Initial Quality Study: Ford scores high; Mercedes jumps
Porsche, Lexus top J.D. Power list


Automotive News
June 6, 2007 - 1:37 pm



Ford Motor Co.'s Lincoln division broke into the top three of the J.D. Power and Associates 2007 Initial Quality Study, released today. But the biggest jump in rank came from Mercedes-Benz, which climbed to No. 5 this year from No. 25 in 2006.

Ford division and Mercury vehicles also jumped in the research firm's rankings. Mercury ranked eighth this year, moving eight spots higher. Ford moved five spots to 10th.

Ironically, Ford's Wixom, Mich., assembly plant, which recently closed, earned J.D. Power's Platinum Plant Quality Award for producing vehicles yielding the fewest defects. The research firm said Lincoln Town Cars produced there averaged 35 problems for every 100 vehicles.

In the study, Ford earned model segment awards for the Ford Mustang, Lincoln Mark LT, Lincoln MKZ and Mercury Milan. The Mazda MX-5 Miata also earned a segment award. Mazda is partially owned by Ford.

Mercedes-Benz improved its nameplate rank by 20 positions - the greatest improvement of any nameplate in the study.

For the second year, Porsche topped the overall nameplate rankings, averaging 91 problems per 100 vehicles. Following were Lexus, Lincoln, Honda and Mercedes-Benz.

Honda - with the fewest problems per 100 vehicles among nonpremium brands - improved to fourth from sixth in the 2006 study and earned awards with the Civic and CR-V. Among nonpremium brands, Kia posted the largest improvement in ranking, moving from 24th in 2006 to 12th this year. Kia earned an award for the Kia Rio and Rio5 for the second year in a row.

"Initial Quality" ratings are a ridiculous and time wasting endeavor designed by J.D. Power (a marketing organization) to assist usually poor standing auto makers in creating a false impression of quality. Their data itself isn't necessarily wrong, but it's always polished and customized to suit the specific requests of the auto makers who buy that data. For instance, Mercedes, who has compiled a vile and disgusting record or reliability over the last 7 years or so, is in DIRE need of improving their image. J.D. Power to the rescue. Here's how a typical conversation amongst the companies might go:

J.D. Power: "How can we help you today, Mercedes?"

Mercedes: "Well, we want to show people that our cars are reliable; you know, to counter the reality we've buried ourselves with."

J.D. Power: "No problem. We'll conduct a survey asking your new customers what they think of your cub holders. Your cup holders are sturdy and of high quality, right? We'll ask them about that, then present you with a customized data set that shows how superb your quality is, in general terms. That way people will be fooled into believing your quality has shot through the roof overnight!"

Mercedes: "Oh boy!! Oh golly, gee!! That's great!! Now we'll be able to give Dieter a fat bonus at year's end with all the improved sales we'll see from this "data"."

J.D. Power: "We're always glad to help. That'll be $500,000, please."

Mercedes: "Can we pay you next week? We're a bit strapped right now, but as soon as we sell Chrysler we'll have some cash flow"


The other problem with all of this is you'll never, never get an objective, accurate, and rational analysis of a car from a brand new car owner, which is what all of these "Initial Quality" surveys poll from. When you have a brand new car, everyone is almost always still in the "Honeymoon" period, where you have a brand new car, with that new car smell, and everything is working properly. The person is excited and happy. So they're not going to have any problems. I always find it amusing when people submit car reviews two weeks into ownership. They're always, "Two weeks into ownership and no problems so far! Hot damn!". Well, of course there are no problems! Even the worst contemporary cars won't have problems in two weeks... or even the first several months. I mean, gimme a break!

So even when the likes of Honda are well represented by J.D. Power, I take such presentation with a grain of salt. Data that really means something is that which polls equally amongst all auto makers, and does so at least two to three years into ownership. THAT'S when you separate the wanna-be quality vehicles from those that deliver in reality...

I was not endorsing the JD IQS study, only passing it along - in fact I have seen first hand the extra measures the OEM's take on ALL MEDIA CARS.

I have seen 1st hand the extra's (one that comes to mind is extra sound deadening on an upscale big 3 nameplate) that go into the launch of a vehicle and then once the JD study vehicle population window is over... YEP time to cut cost and VIOLA GONZO!!!

And just out of curiosity, where are you getting this information from?

I mean, I doubt 100% of the data is objective but I don't believe things on someone's premonition, I'm not calling you a liar just wondering where you get this from?

All that I tell on these boards is from personal experience, if it's second hand I say so - if It's a premonition I note that as well.

Greets!

Certainly no personal offense was intended-- All I was saying is J.D. Power is a for-profit marketing organization. And as a marketing organization, their charge is to beautify products in efforts to promote sales. They're not about protecting consumer interests, which is what we should be looking out for...

Also, it should be noted that I haven't faulted the actual data that J.D. Power collects. They collect immensely varied data to serve the specific purpose they've been requested to handle. So yes, it's likely reasonably accurate-- But even accurate data doesn't mean that it's practically useful (see aforementioned "Cup Holder" scenario). And, to boot, when data is "cooked" to result in a specific, desired outcome, that too serves no useful consumer purpose. It only serves the purposes of the auto maker who paid big money to use that data.

Case in point: Consumer Reports has rated Mercedes shockingly poor in reliability; something Mercedes has been falling all over themselves trying to explain away. CR is likely the most trusted auto testing organization nationally, so when your cars are poorly rated by them, as a manufacturer you're in deep trouble. So then, low and behold, a study by J.D. Powers suddenly shows Mercedes hugely improved-- Even though they haven't released any new models-- They're all the same ones rated by CR. So the near certain reality is nothing's changed-- Mercedes simply bought themselves data that shows they've improved to try and counter the damage done by other information sources. And that's not to say Mercedes doesn't realize they'd better start getting back to quality, but there hasn't been nearly sufficient time yet for the kind of improvements J.D. Power seems to be suggesting. It's not physically possible.

No single source of information is perfect by any means, but organizations selling data for profit are the last one's I'd entrust with, say, a $25k+ auto purchase. That data will only reflect the reality the auto maker wants you to see, be them Mercedes, Honda, Toyota, or whomever; it matters not. In truth, all auto makers play the same marketing game using J.D. Power information-- Just so long as it paints them in positive light.

So no offense to anyone-- Certainly mean not to wage a flame war! All I'm saying is investigative logic doesn't endear my trust of profiteering data miners. :deal:

Greets!
So no offense to anyone-- Certainly mean not to wage a flame war! All I'm saying is investigative logic doesn't endear my trust of profiteering data miners. :deal:

WOW, well spoken and a gentleman....

Like I said I don't endorse JD IQS so I took zero offense.

And I can't say I don't agree with your statements!

Some interesting and astute observations, made in such a polite respectfull manner too.. :notworthy Very nice to see :thmsup:

People rarely keep cars long enough to do a decent long term reliability study. So cars change hands many times in their lifetimes. Bad ones get scrapped, good ones get cherished.. :)

Personaly I think the best way to judge how good/bad a car is, is to look around you, how many cars of over 10 years of age can you see? and note the makers names.. :) .. But then, I would never buy a new car (or a brand new Computer operating platform).. heh heh.. :naughty: :paranoid:
.

People rarely keep cars long enough to do a decent long term reliability study. So cars change hands many times in their lifetimes. Bad ones get scrapped, good ones get cherished.. :)

Personaly I think the best way to judge how good/bad a car is, is to look around you, how many cars of over 10 years of age can you see? and note the makers names.. :) .. But then, I would never buy a new car (or a brand new Computer operating platform).. heh heh.. :naughty: :paranoid:
.

Let's see, 4 of our 6 vehicles are 10 yrs or older. 1975 Ford Ranger F-150 Super Cab 8 ft bed. 1986 Honda Goldwing Aspencade SE-i. 1992 Geo Metro LSi convertible. 1997 Honda Odyssey EX. Only the Odyssey and the Metro have over 100,000 miles, though.

Geologic.. I love you.

You made me roflmao @ work omg. :)

i found the jd power initial quality survey as amusing as always.

one thing that bothers me, and has always bothered me is they definitely do paint the results to reflect what needs the boost, so to speak.

ie~every article i found regarding the recent survey results kept putting ford out there as the best in initial quality, yet if you delve deeper into the specifics, you start finding out more.

first~"ford" as mentioned in the titles of so many articles, is not just "ford". it's ford, mazda, lincoln, etc. there are so many car lines that compromise ford that it's almost a huge joke. they also have a ton of vehicles out there, many of which are marketed under various names under varying parts of their line. same cars though. the collective ford topped the most categories, but only lincoln placed high on the overall list.

one thing i wish they'd point out on those results is that while a ford nameplate of varying types topped the most categories, overall, they didn't do as well. if you look at the number 2, 3, 4 and so on cars in the individual groups, you'll see alot more of honda, toyota, etc, especially in comparison to how many vehicles they have out there. a huge chunk of honda/acura and toyota/lexus/scion are on those lists. they just don't have the obnoxious amount of rebadged cars that ford does.

the overall standings are a tidbit better to rely on since they take all of the data into consideration, just not one particular car topping this list or that, if you know what i mean.

i think the data is semi-accurate/useable, but it is presented in a really poor format! :thumbsdow

agree with one of the poters above.... take a look at 10 year old cars or older, and see how many are still on the road.... i'm still seeing alot of 4th gen accords myself, alot of them my color too.... :banana:

i'm still seeing alot of 4th gen accords myself, alot of them my color too>>>

There are a lot of 4th gens still on the road around here as well.

in fact, it seems like that there are a bit more 4th gens than 5th gens still on the road....

most of the 4th gens i have seen have little, if any, rust either....

if i compare my accord to the others that i normally see, i come to find that the body on mine needs some major work. :paranoid: