pontiacs at that factory. I suppose
it you averaged all Pontiac models together and all Buick models
together the Buick models might take more time on average, but I do not
believe that the difference exists for models built on the same assembly
line. If you go to JD Powers site and compare the 2001 Bonneville, Park
Avenue and Aurora, you will see that the results are all over the place.
If this was a true gauge of reliability, they should be almost
identical. But in some categories one car is a 5, another a 3, and the
third a 2. This just illustrates how faulty this particular survey
methodology is. So claiming that a Toyota is better because of this
survey is silly.

Regards,

Ed White