What is life like with your car? Let us know and win £500 in John Lewis vouchers | No thanks
Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - JimmyV

I have my doubts about taking the reliability ratings for the face value. The top rated car in Reliability Index is Kia Picanto and the "popular" reliable car VW golf is at 97. At first it looked like people's perception is not acually reality. On closer inspection I can see some interesting flaws in the ratings. The average mileage of Kia is 26000, but VW's is 60000. The chances for a high mileage car going to garage is much higher. Say, they took that into consideration in their "index" calculation. But, I did not see seperate ratings for different versions of the same model. I don't think Kia picanto has an option for a high power engine(even if it is there I doubt if people buy it). The Golf have some pretty powerful engines and sport suspensions in some versions(for which there are many takes I presume). Surely these top end cars risk more garage time considering how these car is going to be used. This can affect the Golf's rating as a whole which is not fair.

In certain cases the reliability ratings can act as a guide I suppose. But the ratings can be far from truth unless someone tell me my assumptions about how they rate is wrong.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - unthrottled

The data is taken from aftermarket warranty companies. If you believe that each car on the road has an equal probability of being covered by an aftermarket warranty, then the data represents a fair cross section of cars and is indictative of relative reliability. Otherwise the data is total bunk.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - JimmyV

Even if we consider the cars have equal probability of being covered by aftermarket warranty, how is it justified a car model which has a versions of insanely powerful engines and sport suspension compared with another car which has only a range of economical engines. Also, what about diesel engines, automatic gearboxes which are prone to problems? One maufactuer can have none of these options for a particular model and come on top of the index. In reality, if compared like for like, the poor index rating car could come on top. For example a Golf petrol below 100 PS with manual transmission could be more reliable than a Kia Picanto with the same parameters. Hence kia in number 1 and golf is number 97 could be not that real. I haven't seen the ratings agency taking these into consideration.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - unthrottled

I don't think I understand your point. How does the (specific) output of an engine change the basis of comparing reliability? It is the design team's job to make sure the car does what it says on the tin. It's perfectly valid to expect an engine with 100hp/litre to be as reliable one with 50hp/litre since the design team should have ensured that it was up to the job before releasing it to the market. Unlike HD engines, car engines' average output is small and has little to do with the maximum rated power.

Sports suspensions are a little different. Like clutches, their reliability is largely down to operator (mis)use which is why there are exemptions/restrictions to warranty on these components.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - Collos25

In Germany its taken from the ADAC every car they visit for a breakdown is logged put into a computer program and once a year it spews out facts as to what is the most reliable car.As just about everybody in Germany is in the ADAC its normally a pretty fair assessment.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - madf

Just look at the technical queries on this forum. The ones missing are reliable. The rest are not...

(Supercars and £50k BMWs/Mercs are excluded of course: their owners can afford to pay for repairs)

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - JimmyV

I don't necessarily agree with that logic. It is like me saying I am fitter than Usain Bolt because I am not getting any injuries.

A basic bland car with a low tech engine(please dont relate this with the previous analogy) will attract certain customers who are extremely careful with their investment and hence the chances of car ending up in garage is extremely low

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - madf

A basic bland car with a low tech engine(please dont relate this with the previous analogy) will attract certain customers who are extremely careful with their investment and hence the chances of car ending up in garage is extremely low

You mean the lack of Honda and Toyota owners mean they all have low tech engines.?

ROFL

Most of the user issues are little to do with engines directly.. and all to do with car electronics

See Renault dashboards going blank...

And who says the Ford TDCI engien is high tech? When VW and Nercedes and Toyota can make diesels which don'tt blow up their turbos...

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - JimmyV

---You mean the lack of Honda and Toyota owners mean they all have low tech engines.?

Sorry, I didn't mean to mention "engine" in particular. However, the more complicated tech the car is, the more repair costs are, which will affect reliability ratings.Car manufactureres can play "safe" to build a perfectly reliable car.

And no disrespect to the Japanese car makers. But thier relatively careful driver profile may have helped their consistent lead in the reliability surveys.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - TeeCee

In Germany its taken from the ADAC every car they visit for a breakdown is logged put into a computer program and once a year it spews out facts as to what is the most reliable car.As just about everybody in Germany is in the ADAC its normally a pretty fair assessment.

Probably about as fair as you can get. In a similar vein I was in a mate's 1.8 Nissan Primera when it gave up the ghost on the A1. He phoned his insurer's breakdown service and a tow truck duly turned up. The bloke looked at it, said "probably crank sensor, nothing I can do here" and towed it in. When at their garage it turned out they were going to have to take us and the car back:

"Can't you fix it?"

"No. We have no parts for these. In fact we don't even have manuals for these cars, they never break down."

Me: Indicates car and raises eyebrow.

"Look. We handle this stretch of the A1 for most insurers' cover, Green Flag, Europ Assistance and we also cover for the AA and RAC. RAC are worst, they only call us when they've run out of ways to fob off the customer, so their people are always furious when we arrive. We've been doing this for over a decade and this is the second Nissan we have ever been called to, the other one was a Micra which the lady had filled with diesel."

"If modern cars are so reliable, what keeps you in business?"

"Ooooh, anything French. Or Italian....."

After that we discussed marques and relaibility at length. His experiences reflected popular opinion. Japanese cars most reliable, then German stuff, then the GMs, Rovers and Fords forming the mid-table mediocrity, then the Italian makes and the French stuff bringing up the rear. This was before Korean cars became common (Daewoo were new at the time) and prior to Renault infecting Nissan with their gremlins.

Oh BTW. He was right, it was the crank sensor and my mate got the recall two weeks later......

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - JimmyV

Japanese cars most reliable, then German stuff, then the GMs, Rovers and Fords forming the mid-table mediocrity, then the Italian makes and the French stuff bringing up the rear. This was before Korean cars became common (Daewoo were new at the time) and prior to Renault infecting Nissan with their gremlins..

Order the following according to the chances that you can see a complete moron of a driver in the driver seat.

1.Toyota Avensis

2.Honda Accord

3. BMW 3 Series

4.Mercedes Benz C class

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - JimmyV

I am not saying that high power eqaute to less reliability. As someone mentioned in the same thread, a specific variant could attract specific type of customers. Youth love high power cars and tend to abuse it. No matter how many tests are done, the more the engine go to the red line the more chances that it is going to break. So, even though it is not actually the cars fault they tend to go to garage more often.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - unthrottled

No matter how many tests are done, the more the engine go to the red line the more chances that it is going to break.

Does it? When Honda began selling their high revving little 4 pots in the US, people couldn't believe that they could compete with big ol' V8s in terms of longevity. They did. And then some.

Your ability to use a lot of power is very limited in the real world. Most faults come down to silly errors (either cost cutting at the maufacturing end, or muppetry on the operators' part.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - JimmyV

Lets put it this way. All I am stating is

chances of a car developing a fault in the hands of a uncivilized/ unskilled/inconsiderate/aggressive... driver is much more than in the hands of a proper driver. And the former profile of drivers tend to buy certain kind of cars which might affect the cars reliability ratings even though the fault might not be the cars.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - RT

No matter how many tests are done, the more the engine go to the red line the more chances that it is going to break.

Does it? When Honda began selling their high revving little 4 pots in the US, people couldn't believe that they could compete with big ol' V8s in terms of longevity. They did. And then some.

Your ability to use a lot of power is very limited in the real world. Most faults come down to silly errors (either cost cutting at the maufacturing end, or muppetry on the operators' part.

And Subaru reliability doesn't seem to be adversely affected by all their engines love of rpm.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - Engineer Andy

I suppose it depends on whether they break down models into all their sub-variants or not, for instance my Mazda3 1.6 petrol TS2 has always been said to be very reliable, but ONLY if you don't get the traction and stability control packages (I was "lucky" and got the continental version, which doesn't for some reason, having other features instead), which have had problems (shared with many other cars from other makes using the same equipment). The same goes for the diesel versions (DMF/DPF issues from the Ford-PAS sourced engines).

I think also the "Reliability Index" cannot in my opinion be completely fair, as certain types of car owners will be attracted to their policies, possibly older buyers buying a car from new, wishing to ensure "peace of mind" after the manafacturer's warranty is up (these people may do lower mileage but not thrash the car, buy a certain type of vehicle, so this would reflect in the type/number of claims brought) or other buyers who only buy second hand and don't pay much attention to decent servicing and/or have a driving style/mileage that affects the car negatively - they may buy different cars altogether from the first group.

These "ratings" should be only a rough guide in my opinion, given the above - and that everyone drives and looks after their cars differently. A good example is how my car's stable-mate, the RX8, is always given really poor reliability ratings - my belief is that they break down because people buy them and think they can be used as a "weekend car", intersperced with short trips to the shops, which as many of us know, knackers the engine and CAT. If owners drove them in the manner recommended by the manufacturer (especially for high-performance sportscars), then they would likely be more reliable.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - 72 dudes

Some years ago I owned a 2001 Citroen C5 and was amazed when it appeared just above the Nissan Micra in the What Car? reliability index. (about number 15 IIRC)

I wrote to the editor of the magazine and asked him why then did his publication have such a negative view of the C5's reliability.

"We'll look into" was the gist of the reply. He copied his Used Car Editor into the reply. When I had heard nothing after 2 weeks, I wrote back to the Used Car Editor, copying in the Editor.

I'm still waiting to hear back 6 years later.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - Bobbin Threadbare

The adage 'lies, damn lies and statistics' springs to mind. You can make any numbers say anything you want them to if you 'analyse' them in the right way.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - RT

Have you noticed how a dealers' attitude alters to common problems when the warranty ends - during the warranty period it's a case of "we've never heard of this issue on this model" but once the warranty ends and customer pays for everything it's a case of "yes, they all do that, it's a design fault"

The only guide to true reliability I've ever found is to use Glass's or similar value for p/x trade-in - the trade puts it's money where it's mouth is and pays more for better models and less for the worst models.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - JimmyV

------ A good example is how my car's stable-mate, the RX8, is always given really poor reliability ratings - my belief is that they break down because people buy them and think they can be used as a "weekend car", ------------

Thats exactly my point.The typical customer profile of Japanese cars might be helping their reliability record.

Edited by JimmyV on 04/12/2012 at 20:29

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - sandy56

I do not agree.

I have owned Fords Vauxhalls BMW AUDI SAAB and Toyota to name a few.

Overall what car wouldI buy if iI have to pay for it and maintain it- A Toyota.

I have reviewed reliabilty data from the UK, USA Germany on all sorts of cars and the facts are quite simple, on average Japanese makes are more reliable. Even the German own statistical reviews agree that the Japs have them beat on reliability.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - JimmyV

I do not agree.

I have owned Fords Vauxhalls BMW AUDI SAAB and Toyota to name a few.

Overall what car wouldI buy if iI have to pay for it and maintain it- A Toyota.

I have reviewed reliabilty data from the UK, USA Germany on all sorts of cars and the facts are quite simple, on average Japanese makes are more reliable. Even the German own statistical reviews agree that the Japs have them beat on reliability.

Reliability "data" is in question here. However I will be curious to find out about your own experiences. A fair comparision would be between VW and Toyota as both makes car for the mass market.

1)When you say when you have to pay for it and maintain it, are you saying that the Germans are expensive to buy and service or they are more prone to a breakdown/fault comapred to the Japs? These two are different things.

2) Assuming you had relaibility issues with the Germans, the specific area of fault you find in the German car was available for you in the Jap car?

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - RT
I have reviewed reliabilty data from the UK, USA Germany on all sorts of cars and the facts are quite simple, on average Japanese makes are more reliable. Even the German own statistical reviews agree that the Japs have them beat on reliability.

You can't use reliability data from the USA - many of the cars they use there are built in different factories, typically US factories away from the Detroit skill base, to the apparently identical models we buy here - that does have a bearing on reliabilty as US-built Japanese, Korean and German brands don't seem to be as reliable as the models built in Japan, Korea and Germany that we buy - that's anecdotal but they do get major issues that simply aren't an issue here - and that's despite their obsession in the USA with frequent "lube services" as frequently as every 3,000 miles.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - madf
I have reviewed reliabilty data from the UK, USA Germany on all sorts of cars and the facts are quite simple, on average Japanese makes are more reliable. Even the German own statistical reviews agree that the Japs have them beat on reliability.

You can't use reliability data from the USA - many of the cars they use there are built in different factories, typically US factories away from the Detroit skill base, to the apparently identical models we buy here - that does have a bearing on reliabilty as US-built Japanese, Korean and German brands don't seem to be as reliable as the models built in Japan, Korea and Germany that we buy - that's anecdotal but they do get major issues that simply aren't an issue here - and that's despite their obsession in the USA with frequent "lube services" as frequently as every 3,000 miles.

The US obsession with oil change sis because many drivers use lube shops which use mineral oil.

MAny US drivers use mineral oil only...

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - unthrottled

Not all of the reasons are daft.

API standards are generally considered to be inadequate and has lead to a loss of confidence in oils.

Most of the US has a true continental climate (hot summers and hard winters) which is tougher on oil than our dinky grey-all-year weather.

US oils have less ZDDP than euro spec oils (long term catalytic converter efficiency). This is hard on two valve engines which are more common than in Europe.

That said, 3000 miles is too soon for all but the most extreme running conditions.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - skidpan

US oils have less ZDDP than euro spec oils (long term catalytic converter efficiency). This is hard on two valve engines which are more common than in Europe.

The current and recent API specs have little ZDDP in as standard regardless of them being US or European. When I ran an old 2 valve pushrod in my classic I always used oils that contained ZDDP. Millers do a Competition Full Synthetic which is not cheap but has the best spec I could find for the money, use it in a car with a cat fitted and you will eventually kill it. Modern materials/treatment together with the cam acting on lifter design does not require ZDDP like the older pushrod or follower designs. Aquaintences that used oils with little ZDDP in them in engines like mine could wipe a set of followers and a cam out in under 1000 miles yet never blamed the oil, in some cases very expensive oil. I never had a problem. Link to Millers oils page.

http://www.millersoils.co.uk/pdf/automotive/ZDDP.pdf

With regards to surveys earlier this year the Kia Sportage won the What Car customer satisfaction survey. It was not the new highly rated model but the previous model that never made it into any ones top 10 cars. It achieved a maximum 5* across all the categories, looked most impressive.

But when you looked deeper only one, yes one owner had replied to the survey for this model and they just happened to be delighted.

So basically the whole survey was a waste of time.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - unthrottled

Interesting, skidpan.

Pushrod engines are still manufactured in the US. Presumably the switch to roller lifters solved the valvetrain wear problem. No mean feat given the size of some of those valves!

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - jamie745

They're flawed because the data is collected only from those who have a warranty. My car doesn't have a warranty so its faultlessness isn't recorded anywhere by anyone.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - RT

They're flawed because the data is collected only from those who have a warranty. My car doesn't have a warranty so its faultlessness isn't recorded anywhere by anyone.

Plus - many people don't buy warranties because they're poor value for money and would rather keep a notional pot of money to pay for unexpected repairs.

Manufacturers will of course have almost complete statistics for cars under original warranty - but of course they really are one of their most guarded secrets.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - jamie745

Warranties are full of holes, clauses and small print designed to stop them having to pay for anything. Essentially it's like paying for inconvenience.

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - Engineer Andy

They're flawed because the data is collected only from those who have a warranty. My car doesn't have a warranty so its faultlessness isn't recorded anywhere by anyone.

Plus - many people don't buy warranties because they're poor value for money and would rather keep a notional pot of money to pay for unexpected repairs.

Manufacturers will of course have almost complete statistics for cars under original warranty - but of course they really are one of their most guarded secrets.

Yes, IMO you're right. I do remember that about 15 years ago Mitsubishi were hauled over the coals when it was found out that they had supposedly under-reported many reliability issues to pretend their cars were more reliable than was actually the case. Perhaps someone else can remember this as well - I can't remember where I heard it (not on the web - either TV or newspaper).

Reliability ratings.Fact or Flawed? - John F

They're flawed because the data is collected only from those who have a warranty.

They are also flawed because much data comes from heavy use high mileage newish car drivers, who tend to have cars suitable for this sort of life. Their mechanics are often finely tweaked for ultimate economy in the first few years rather than longevity/durability.

All makes have their occasional model mistakes, e.g. BMW and Jag cylinder liners, Vauxhall camshafts, Mercedes autos, VW/Audi coil packs, Ford wheel bearings, Renault and Land Rover virtually anything you can think of.........!!