I had some questions also when I first looked over this list, some shared with the other readers:
1. Why is Mercury ahead of Ford, and Lincoln further down the list when the 3 marques share many of their body styles and are assembled on the same lines? Should they not have the same ranking? Obviously, this study is not truly objective, and so must be subjective.
2. Why is Acura so far down the list, yet Honda is further up the list? Is it because Acura owners are expecting a lot, but are not being satisfied?
3. Why is Scion so far down the list? Similarly to Acura, are Scion owners expecting a lot but are not being satisfied?
4. Hyundai is quite far up the list. Are Hyundai owners expecting relatively less, and so are more easily satisfied?
I tried to search for the question(s) asked in this study. While I could not find the question(s), I did find the criteria against which the vehicles are judged. I found that of the 8 criteria, only 5 are criteria that my fellow readers/posters would consider to be "quality-related", in other words, related to mechanical breakdown.
Overall Quality: "...complete breakdown or malfunction, or where controls or features may work as designed, but are difficult to use or understand"
Overall Quality - Mechanical: "...complete breakdown or malfunction of any component, feature, or item (i.e., components that stop working or trim pieces that break or come loose)"
Powertrain Quality - Mechanical: "...problems with the engine or transmission as well as problems that affect the driving experience (i.e., vehicle/brakes pull, abnormal noises or vibrations) only"
Body & Interior Quality - Mechanical: "...problems with wind noise, water leaks, poor interior fit/finish, paint imperfection, and squeaks/rattles"
Features & Accessories Quality - Mechanical: "...problems with the seats, windshield wipers, navigation system, rear-seat entertainment system, heater, air conditioner, stereo system, sunroof and trip computer"
Overall Quality - Design: "...problems where controls or features may work as designed, but are difficult to use or understand (i.e., overly complicated controls/features that are difficult to operate due to poor location)"
Powertrain Quality - Design: "...problems with the engine or transmission as well as problems that affect the driving experience (i.e., ride smoothness, responsiveness of the steering system and brakes, and handling/stability)". So, a quiet engine on a sporty car (in which the driver may want to hear the engine) could be taken as low quality?
Body & Interior Quality - Design: "...
problems with the front-/rear-end styling, the appearance of the interior and exterior, and the sound of the doors when closing". So, a truly subjective criteria, aesthetic design (for example, some may like the style of Toyotas while others may not), is a measurement of quality. Could this be Acura's problem?
Features & Accessories Quality - Design: "...problems with the seats, stereo/navigation system, heater, air conditioner, and sunroof". If so, I would rate current Hondas, with their centre stacks full of similar-looking and confusing buttons, as low quality.
While only 5 of the 8 are related to mechanical breakdown or "reliability" as most would define it, "quality" is more than reliability, and in quality assurance circles, is defined as how well the product meets the users' expectations. So, this is a subjective study masquerading as an objective study. It all has to do with expectations: if your expectations of your car are few or less stringent, the more likely that you will be more easily satisfied. Similarly, if a previously low-ranked car has made improvements (Infiniti and MB, for instance), the more likely the owner will be satisfied; and vice-versa, if a previously high-ranked car now has some problems (even if they are simply design problems, perhaps evidenced by some of styling changes on current Acuras), the more likely the owner will NOT be satisfied.
Two study conclusions in particular came to my attention:
"Excessive wind noise continues to be the most frequently cited problem among new car buyers, followed by excessive fuel consumption—not surprising considering the steady rise in gasoline prices that is making consumers more critical of their vehicle’s fuel economy, and prompting many to switch to smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles."
So, otherwise quiet cars (so that wind noise is more likely to be a problem) are low quality? And (relatively) high fuel consumption cars are now low quality?
"The integration of new technology continues to be a challenge for manufacturers. Of the eight problem categories the study tracks, only the Audio/Entertainment/Navigation category suffers a quality decline. Most of this decline in quality is due to design-related issues such as the controls being difficult to operate or understand."
This was a problem that Mercedes-Benz suffered from a few years ago, and something they were working seriously to correct. So, with MB now further up the list, does that mean that its technology-integration problems are largely solved?
Source:
http://www.jdpower.com/autos/article...-Study-Results
