Author Topic: Lexus, Toyota, Acura Tops CR Reliability Survey 2013 (Read 7111 times)

Black Hatch · « **on:** October 28, 2013, 10:15:51 pm »

"Japanese car brands continue to dominate in car reliability, but brands from all corners of the globe showed movement in the latest analysis. Lexus, Toyota, and Acura claim the top three spots in predicted reliability rankings by brands. But that is not to say choosing a Japanese-branded car ensures fewer problems."
http://editorial.autos.msn.com/consumer-reports-car-reliability-survey-shows-brands-rising-and-falling?icid=autos_4781
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2013/10/toyota-camry-rav4-no-longer-recommended-safety-concerns/index.htm

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2013/10/japanese-brand-dominance-ends-in-2013-consumer-reports-reliability-study.html
1. Lexus
2. Toyota
3. Acura
4. Audi
5. Mazda
6. Infiniti
7. Volvo
8. Honda
9. GMC
10. Subaru

If you care for Consumer reports...

Snowman · « **Reply #1 on:** October 28, 2013, 10:21:25 pm »

Audi

mmret · « **Reply #2 on:** October 28, 2013, 10:24:13 pm »

Audi is 4 spots ahead of Honda?

CanuckS2K · « **Reply #3 on:** October 28, 2013, 10:40:48 pm »

Never really got the whole "predicted" reliability ratings from CR. Certainly not anything I really ever pay attention to.

Frontier1 · « **Reply #4 on:** October 29, 2013, 05:41:44 am »

Ya, so they take a new car around their loop for a ride, then park it in a front of a big crystal ball. I must be the only lucky Nissan driver that only ever has to do oil changes.

Sir Osis of Liver · « **Reply #5 on:** October 30, 2013, 01:03:20 am »

Ford got creamed for MFT. CR continues not to distinguish between ergonomics and reliability.

Frontier1 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 31, 2013, 05:54:22 am »

Quote from: Sir Osis of Liver on October 30, 2013, 01:03:20 am

Ford got creamed for MFT. CR continues not to distinguish between ergonomics and reliability.

Nissan as well, and I can relate, there is no way my wife can figure out the radio/nav/bluetooth system in her VersaNote, but again nor is she very good with Windows and PCs in general or anything techy. I'll have to configure it for her before she gets upset with it. Therefore we have to picture that a lot of people are even worse than her. Then we also have the problem that not all phones are compatible with all the features by looking at the list of various manufacturers, so if the buyer or the salesman dont know this before hand someone might just end up peeved.

tooscoops · « **Reply #7 on:** October 31, 2013, 12:07:01 pm »

was reading some of the cr stuff lately.... i think it's like the first time that chrysler doesn't have anything in the "worth ten" list.... 50% fords... i'm sure it's all because of myfordtouch or whatever... or at least most of it.

yeah, i generally assume peoples phones will be compatible... i always say as long as it has bluetooth, but i have some customers who just think cellphone = bluetooth. i feel like if the person is unable to pair the phone, they are also probably unable to drive and talk on the phone at the same time anyway.... no offense meant.

blotter · « **Reply #8 on:** October 31, 2013, 12:52:16 pm »

look at Volvo!

Quote

CR continues not to distinguish between ergonomics and reliability.

that's the biggest issue I take with this. While some ergonomics are common sense, some of it is also suggestive.

Fobroader · « **Reply #9 on:** October 31, 2013, 12:54:15 pm »

Quote from: Sir Osis of Liver on October 30, 2013, 01:03:20 am

Ford got creamed for MFT. CR continues not to distinguish between ergonomics and reliability.

While I H-A-T-E the MFT system with an undying passion, it has nothing to do with reliability.

tooscoops · « **Reply #10 on:** October 31, 2013, 01:00:47 pm »

while i'm totally generalizing, i feel that the type of buyer who uses (solely) consumer reports are the type of buyer who buys simple options intending on the car lasting for over a decade. hardly the type of buyer who will be opting for the mft option.

ah well. just one source of information... hopefully everyone who reads it takes it with a grain of salt.

Fobroader · « **Reply #11 on:** October 31, 2013, 01:21:44 pm »

Quote from: tooscoops on October 31, 2013, 01:00:47 pm

while i'm totally generalizing, i feel that the type of buyer who uses (solely) consumer reports are the type of buyer who buys simple options intending on the car lasting for over a decade. hardly the type of buyer who will be opting for the mft option.

ah well. just one source of information... hopefully everyone who reads it takes it with a grain of salt.

While a crowd of gearheads like whats on here would take anything car related with a grain of salt, but for the vast majority of people CR is the word of god.

redman · « **Reply #12 on:** October 31, 2013, 01:22:05 pm »

Autoguide has also published CR's Top Ten List of least reliable vehicles. It seems that Ford is be lambasted by it's readers. Justified or not.

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2013/05/top-10-least-reliable-cars-and-trucks.html

sailor723 · « **Reply #13 on:** October 31, 2013, 01:35:34 pm »

Quote from: Sir Osis of Liver on October 30, 2013, 01:03:20 am

Ford got creamed for MFT. CR continues not to distinguish between ergonomics and reliability.

I thought they originally slagged it as a safety hazard. IE...It was so complicated and hard to use that they felt people would be distracted trying to use it and get into more accidents..

CanuckS2K · « **Reply #14 on:** October 31, 2013, 01:40:23 pm »

Quote from: redman on October 31, 2013, 01:22:05 pm

Autoguide has also published CR's Top Ten List of least reliable vehicles. It seems that Ford is be lambasted by it's readers. Justified or not.

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2013/05/top-10-least-reliable-cars-and-trucks.html

CR is getting more and more pathetic! That list was brutal. Since when does things like a tight backseat, visibility, stiff ride, unrefined tranny, etc have anything to do with reliability. I don't think I read one single thing reliability wise in that link.

sailor723 · « **Reply #15 on:** October 31, 2013, 01:44:48 pm »

Quote from: CanuckS2K on October 31, 2013, 01:40:23 pm

Quote from: redman on October 31, 2013, 01:22:05 pm
Autoguide has also published CR's Top Ten List of least reliable vehicles. It seems that Ford is be lambasted by it's readers. Justified or not.

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2013/05/top-10-least-reliable-cars-and-trucks.html

CR is getting more and more pathetic! That list was brutal. Since when does things like a tight backseat, visibility, stiff ride, unrefined tranny, etc have anything to do with reliability. I don't think I read one single thing reliability wise in that link.

Well, lack of visibility is arguably a safety issue but I have to agree on the others.

Sir Osis of Liver · « **Reply #16 on:** October 31, 2013, 01:45:07 pm »

The first one on the list is the Flex, which they continue to recommend. So what does that mean exactly?

The Focus was another example, Everything is in the red except for audio equipment and "transmission, minor". Even with the transmission, they don't distinguish between it needing a reflash, or needing actual repairs.

It's getting difficult to tease out which cars are actually problematic.

Fobroader · « **Reply #17 on:** October 31, 2013, 01:48:20 pm »

Quote from: sailor723 on October 31, 2013, 01:35:34 pm

Quote from: Sir Osis of Liver on October 30, 2013, 01:03:20 am
Ford got creamed for MFT. CR continues not to distinguish between ergonomics and reliability.

I thought they originally slagged it as a safety hazard. IE...It was so complicated and hard to use that they felt people would be distracted trying to use it and get into more accidents..

Thats still peoples stupidity, I have a smartphone, but if I walk out into the middle of a busy street and get his by a truck while playing angry birds its not Samsungs fault is it??

Quote from: CanuckS2K on October 31, 2013, 01:40:23 pm

Quote from: redman on October 31, 2013, 01:22:05 pm
Autoguide has also published CR's Top Ten List of least reliable vehicles. It seems that Ford is be lambasted by it's readers. Justified or not.

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2013/05/top-10-least-reliable-cars-and-trucks.html

CR is getting more and more pathetic! That list was brutal. Since when does things like a tight backseat, visibility, stiff ride, unrefined tranny, etc have anything to do with reliability. I don't think I read one single thing reliability wise in that link.

Apparently they have a vendetta against Ford.....

aquadorhj · « **Reply #18 on:** October 31, 2013, 01:55:27 pm »

Quote from: Fobroader on October 31, 2013, 01:48:20 pm

Quote from: sailor723 on October 31, 2013, 01:35:34 pm
Quote from: Sir Osis of Liver on October 30, 2013, 01:03:20 am
Ford got creamed for MFT. CR continues not to distinguish between ergonomics and reliability.

I thought they originally slagged it as a safety hazard. IE...It was so complicated and hard to use that they felt people would be distracted trying to use it and get into more accidents..

Thats still peoples stupidity, I have a smartphone, but if I walk out into the middle of a busy street and get his by a truck while playing angry birds its not Samsungs fault is it??

Quote from: CanuckS2K on October 31, 2013, 01:40:23 pm
Quote from: redman on October 31, 2013, 01:22:05 pm
Autoguide has also published CR's Top Ten List of least reliable vehicles. It seems that Ford is be lambasted by it's readers. Justified or not.

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2013/05/top-10-least-reliable-cars-and-trucks.html

CR is getting more and more pathetic! That list was brutal. Since when does things like a tight backseat, visibility, stiff ride, unrefined tranny, etc have anything to do with reliability. I don't think I read one single thing reliability wise in that link.

Apparently they have a vendetta against Ford.....

don't even think about that Fob... i'm afraid somebody will think that's justified to blame manufacturers.. wouldn't even surprise me, what with all Toyota UA lawsuits...

sailor723 · « **Reply #19 on:** October 31, 2013, 01:55:52 pm »

Quote from: Fobroader on October 31, 2013, 01:48:20 pm

Quote from: sailor723 on October 31, 2013, 01:35:34 pm
Quote from: Sir Osis of Liver on October 30, 2013, 01:03:20 am
Ford got creamed for MFT. CR continues not to distinguish between ergonomics and reliability.

I thought they originally slagged it as a safety hazard. IE...It was so complicated and hard to use that they felt people would be distracted trying to use it and get into more accidents..

Thats still peoples stupidity, I have a smartphone, but if I walk out into the middle of a busy street and get his by a truck while playing angry birds its not Samsungs fault is it??

Quote from: CanuckS2K on October 31, 2013, 01:40:23 pm
Quote from: redman on October 31, 2013, 01:22:05 pm
Autoguide has also published CR's Top Ten List of least reliable vehicles. It seems that Ford is be lambasted by it's readers. Justified or not.

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2013/05/top-10-least-reliable-cars-and-trucks.html

CR is getting more and more pathetic! That list was brutal. Since when does things like a tight backseat, visibility, stiff ride, unrefined tranny, etc have anything to do with reliability. I don't think I read one single thing reliability wise in that link.

Apparently they have a vendetta against Ford.....

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.