Lexus no longer Number 1 on JD Power
03-20-2009, 09:20 AM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,338
Explain the difference if my perception is that the window seal failed and it did actually fail, necessitating replacement.
It is not in any normal car's design specifications to have nail-proof tires. If it WAS and your car did get a nail in the tire then yes, that'd be a reliability issue.
We can argue all day long about the definition of reliability as to whether it stops at point A to point B mechanical functionality.. point is there's a ton of things that go wrong on a car that don't meet that scope of that definition, and I think you'd be crazy to tell me that a car practically falling apart and failing in every way possible except those that allowed you to get to your destination safely, was a reliable car. JD Power obviouisly agrees with my thought process on this. Many people in this thread obviously do not. Regardless, JD Power's definition is far from incorrect... it's just not absolute.
It is not in any normal car's design specifications to have nail-proof tires. If it WAS and your car did get a nail in the tire then yes, that'd be a reliability issue.
We can argue all day long about the definition of reliability as to whether it stops at point A to point B mechanical functionality.. point is there's a ton of things that go wrong on a car that don't meet that scope of that definition, and I think you'd be crazy to tell me that a car practically falling apart and failing in every way possible except those that allowed you to get to your destination safely, was a reliable car. JD Power obviouisly agrees with my thought process on this. Many people in this thread obviously do not. Regardless, JD Power's definition is far from incorrect... it's just not absolute.
Last edited by Threxx; 03-20-2009 at 09:25 AM.
03-20-2009, 09:51 AM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 603
Explain the difference if my perception is that the window seal failed and it did actually fail, necessitating replacement.
It is not in any normal car's design specifications to have nail-proof tires. If it WAS and your car did get a nail in the tire then yes, that'd be a reliability issue.
We can argue all day long about the definition of reliability as to whether it stops at point A to point B mechanical functionality.. point is there's a ton of things that go wrong on a car that don't meet that scope of that definition, and I think you'd be crazy to tell me that a car practically falling apart and failing in every way possible except those that allowed you to get to your destination safely, was a reliable car. JD Power obviouisly agrees with my thought process on this. Many people in this thread obviously do not. Regardless, JD Power's definition is far from incorrect... it's just not absolute.
It is not in any normal car's design specifications to have nail-proof tires. If it WAS and your car did get a nail in the tire then yes, that'd be a reliability issue.
We can argue all day long about the definition of reliability as to whether it stops at point A to point B mechanical functionality.. point is there's a ton of things that go wrong on a car that don't meet that scope of that definition, and I think you'd be crazy to tell me that a car practically falling apart and failing in every way possible except those that allowed you to get to your destination safely, was a reliable car. JD Power obviouisly agrees with my thought process on this. Many people in this thread obviously do not. Regardless, JD Power's definition is far from incorrect... it's just not absolute.
03-20-2009, 10:04 AM
#34
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,338
You are dealing with more of an emotional issue. Not so much actual mechanical issue. What is considered excessive wind noise to one person may not be excessive to another. Engineering tolerances at the auto manufacturer will determine if the seal has failed. Now, if radio buttons are popping off, window switches are cracking/breaking, and electrical gremins along with the wind noise? Then, I'm right with you. The car has serious quality issues that need to be addressed. The main problems reported in the article were wind noise, peeling paint, and brake noise. Peeling paint is most definitely a quality issue. Brake vibration is also a big issue. Will I be able to stop my car in time during a panic stop?
But I am saying in the former case, it's a legitimate complaint, and it makes sense that JD Power includes it. Though it'd probably be a good idea if they made sure people had confirmed that it was actually a problem with their car and not just a normal level of wind noise that they didn't find acceptable.
03-20-2009, 10:14 AM
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 603
Threxx, I see your point, and we place different priorities on wind noise. Nothing wrong with that at all. I drive a 14 year old firebird, and I can barely hear the radio over the exhaust (kind of an exaggeration, but it gets my point across). I also drive a 2004 RX330 on a regular basis. While the lexus is a great car, I do have two issues with it. Both are very subjective. The sunglasses cubby attached to the headliner, near the dome light. When I push the button to get my glasses out, or put them back in, that's fine. When I go to push the cubby back into the headliner, it flops back open, because the button sticks. I have to manually pull the button out, and then close it. Annoying. And, I think the starter turns over too many times before the engine starts running. In my firebird, it's two clicks, turnovers, or whatever you call it, and then VROOM! The lexus goes anywhere from 8-10 times. It always starts, but I don't like what I would consider excessive wear on the starter. The starter is probably within toyota's engineering tolerances, and will probably be the only starter in the vehicle before it is sold, so it would be something subjective, rather than a quantifiable failure, and would not be something I would mention on a JD Power survey.
03-20-2009, 10:33 AM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,338
Threxx, I see your point, and we place different priorities on wind noise. Nothing wrong with that at all. I drive a 14 year old firebird, and I can barely hear the radio over the exhaust (kind of an exaggeration, but it gets my point across). I also drive a 2004 RX330 on a regular basis. While the lexus is a great car, I do have two issues with it. Both are very subjective. The sunglasses cubby attached to the headliner, near the dome light. When I push the button to get my glasses out, or put them back in, that's fine. When I go to push the cubby back into the headliner, it flops back open, because the button sticks. I have to manually pull the button out, and then close it. Annoying. And, I think the starter turns over too many times before the engine starts running. In my firebird, it's two clicks, turnovers, or whatever you call it, and then VROOM! The lexus goes anywhere from 8-10 times. It always starts, but I don't like what I would consider excessive wear on the starter. The starter is probably within toyota's engineering tolerances, and will probably be the only starter in the vehicle before it is sold, so it would be something subjective, rather than a quantifiable failure, and would not be something I would mention on a JD Power survey.
The starter, while I can definitely see it being reported on JD Power as an issue (and here in we get to the area of consumers possibly reporting issues that ARE within design specifications) but I happen to know from personal experience and research after deciding that our 4runner took too long to start up that Toyota/Lexus designs their starting systems to start the engine as lean as possible for emissions reasons... this causes them to intentionally take longer to crank than engines that are less miserly with fuel on startup.
03-20-2009, 10:48 AM
#37
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,488
Jake Robb, on the other hand, could have his brand new Chevrolet's HVAC system fail, radio break, dash lights constantly flickering, tachometer stops working, seat heaters and lumbar stop working, leather on the seats tear at the seams to expose foam, and glove box can't stay latched shut, but he'd still call the car reliable.
03-20-2009, 11:25 AM
#38
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,338
It's easier to consider that car reliable because of its age and mileage though. In a beater car your expectations are lowered. You didn't just drop 30 grand on it to cruise in style and comfort. You bought it to not give a damn if something breaks... just so long as it gets you there in one piece. If you had that happen on a 3 year old car with 36k miles (the average age/mileage of cars in this survey), would you still consider it reliable? Could you really tell somebody asking if your car has been reliable "yes" with a straight face?
03-20-2009, 12:20 PM
#39
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 603
I would consider a car reliable if it does not leave me stranded (whether in my driveway, or 100 miles from home), and I am able to use all the advertised features of the car without issue. Beyond that, in my mind, would be subjective to what the user defines as acceptable.
03-20-2009, 01:02 PM
#40
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,488
It's easier to consider that car reliable because of its age and mileage though. In a beater car your expectations are lowered. You didn't just drop 30 grand on it to cruise in style and comfort. You bought it to not give a damn if something breaks... just so long as it gets you there in one piece. If you had that happen on a 3 year old car with 36k miles (the average age/mileage of cars in this survey), would you still consider it reliable? Could you really tell somebody asking if your car has been reliable "yes" with a straight face?
03-20-2009, 01:17 PM
#41
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Payson, AZ USA
Posts: 1,181
Car manufacturers love someone like you.
On the other hand, most people would not be so generous. They would say that they have had alot of annoying things go wrong with their car, and leave out the part where they still thought it was reliable.
From 0-100K miles, I expect "almost" perfect out of my new vehicle. I maintain them well, keep them clean and shiny, do not abuse them, and make my payments. It is my $20-50K, and I expect to be "rewarded" for spending it on _________ vehicle. This includes a lack of annoyances. Now, that is not to say that I expect absolute perfection. Over the course of time, I expect that a rattle or two may pop up............. and there may be some small failure of some sort (that does not stop me from being able to go from point A to point B). If these things happen in the first 10K miles, you can bet that I am not going to be real happy with my purchase. The closer to 100K they go, the less annoying they become.
Reliability is subjective, based on the individuals definition of what it entails. For every "I think the wind noise around my mirrors is excessive," there will be a "as long as it gets me where I'm going, it is still reliable." This is why your sample size has to be large enough................ so these extremes balance out, and you arrive at the truth.............. which is usually somewhere in the middle.
On the other hand, most people would not be so generous. They would say that they have had alot of annoying things go wrong with their car, and leave out the part where they still thought it was reliable.
From 0-100K miles, I expect "almost" perfect out of my new vehicle. I maintain them well, keep them clean and shiny, do not abuse them, and make my payments. It is my $20-50K, and I expect to be "rewarded" for spending it on _________ vehicle. This includes a lack of annoyances. Now, that is not to say that I expect absolute perfection. Over the course of time, I expect that a rattle or two may pop up............. and there may be some small failure of some sort (that does not stop me from being able to go from point A to point B). If these things happen in the first 10K miles, you can bet that I am not going to be real happy with my purchase. The closer to 100K they go, the less annoying they become.
Reliability is subjective, based on the individuals definition of what it entails. For every "I think the wind noise around my mirrors is excessive," there will be a "as long as it gets me where I'm going, it is still reliable." This is why your sample size has to be large enough................ so these extremes balance out, and you arrive at the truth.............. which is usually somewhere in the middle.
03-20-2009, 01:33 PM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, ON Canada
Posts: 2,402
Jaguar?!?!?!
Jaguar? Jaguar has a loooong way to go to be considered a reliable car. I will take Lexus over Jaguar if reliability is a concern, any day. Design, of course, then it's a different story.
Everyone remembers 80's and 90's Jaguars, leaking oil and being parked in driveways. While they may have improved initial quality, it's not a car that comes to mind when the word "reliability" is mentioned.
Everyone remembers 80's and 90's Jaguars, leaking oil and being parked in driveways. While they may have improved initial quality, it's not a car that comes to mind when the word "reliability" is mentioned.
03-20-2009, 01:37 PM
#43
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,488
If you ask about quality, or how many issues I've had, or anything like that, it's not like I'm going to say everything was fine...
03-20-2009, 01:37 PM
#44
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 603
Jaguar? Jaguar has a loooong way to go to be considered a reliable car. I will take Lexus over Jaguar if reliability is a concern, any day. Design, of course, then it's a different story.
Everyone remembers 80's and 90's Jaguars, leaking oil and being parked in driveways. While they may have improved initial quality, it's not a car that comes to mind when the word "reliability" is mentioned.
Everyone remembers 80's and 90's Jaguars, leaking oil and being parked in driveways. While they may have improved initial quality, it's not a car that comes to mind when the word "reliability" is mentioned.
03-20-2009, 01:49 PM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,338
That sentence needs more detail/qualification. As long as you can rely on it to what? Get you to your destination without a break down? That's a very low bar of expectations in this day and age and possibly by you don't seem to find as much fault with some of the garbage GM has put out in the 80s, 90s, and 00s as most others do.
Let me complete that sentence for myself...
I would like to be able to rely on my car to provide me with all of the creature comforts and capabilities that I paid tens of thousands of dollars for without necessitating multiple headache inducing trips to the dealership to keep them functional. I rely on my car to perform in all ways just as it did from the showroom floor, especially in the first few years of ownership. If my stereo stops working, I obviously can't rely on it to work, can I? My 335i's vapor shield in the driver's side door was improperly seated and let water leak inside my driver's side footwell during a storm. I made it home just fine but I wasn't able to rely on my car to stay dry during a storm. These are all reasonable expectations that I rely on from a new car and when they fail me, the car has become unreliable. No I'm not going to be as frustrated by a leak in my door as I would be by the engine blowing up on me, but they're just different degrees of unreliability.
Let me complete that sentence for myself...
I would like to be able to rely on my car to provide me with all of the creature comforts and capabilities that I paid tens of thousands of dollars for without necessitating multiple headache inducing trips to the dealership to keep them functional. I rely on my car to perform in all ways just as it did from the showroom floor, especially in the first few years of ownership. If my stereo stops working, I obviously can't rely on it to work, can I? My 335i's vapor shield in the driver's side door was improperly seated and let water leak inside my driver's side footwell during a storm. I made it home just fine but I wasn't able to rely on my car to stay dry during a storm. These are all reasonable expectations that I rely on from a new car and when they fail me, the car has become unreliable. No I'm not going to be as frustrated by a leak in my door as I would be by the engine blowing up on me, but they're just different degrees of unreliability.