JD Power 2007 IQS results

Could it be that Benz actually took their critics to heart and shaped up?:eek:

http://i15.tinypic.com/62emddk.jpg

http://i13.tinypic.com/661hjjd.jpg

Cadillac has REALLY slipped in that survey recently. They used to be in the top 5.

Chevy and Saturn especially need to consistantly get above industry average, at least. These are supposed to be the economical, well-built, bread-and-butter divisions now for GM.

Cadillac has REALLY slipped in that survey recently. They used to be in the top 5.


Wow... I didn't even notice that. That's terrible. They're right next to my POS Audi!:D

Cadillac was alway near the top, what did they do to slip? Escalade first year kinks? Same goes for BMW.

Ford and Hyundai really kicked some but :eek: Ford has 4 out of the top ten brands, good for them :thumb:

can someone post the 2006 and 2005 and possibly older for comparison?

There is pretty wide year to year variability for some marks in this survey. Makes me wonder what it really tells you if anything. Also the fact that Prosche is always at the top should tell you something.

2006 and 2007 were done using the same standards of measurement.

2005 was using their older standards and focuses on only number of problems and not anything else such as significance of problems and quality of problem resolution.

http://12.155.133.142/corporate/news/releases/charts/2006082a.gif

http://www.jdpower.com/presspass/pr/images/2005069b.gif

Such drastic changes from one year to the next make me question the validity of the survey (whether the changes are good or bad for my "favored" divisions). :think:

For example, why did Buick slip so badly? They didn't have any brand new launches for '07, did they? The Enclave is just now hitting the streets, and it is an '08 model.

Cadillac had the new GMT900 Escalade for this year, so perhaps there were some teething glitches there or something, but the rest of the lineup has been around since prior to '07.

:think:

Cadillac had the new GMT900 Escalade for this year, so perhaps there were some teething glitches there or something, but the rest of the lineup has been around since prior to '07.

Don't the automakers still practice mid-cycle "de-enhancements" where some parts are replaced by cheaper pieces a few years into the run to save cost, hoping that people won't notice?

god dammit chevy, comeon.

Midsize car - I don't see Toyota Camry anywhere. Mercury Milan and Ford Fusion? They're on the list :)

As for "Sporty Midsize Car", I don't think the Solara is sporty by any means, other than being a convertible.

I am much more concerned about the long-term study. That is where Cadillac is doing well and will hopefully continue to do so.

Don't the automakers still practice mid-cycle "de-enhancements" where some parts are replaced by cheaper pieces a few years into the run to save cost, hoping that people won't notice?Not that I've ever seen or heard of.

:shrug:

Midsize car - I don't see Toyota Camry anywhere. Mercury Milan and Ford Fusion? They're on the list :)

As for "Sporty Midsize Car", I don't think the Solara is sporty by any means, other than being a convertible.

The Camry V6 has had some transmission issues at launch - really pissed some people off.

I actually did a short writeup on my opinion of the Fusion rental car I had in Arizona. To sum it up - it was really impressive for the price.

What you need is a study with a real cohort of vehicles from every manufacturer and objective definition of problems. Run them all for a while and see what happens. Too bad this kind of study would be too costly for anyone to do.

How is Honda so great and Acura not??

Holy crap @ Crysler/Dodge/Jeep :o

How is Honda so great and Acura not??

Holy crap @ Crysler/Dodge/Jeep :o

Acura used to make Hondas + extra quality control + nicer materials + a few extra nice features that would not detract from reliability.

Now Acura is making several vehicles that are FAR gone from their 'honda cousins', feature dramatically different designs, and features on par if not exceeding that of what the competition in Europe is offering.

Remember what used to get Benz, Audi, and BMW in trouble? Too many untested gadgets. Well... looks to me like it got Acura in trouble too.

Even Lexus' LS460 came in second place in its class for initial defects this go 'round because it has so many freakin' toys on it (plus it's a new model launch)

GM didn't have ONE brand above average?

Don't the automakers still practice mid-cycle "de-enhancements" where some parts are replaced by cheaper pieces a few years into the run to save cost, hoping that people won't notice?
Yep, it is the norm in the industry (both imports and domestics). Suppliers have yearly cost savings targets (usually ~3% annually). The changes that are made to reduce cost will almost never improve quality. One example would be to lower the material thickness on a radiator. This saves material cost, but reduces the strength and durability of the part. The razor's edge that you ride is whether or not it effects long term durability. You don't really know that answer because you don't test vehicle level durability.

It's scary stuff sometimes if you are the one repsonsible for releasing the design.

Wow, look at the trend in the industry average over the past 3 surveys.

GM didn't have ONE brand above average?

I did the survey last night on my C6. It's an interesting survey, quite comprehensive. I couldn't think of a single problem, irritation, gripe, or whine about the Corvette. Too bad it's not a separate brand!

I did the survey last night on my C6. It's an interesting survey, quite comprehensive. I couldn't think of a single problem, irritation, gripe, or whine about the Corvette. Too bad it's not a separate brand!

How could you have done the IQS survey on your C6? You've only owned it for half of the 90 day period they want you to report on.

It's scary stuff sometimes if you are the one repsonsible for releasing the design.

QFT. In my opinion, those "mandatory cost reductions" are a terrible idea. Those that engage most heavily in that practice produce predictable results.

My goodness, what the hell happened to Cadillac? :(

And as a closing thought, I'd just like to note that the simple fact that Mercedes has to celebrate their return to the top five should be considered a dismal failure by that company.

I don't understand how the exact same hummer did so good in '05 but sucky now... was the H3 out back then?

Midsize car - I don't see Toyota Camry anywhere. Mercury Milan and Ford Fusion? They're on the list :)

As for "Sporty Midsize Car", I don't think the Solara is sporty by any means, other than being a convertible.

omigod, ive been driving an 07 toyota camry pool car we've got at work the past 2 days and it is complete garbage...just some of the things ive noticed are....

the dash fit and finish is horrible, it is nowhere near where its supposed to be around the air vents, wavy and peels up at the ends.

the door handles dont fit together right and scratc your hands...bad design because it does it on both sides..

the car downshifts in cruise control and will stay at 5k rpms way longer then it needs to once its at the speed you need, felt wrong to me

steering is really sloppy and loose, but touchy at the same time. not enough resistance in the wheel and it wants to wander and jaunt all over the road, plus its loud and looks ugly

why did Buick slip so badly?


Buick actually starting dropping in 2006. I believe it can be attributed to dropping two initial quality award winners-LeSabre and Century. Mostly new models will more than likely result in lower quality ratings.

Look at what GM car won the initial quality award two years in a row- the soon to be discontinued Pontiac Grand Prix. It should be an untouchable name in the lineup.
Instead more alphabet soup is on the way. Total Jimmy Hendrix.

How could you have done the IQS survey on your C6? You've only owned it for half of the 90 day period they want you to report on.

Beats me! They sent me the form, asked me to fill it out. I filled it out, sent it in. Maybe there will actually be some problems in the next few weeks. Oh well.

Don't the automakers still practice mid-cycle "de-enhancements" where some parts are replaced by cheaper pieces a few years into the run to save cost, hoping that people won't notice?
Depending on what you mean, no. Changing components in mid-stream is worse than a nightmare for production, and opens the door for all kinds of liability. Even at Tier 1 and Tier 2 levels, everything is "per spec". I have a spec in front of me right now for a Volvo part that nails down everything about a rivet (a basic blind rivet with a 3/16" aluminum body that you and I can buy at Lowe's or Home Depot today, yet I have to use EXACTLY this rivet by this maker with their marking on it or my company is liable for anything that may result from the failure of this rivet).

Changes are not done unless justified and agreed to by all parties (internal and/or external).

Now that's not to say that some changes can not be driven by cost savings - it certainly does occurr, but that would mean changing it once, and staying with it, not flip-flopping. As IREngineer said - there may be changes, but they go 1 way.

I am unaware of any specific "program" whereby a superior part is used at the start of a run to ensure good reception of the model, then it is replaced by cheezy cheap stuff hoping it won't rear it's head.

Depending on what you mean, no. Changing components in mid-stream is worse than a nightmare for production, and opens the door for all kinds of liability. Even at Tier 1 and Tier 2 levels, everything is "per spec". I have a spec in front of me right now for a Volvo part that nails down everything about a rivet (a basic blind rivet with a 3/16" aluminum body that you and I can buy at Lowe's or Home Depot today, yet I have to use EXACTLY this rivet by this maker with their marking on it or my company is liable for anything that may result from the failure of this rivet).

Changes are not done unless justified and agreed to by all parties (internal and/or external).

Now that's not to say that some changes can not be driven by cost savings - it certainly does occurr, but that would mean changing it once, and staying with it, not flip-flopping. As IREngineer said - there may be changes, but they go 1 way.

I am unaware of any specific "program" whereby a superior part is used at the start of a run to ensure good reception of the model, then it is replaced by cheezy cheap stuff hoping it won't rear it's head.
I could name a few, but fear black Suburbans...and Navigators

I've been saying it whether anyone listens or cares... Ford has game on right now with regards to their building processes and design quality.

All three primary brands below industry average for registered complaints is not just a sign, it's incredible for a company with the financial situation they have. This resounds in confidence that the products are good. Maybe Ford could crack the top 10, or maybe Lincoln, and we would say one line or one plant was on track, but when EVERY one of Ford's primary brands are better than average - well, that's not a fluke.

Look at their recall record since 2005 models were released.
Look at their customer satisfaction record since 2005.
Now this statistic.

I'm not personally surprised, but I am slightly pleased - at least to see it in print for a change and not just heresay.

NOW, if we could just get them to put this wonderful quality into a package that was aggressive and trend-setting instead of bland and uninspiring. :rolleyes: Hinting towards Falcon, Mondeo, Euro Focus, XR8, Ka, Sport Ka, and several others.

As for Toyota's showing... ummm... yeah.
Solara is now a "sporty car"?!?! Well, I guess it must be - Humpy Wheeler chose it as the pace car for the Coca-Cola 600 2 weeks ago at Charlotte. That makes it a sporty car I reckon I guess I suppose. :rolleyes:
They had to stick it in there somewhere.
After all, I see tons of people cross-shopping the Mustang and Solara. :yes:

Now I have to admit, I am disappointed in GM's showing on the overalls, and I seriously think there is something wrong there (with the poll that is). I personally think GM is doing an incredible job recently, and I doubt seriously if the Caddy CTS is getting WORSE as it ages a few years. Buick... OMG. I can't believe they are that far down. GM had the best plant a couple years ago, and I find it almost impossible to think that they completely lost the edge that got them on top. Maybe they will make up for it in the truck segment - the new GMT is rockin'.

Last comment - as someone else said - look at the industry average over the last 3 years... from 118 up to 127.
It's going the wrong way folks!!!
Either the Honda and Toyota buyers are finally starting to tell the truth about their 99-million vehicles that actually DO have a problem here and there, or the entire industry is backing up. :eek:
Any hypotheses.... anyone?

I've been saying it whether anyone listens or cares... Ford has game on right now with regards to their building processes and design quality.

All three primary brands below industry average for registered complaints is not just a sign, it's incredible for a company with the financial situation they have. This resounds in confidence that the products are good. Maybe Ford could crack the top 10, or maybe Lincoln, and we would say one line or one plant was on track, but when EVERY one of Ford's primary brands are better than average - well, that's not a fluke.

Look at their recall record since 2005 models were released.
Look at their customer satisfaction record since 2005.
Now this statistic.

I'm not personally surprised, but I am slightly pleased - at least to see it in print for a change and not just heresay.

NOW, if we could just get them to put this wonderful quality into a package that was aggressive and trend-setting instead of bland and uninspiring. :rolleyes: Hinting towards Falcon, Mondeo, Euro Focus, XR8, Ka, Sport Ka, and several others.

As for Toyota's showing... ummm... yeah.
Solara is now a "sporty car"?!?! Well, I guess it must be - Humpy Wheeler chose it as the pace car for the Coca-Cola 600 2 weeks ago at Charlotte. That makes it a sporty car I reckon I guess I suppose. :rolleyes:
They had to stick it in there somewhere.
After all, I see tons of people cross-shopping the Mustang and Solara. :yes:

Now I have to admit, I am disappointed in GM's showing on the overalls, and I seriously think there is something wrong there (with the poll that is). I personally think GM is doing an incredible job recently, and I doubt seriously if the Caddy CTS is getting WORSE as it ages a few years. Buick... OMG. I can't believe they are that far down. GM had the best plant a couple years ago, and I find it almost impossible to think that they completely lost the edge that got them on top. Maybe they will make up for it in the truck segment - the new GMT is rockin'.

Last comment - as someone else said - look at the industry average over the last 3 years... from 118 up to 127.
It's going the wrong way folks!!!
Either the Honda and Toyota buyers are finally starting to tell the truth about their 99-million vehicles that actually DO have a problem here and there, or the entire industry is backing up. :eek:
Any hypotheses.... anyone?

Just an observation but, in the beginning of this post I see you taking the poll results as a great sign of Ford having their stuff together. Then you go on to GM who has less impressive results, and begin to question the accuracy of the poll.

It's either one or the other. I always hear people praising the results of polls and editorials that they agree with, and condemning those that they don't, but this may be the first time that I've seen in one complete post, a poll's results both taken for granted, and questioned at the same time.

I could name a few, but fear black Suburbans...and Navigators

Hehehe! :D

I won't say there aren't a few suppliers who wouldn't swap a part here and there to save a penny, but they aren't supposed to.

I have no problem claiming that I will not ever endorse it though. That kind of activity is cancerous to morale, quality, and eventually the company's reputation IMO. Besides, I am the kind of guy who pays a premium for a better product anyways... my tools, my appliances, my clothes, etc. It's just my philosophy to seek the right part first, then work on pricing.

Hopefully this kind of thing is going away as competition gets tougher instead of it becoming more prevalent.
A recall for a few million vehicles having faulty switches because you saved $.03/each can have a somewhat negative affect on a companys outlook. :yes:

I think it has been stated that JD Power has changed their methods, which could explain why the average has risen over the last couple of years....

Just an observation but, in the beginning of this post I see you taking the poll results as a great sign of Ford having their stuff together. Then you go on to GM who has less impressive results, and begin to question the accuracy of the poll.

It's either one or the other. I always hear people praising the results of polls and editorials that they agree with, and condemning those that they don't, but this may be the first time that I've seen in one complete post, a poll's results both taken for granted, and questioned at the same time.

I admit it readily - not ashamed of it either.

I said in my post that it was pleasing to see Ford get "something good" in writing for a change, and - separately from the poll - I think based on my first-hand experiences that Ford DOES INDEED have a fantastic program in place now for quality control and good design. Just coincidence or actual good polling - I can't say which, all I know is Ford finally got a bone thrown their way.

Likewise, I am perplexed by GM's lack of presence. I personally think their products are better than some of the ones listed in the results, and should be there. I can not explain why they are not. Again, my personal subjective feelings.

You are correct - I contradict myself (or the poll) based on validity of the poll, but my comments were based on subjective feeling, not fact. :shrug:

As I reread your post, I think you may have misunderstood my take on Ford's success. I have been claiming for many months that Ford is on a tear. No recalls of the new Mustang since introduction - which on a new platform, new drivetrain(s) - yes plural, new interior, new computer controls, new suspension, new everything - that's pretty d@mn impressive. Same goes for the new F150, and several other new releases like 500 and Milan.
So at the beginning of my other post, I am not saying "the poll is based on facts so I am right", I am saying "The poll and I have come to similar conclusions regarding Ford products" - my conclusion being subjective and personal, theirs being... hell, I honestly don't have a clue how they did it this year... I'll have to read and find out.

I think it has been stated that JD Power has changed their methods, which could explain why the average has risen over the last couple of years....

Yes... it was stated earlier. Nobody reads, though.:p (http://web.camaross.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4646133&postcount=7)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19073071/



DETROIT - Ford supplanted Toyota as the leader of the pack in initial quality rankings, taking the top spot in five of 19 segments in the 2007 survey by J.D. Power and Associates, released Wednesday.

Porsche again dominated the overall ranking of brands, averaging 91 problems per 100 vehicles as it had last year. That compared with a 2007 industry average of 125 problems per 100 vehicles. Last year it was 124.

Ford Motor Co. earned segment awards for the Ford Mustang, Lincoln Mark LT, Lincoln MKZ, Mercury Milan and Mazda MX-5 Miata. Mazda is 33.4 percent owned by Ford.

Toyota Motor Corp., which grabbed the top spot in 11 segments last year, captured only four this year — the 4Runner, Sequoia, Tacoma and Lexus RX350/RX400h.

Ford’s Lincoln brand took third in overall nameplate rankings, averaging 100 problems per 100 vehicles. It was behind Porsche and Toyota’s Lexus luxury brand, which averaged 94 problems per vehicles.

Lincoln jumped from 12th in 2006.

“We saw dramatic improvement from Lincoln,” said Neal Oddes, J.D. Power’s director of product research and analysis. “It was a fantastic year for the Mercury Milan, with dramatic improvements in terms of defects.”

Overall, he said, Ford’s strength came from new launches such as the Edge, MKX and MKZ.

Toyota had seen its list of quality leaders decrease in a quality study released Monday by Strategic Vision Inc., a San Diego-based market research company and consultant to automakers. Despite improving its overall quality, Toyota led in one category in that study — down from four in 2006. South Korean automaker Hyundai Motor Co. led in five categories, outperforming its Japanese, European and U.S. competitors. Last year, it had no winners.

In the J.D. Power survey, Hyundai fell from third overall to 12th. Oddes said relaunched vehicles such as the Santa Fe did not do as well as the automaker had hoped. On the plus side, the redesigned Elantra performed well in its segment.

For the study, Westlake Village, Calif.-based J.D. Power collected responses from more than 97,000 buyers and lessees of new 2007 model year vehicles after 90 days of ownership.

This year’s survey included 228 questions and asked for information specifically about design and production, such as defects and malfunctions.

Someone posted an IQS once, it had questions about "Do you like the amount of cup holders the vehicle has"

:think:

Ford, above the industry average ? I cant believe that. :confused:

Don't the automakers still practice mid-cycle "de-enhancements" where some parts are replaced by cheaper pieces a few years into the run to save cost, hoping that people won't notice?

Oh you'd better believe GM did it, and did it for a long, LONG time. The Martian and I had a long talk at BG '05 about how GM's model lines would be DE-enhanced versus enhanced as their life cycle grew, which is the polar opposite to what makes sense. As the competition gets better products, why do you want to make your's worse?

As for these pieces causing quality issues such that IQS would pick up, I don't think GM would do THAT. They don't want the cars breaking down more...just that they would cheapen upholstery, lessen standard features, etc...

Depending on what you mean, no. Changing components in mid-stream is worse than a nightmare for production, and opens the door for all kinds of liability. Even at Tier 1 and Tier 2 levels, everything is "per spec". I have a spec in front of me right now for a Volvo part that nails down everything about a rivet (a basic blind rivet with a 3/16" aluminum body that you and I can buy at Lowe's or Home Depot today, yet I have to use EXACTLY this rivet by this maker with their marking on it or my company is liable for anything that may result from the failure of this rivet).

Changes are not done unless justified and agreed to by all parties (internal and/or external).

Now that's not to say that some changes can not be driven by cost savings - it certainly does occurr, but that would mean changing it once, and staying with it, not flip-flopping. As IREngineer said - there may be changes, but they go 1 way.

I am unaware of any specific "program" whereby a superior part is used at the start of a run to ensure good reception of the model, then it is replaced by cheezy cheap stuff hoping it won't rear it's head.This is how I originally interpreted his question, too, and why I also said "no" for my response.

The Martian and I had a long talk at BG '05 about how GM's model lines would be DE-enhanced versus enhanced as their life cycle grew, which is the polar opposite to what makes sense.

That's exactly what I remembered, and why I mentioned it. Thanks Jase.

As for these pieces causing quality issues such that IQS would pick up, I don't think GM would do THAT. They don't want the cars breaking down more...just that they would cheapen upholstery, lessen standard features, etc...

Well if I'm not mistaken, IQS is meant to measure quality defects of any kind in the first 90 days of ownership. That would include upholstery/interior problems, etc. Suppose GM cheapens a fastener a few years into the run and as a result an interior panel comes loose. I'd think that would be picked up on the survey. :shrug:

Ya know, I really don't believe the early 4th Gen's had problems with their power window motors. My '94 Z28 windows rolled up quickly and without fail even after 100,000 miles. My '01 on the other hand is already showing signs of failure on both sides at half the miles and half the time. Perhaps this is an example? :think:

steering is really sloppy and loose, but touchy at the same time. not enough resistance in the wheel and it wants to wander and jaunt all over the road, plus its loud and looks ugly

I drove a newer model Toyota SUV (the big one). I felt like I was chasing the thing all over the road. Steering wandered, and was touchy as hell. If that is what magazine writer's call precise, and responsive; they are most definately crackpots.

Ford, above the industry average ? I cant believe that. :confused:

Well you could counter with Consumer Reports I suppose, it seems to me (speaking Mustang only) that they rated the S-197 below average in reliability. Caue you know, they are like experts at everything.