Topic: Lexus, Toyota, Acura Tops CR Reliability Survey 2013

[Sir Osis of Liver]

People alleged stupidity aside, if it's harder to use,more complicated,and more distracting than similar control systems in other cars I'd say it's a fair knock against Ford.

Also, if large numbers of Ford's customers have trouble figuring out than Ford has  a problem with the system period.

Ergonomic issues are completely irrelevant to reliability study. I only want to know if something is going to break. I don't particularly care if great uncle Edgar can't figure out how to change suspension settings.

[Fobroader]

As far as I know MFT is a stand alone option is it not?? If Ford had half a brain they would make it optional on everything. It is a huge pain in the ass to use, its counterintuitive and to actually get it to work you have to sit down and learn it. Like I said, I think its useless and a huge PITA to use, but it shouldnt affect CRs reliability rankings.

[CanuckS2K]

People alleged stupidity aside, if it's harder to use,more complicated,and more distracting than similar control systems in other cars I'd say it's a fair knock against Ford.

Also, if large numbers of Ford's customers have trouble figuring out than Ford has  a problem with the system period.

Ergonomic issues are completely irrelevant to reliability study. I only want to know if something is going to break. I don't particularly care if great uncle Edgar can't figure out how to change suspension settings.

Agree 100%!  If people don't like MFT or find it frustrating to use that's fine......but it's NOT a reliability issue.  Same with the comments in that article on the other vehicles, they have NOTHING to do with reliability! 

[Snowman]

  Am I missing something. CR is removing its recommended rating and not the reliability rating. There are many cars that are rated high but do not have a recommend check mark. I think you are confusing the two 

[tooscoops]

i think people are just talking about the "10 least reliable cars for 2013" listed by CR...

unless the heading is horribly wrong, i'd say that's the reliability index that has changed.

[sailor723]

Am I missing something. CR is removing its recommended rating and not the reliability rating. There are many cars that are rated high but do not have a recommend check mark. I think you are confusing the two 

That's what I wondered. I know CR removed the "recommended" rating from Fords because of MFT's bugs and user unfriendlyness.

OTOH I can see owners responding to the CR reliability survey indicating "problems" with controls or electronics if they can't get MFT to work. Large numbers of owners reporting "trouble" would certainly would show up in the reliability scores.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Am I missing something. CR is removing its recommended rating and not the reliability rating. There are many cars that are rated high but do not have a recommend check mark. I think you are confusing the two 

They give the Focus a solid black for audio equipment, which is apparently enough to drop it's reliability rating to below average. They include all complaints such as frequent rebooting along with complaints regarding usability: "I can't tune the radio." It muddies actual problems with usability.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Another thing regarding MFT, you don't even have to use it for common functions. There are redundant controls on the steering wheel and the voice commands which work really well. They even worked for me, and I'm a mumbler. My Subaru system never knew what I was going on about.

[redman]

Another thing regarding MFT, you don't even have to use it for common functions. There are redundant controls on the steering wheel and the voice commands which work really well. They even worked for me, and I'm a mumbler. My Subaru system never knew what I was going on about.

Yes, but would it work for either one of these guys. Now that would be some speech recognition software !!

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Another thing regarding MFT, you don't even have to use it for common functions. There are redundant controls on the steering wheel and the voice commands which work really well. They even worked for me, and I'm a mumbler. My Subaru system never knew what I was going on about.

Yes but would it work for him. Now that would be some speech recognition software

  Nice!

[Snowman]

Am I missing something. CR is removing its recommended rating and not the reliability rating. There are many cars that are rated high but do not have a recommend check mark. I think you are confusing the two 

They give the Focus a solid black for audio equipment, which is apparently enough to drop it's reliability rating to below average. They include all complaints such as frequent rebooting along with complaints regarding usability: "I can't tune the radio." It muddies actual problems with usability.

Which CR site are you on  I also see two block dots in 2012-13 for transmission.


"All versions of the Focus are fun to drive. Its supple and controlled ride, low noise levels, and solid interior make it feel substantial. The 160-hp four-cylinder provides adequate acceleration, but the automatic transmission isn't so smooth at low speeds. Both the hatchback and sedan SE versions got 28 mpg overall; the SFE returned 31 mpg overall. The rear seat is tight even by small-car standards, and some controls are needlessly complex. The sporty ST is a wickedly fun performance hatchback with a powerful turbo engine, while the Focus Electric is one of the best EVs available. In our tests we averaged 80 miles of range per charge. Energy consumption was the equivalent of 107 mpg. Reliability has been well below average".

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Am I missing something. CR is removing its recommended rating and not the reliability rating. There are many cars that are rated high but do not have a recommend check mark. I think you are confusing the two 

They give the Focus a solid black for audio equipment, which is apparently enough to drop it's reliability rating to below average. They include all complaints such as frequent rebooting along with complaints regarding usability: "I can't tune the radio." It muddies actual problems with usability.

Which CR site are you on  I also see two block dots in 2012-13 for transmission.


"All versions of the Focus are fun to drive. Its supple and controlled ride, low noise levels, and solid interior make it feel substantial. The 160-hp four-cylinder provides adequate acceleration, but the automatic transmission isn't so smooth at low speeds. Both the hatchback and sedan SE versions got 28 mpg overall; the SFE returned 31 mpg overall. The rear seat is tight even by small-car standards, and some controls are needlessly complex. The sporty ST is a wickedly fun performance hatchback with a powerful turbo engine, while the Focus Electric is one of the best EVs available. In our tests we averaged 80 miles of range per charge. Energy consumption was the equivalent of 107 mpg. Reliability has been well below average".

Yeah, they have a below average for "transmission, minor". There again, as I mentioned above, does that mean it needed to be repaired, or is it a re-flash or is it something else? Everything else is above average, or well above average.

[Snowman]

Am I missing something. CR is removing its recommended rating and not the reliability rating. There are many cars that are rated high but do not have a recommend check mark. I think you are confusing the two 

They give the Focus a solid black for audio equipment, which is apparently enough to drop it's reliability rating to below average. They include all complaints such as frequent rebooting along with complaints regarding usability: "I can't tune the radio." It muddies actual problems with usability.

Which CR site are you on  I also see two block dots in 2012-13 for transmission.


"All versions of the Focus are fun to drive. Its supple and controlled ride, low noise levels, and solid interior make it feel substantial. The 160-hp four-cylinder provides adequate acceleration, but the automatic transmission isn't so smooth at low speeds. Both the hatchback and sedan SE versions got 28 mpg overall; the SFE returned 31 mpg overall. The rear seat is tight even by small-car standards, and some controls are needlessly complex. The sporty ST is a wickedly fun performance hatchback with a powerful turbo engine, while the Focus Electric is one of the best EVs available. In our tests we averaged 80 miles of range per charge. Energy consumption was the equivalent of 107 mpg. Reliability has been well below average".

Yeah, they have a below average for "transmission, minor". There again, as I mentioned above, does that mean it needed to be repaired, or is it a re-flash or is it something else? Everything else is above average, or well above average.

It has a score of 71 and right in the middle of the pack. I would not consider that bad, right there with the Civic 

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Am I missing something. CR is removing its recommended rating and not the reliability rating. There are many cars that are rated high but do not have a recommend check mark. I think you are confusing the two 

They give the Focus a solid black for audio equipment, which is apparently enough to drop it's reliability rating to below average. They include all complaints such as frequent rebooting along with complaints regarding usability: "I can't tune the radio." It muddies actual problems with usability.

Which CR site are you on  I also see two block dots in 2012-13 for transmission.


"All versions of the Focus are fun to drive. Its supple and controlled ride, low noise levels, and solid interior make it feel substantial. The 160-hp four-cylinder provides adequate acceleration, but the automatic transmission isn't so smooth at low speeds. Both the hatchback and sedan SE versions got 28 mpg overall; the SFE returned 31 mpg overall. The rear seat is tight even by small-car standards, and some controls are needlessly complex. The sporty ST is a wickedly fun performance hatchback with a powerful turbo engine, while the Focus Electric is one of the best EVs available. In our tests we averaged 80 miles of range per charge. Energy consumption was the equivalent of 107 mpg. Reliability has been well below average".

Yeah, they have a below average for "transmission, minor". There again, as I mentioned above, does that mean it needed to be repaired, or is it a re-flash or is it something else? Everything else is above average, or well above average.

It has a score of 71 and right in the middle of the pack. I would not consider that bad, right there with the Civic 

That's the result of their road test. I was referring to the reliability study.

But yeah, they've got quite a few positive comments for the car. Personally I like them quite a bit. I'd have no issue getting a Titanium with the manual transmission or an ST.

[Snowman]

Am I missing something. CR is removing its recommended rating and not the reliability rating. There are many cars that are rated high but do not have a recommend check mark. I think you are confusing the two 

They give the Focus a solid black for audio equipment, which is apparently enough to drop it's reliability rating to below average. They include all complaints such as frequent rebooting along with complaints regarding usability: "I can't tune the radio." It muddies actual problems with usability.

Which CR site are you on  I also see two block dots in 2012-13 for transmission.


"All versions of the Focus are fun to drive. Its supple and controlled ride, low noise levels, and solid interior make it feel substantial. The 160-hp four-cylinder provides adequate acceleration, but the automatic transmission isn't so smooth at low speeds. Both the hatchback and sedan SE versions got 28 mpg overall; the SFE returned 31 mpg overall. The rear seat is tight even by small-car standards, and some controls are needlessly complex. The sporty ST is a wickedly fun performance hatchback with a powerful turbo engine, while the Focus Electric is one of the best EVs available. In our tests we averaged 80 miles of range per charge. Energy consumption was the equivalent of 107 mpg. Reliability has been well below average".

Yeah, they have a below average for "transmission, minor". There again, as I mentioned above, does that mean it needed to be repaired, or is it a re-flash or is it something else? Everything else is above average, or well above average.

It has a score of 71 and right in the middle of the pack. I would not consider that bad, right there with the Civic 

That's the result of their road test. I was referring to the reliability study.

Can't comment on the weight of each dot.

[Frontier1]

As far as I know MFT is a stand alone option is it not?? If Ford had half a brain they would make it optional on everything. It is a huge pain in the ass to use, its counterintuitive and to actually get it to work you have to sit down and learn it. Like I said, I think its useless and a huge PITA to use, but it shouldnt affect CRs reliability rankings.

In our case, very easy to use, configuring less so.

[ArticSteve]

People alleged stupidity aside, if it's harder to use,more complicated,and more distracting than similar control systems in other cars I'd say it's a fair knock against Ford.

The system is IDIOTIC.  They added some remote slider controls for fan and volume, but they sucked too.  Overall MT ruined the vehicle.  Had it for 3 weeks, 2000 miles in California lately.