Can't prove it by me. Of all the cars I have owned, only two were
problematic over time, a '51 Chevy and a '97 Lexus. Although I do not keep
my cars ten years most of them have gone to relatives and friends, some of
whom keep then even longer than ten years. If one does the proper
preventive maintenance any brand today will run to 200K or more.
I also own a '41, '64, '71, and a '83 domestics. All but the '41, where
purchased new and currently have from 100K to 300K on the clock and they all
look and run just fine.
Since I was in the fleet service business I have learned to do what
corporate fleet mangers do. I look at the total cost over time to acquire,
insure, maintain, repair and replace my vehicles. That is the reason why I
no longer buy imports
mike
"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:67ll63dfqav9uea2poc1qcdhglg0qj9f91@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2007 17:27:00 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
>>The fact is most ALL of the vehicle manufacturers fall within the
>>statistical average of 2%, which is the average number of faults for ALL
>>manufactured products. Naturally one will be on top and one will be on
>>the
>>bottom in ANY list but a variation of .05% to 1% is in indeed meaningless.
>
> What is meaningless is your 2% number. 2% of what? 2% of all
> transmissions fail every day? 2% of cars will need a repair if driven
> 300,000 miles?
>
> If you keep cars for two years (like you do) and have connections in
> the industry and/or enough money that you don't care about resale
> value, then it may not matter. For people who want to drive a car for
> 5 - 10 years and don't want to be making monthly trips to the garage,
> it makes a difference.
>
>>What the customers should be more concerned about is the total cost to
>>drive
>>the vehicle home, dealer service, shop rates for that service, insurance,
>>and parts costs, not whose brand in on the grill.
>>
>>mike
>
> Economical car ownership is most dependent on avoiding depreciation
> costs and finance charges. High-quality, durable and reliable cars
> are best for this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>"Rising Sun" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
>>news:6cfe4cac44b46f92eb10fc79aedaea4a@pseudo.bor ked.net...
>>> The Autobeat http://snipr.com/1n8lb
>>>
>>> ..General Motors and Chrysler tumbled down the list in J.D. Power and
>>> Associates' annual Initial Quality Study. The study measures problems
>>> found in the first 90 days of ownership after interviewing 97,000
>>> consumers.
>>>
>>> GM did poorly and a company spokesman argued that the survey doesn't
>>> matter. All of GM's brands finished below the industry average, which
>>> is 125 problems per 100 vehicles...
>>>
>>> The reason it doesn't matter, says the spokesman, is that the
>>> difference between top performers and the middle of the pack is
>>> statistically irrelevant. Toyota, which tied Jaguar for sixth with 112
>>> problems per 100 vehicles, beat Chevy by just 17 problems per 100 cars.
>>> He makes a point. Few consumers will notice 17 problems per 100
>>> vehicles. The Power study, he told me, is becoming less and less
>>> relevant because quality is reaching parity.
>>>
>>> There's some truth to that. But the argument naively misses a huge
>>> point. While some brands like Mercedes moved way up the charts this
>>> year and others, like Chrysler, tumbled way down, hot names like Honda
>>> and Toyota are in the top 10 every year. Every year!
>>>
>>> Consumers love and trust those brands. And those companies have been
>>> dining on Motown's market share for decades now. Sure, Detroit is
>>> close, by the numbers anyway. But consumers won't believe that Detroit
>>> is as good as Honda and Toyota until they beat them and beat them
>>> consistently in J.D. Power surveys, Consumer Reports studies, word-of-
>>> mouth recommendations and just general buzz. I'm sorry, why should a
>>> guy who's on his third Toyota or Honda buy a Chevy? Because the initial
>>> quality is almost as good and the disparity is statistically minuscule?
>>> There's a great sales pitch...
>>> ==========
>>> Rising Sun: http://snipr.com/eat_me_jarhead
>>>
>>