Blah Blah Blah. What does 2% mean?



On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 14:09:23 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

>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.bo rked.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
>>>>
>>>
>