JD Powers Survey

[Hroussard]

Hey Folks, did you'all see the 2005 Brand Quality ratings for 2005.?

The criteria are : How many problems per 100 new vehicles are being reported.

Here are some of the numbers:

How many car companies participated : 36

Who won : Lexus with 81 defects per 100 cars

What was the industry average : 118 defects

What did Porche do : Ranks 32th together with Volkswagen ( so you could say Porsche was 33th in the ranking with 149 defects per 100 cars)

Who did Porsche beat : Land Rover ( with 149 points) , Mazda (with 149 points) and Suzuki ( with 151 points).

I would suggest Porsche came a close last.

This really sux but then, with all the problems we are seeing this is not a surprise.

But here is some good news. The new Ford GT had a recall and guess what is in the recall ??? RMS!!

Cheers

HarryR ( mightily disappointed)

[Guest]

"WOW"... an RMS RECALL. Now there is a couple of words you don't normally here together! :(

[x5rap]

Porsche sought engineering help from the Japanese when they designed the 996. I have an early build (2/98) '99 996 coupe tip with 37500 mi. They sought ways to cut cost and get the cars more reliable. Still, RMS problems and others happen and they only beat Range Rover, Mazda and Suzuki. Staggeringly sad, but true.

What a shame...but what a great car. For prior owners of my 996, there were oil separator and cam cover leaks and other common ones, not RMS though. Not a terrible history at all. These are great cars and stat's be damned. Disraeli said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damnable lies and statistics."

If I could've afforded a new 997, I'd have bought one in a heartbeat--118 defects per 100 cars or not...

[umn]

Goodness, that's appaling. However, give the build quality of my car, perhaps not entirely surprising.

Where did they end up last year? And is there a link to a web site with the actual ranking? I found the JD Power site, but couldn't find the ranking.

Cheers,

Uwe

[bavarian]

I have to believe that the ratings are skewed by the Cayenne. The newer 996 (including my C4S cab) are solid as a rock, and I have had zero defects in 12 months of ownership (the potential RMS headache in the future is another matter). By comparison, my 02 745Li has had countless problems.

[Wedge]

Can anybody shed a little historical perspective on this story? How did Porsche do in the "good old days" of the 964 and 993 based cars? I wonder if the philosophy set forth by Dr. W et al, the automation of production, and the Japanese influence has watered down the build quality and precision that Porsche has long been known for. Or, possibly, the cars are actually better than in the 70's, 80's, and 90's.

[plima]

One data point: I've owned a '68 911 (280,000 miles, 2 engine rebuilds), a '63 SC Cabriolet (80,000 miles, 2 engine rebuilds), a '70 914 (120,000 miles, no rebuilds), and currently an '04 GT3 with 12,000 miles. The '68 911 broke 3 rocker arms when the timing chain tensioner failed (at 10K miles). That car had no other issues (but that one was a BIG one). The 356 was a wonderfully fun car with many minor issues. The 914 had several issues (most serious was a battery location that caused the battery to be flooded whenever it rained, overflowing acid...) The GT3 (bought new, 10 months old now) has zero defects. I think Porsche is making forward progress in both performance and quality (again, only my direct experience).

[FlashingBlade]

I have always cast a rather skeptical eye towards the JD Power ratings.

The report you are referring to is the Initial Quality Survey, which

monitors a bunch of issues (including ride and handling)

during the first 90 days of ownership for what I presume is the 2005

model year. The report also bunches all models together for their ranking,

which indeed means that boxsters, 911 and Cayennes fall in the same

pot. http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases/press....asp?ID=2005069

If you look at the above link you will see that the 911 is mentioned

as one of the highest ranked premium sports cars...

In all honesty, I don't really care what happens during the first 90

days of ownership. That's what warrantee is for. The IQS survey

it's also unlikely to cover RMS failures. I am more concerned about

the quality at 150k miles and 10 years.

Another thing to note is that the difference between worst and best

car has diminished significantly over the years. The worst 2005 car

would qualify upper mid pack a couple of years ago.

Also, there is a lot of psychology involved. Don't you think

that someone who just spent 100k on a car isn't going to be

a lot more picky than someone who bought a 10k car?

Jan

[Hroussard]

One data point:  I've owned a '68 911 (280,000 miles, 2 engine rebuilds), a '63 SC Cabriolet (80,000 miles, 2 engine rebuilds), a '70 914 (120,000 miles, no rebuilds), and currently an '04 GT3 with 12,000 miles.  The '68 911 broke 3 rocker arms when the timing chain tensioner failed (at 10K miles).  That car had no other issues (but that one was a BIG one).  The 356 was a wonderfully fun car with many minor issues.  The 914 had several issues (most serious was a battery location that caused the battery to be flooded whenever it rained, overflowing acid...)  The GT3 (bought new, 10 months old now) has zero defects.  I think Porsche is making forward progress in both performance and quality (again, only my direct experience).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The article appeared in the USA TODAY Newspaper dated May 19th 2005. Page 3B Maybe you can find it on their Web site. The article reads" Toyota comes out on top again in Quality Study".

Top ranging Premium Sports car : Nissan 350Z

Cheers

HarryR