Car and Bike Talk Discussions and comparisons of cars and motorcycles of all makes and models.

Reliability comments?

Thread Tools
 
Old Mar 16, 2005 | 12:32 PM
  #31  
steve c's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 6,792
Likes: 4
Default

anymore scientific than "well i have 3 land rovers and they're reliable, so therefore land rovers are reliable"
You are rephrasing what I have written. I have mentioned in the past that my experience with Land Rover has been positive and that I do not believe many of the negative comments made about them by people with no first hand experience.
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2005 | 12:36 PM
  #32  
daabc's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
From: LA
Default

Steve is stating the experience with land rovers that he has own. He never made a comment about Land Rover as a whole.
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2005 | 12:37 PM
  #33  
daabc's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
From: LA
Default

oops...looks like u responded faster then me..
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2005 | 02:39 PM
  #34  
rloewy's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
From: Portland
Default

Originally Posted by steve c,Mar 16 2005, 12:16 PM
This has been said before, but beware of believing the various "reports." Want to know how man of them collect their data? They send me a 8 page survey and a dollar bill as enticement to fill it out. Very scientific.
How is that any different from other surveys taken on "whatever" subject? Basically you want a big enough sample size from a SRS pool. How is it any different from exit polls at elections or from medical research on the effects of new medicine?

The problems (if there is one) is not in the fact that they send you a $1 and a 8 page survey - the problems are most likely to arise from one of the following:

- A biased sample pool (and I have no idea what survey company uses what method for the selection of their sample - but I would guess that the major ones use something close enough to a SRS or no-one will buy their reports)

- The size of the sample (and thus - the margin of error) - once again, I assume that the big companies (JD Power etc...) spend enough money to reach enough people - so even with low participation rate they still get sample sizes in the hundreds - which will lead to small variance and thus low margins of error.

- The wording of the survey questions (and this is actually the hardest one to measure - because the wording needs to be as neutral as possible or you plant bias in the survey results).

In the end - surveys of these sorts are usually rather good indicators of what really happens in the world - they are never 100% accurate - but if you see the same trend repeating itself over a long time in repeating surveys - it is usually a very good indicator. For example - the fact that Hyundai seems to be getting good and improving ratings in multiple surveys over the last 2 or 3 years is a good sign that they really are improving fast. If Brand X seems to be getting tarnished in multiple surveys over 2 - 3 years - there is usually a reason for that.
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2005 | 03:44 PM
  #35  
BBY2KS2K's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 18,098
Likes: 1
From: Lake Stevens, WA
Default

To me reliability is very important, no matter what kind of car it is. Only the "fun to drive" factor rates higher for me. I don't want to spend my hard earned dollars on constant repairs or waste my free time sitting in a service shop waiting rooms.
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2005 | 06:29 PM
  #36  
Legal Bill's Avatar
Thread Starter
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 34,130
Likes: 126
From: Canton, MA
Default

Originally Posted by Warren J. Dew,Mar 16 2005, 10:57 AM
For my part, I cared about the reliability of the S2000 because it was going to be my daily driver. For a weekend car, spending several Saturdays working on the car may be almost as fun as spending several Saturdays driving it, but working on the car won't get me to my job.

The problem with getting statistical information is that most sources don't publish reliability data, and those that do may have methodology that doesn't match my needs. When I looked up Consumer Reports' data in December, it showed the S2000 as being more reliable than any other Honda, but its data are based on time, not mileage, so it was skewed by the fact that most S2000s are only driven on weekends. Plus it's based on surveys anyway, so fundamentally they're just asking a bunch of people their opinions, like I could. It was useful, since they ask a lot more people than I can, but it was also useful to come here and hear what some people had to say in detail, rather than just get it lumped into a single number.

I also differentiate between reliability - what percentage of the time the car is spending outside of the shop - and durability - how long the car will last. I haven't found any published durability data at all, so I have to rely on opinions and how many ten or twenty year old cars I see. My conclusion is that the makes that last the longest are not the same as the makes that spend the least time in the shop.

The bottom line is that I find discussion about reliability to be useful. In fact, extra opinions on reliability are more useful than extra opinions about performance. A given car will perform pretty much the same for all its drivers, so one or two opinions on performance may be enough, but maintenance problems vary from car to car, so getting a lot of opinions is more useful for reliability.
I agree with you to a certain extent. I think opinions and reports about breakdowns and known problems are helpful. Before buying my S2000 I came here to read about known problems. I ignored all the "Honda reliability/quality is best" comments and studied the complaints in under the hood and the TSB discussions. Those were helpful and steered me away from a used '00 model I was looking at.
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2005 | 06:37 PM
  #37  
CG's Avatar
CG
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 7,029
Likes: 2
From: In the heart of the USSA!
Default

Originally Posted by ttb,Mar 16 2005, 02:06 AM
When was the last time somebody said

"I'm going to start buying Ford because my last Honda was so unreliable"
You know it's funny because one of the reasons I bought a cheap Ford SVT Focus was because my S2000 was so unreliable. The SVTF sure isn't the best car in the world but in 13 months and 22,000 miles it's been damned good. I would have bought a Civic Si if I could have gotten one for $1500 more than the SVTF even though it wouldn't have had HID's, leather heated Recaro's, 290w 6 disk CD, tilt/tele, ect. I couldn't though so I got the cheaper, quicker, better handling, rapidly depreciating Ford.
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2005 | 06:52 PM
  #38  
Legal Bill's Avatar
Thread Starter
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 34,130
Likes: 126
From: Canton, MA
Default

I guess I have been lucky. Through dozens of cars, new and used, I can report that the new and/or slightly used cars I have bought don't spend much time in the shop. As a result of my life time experience, I take a very literal read of the reliability reports. If car A has 20 problems per 100 cars, and car B has 10 problems per 100 cars, it is easy to jump to the conclusion that car B is twice as reliable. But I think about how many times I will have to go to the shop. With car B my chances ar 1 in 10 that I'll go to the shop, with car A it is 2 in 10. There's still a good chance I won't have to go to the shop.

Another issue is the degree of the problem. Someone above thought it was a significant problem to have a bad window switch. I agree with the person who pointed out that the bad window switch qualifies as a problem that they don't really care that much about. Sure, it's a pain, but it isn't like getting stranded.

On that point, let me say that sports car reliability is so much improved today when compared to the 60s and 70s, that I really don't give much weight to the issue when it comes to performance cars. It isn't like I see a broken down Mustang/Corvette/Miata/S2000 on the side of the road every day. And believe me, back in the day, you did see one a day.

In the end, there are just too many interesting performance cars out there to limit my experience to the reliability kings. I for one am not going to my grave without owning a Vette or a 911 just because an MR 2 is more reliable.
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2005 | 09:06 PM
  #39  
CG's Avatar
CG
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 7,029
Likes: 2
From: In the heart of the USSA!
Default

Originally Posted by Legal Bill,Mar 16 2005, 09:52 PM

In the end, there are just too many interesting performance cars out there to limit my experience to the reliability kings. I for one am not going to my grave without owning a Vette or a 911 just because an MR 2 is more reliable.
Well said!
Reply
Old Mar 17, 2005 | 07:21 AM
  #40  
xviper's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 37,305
Likes: 18
Default

Originally Posted by Legal Bill,Mar 16 2005, 08:52 PM
In the end, there are just too many interesting performance cars out there to limit my experience to the reliability kings. I for one am not going to my grave without owning a Vette or a 911 just because an MR 2 is more reliable.
I COMPLETELY agree with this statement. For me, I've gone that route and as I get older, reliability is important in any car I buy.
However, having said that, I firmly believe that any car enthusiast should endeavour to own and drive certain automobiles in their lifetime, reliability be damned - a Vette, a Viper, a Porsche, a Mustang ................ and the list goes on.
Of course, let's not forget about an S2000.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:09 PM.