[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)