[HN Gopher] Who makes the most reliable new cars?
___________________________________________________________________
Who makes the most reliable new cars?
Author : deletionist
Score : 90 points
Date : 2023-11-29 18:42 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.consumerreports.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.consumerreports.org)
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| Hard to answer the question because "reliable" means different
| things to different people. Infotainment system keeps dropping
| Bluetooth connections? "Unreliable." Engine seizes at 70 MPH?
| "Unreliable." Car only has minor mechanical problems, but dealers
| can't get parts for months? "Unreliable."
|
| A car is too complex a thing to be characterized with a single
| scalar value.
| qup wrote:
| I prefer the opinions of mechanics.
|
| There was a reddit thread this year where someone asked "what
| brand would you tell everyone to avoid", and it was a pretty
| unanimous "Toyota wins."
|
| Hopefully they'll quit making infotainment systems. I like my
| phone->FM adapter.
|
| Edit: I worded my comment poorly. The mechanics all love
| Toyota. Everything else was on many guys' shit-lists.
| saltymug76 wrote:
| Do you have a link to that thread?
| qup wrote:
| Maybe here: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/jbw
| 8i7/mechanics...
|
| Older than I thought, but perhaps I just stumbled across it
| this year. That's the only one I could find with a big
| number of comments, like I recall.
| saltymug76 wrote:
| Thank you!
| 10000truths wrote:
| Any details on why? I was under the impression that Camrys
| and Corollas are infamous for lasting a long time.
| jgalt212 wrote:
| > There was a reddit thread this year where someone asked
| "what brand would you tell everyone to avoid", and it was a
| pretty unanimous "Toyota wins."
|
| Interesting, as I was under the assumption that Toyota and
| Honda were the cheapest to repair.
| explaininjs wrote:
| Surely Toyota didn't win "most avoided", but rather most
| recommended?
|
| But same re. infotainment. I have a suction cup MagSafe
| charging mount for my 2004 4Runner and I patched a bluetooth
| receiver into the stock head unit. Nothing better than that
| glorious amber glow when driving late at night. LCD's are
| blinding by comparison.
|
| Plus this way I don't ever have to enter the iPhone's
| crippled CarPlay navigation mode, or really deal with CarPlay
| ever. I just use the phone the same as any other time, no new
| UI or "safe driving" features to obstruct me.
| qup wrote:
| Yes, they won most recommended, sorry. I spent a while
| looking for the thread, but can't find it. Here's a very
| similar one, though, which was in AskReddit vs
| AskMechanics.
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/jbw8i7/mechanic
| s...
|
| Interestingly, on the OP link, they don't list the Tacoma,
| notoriously one of the most reliable vehicles.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Weird that consumer reports would exclude one of the top
| selling Toyota vehicles in the US.
| Vecr wrote:
| "Not technically a car" but I don't think that's the
| correct reason for why the article wouldn't have.
| explaininjs wrote:
| They include Tundra
| dave8088 wrote:
| I have a feeling you're misremembering the details. Toyota's
| have a reputation for being some of the most reliable cars.
| BrentOzar wrote:
| > it was a pretty unanimous "Toyota wins."
|
| Part of the reason is that Toyota uses really conservative,
| classic engineering. They sell things that have worked well
| for decades, and they're hesitant to introduce new features.
|
| That's also why their infotainment systems are notoriously
| terrible and they lagged years behind everyone else on
| selling electric cars. Gotta take the good with the bad.
| davidw wrote:
| > and they lagged years behind everyone else on selling
| electric cars
|
| I thought part of that was that they were big believers in
| hydrogen?
| contact9879 wrote:
| after learning about how conservative Toyota is in
| general, their interest in hydrogen seems blown out of
| proportion solely because every other manufacture was so
| quick to move to electric. Toyota is still in the "figure
| out what works best long term" phase
| davidw wrote:
| I am more of a bike guy, so it was just something I
| recall reading. I don't have any deep insights into the
| car industry. I do have a Toyota though and it seems to
| run pretty well and gets me from place to place when
| needed.
| deng wrote:
| From TFA: "We study 20 trouble areas, from nuisances--such as
| squeaky brakes and broken interior trim--to major bummers, such
| as potentially expensive out-of-warranty engine, transmission,
| EV battery, and EV charging problems. [...] We weigh the
| severity of each type of problem to create a predicted
| reliability score for each vehicle, from 1 to 100."
| crazygringo wrote:
| The article explicitly accounts for the severity of different
| issues, and assigns them different point values.
|
| You absolutely can reduce it to a single scalar value. You
| might personally disagree with the weights, but then your
| calculation is just a little bit different.
|
| And you _have_ to be able to reduce it to a scalar value at the
| end of the day, or else you 'd never be able to make a decision
| about which car to buy, because you'd be entirely paralyzed
| when it came to cost/benefit assessments.
| Vecr wrote:
| Technically a resolute agent can handle a utility function
| that messed up, but I'm not sure if people in general would
| be able to self-commit well enough.
| afjeafaj848 wrote:
| Exactly
|
| Its like counting number of bugs or lines of codes as metrics
| irtefa wrote:
| No way Mini is in the top 3!
| quaffapint wrote:
| I'd love to know what happened there. They used to be on their
| unreliable list for years.
| smlacy wrote:
| Very weird how EVs and ICEs are intermixed.
|
| I would expect vastly different results across different
| drivetrains, and probably even more differences across shape/size
| platforms (compact, sedan, truck, van, etc.).
| wyldfire wrote:
| There's a chart "How Electrified Powertrains Compare" which
| shows "Problems compared to gasoline-powered vehicles." You
| might be surprised to see that in fact EVs fare significantly
| worse than ICEs. I'd wager that they're mostly newer designs
| that naturally have bugs but instead of making modest changes
| to the car design in a new model, they're making
| significant/sweeping changes.
| bad_alloc wrote:
| Oddly enough they don't state what the problems are.
| Meanwhile the ADAC (German car club) find that EVs have
| similar defect rates in components they share with ICE while
| having less engine issues. Overall, they conclude there is
| insufficient data for a meaningful statistic at this time:
|
| https://www.adac.de/rund-ums-fahrzeug/unfall-schaden-
| panne/a...
| kipchak wrote:
| For example the Mach-e has had issues with contactors welding
| open during heavy usage and charging as the same part was
| used between the standard and higher performance model.
| sethhochberg wrote:
| I agree with you in principle but I think if you're Consumer
| Reports and you know much of your audience is very nontechnical
| (ie, will only have a very surface-level understanding of
| electric vs hybrid vs ICE) it makes some sense to attempt to
| distill an entire brand down to a single datapoint.
|
| Many readers aren't savvy and just want to know what dealership
| to show up at to start asking what they can afford. If brand
| XYZ has amazing ICE reliability but their EVs are trash, you
| suddenly need to be a more informed consumer when you get to
| that dealership. Easier to just rank the companies with a long
| history of reliability across multiple product segments higher.
| 3cats-in-a-coat wrote:
| In the end, they're both a type of "car". And they're judged on
| how reliably they "car".
|
| It's especially important to see how they compare given the
| zealous push for EVs to replace ICE completely.
| neogodless wrote:
| From the article:
|
| > Cars, including sedans, hatchbacks, and wagons, remain the
| most reliable vehicle type, with an average reliability rating
| of 57 (on a scale of 0 to 100), followed by SUVs (50) and
| minivans (45). "Sedans have fallen out of favor with consumers,
| but as a class they are very reliable," says Jake Fisher,
| senior director of auto testing at Consumer Reports. "They
| often have less of the latest technology and features that can
| cause problems before the bugs are worked out." Pickup trucks
| come in last, with an average reliability rating of 41.
| afjeafaj848 wrote:
| > Pickup trucks come in last, with an average reliability
| rating of 41
|
| That surprises me because I've browsed a lot of use vehicles
| and it seems to me like pickups can go to way higher miles
| than cars. I see a lot of them still run fine with 150,000+
| miles
|
| Maybe the owners are more willing to pay for major repairs
| though since getting a new one is so expensive?
| opencl wrote:
| This CR report is about the reliability of _new_ cars over
| the first year of ownership. The correlation to how many
| issues there will be 10, 15, 20 years down the line is
| rather tenuous.
| notatoad wrote:
| i don't think it's weird, reputation is one of the whole
| reasons for the existence of brands. If an ICE brand is willing
| to put their reputation on the line to bring an EV to market,
| that means something different than if they were to market
| their EVs under a new brand name.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| Well, yes but then also newcomers to car design world make tons
| of design mistakes that seems clever at the start but do bite
| back later.
|
| For most folks buying a car these days, if they choose EV its
| not due to environmental concerns, not primarily or
| secondarily, at least I don't know single one person among EV
| owners. They just want a reliable car, and 130 years of fine
| tuning combustion engines can end up more reliable in say 15
| years than shiny unproven electric design (single case 1 but I
| can provide such - my previous bmw e46 vs tesla model s of my
| colleague, or model 3 of another colleague).
| raajg wrote:
| I don't see how 'Tesla' is not top of the list here. For the
| 'Trouble Areas' I suspected they're normalizing over the 'length
| of ownership' which would bias the scores towards older car
| companies.
| smlacy wrote:
| Often times "Reliability" is calculated as "fraction of cars
| that have a recall or other unscheduled maintenance during the
| initial N months of ownership" and I believe Tesla is actually
| quite high in this regard?
|
| https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2023-us-vehi...
| fiddlerwoaroof wrote:
| My Tesla has been much less costly to own over the last three
| years than my Honda Odyssey: I have had several mobile repair
| visits for cosmetic issues and some OTA "recalls" but I find
| it hard to believe that any ICE car is more "reliable" than a
| Model 3 that didn't gave obvious QC issues at delivery.
| kspacewalk2 wrote:
| It remains to be seen how an 8 year old Tesla fares against
| an 8 year old Odyssey.
| stonogo wrote:
| The linked article differentiates cost of ownership and
| reliability. An unreliable car can be low-ownership-cost if
| it's under warranty.
| fiddlerwoaroof wrote:
| I mean, much less maintenance in absolute terms: no oil
| changes, transmission trouble, etc. Mostly just replacing
| windshield wipers and tires. The mobile service issues
| were all basically cosmetic issues that wouldn't really
| impact reliability.
| unregistereddev wrote:
| On the contrary, I'm impressed by how much Tesla has improved.
| They used to be second last, and the effort they've put into
| improving quality - especially on the Model 3 - is clearly
| paying off.
| agloe_dreams wrote:
| Tesla's reliability scores have always been pure and utter
| trash. This is the best result they have ever had. While other
| companies have a higher failure rate of major drivetrain
| components, Tesla is stuck somewhere between reinventing
| everything (thus lacking legacy knowledge) and not fixing
| things because they don't have the time/manpower for it. A
| great example of this is Model 3 Suspension failures. The Model
| 3 upper control arms are known to fail prematurely and
| seemingly, there is no fix. By all means, this is an extremely
| dangerous failure that can cause loss of vehicle control.
| Germany has a far more serious inspection process than the US
| and the result for Tesla is truly a disaster:
| https://www.autoevolution.com/news/tesla-model-3-is-the-car-...
| ajross wrote:
| > Tesla's reliability scores have always been pure and utter
| trash.
|
| Linked article is _literally_ reliability score that puts
| them dead center in the middle of the pack.
|
| I'm amazed at the investment people have on arguments about
| Tesla, and this particular canard especially. I mean, they're
| cars? Sometimes they break? But not often? Some other brands
| are better. But some are worse!
|
| It's a boring story about boring facts. Why is it so
| important to you (and so many other people) that this be a
| hyperbolic affront to all humanity and not just... a car
| company?
| Vecr wrote:
| > This is the best result they have ever had. If this is
| the best they've ever had for a report it means that all
| the other reports were worse.
| ajross wrote:
| Or... that they're improving rapidly and we should
| celebrate that? Does that spin not work for you?
|
| Look, again: they make cars. Cars are complicated devices
| and sometimes break. There's some, but not a lot, of
| variation between individual manufacturers in the
| frequency with which they break. And _that 's not very
| interesting_, and doesn't justify the kind of outrage I'm
| seeing in threads like this.
|
| Whatever has you guys all puffed up about this, it's not
| genuine concern for poor Tesla owners who spend 15% more
| time in the shop, or whatever.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _don 't see how 'Tesla' is not top of the list here_
|
| Tesla owners love their cars. This means they tend to overlook
| issues others might find unacceptable. If my car just refused
| to drive until I restarted it a few times, that would be a
| catastrophic fuckup. But I've seen Tesla owners shrug that
| away.
|
| Which is fine! There have _always_ been legendary cars with
| notorious maintenance issues. But base reliability matters to
| most, and it matters to track that neutrally.
| mkii wrote:
| Is it fine though? For people to use machines that are known
| to put others in danger? I'm referring to "FSD" doing
| absolutely bullshit things like not detecting objects in the
| way.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _referring to "FSD" doing absolutely bullshit things like
| not detecting objects in the way_
|
| Did _Consumer Reports_ look at FSD? I don 't think optional
| features like that factor into reliability.
| mkii wrote:
| I didn't say it did?
| mkii wrote:
| Ah yes, Tesla. The brand where new owners have to consult
| third-party compiled QA checklists because of how poor their
| own controls are
| semi-extrinsic wrote:
| I don't own a Tesla, but just from observing them on the road
| and in the neighbourhood I can tell there are many reliability
| issues just with the easily observable features:
|
| * Model S third brake light has single LEDs failing one by one
|
| * Model X doors don't open in sub-zero weather, friends of us
| had an ICE rental car for weeks last winter
|
| * All models, automatic activation of rear driving lights at
| night does not work
|
| * All models, cruise control or something will sometimes
| suddenly slam the brakes on wide open road, so you need to keep
| good distance
|
| * Model 3 and Y automatic high beams / matrix LED don't
| function correctly at night if the car is dirty, they blind
| everyone on the road - I will be very surprised if this doesn't
| trigger a recall soon
|
| * Model X front driving light clusters failing, I've seen
| several, all on the passenger side
|
| * Model 3 and Y, rear lights plastic cracking like it's a 1980s
| Hyundai
| ecliptik wrote:
| > Model 3 and Y automatic high beams / matrix LED don't
| function correctly at night if the car is dirty, they blind
| everyone on the road - I will be very surprised if this
| doesn't trigger a recall soon
|
| Is that what that is? I thought it was my eyes getting older
| when thinking car headlights are brighter at night than they
| used to be. We live in an area with a high % of Teslas on the
| road and this could explain a lot.
| semi-extrinsic wrote:
| Well, yes and no. The first development which is more than
| ten years old at this point, was to have projector xenon
| lights that are veery bright below a sharp line. That line
| is supposed to be kept below eye level of oncoming traffic,
| and there is a sensor that adjusts the line height. In
| Europe there is also a requirement to have washers on the
| headlights if you have this. The system kind of works fine,
| except when it doesn't, for instance when driving over a
| curved hill where it cannot work due to geometry, or when a
| sensor fails.
|
| Then in the past 3-4 years, matrix LED lights became
| popular, where you have an array of LEDs with narrow beam
| optics that are aimed in a slight spread, so that each LED
| covers a specific area of the road ahead. Then there is a
| sensor that detects oncoming traffic, and dims the one or
| two LEDs that point towards those cars.
|
| On the Model 3 and Y there seems to be a particularly
| frequent failure mode with the matrix LED where the lights,
| or sometimes just one of them, doesn't detect oncoming
| traffic at all. It also occurs when they are driving behind
| someone.
|
| Couple of weeks ago I was behind such a Tesla at night, and
| I had to just let him get far in front of me, because he
| kept getting blinked at with the ultra-powered high beams
| of every oncoming semi trailer. Of course the poor driver
| couldn't do a thing about it.
| MetaWhirledPeas wrote:
| > All models, cruise control or something will sometimes
| suddenly slam the brakes on wide open road, so you need to
| keep good distance
|
| You saw this on all models, on the road and/or in your
| neighborhood? (I mean surely not, but I'm curious to know how
| you came to this conclusion.)
| nonethewiser wrote:
| Lexus is toyota. Accura is honda. So it's really like:
|
| 1. Toyota
|
| 2. Mini
|
| 3. Honda
|
| 4. Subaru
|
| 5. Mazda
|
| Congratulations Japan.
| smlacy wrote:
| Isn't Mini BMW?
| neogodless wrote:
| Yes. But still, 4/5 of the most reliable brands (including
| their luxury division) are Japanese. BMW/Mini is up there,
| though!
| tim333 wrote:
| It's nice and slightly surprising to see something somewhat
| made in Britain up there in reliability. I know BMW own it
| but a lot are still made outside Oxford.
| bad_alloc wrote:
| Mini is BMW
| kspacewalk2 wrote:
| It's incredible how the Japanese carmakers were able to perfect
| the auto manufacturing process and then proceed to hold that
| advantage for what, 30+ years now? It's not a secret how they
| did it, it's been studied to death, every manner of
| technology/expertise/management transfer has been tried, and
| still no one comes quite close enough to threaten their
| position.
| bena wrote:
| I think it's just commitment to the process at this point.
|
| The hard bit isn't the process per se, it's executing the
| process when it would otherwise be easier not to.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I assume it's because the other nations' automakers would
| rather compete along other lines. The Japanese already locked
| onto reliability/quality, so rather than try to fight them on
| something they are already good at, they try to optimize for
| style/status/performance/patriotism/etc.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| Maybe they are too stubborn to succumb to 'the race to the
| bottom' cost (and correspondingly quality) wise, since these
| things do bite back after longer time than current year exec
| bonuses materialize.
|
| Or maybe they have different approach to beta testing, see
| say Zelda come out basically flawless and how say Betshesda
| or many others can deliver their stuff (beta testing months
| after release with fixes have 1000+ rather basic items).
| ajross wrote:
| To be fair, exactly that level of investment in process and
| conservatism around change is arguably what led them all
| (literally every single Japanese manufacturer) to miss the
| boat on EVs.
|
| Basically, getting to your last sentence: you have the wrong
| threat model. Making "cars better" is great if what a "car"
| is doesn't change. But what the market wants is "better
| cars".
| kspacewalk2 wrote:
| I'd hold off on declaring that the EV boat has departed. It
| remains to be seen at what level EV uptake will plateau,
| without _major_ advances in battery tech and EV
| practicality. Coming from a rather nippy Canadian city
| which bought a bunch of electric buses, fucked up badly[0]
| and probably made purchasing more electric buses an
| untenable proposition for (conservatively) 5-7 years, and
| having heard from multiple EV owners about the less
| glamorous aspects of EV ownership in Canada (charging cost
| /duration/convenience, battery performance in cold weather,
| skyrocketing insurance and repair costs)... The boat, far
| from being missed, is still in the dry dock.
|
| [0] https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/more-than-
| half-o...
| ajross wrote:
| Not interested in EV flamery. My point was economic:
| _clearly_ EVs are a very large new market segment, and
| Japanese brands aren 't competing there at all. That's
| bad, if your business is to sell cars.
|
| It's really bad if you have a sub-brand, like "Hybrids",
| which has been completely decimated by the (again very
| real, even if you don't think anyone in Edmonton should
| buy them) move to electric devices in the market.
|
| Basically: 8 years ago Toyota _owned_ the "ecologically
| sensitive car buyer" market. And now you might as well
| flush the Prius brand in the toilet, no one wants them
| and selling them as "green" relative to a Tesla is a
| joke.
| ericmay wrote:
| I think I'm going with this as a car owner and buyer I
| would be very reluctant to switch back from an EV. It's
| just for me so much nicer and more convenient. I have a
| few friends who share the same sentiment. It's a category
| change and the Japanese automakers (to which I have great
| affinity) aren't in the category so there's nothing for
| me to buy from them.
| EnergyAmy wrote:
| Every single Japanese manufacturer? Nissan has been and is
| doing great with the Leaf. They discontinued recently, but
| only to replace it with a new EV, not because it was doing
| badly.
| TulliusCicero wrote:
| No, they're not, not really. At least not in the US
| anyway.
|
| In Q3 this year, Nissan is in 10th place, with 6000 EV's
| sold: https://caredge.com/guides/electric-vehicle-market-
| share-and...
|
| If you look at numbers from a couple years ago compared
| to now, most of the other manufacturers are way up,
| whereas Nissan almost looks like they've already
| plateaued.
|
| Also, apparently the Leaf successor won't go into
| production until _2026_?
| https://electrek.co/2023/05/19/what-we-know-nissan-leaf-
| ev-r...
|
| That's crazy if true. What the hell has Nissan been
| doing?
| EnergyAmy wrote:
| I'll admit that "doing great" is open to interpretation,
| but my point is that Nissan hasn't "missed the boat" due
| to conservatism. They've had a nice, reliable EV
| available for a decade now, and you can go out and buy
| one today. Maybe they'll fall off the boat due to
| mistakes made now, but they've been on the boat for quite
| some time.
| WillAdams wrote:
| The first time the U.S. tried to study this, they asked for a
| sample of parts, specifying a precision range, noting that it
| was acceptable for up to 10% of the parts to be at the
| extremes of said range.
|
| The Japanese company sent them 3 bags of parts noting: The
| bag with the full quantity is made to match the provided
| blueprint, the other two bags contain 1/10th as many parts
| which are either larger or smaller as requested. May we ask
| what the purpose of these other parts is?
|
| When they started measuring the parts, they were all
| identical --- part-way through, they decided that their
| micrometer must be broken and sent for another --- it
| revealed that all parts where _exactly_ the right size per
| the specifications of the drawing.
| asalahli wrote:
| I've heard this story ever since I was a kid, but never
| been able to find a credible source. I'm compelled to
| believe it's no more than a story, at this point.
| gridder wrote:
| It's thanks to their culture and mentality. You cannot
| replicate that.
| dclowd9901 wrote:
| Because it requires a populace who culturally fixates on
| quality.
|
| It doesn't mean a thing to have a "stop everything" lever if
| your workforce doesn't want to pull it because they don't
| give a flying fuck if they ship a shoddy car.
|
| It's a story told again and again with tons of Japanese
| products.
| 404mm wrote:
| I'd love to see a comparison / breakdown of models made in
| Japan vs made in USA/Mexico/Canada (for the NA market). Some of
| the most common Lexus models are not made in Japan
| 535188B17C93743 wrote:
| Isn't Subaru also Toyota?
| mkii wrote:
| No, but they do have some collabs together
| kipchak wrote:
| They have partnerships like on the FRS/BRZ and Toyota owns I
| think a 20% stake but separate companies.
| neogodless wrote:
| No. They certainly have partnerships on specific models
| (Subaru BRZ / Scion FR-S / Toyota 86, Subaru Solterra EV /
| Toyota bZ4X), but they are not exclusive, and each have their
| own platforms and powertrains for most of their models.
|
| Toyota has partnered with Mazda as well - for example, there
| was Mazda 2 rebadged as a Toyota Yaris for a few years.
| buildsjets wrote:
| Subaru is a subsidiary of Fujitsi Heavy Industries.
| hawski wrote:
| I wonder if Renault is on the same level as Nissan. I
| understand they share a lot, but are not present on the
| American market.
| is_true wrote:
| Just one data point, someone I know sells cars and told me
| that the old Renault duster was based on a Nissan car but the
| new model is based on a Dacia car and it sucks.
| keb_ wrote:
| Been driving the same car for almost 17 years now (2005 Honda
| Civic LX) and still going strong. Fine piece of engineering.
| Thanks Honda!
|
| My family has sworn by Japanese cars since I was a kid, with
| most of us buying exclusively Honda or Toyota (incl their
| luxury lines, Acura/Lexus).
| me_smith wrote:
| I've been driving my Toyota Tacoma for 22 years now and
| currently at 245k miles (with some off-roading thrown in
| there). With regular upkeep, it's amazing how much abuse these
| can take and still run fine. I haven't had any major problems.
| My next car will definitely be a Toyota.
| black6 wrote:
| I'll be disappointed if I don't get half-a-million miles out
| of my '01 Tacoma. The major-est piece of equipment I've had
| to replace was the power steering pump, and the biggest PITA
| was the timing belt, which didn't need to be replaced at the
| time, but I did it for preventative maintenance. 326k miles.
| buildsjets wrote:
| Anecdotally, my wife has owned her Toyota Celica since new in
| 2002. In that time, other than oil changes / tires / brake
| pads, the only thing that has failed is an air conditioning
| relay, twice. The second time around there was a new improved
| replacement part number, which has worked fine for 10 years
| now.
|
| I also have an Audi A4 and S4. Something is always breaking
| on them, but they are very enjoyable to drive compared to the
| Celica. It has such terrible torque steer that we avoid
| driving it in any kind of rain. With an open diff, it's
| essentially a one wheel drive vehicle on any kind of low
| traction surface. Specifically, the front left wheel.
| dheera wrote:
| There's also whether people ignore warning signs or not. I
| previously had a long-term rented Ford Focus via Canvas (which is
| no longer around). There were lots of issues with it. A bumper
| valence that had some screw holes that had expanded and would
| fall off if only 1 additional screw failed. They were unwilling
| to fix it, and it did in fact fall off on the highway later due
| to their unwillingness. Tire treads had almost worn bald, they
| were also unwilling to fix it until a flat actually happened. Car
| idled at high RPM, I told them about it, they were unwilling to
| do anything about it, and the engine started stalling on the
| highway a few months later.
|
| Almost every single problem with the car had a warning sign that
| I had told them well in advance, but they were always unwilling
| to do anything about it.
|
| If you do your due diligence by taking action at every warning
| sign (strange noise, RPMs not the usual value, etc.) a LOT of
| "reliability" issues would not happen in the first place. A car
| is a fast-moving piece of mechanical equipment and needs regular
| servicing.
|
| Don't do what doctors do and "wait till shit happens" to diagnose
| you so that they can make a buck off of you in the hospital.
| Prevent shit.
| injb wrote:
| True, but the people who ignore warnings on VWs also ignore
| them on Toyotas, and yet Toyota still consistently comes in
| ahead.
|
| I do think there are cultural issues though with the US vs
| Europe. It's very common that cars that are known for quality
| and reliability in Europe are regarded as exceptionally
| temperamental in the US. When I first moved to the US I
| couldn't understand why German cars had such a bad reputation
| for reliability here. Most of them are traditionally considered
| more or less bulletproof in Europe.
|
| But after while I noticed that many American owners don't pay
| any attention to maintenance schedules, and just wait until
| something breaks. Some cars are forgiving of that, and some
| aren't.
|
| Nowadays I rank cars into roughly 3 categories: those that
| hardly ever break no matter what you do, those that are fine if
| you do what you're told, and those that break no matter what
| you do.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| My girlfriend bought her Toyota corolla for 5000 bucks some
| time ago, old, used, and soon started showing engine warn
| sign. Pretty bad if you ask me. Yet that light never
| manifested into anything real, 80k+ km down the road, still
| works reliably (technician couldn't find anything and just
| resetting it soon brought it back).
| sottol wrote:
| I always wondered how "self-fulfilling" that is with
| Toyotas/Lexus. If you buy a Toyota for reliability, and intend
| to keep it, you're probably taking better care of it (both in
| terms of service and driving habits) than if you were to lease
| a "fun vehicle" for 3 years.
|
| That said, Toyota does often decide to go for reliability over
| other measures like fuel economy or power in eg their engines.
| Some of the older Toyota engines used twice as many bearings as
| other engines for example, downside being extra drag and lower
| fuel economy.
| sertbdfgbnfgsd wrote:
| Shocking that Tesla is middle of the table.
| jansan wrote:
| Would you expect them on higher or lower rank?
| sertbdfgbnfgsd wrote:
| Given the media reports about the cars quality, I would
| expect them to be much lower. Then again, I don't know
| anything about cars.
| UberFly wrote:
| Media reports are sadly about as reliable as that story
| from uncle Bob.
| sertbdfgbnfgsd wrote:
| To pick a random example, I just saw one saying tesla
| touch screens overheat, leading glue to leak inwards into
| the screen and making them unresponsive. Are you saying
| this isn't true then?
| UberFly wrote:
| Even Uncle Bob is correct some of the time. My point
| being that media over sensationalizes issues and that
| basing your view on reality through their port window is
| risky.
| 303uru wrote:
| As a Tesla owner I was surprised they're that low. I know
| probably 30 owners and haven't heard of any maintenance outside
| of tires and a few panel gaps at delivery.
| mlhpdx wrote:
| I'm perennially baffled by CR's ratings. They are a lagging
| indicator at best, and skewed/biased at worst. Does anyone
| actually use this information any more?
| twelve40 wrote:
| I really don't know much about the topic, but if you call this
| article essentially useless biased trash, it might be useful to
| explain why?
| Exoristos wrote:
| They're still widely used and highly regarded -- outside of
| Silicon Valley, anyway.
| tehnub wrote:
| What do Silicon Valley people use? Just this
| https://www.tesla.com/compare ?
| FlyingBears wrote:
| Mini is hot garbage on wheels comparable to VW. I am really
| surprised to see this.
| hilux wrote:
| Indeed. I'm so surprised that it's hard to believe.
| tanjtanjtanj wrote:
| No idea on Mini but independent Volkswagen service centers are
| never short on work.
| omginternets wrote:
| Maybe something changed? Subarus used to suffer head gasket
| failures, and still suffer from this reputation despite the
| fact that it's been fixed for nearly two decades.
| doubled112 wrote:
| I don't know about Mini, but I hope the new VWs are better than
| my experience.
|
| My VW is admittedly 10 years old, and still under the
| Dieselgate warranty, but I've averaged 2 warranty repairs per
| oil change interval for 3 years now.
|
| They haven't been able to figure out the cranks forever but
| does not start for those 3 years, two dealerships have tried
| now.
|
| They are fairly expensive trips I'm glad to have warranty on.
| EGR, DPF, 4 sensors in one trip, etc. I'm almost to a new
| exhaust system and the CEL is on again.
|
| Wish me luck! I went back and forth to the dealership 7 times
| before they put it back together right last time.
|
| If that's the experience, count me out. It's the last one.
| tbeseda wrote:
| It's almost like the methodology is borderline pseudo-science.
| Many choices are irrational and unexplained. Several key models
| are missing from each brand's lineup. Tacoma? Ranger? They have
| Tundra and F-150...
| jansan wrote:
| From my years at a major car supplier I know that Toyota was
| never interested in our latest developments, even if we offered
| them at a cheaper prize. They only purchased components that had
| been in use for other cars.
|
| I own a Toyota Avensis. It is the most boring car in the world,
| but I never ever had any issues with it. Mine is the second
| facelift, built in 2015, based on a chassis that had been in
| production since 2009. So any early problems have been resolved
| long time ago.
|
| Maybe this explains a bit why Toyota is on top in the reliability
| ranking. They are very reasonable cars. Would I buy one if I had
| more money? Hell, no!
| toast0 wrote:
| > Maybe this explains a bit why Toyota is on top in the
| reliability ranking. They are very reasonable cars. Would I buy
| one if I had more money? Hell, no!
|
| Maybe if you pay enough for the car that dealer service drops
| off a loaner, picks up your car, then drops off your car and
| picks up the loaner with minimal interaction, a less reliable
| car is fine. Or if you have a useful car and a fun car, the fun
| car doesn't have to work all the time. Otherwise, having a car
| that just works is worth a lot.
| doubled112 wrote:
| > They are very reasonable cars
|
| I've been asked a few times "what car would you buy?" and my
| answer is always something along the lines of "if you need to
| ask, you shouldn't buy a car that I'd buy".
|
| Why don't I own a Toyota? Because they're boring. Boring is
| actually what most people are looking for in a car.
|
| I need a little excitement in my commute. Maybe something
| starts spraying. Maybe something starts smoking. Maybe
| something falls off.
| omginternets wrote:
| Does this account for driving habits? I've just purchased a
| Subaru WRX, and I can't fight the feeling that the reliability
| score is in some way influenced by the hoards of idiots that
| flock to this car for its tuning and hooning potential.
| aalimov_ wrote:
| Yeah there's certainly a temptation there if you're into
| working in cars. Alongside your tuning/hooning remark - some
| cars certainly attract a particular kind of audience, although
| if it was really hoards, they would have probably released an
| STI variant for the new body :(
| omginternets wrote:
| > they would have probably released an STI variant for the
| new body :(
|
| Pow, right in the feels :')
|
| But in reality, I suspect this has more to do with the
| following two things:
|
| 1. The STi package has always had abysmal fuel economy, and I
| believe there are regulations that enforce an average fuel
| economy across an entire manufacturers fleet
|
| 2. Many (most?) of the modders and hooners are put off by the
| price. In fact, most aren't really interested in a track car,
| but rather in a cheap, fast box to drag race between traffic
| lights.
|
| P.s. the new BRZ might also be stealing a bit of the market,
| despite the reverse-Zoolander issue it faces with oil
| pressure...
| rokkitmensch wrote:
| (hordes)
| omginternets wrote:
| Whoops. Semantic collision with Tony Hoare ^^
| TheCleric wrote:
| I feel that would get balanced by Subaru's other models, which
| are mostly not known for such things.
| omginternets wrote:
| Very possibly. Still not sure what to make of these rankings
| though...
| willis936 wrote:
| The message is clear: steer clear of Subaru if you want a
| reliable engine.
| thedaly wrote:
| I suspect it is caused by the numerous models with a faulty
| engine, like my 2010 Forester.
| willis936 wrote:
| My spouse had a 2010s Outback that went through two engines
| in three years. Bye bye Subaru.
| darod wrote:
| Not understanding the haterade with Minis. I've owned mine since
| 2015 and I've had no major issues. The engine is snappy, it
| handles great in cornering, easy to park, etc etc.
| deng wrote:
| What a disaster for VW and Mercedes, but it pretty much confirms
| what everyone here in Germany is saying: reliability has gone
| downhill, with exception of BMW and Porsche (but it'll cost you),
| whereas Japan is at the top for ages, with South Korea (Kia,
| Hyundai) providing a good, cheaper alternative.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| What do they say about Audi, since it is so related in parts
| with Porsche via VW parent group?
| deng wrote:
| Audi usually scores pretty well (but again, it'll cost you,
| the Audi A1 is extremely reliable, but you don't get much car
| for your money...).
| saiya-jin wrote:
| Also, you go for Audi (standard models) mainly for how
| chassis is modeled (aka looks), internals of VW
| conglomerate are almost identical to cheaper VW or
| sometimes also Skoda or Seat.
|
| Interestingly, one of my colleague's worst car experience
| was Audi, not sure if A1 or A2, but he was very
| disappointed how unreliable it was. Case point 1.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| 5 year old A5 here and it's an excellent car. didn't go
| for any bigger engine etc. Close friends have a Q5 and
| it's got bugs galore. Seems kind of random.
| davidthewatson wrote:
| The paradox is that hybrids have MORE potential trouble areas
| than ICE but less reported trouble.
|
| All hail McLuhan.
| tqi wrote:
| I think this is more likely to be the case that Hybrids are
| dominated by Toyota/Lexus. See:
|
| > Overall, hybrids have 26 percent fewer problems than cars
| powered by internal combustion engines (ICE). Some standouts
| include the Lexus UX and NX Hybrid and the Toyota Camry Hybrid,
| Highlander Hybrid, and RAV4 Hybrid.
|
| and:
|
| > Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs)... have 146 percent
| more problems than ICE vehicles. Still, there are PHEVs that
| buck that trend, including standouts such as the Toyota RAV4
| Prime
| furyofantares wrote:
| > The paradox is that hybrids have MORE potential trouble areas
| than ICE but less reported trouble.
|
| > All hail McLuhan.
|
| That doesn't seem paradoxical, I'd never expect that just
| counting potential trouble areas is the right thing, things can
| be made more reliable by addition. Make a laptop without a
| battery and I'm gonna report a lot of problems stemming from
| sudden power loss. Put a battery in, that's a new potential
| trouble area, but even if I still use it plugged in
| exclusively, I'm gonna report fewer problems since I'll never
| have sudden power loss and have no problems downstream of that.
|
| Maybe that's not the case with hybrids? I don't know, but it
| seems like it could be - any time some of the load is taken off
| some of the most physical components, the ICE and the brakes,
| it could improve reliability even though the systems taking the
| load off can then also have problems.
| Tactical45 wrote:
| I wonder if hybrid being more reliable than gasoline cars is
| simply a function of most of those being Toyota, versus any
| effect stemming from the car being Hybrid.
| janalsncm wrote:
| To test that you could compare the hybrid versions against
| their ICE counterparts. For example hybrid Corolla.
| whaleofatw2022 wrote:
| Fwiw eCVTs are not at all like normal ones, frankly they are
| more simple than most other transmission types
| stouset wrote:
| I wouldn't be surprised if that's a component. But I would be
| surprised if that's a primary reason.
|
| There's just a lot more to go wrong with an ICE vehicle. You
| need oil and regular oil changes. A radiator, tubing, and
| antifreeze. An alternator. A carburetor and a catalytic
| converter. Timing belts. A exhaust system. None of this (as far
| as I know, IANAM) is needed for an electric vehicle.
|
| A disproportionate amount of what's under the hood of an ICE
| has to do with managing the consequences of the "C" component
| of that acronym (heat, combustion gases, electricity
| generation, lubrication, carbon deposits).
| neogodless wrote:
| You may have misread the parent comment, which talked about
| HYBRID vehicles being more reliable than ICE-only vehicles.
| Hybrid vehicles include all of the comments of an ICE
| vehicle, plus they have electric batteries and motors, and
| may have a system of transferring power from either system to
| the wheels. Overall they have _higher_ complexity than either
| ICE or electric-only vehicles.
| c22 wrote:
| They have higher complexity, but also more redundancy.
| Likely neither of the powertrains experiences the same rate
| of wear and tear as either would experience on ther own.
| stouset wrote:
| Apologies I did misread that.
| TheCleric wrote:
| Yes, but wouldn't a hybrid be a worst of both worlds? All the
| problems of an ICE engine AND the potential electric issues?
| 303uru wrote:
| I don't think so. You're using two low load, low power
| systems combined. The least reliable ICE systems almost
| always correlate to the more powerful ones.
| jansan wrote:
| > You need oil and regular oil changes.
|
| Slightly OT, but I recently found that here in Germany there
| is a service where you can go to just like to a car wash
| without making an appointment. They will do the oil change
| for you within ten minutes or so and you do not even have to
| get out of your car during that time. This makes oil changes
| so much less annoying.
| sumthinprofound wrote:
| This has been common in the US for at least a decade now.
| tshaddox wrote:
| Jiffy Lube had 1,000 locations in the U.S. in 1989.
| According to my experience in the 1990s (limited mostly
| to the Midwest), quick oil change shops were ubiquitous
| even in small towns.
| Riseed wrote:
| I've never seen a shop that will let anyone stay in the
| vehicle while it was being worked on, even for something
| so simple as an oil change. Where did you find one?
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| Four decades ago where I lived then. I used them here
| 30yr ago.
| alphager wrote:
| What's the name of the company?
| jansan wrote:
| Hybrid motors take a lot of stress from the ICE during load
| changes. This makes the ICEs potentially live much longer. A
| lot of taxis areound here are older hybrid Toyotas. They must
| have at least 400,000km mileage already.
| timbit42 wrote:
| A taxi driver in Vancouver had a 2004 Prius and drove it 1
| million kilometres with only regular maintenance and no
| failures. Toyota bought it back from him and took it to Japan
| to study it.
| bluemax wrote:
| My Toyota hybrid reliably does not start after 4 weeks not
| driving. The 12 volt (1 year old) battery is drained too much
| after such a period of inactivity. I was not expecting this
| from Toyota, pretty disappointing.
| woleium wrote:
| to the fusebox with a multimeter batman!
| baking wrote:
| Unplug the USB chargers first.
| taylodl wrote:
| Welcome to the motorcycling world! Today's cars continually
| start the engine - that's a huge draw. If you're going to
| leave your car sit more than a couple weeks then you should
| put your battery on a tender. Motorcyclists have been doing
| that for _decades._
| pcl wrote:
| Why is that an issue for motorcycles?
| Baeocystin wrote:
| Tiny batteries have less headroom against phantom drains.
| Also, most motorcycles aren't daily riders, so the
| problem is exacerbated.
| Syonyk wrote:
| Yeah, I (not really) joke that everything on the hill gets
| plugged in. It makes life a lot easier.
|
| Even with no idle draw, lead acid batteries self discharge
| over time. Life got way easier when I just accepted it, and
| now I've got a pile of 6V/12V battery tenders that go into
| just about everything (I have no shortage of 6V vehicles
| out here too). That and block heaters. The tractor and
| truck both appreciate them.
| amluto wrote:
| Maybe they hired whoever designed the original Tesla Model S
| 12V battery management system. Or the original Tesla low-
| power sleep system.
| Syonyk wrote:
| Oh man, that was a train wreck!
|
| I did some analysis of the Tesla 12V system back in 2016,
| and I'm amazed the batteries lasted as long as they did
| with how badly they abused the lead acid battery!
|
| https://www.sevarg.net/2016/10/30/tesla-
| model-s-12v-battery-...
| rwmj wrote:
| One thing I never understood is why hybrids have the 12 volt
| battery at all. Couldn't the entertainment system etc be
| powered from the 200V EV battery (after stepping it down
| obviously)?
| JonathonW wrote:
| Everything on the 12V system essentially _is_ powered from
| the traction battery (the big one that can power the
| motors), once the car is turned on.
|
| In Toyota, at least, the traction battery is completely
| disconnected (via a relay) when the car is off. The 12V
| battery is needed to power anything on the 12V system up
| until the car starts-- that includes the car's computer,
| which is what (after doing all its self-checks and whatnot)
| activates that relay and connects the traction battery to
| everything else in the car.
|
| The traction battery isn't always connected probably mostly
| for safety reasons (having 400-someodd volts energized
| across the whole car even when it doesn't need it isn't
| great), but that also keeps it from getting excessively
| drained if something in the car malfunctions. It's pretty
| cheap to replace a 12V lead-acid battery if it's
| overdischarged after you left the lights on... the big
| hybrid battery, not so much.
| rwmj wrote:
| Makes sense, thanks for the explanation.
| jackmott42 wrote:
| Because they want to completely disconnected the big
| battery when not in use to prevent phantom drain, and you
| need a little power to run passive systems that need to be
| on still (like remote keys etc).
|
| Some EVs like Tesla now use a separate lithium ion 12v
| battery that should last forever, instead of a lead acid
| 12v battery with a limited life span.
| Syonyk wrote:
| No. Or, at least, not easily. The high voltage battery
| isn't generally connected until "the computers are happy"
| with the state of things, for various hybrids/EVs/etc.
|
| There's also a legal requirement that "marker lights and
| such" still work (presumably, also power locks and such)
| after a prime mover failure. Basically, if the engine
| quits, you should still be able to signal, get over, turn
| your 4-ways on, etc.
|
| The easiest solution is to just put a lead acid 12V battery
| in the car for that. Lithium, in particular, is a problem
| below freezing because you can't safely charge it, whereas
| lead doesn't have that problem.
| perardi wrote:
| Because so much of the real deep-down legacy bits of the
| car assume a 12-volt battery.
|
| https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a38537243/electric-
| car...
|
| There's a lot of Tier 3 supplier...stuff...in a car that
| was architected for 1978 and has never had a thorough re-
| think, because the profit margin is like nothing.
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| Happened to my wife's ex-Toyota CHR hybrid (not plug-in
| hybrid) after 5 weeks of vacation. I hooked a CTEK charger to
| it for 8 to 12 hours and all was good again. I didn't leave
| the car on the CTEK charger for five weeks because it was
| parked outside and not at our place.
|
| Otherwise CTEK chargers are really nice. Certain car brands
| like Porsche while sell you a "Porsche charger" for two or
| three times the price but it's just a CTEK charger re-branded
| with the Porsche logo on it.
|
| If you've got a garage with electricity, it's an option. If
| you don't want to let the car on the charger during 5 weeks,
| just connect it as soon as you come back and in a few hours
| the car is ready.
| Johnny555 wrote:
| My Honda Hybrid is the same way, sometimes I go weeks between
| drives and if I park it for more than a couple weeks, I plug
| it into a 12V battery charger to keep the 12V battery topped
| up.
|
| But I blame the car's smart features (that use the cell modem
| to allow remote start, etc) rather than it being a hybrid. I
| suspect that the non-hybrid model would be the same.
| Syonyk wrote:
| A standard hybrid (of the sort that a range of companies make,
| handwavingly a parallel hybrid with creep capability, which a
| PHEV is just a supersized version of) eliminates a huge swath
| of things that go wrong with ICEs.
|
| First and foremost, the transmission replaces the rather
| staggering pile of complexity of a modern automatic
| transmission, typically, with "a few motor/generators, some
| planetary gears, maybe a band that only engages when a motor is
| already stopped, and some power electronics." Compared to the
| 9+ speed automatics, this is _dramatically_ simpler. Quite a
| few hybrids don 't even have a mechanical reverse gear, it's
| just using the electronics for that brief period.
|
| But, beyond that, you generally aren't asking the engine to
| idle, or to provide "starting torque" for the car - the hybrid
| system handles that sort of thing well. On at least the Gen 1
| Volts, the motor "idles" at about 1200-1300 RPM, vs the ~750
| RPM in most other vehicles, because it's almost never needed at
| low speed (heating in the dead of winter is the one time I
| notice it). But you don't have low speed, high load operation
| on the engines (which is a hard regime to operate in), and you
| don't have rapid speed changes with gear shifts (which is
| certainly more stressful than smooth speed changes or
| continuous speed operation).
|
| You have less brake system wear, and... it goes on.
|
| I know there's this popular "Hybrids/PHEVs are the most
| complicated of both worlds, so they _must_ be the most
| unreliable of all worlds! " thing going around, but the data is
| quite clear that they're exceedingly reliable in actual use,
| and the "most complicated of all worlds" things tends to zoom
| out far enough to avoid looking at the transmission or engine
| design at any level of detail.
| Johnny555 wrote:
| I thought maybe it was from mostly keeping the ICE engine in a
| comfortable power-rpm band, rarely making it lug at low RPM's
| to get the car going, rarely reving up to high RPM's, and never
| idling the engine, it's either running under load to charge the
| battery (or drive the car), or turned off.
| michalf6 wrote:
| BMW got much better since the switch to B series engines, N
| series era was horrible. Timing chains between the engine and
| gearbox are a pain point though, they need to be replaced with
| mileage.
| tricky wrote:
| Not all N series engines are awful. The N52, while not as
| amazing as the previous M52/M54 engines, is a fantastic,
| reliable engine. However, the 4 cylinder N20 used between
| 2011-2017 is the worst. Faulty timing chain guides often fail
| and immediately grenade the engine. They were so bad there was
| even a class action lawsuit
| ZeroGravitas wrote:
| I'd read that hybrids had better reliability than ICE cars, but
| from a glance at this data it might just be an artefact of high
| reliability manufacturers being overrepresented in this market.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| Would love to see this scattered against maintenance cost.
|
| Having to take my Subaru in for an oil change every six months is
| annoying, even if it means I've only ever had one serious issue.
| (Computer flipped out because someone didn't close the gas cap
| tightly enough, leading to a service visit requirement, which is
| absurd.)
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I do my own oil change, but how much can it cost? Surely not
| more than $50 and 20min I hope.
| TheCleric wrote:
| Oh it's definitely more than $50.
|
| I have done my oil changes in the past, and for the
| recommended oil and filter on my 8 year old Toyota, $50 would
| cover 5 quarts of oil and a cheap filter. Add in disposal +
| labor, it's sometimes just easier to pay my local mechanic
| the $75 for the oil change.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I always get my oil at Costco at 6 quarts for less than
| $30. I figured mechanic shops are surely buying for less.
| And oil filters are usually less than $10 for the cheap
| ones, and maybe $15 for the high end ones. I assume auto
| shops probably use the cheaper ones. Actually, the reason I
| do my own oil change is because I can trust Costco/Autozone
| to sell me good quality oil and oil filter, whereas I don't
| know what a mechanic would put in, and it only takes me
| 30min.
|
| https://www.costco.com/mobil-1-advanced-fuel-economy-full-
| sy...
|
| I just looked up a local mechanic's website, and they
| advertise $35 for synthetic blend oil change, and $65 for
| full synthetic blend oil change (most non european cars). I
| wonder if they price it to be at cost or even a loss
| leader.
| dvh wrote:
| Tristan disagrees with you:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM4ZOJk1Btc
| jerlam wrote:
| This article seems quite similar to the one posted two days ago
| on HN about Brother printers - they're great because they have
| very low innovation.
|
| The top car brands - Lexus/Toyota, Acura/Honda, Subaru, and Mazda
| - have been widely scolded for not trying very hard to build EVs
| and would rather refine the same exact ICE cars for decades.
| eweise wrote:
| Subaru and Mazda are fairly small so I wouldn't expect a lot of
| R&D from them. Toyota has been really successful with hybrid
| which to me, seem like the best solution until EV range cost,
| and infrastructure improve.
| tomatotomato37 wrote:
| Those two are weird; they use to have a lot of out-there
| designs (boxers & rotaries respectively) but seem to have
| slowed down on the innovation since then.
| kyle_grove wrote:
| Mazda engine R&D is seemingly quite impressive: the SkyActive
| X engine is an unusual ICE gasoline engine that takes ideas
| from diesel, with greater fuel efficiency and horsepower.
| standardUser wrote:
| I appreciate data like this because it helps counter the super
| strongly held opinions most car enthusiasts have about car
| brands, which generally seem to be based on hearsay and
| conjecture.
| alex_c wrote:
| >We weigh the severity of each type of problem to create a
| predicted reliability score for each vehicle, from 1 to 100.
|
| It bothers me to see a 1 to 100 scale for this - what does the
| number actually mean in practice? Comparing a score of 80 and a
| score of 20, does that mean the lower score is likely to need 4x
| as many trips to the mechanic? 4x as much spent on repairs in a
| year?
|
| In other words - how big is the gap between first and last place
| in real-world terms? Presenting the scores this way suggests a
| huge difference, is that actually the case?
|
| Either way, surprised to see Mini near the top and Mercedes-Benz
| all the way at the bottom!
| thedaly wrote:
| > ...what does the number actually mean in practice?
|
| Seemingly very little:
|
| _We study 20 trouble areas, from nuisances--such as squeaky
| brakes and broken interior trim--to major bummers, such as
| potentially expensive out-of-warranty engine, transmission, EV
| battery, and EV charging problems. We use that information to
| give reliability ratings for every major mainstream model._
|
| _We weigh the severity of each type of problem to create a
| predicted reliability score for each vehicle, from 1 to 100. We
| use that information to give reliability ratings for every
| major mainstream vehicle. (The reliability rating is then
| combined with data collected from our track testing, as well as
| our owner satisfaction survey results and safety data, to
| calculate each test vehicle's Overall Score.)_
| asicsarecool wrote:
| You can't buy an 'average' Mazda, or an 'average' Mercedes. Each
| manufacturer has models up and down the reliability curve.
|
| I guess this is interesting, but only actionable info is if you
| pay for a subscription and look up not just a particular model,
| but of a particular year and trim
| brookside wrote:
| I have never understood how the Consumer Reports model of
| self(reader)-reported reliability can produce can statistically
| valid results.
|
| There are many biases build in to self-reporting surveys.
| Longtime Consumer Reports readers who buy a Toyota because they
| believe it is the most reliable make _want_ their choice to have
| been correct. Their answers about problems with their car will
| reflect that.
| prepend wrote:
| CR also uses their own tests and maintenance records.
|
| There are definitely flaws with self reporting but it's just a
| data source with its limitations.
|
| Statistical validity is based on what is done with the data,
| not whether it's self reported or measured accurately. What you
| may be thinking of is whether their study or logic is sound.
| 93po wrote:
| Data around cars is notoriously complete bullshit. One example
| is that one of the main metrics used by a very big name, maybe
| CR, is "reliability compared to * _expectations*_ ". Obviously
| cars that people have high expectations for (Teslas) are going
| to score horribly here even if they are objectively more
| reliable than other brands. And of course they bury this little
| fact way down in the info and everyone walks away with "welp
| teslas just fucking break all the time"
| johngossman wrote:
| There was a time when CR regularly rated Buick at the top of
| the charts. At that time, my mom and all her little old lady
| friends (I'm not using those adjectives lightly) had Buicks and
| literally used them to drive to Church on Sundays (and
| occasionally the grocery store, which was about five blocks
| away). The cars were terrible, but they were treated well.
| algidagreen wrote:
| Very weird that Volvo Cars, from the land of Spotify and all the
| other unicorns, has such huge problems with reliability (they
| consistently rank one of the lowest in the reliability due to
| infotainment/computer problems). They must be doing something
| really wrong. All that talent in Sweden and they can't make it
| stable? The stock has been tanking massively for a while now.
| Anyone knows whats up? Did they outsource their software/platform
| to third world countries?
| jansan wrote:
| Not sure if this plays a role, but they are owned by a Chinese
| holding company, so no longer 100% Scandinavian.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| It takes 1 lead architect to make bad long term decisions and
| you have easily 10+ years of clusterfucks in that area, and we
| know infotainment was at the bottom of priorities list of
| conservative manufacturers for a very long time.
|
| I have BMW 5 series F11, not the newest model but TBH given
| current design I am better off that way. It has tons of tiny or
| bigger than tiny software bugs in behavior. Seems like some
| sensors in the car also start to die, giving some rather crazy
| warnings (ie chassis integrity check when a _very_ good car
| mechanic went through and didn 't find any sign of damage,
| sometimes big collision flash on screen that is never going to
| happen, 10+C temperature change and I get tire pressure
| warnings and so on). The stuff that should be helping you ends
| up annoying much more and is often disabled, which is outright
| fail of engineering.
|
| With that software quality, going to newer more integrated and
| stupidly designed (less physical buttons) version would be a
| step back, and I very confident they just made it shinier, not
| better tested. Maybe my next car will be one model earlier than
| our current one, the problem is with old enough cars even basic
| things like wires and tubes start to fail.
| 303uru wrote:
| So reviewing this more closely. This is a joke. What is
| reliability? I would say, that the car starts in the morning,
| that it gets you from point A to B, that it isn't in the shop.
| But that only appears to be half the equation here. While
| annoying is a panel gap or interior trim issue affect
| reliability? That's rather weird.
|
| Looking at the data, in terms of true reliability EVs appear to
| be about on par with ICE cars which is quite the feat considering
| they have a 120+ year lead. Hammer out the manufacturing defects
| and the lead seems easy to achieve.
|
| It's also a little weird to not give any nod to the almost
| complete lack of maintenance for EVs. Is it not a reliability win
| that you are able to gas up at home and have no maintenance to do
| other than tires?
| whatever1 wrote:
| No way BMW is that high. I literally saw the past 2-3 weeks two
| X7s and an X5 stranded on the highway, on my way to work.
|
| I remember because I was joking yesterday with my partner that we
| should never buy a Beamer.
| Already__Taken wrote:
| That's not counting just how many working X7 and X5's you
| passed.
| dclowd9901 wrote:
| Anecdata.
|
| But as a long time BMW fan I too feel the cars have really
| taken a nosedive in just about every metric. Reliability,
| design, quality, you name it.
|
| Very surprised to also see Mini as high as it is.
| leetcrew wrote:
| BMWs are actually pretty reliable these days. the b58 is very
| solid and used all across their lineup.
|
| of course, they are still expensive to maintain.
| Bhilai wrote:
| You have the data in front of you. As someone else too
| mentioned, the B58 engine is considered pretty reliable by BMW
| mechanics and on various Reddit forums where car enthusiasts
| hangout.
| paxys wrote:
| You are right, research involving millions of data points
| gathered from 330K vehicles over the course of a year is
| completely wrong because you saw a couple of broken BMWs on the
| road on your way to work.
| freecodyx wrote:
| French cars not included, i would say Renault is pretty reliable
| as well
| jefftk wrote:
| ConsumerReports just covers the American market, so in addition
| to Renault (which doesn't sell in the US [1]) it excludes all
| cars that the listed makes sell outside the US.
|
| [1] https://www.hemmings.com/stories/renault-returning-to-us-
| mar...
| hintymad wrote:
| Toyota is amazing for making reliable cars but writing truly
| shitty code. IIRC, a lawsuit a few years ago about Toyota's
| faulty brake system revealed that Toyota engineers cramped tens
| of thousands of lines in a single file and the lines freely
| update hundreds of global variables. It's also interesting that
| Japanese companies follow ISO this and CMM that yet they develop
| slowly and produce shitty software services everywhere. On the
| other hand, they have amazing engineers who wrote amazing books
| about deep technical topics and optimize the hell out of esoteric
| mathematical software that is probably used by millions of
| people. Truly mysterious country
| okl wrote:
| This? From almost 20 years ago.
| https://www.safetyresearch.net/Library/BarrSlides_FINAL_SCRU...
| rngname22 wrote:
| I think you could perhaps say that Japanese are extremely
| highly sensitive to
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switching_barriers in indusrial
| and administrative processes relative to other cultures.
|
| If something causes friction or pain, but switching away /
| updating to a new system would incur a high cost or retraining
| time or break institutional knowledge, there seems to be an
| extreme bias to adapting to the pain rather than suffering the
| switching cost temporarily to improve the situation. There does
| seem to be a benefit though of extreme adaptation that occurs
| when a process remains unchanged for a very, very long time and
| actors in the system can develop extreme levels of experience.
| laurencerowe wrote:
| Note that these stats only account for reliability in the first
| three years:
|
| > Then the brand reliability score was calculated by averaging
| results from 2021 to 2023.
|
| As someone who usually buys ~10 year old cars and drives them
| into the ground I'm much more interested in long term
| reliability. It may correlate but these stats are not that!
| brewtide wrote:
| 100% share the method. If you are patient, somewhat
| knowledgeable, and frankly lucky you can pick up some nice
| things for real cheap at that point. Sometimes they can turn
| into money puts, but oftentimes with some preventative
| maintenance, things just keep going smooth.
| paxys wrote:
| > Who Makes the Most Reliable New Cars?
|
| > CR ranks the brands and reveals how their new models are
| likely to hold up
|
| Literally the title and subtitle of the article, as well as the
| HN submission.
| sharkweek wrote:
| My 3rd Gen Toyota 4Runner is old enough to drink and outside of
| routine maintenance requires almost no thought.
|
| "It's time to get a new car" given that car safety has
| drastically improved and I have two younger kids in that thing a
| few times a week but I'm honestly having a really hard time
| giving it up, something so reliable and plainly functional.
|
| New cars with all their computers and smart technology only look
| like "expensive repairs" to me, whereas if something breaks
| (again, rare!) on my extremely mechanical 4Runner, it's almost
| always something simple and relatively cheap.
|
| Glad to see Yodas at the top of this list though, when mine
| finally kicks the bucket, will confidently get another one I
| suppose.
| jmyeet wrote:
| You should be asking "What do terrorists and militants use?".
| Seriously. Look anywhere at any established militant or terrorist
| group and you'll see common tools. Some examples spring to mind:
|
| 1. Toyota Hilux trucks. Interestingly, for a combination of
| legislative reasons, you can't buy these in the US; But they are
| _incredibly_ reliable.
|
| 2. AK-47 rifles. These are perhaps one of the most influential
| weapon systems in history. Again, incredibly reliable.
|
| 3. Casio digital watches. These are used as timers for improvised
| explosives but again, they're incredibly reliable. And cheap.
|
| Back to cars, reliability is an interesting metric for cars
| because the manufacturers have made it incredibly difficult to
| maintain such cars yourself. You need to go to an authorized
| reapir shop that'll have the equip to access the computer
| systems.
|
| Is this more reliable? If you break down in the middle of
| nowhere, it can be less than ideal. A simpler vehicle can be
| easier to get going again.
| lbj wrote:
| BMW
| lbj wrote:
| BMW beating Mercedes? That'll be the day :D
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-29 23:00 UTC)