Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:59:22 -0400 From: "Tex" <texnospamm101.org> Subject: Re: JD Power: Saab 2nd to last in quality
"- Bob -" <uctraingnospamanet.com> wrote in message news:ajlrd25t3fchpfmgesp2jeueqfp60loat8nospamcom... > He's also right about the price point. Most of the people I know who > purchase a car near the bottom of the line are much more tolerant of > needed repairs, chalking it up to "well, I did buy the cheap car" > whereas people who spent a bucket of money are outraged at not > "getting what they paid for". It's as much of a relative pain for both > and both are justified at getting upset but those who buy near the > bottom of the price range are typically (and correctly most times) > expecting less quality. Hardly...prior to owning my current Saab I owned a "lowly" Ford Focus (which I had purchased for a tad over one third the cost of my current Saab). Shortly after having purchased the Saab I began noticing a number of little issues crop up that I simply could not ignore. None of which I noticed because I had paid dearly for the car (that was no where in my thought process), it was simply that the car definitely had initial quality problems....bad struts, squeaky springs, squealing brakes, loose and even broken plastic interior pieces, oodles of rattles from throughout the interior, broken and loose cabling on the undercarriage. I would consider those to be fairly major defects...none of which I had had for nearly 5 years of ownership of my Ford. My Ford only once had unscheduled visit to the repair shop...after 4 1/2 years (a broken spring, covered as part of a recall notice). And yes the Ford was competely squeak and rattle free, throughout my ownership of it. I recall talking with the guy who sold me the Saab about the problems (who is also a good friend of mine). I honestly felt rather sheepish going back to him to describe the littany of problems (as I'm not one to typically complain about anything). I actually started out by saying "I wouldn't normally come to you with this, but I couldn't ignore some noises in the car that just don't sound good. I was hoping you might take a look at it." > My humble experience buying at the bottom and > top of some product price ranges. From what I've seen (statistically) and heard (anecdotally), it seems to be hit or miss with pricing. Some vehicles fit this logic...Lexus...high priced...high initial quality. And Kia, low price, low quality. While others do not...Mercedes, high price, low initial quality. Toyota, low price, high initial quality. > Combine the first point with the second and... well... the survey's > are totally invalid. Saabs do not belong in the bottom slots. They > don't fit in at the top either - Saab drive quality with traditional > Japanese reliability would be nice... but Japanese reliability is > dropping fast too in my experience. I think it's a misconception that all Japanese automakers produce nothing but high quality vehicles...the stats show otherwise. While certain Japanese automakers produce certain models that are of high quality, it is true that Nissan and more obviously Mitusbishi and Subaru have produced some sub-par quality build vehicles. Honda and Toyota are by no means completely immune from quality problems either, but overall they rank highly. Lexus is a different story. So how is it that Lexus can produce such high quality vehicles even while continuing to shove the latest electronic gadgetry into the car? Seems to me their recipe is simple...start with basic good vehicle formats, that buyers will love for years on end (see LS400 c.1989), and then continually improve on them year after year. They don't try to reinvent themselves every few years...that invites needless complications, and pitfalls. - tex
