Asked how to choose a good mechanic, Tyler Cowen responds that you should buy a Honda or a Toyota and you probably won't need a mechanic to do anything beyond the super-routine. I've never owned a car, but in second-hand anecdotal terms that definitely seems to be the case -- folks who own Hondas or Toyotas, even pretty cheap ones, rarely have problems whereas American cars are plagued with reliability issues. This often strikes me as an under-analyzed element in the saga of American deindustrialization; maybe it's not even true that American durable goods are far less reliable than Japanese brands, but it's certainly what a lot of people think.
« Myths of Decline | Main | Threats »
Reliability
30 Mar 2008 01:24 pm
Comments (84)
Or a BMW.
As always, the situation is more complex than some would acknowledge.
First, the repair and maintenance costs for Hondas and Toyotas on a per-event basis can often be much higher. For example, American cars often use more cheap mass-produced parts than their Japanese competitors, but while cheap mass-produced parts may break more often, they are also cheaper to replace when they do break.
Second, routine maintenance is not an inconsiderable expense category these days. Indeed, generally manufacturing standards have gotten so high at this point that unless there is a design flaw (or accident), most of the work cars require is in the category of expected wear and tear (unless perhaps you fail to follow the suggested maintenance routine).
So, it is not as obvious as people would sometimes suggest that Hondas and Toyotas are in fact less costly to own, once you add everything up. But where they do tend to do better is in limiting unexpected expenses to a bare minimum, and that alone is enough to make them popular with a lot of people (those who are willing to pay a premium for not having to deal with unexpected events).
I recently replaced my alternator on my 1990 Honda Accord. It was the first time the alternator on it has been replaced.
This hand-me-down will be last forever, I'm convinced.
Matt,
Buy a subscription to Consumer Reports (if you're foolish enough not to have one already) and look up their automobile section.
Japanese brands really are more reliable.
Crap. Double Crap. Okay, for the record, Hondas and Toyotas are on average better cars than American cars - granted. But a lot of "reliability issues" are a reflection of the person driving the car. If you don't get regular oil changes, you red line it between stop lights or otherwise drive like a moron and that car will not be the same in a few years. Even a Honda can't take that kind of abuse. You keep perpetuating the myth that Americans can't make cars and our domestic industry might as well close shop today. Liberal yuppies are George W Bush's allies in turning this country into the third world.
After World War II, Japan was ruled by an absolute yet benign and wise dictator, one Douglas Arthur MacArthur. Besides giving women the right to vote and everyone the right to free speech, legalizing trade unions, breaking up large estates through Hugo Chavez-style land reform projects and introducing universal health care, General MacArthur also brought in the best American industrial experts to help rebuild the Japanese economy.
The Toyota kaizen system was merely an adaptation of our War Department's TWI system which worked so well to boost war production (but which was dropped here in 1945).
http://cr4.globalspec.com/blogentry/673/December-8-1945-Toyota-Resumes-Production
Counterpoint: Hondas and Toyotas are cars that economists would choose to drive.
Yes, they're reliable, but they're also generally quite vanilla. The Civic has the 100k timing belt replacement annoyance, but the presumption is that you can take it up to 300k on the clock. Same applies to Volvo 240s, and the 1980s Mercs now driven by biodiesel types.
(The Toyota Hi-Lux pickup, on the other hand, is legendarily indestructible, and doesn't make you feel middle-aged when you drive it.)
Low-end American cars, made in America, are just plain cheap. The Top Gear reviews have a bit of a running joke against US marques, but the interiors are cheap and the chassis design is generally not too far advanced from the covered wagon. Ford and GM do make good cars for other markets; it's just that they can't sell them in the US at the price they command abroad.
You keep perpetuating the myth that Americans can't make cars and our domestic industry might as well close shop today.
It's the cars that are perpetuating this "myth."
But it isn't ALL Japanese cars that rock -- Mitsubishi, for example, kinda sucks. And I don't get nearly the sense of high build quality from Subaru that I do from Honda and Toyota. Maybe Nissan is in their league; I don't know.
I've had 2 Subarus for over a decade and I've found them to be extremely reliable. Built like a tank, never a single problem. And made in Indiana!
Another piece of the equation is are you buying a new car. Do you intend to keep it for the long haul? Ditto with a late model used car. In my experience, Subarus, as well as Toyotas and Hondas, given routine maintenance last for hundreds of thousands of miles. We have owned Subarus because they are good snow cars. I've never had one spin out on me. If you are the sort who wants a new car every few years, all of this is probably less important.
There's a tremendous lag time between quality and perceptions of quality. Essentially Toyota and Honda are now riding high off a good reputation build in the '90s and early '00s. These days the cars are much closer to parity. I mean, Toyota and Honda are still ahead, but not that far ahead.
I'm not a mechanic but used to work in an auto shop in High school (not that far off).
Ranked by reliability according to the mechanics I worked with:
Toyota
Honda
[quality gap]
Mazda
[small gap]
Subaru (powertrain rocks, everything else is junk)
VW (same issue as Subaru)
[big gap]
Nissan
Ford
Chevy
Korean brands
Chrysler/Jeep
Don't buy the argument about American parts being cheaper, labor is expensive.
My best advice: Don't ever get "scheduled maintenance" at 30k-60k-90k. Look up what the maintenance consists of and order the scheduled items separately. You will save paying around $500 for a dealer technician to look at your car for 2minutes. If you want a mechanic to look at your car for two minutes, drive to a garage and hand one $20.
I'd get a used Civic with constant-variable transmission. Also to make sure you google any model before you buy. Some good brands have bad parts eg. Honda's trannys on 6 cylinder engines are total junk,
As I Saab owner, I've spent time finding the right mechanic who has a good balance of price, attention, and honesty.
When I had a Honda, it didn't even strike me that this was something I had to worry about. Yes, when by side-view mirror on my Honda had broken off, it was more expensive to replace than it would have been to replace the side-view mirror on a Ford. However, the money and time I saved on other maintenance problems more than made up for it. The cost extra of replacing individual parts in a Honda pales in comparison to the maintenance problems you'll avoid by owning one.
In fact, my post-Honda experience has been a lesson in learning about the plethora of possible things in a car that could fail.
But a lot of "reliability issues" are a reflection of the person driving the car.
Are you arguing that drivers of American cars are morons? If anything, I'd argue that drivers of American cars are probably a lot more car-savvy because they have to be if they want to keep it in working order. If you own a Honda, all you have to do is wait for the "scheduled maintenance" light to go on, drive to your favorite dealer and independent mechanic, and that's it, for 200k miles or so.
DTM says, "For example, American cars often use more cheap mass-produced parts than their Japanese competitors."
And the non mass-produced Japanese parts are what, individually hand-crafted? Get oudda here.
The last objective reliability survey I saw, and this was a year or two ago, had the Japanese still out ahead, but on the upside, Americans were tied with Germans. This may have had something to do with the DaimlerChrysler disaster. We'll see soon. Of course, these are averages. The best way, IMHO, to get a reliable car is to pick a model that has been on the market for a few years and has a proven track record for reliability/has had the bugs worked out.
We're on our third Honda (never owned a Toyota, as they're more expensive than comparable Hondas, in my experience). My husband's Accord was almost at 250,000 miles and running fine when it was totaled (jerk talking on cellphone and not paying attention). My CRX lasted 20 years. I now have a Fit. It's probably true, as a previous commenter says, that Honda/Toyota parts are more expensive. What matters far more to me is minimizing the headaches of worrying about when the next breakdown will come, and the inconvenience of frequently having the car in the shop. By the way, Subarus probably deserve to be classed with Honda and Toyota as well.
You should read Consumer Reports, and you would learn that the Ford Fusion (aka Mercury Milan) received a slightly higher reliability rating than either the Camry or Accord. See here for brief documentation:
http://www.leftlanenews.com/consumer-reports-ford-fusion-on-par-with-accord-camry.html
I think as 'fleet-wide averages' go, Honda and Toyota do beat American car makers, but America is not nearly so far behind as you might think, and, as in the case of the Fusion, it is better than their Japanese counterparts. Given the flagship status of the Camry and Accord, this seems to me to be a pretty big deal.
One interesting note, Consumer Reports does not allow auto manufacturers to cite their findings in any advertisements. Because CR is so strict about maintaining both their independence and the image of their independence, Ford can't run a car commercial that says, "CR says the Fusion is more reliable than the Camry."
you probably won't need a mechanic to do anything beyond the super-routine.
Mostly, for most new cars, but not always, even for Japanese cars.
I've never owned a car, but in second-hand anecdotal terms that definitely seems to be the case -- folks who own Hondas or Toyotas, even pretty cheap ones, rarely have problems whereas American cars are plagued with reliability issues.
Yes and no; I know of people who had Hondas and Toyotas that were plagued with reliability issues and people with Fords and GMs that weren't.
This often strikes me as an under-analyzed element in the saga of American deindustrialization; maybe it's not even true that American durable goods are far less reliable than Japanese brands, but it's certainly what a lot of people think.
'Far less reliable' isn't true, but somewhat less realiable cars compared to certain competing manufacturers, yes.
And the non mass-produced Japanese parts are what, individually hand-crafted? Get oudda here.
No, the Japanese manufacturers charge really high prices for their parts, that way they can ship them to the assembly plants in the US and add very little value there (other than assembly), and thus escape taxes. Which keeps the money in Japan, as intended.
Ranked by reliability according to the mechanics I worked with:
That's maybe about right except perhaps some of the Europeans are a little too high and the Korean cars are way too high; they should be down there with Yugo.
Low-end American cars, made in America, are just plain cheap.
Yep. And I bet low-end cars made by the Japanese in Japan are the same. Everybody wants to move exports. Poor people in America don't buy Japanese cars; the Japanese just aren't in that segment, but they have to be, in Japan.
Tyler Cowen responds
I'd say the perception is often exaggerated by economists who dislike Americans (except rich Americans) intensely; after all, they hardly ever complain about the massive trade barriers installed by the Japanese or Chinese, but they definitely lose their shit over union members (and other working-class types) who aren't politically pliable enough to make a useful serf class. So in that context, rubbing your hands in glee over the demise of American manufacturers and their replacement by foreign manufacturers from countries where the population knows their place makes perfect sense as part of the class war.
max
['No man so marxist as a self-proclaimed capitalism cheerleader.']
I have to toss out the observation that many Toyotas (and Hondas?) are now manufactured here, so it's a more company-wide issue, rather than where the factory is.
We drive Toyotas. My husband just traded in his '92 Camry for a Prius (yes, it lasted 16 years, all in a fairly maintenance-conscious family--he was going to need to replace the exhaust for more than the worth of the car in the next year); I have a Sienna. We used to have a Corolla wagon. The reason for the consistency is never, ever being left by the side of the road. As fun as I think Jeeps are, the reliability would be a deal-killer.
You should read Consumer Reports
For refrigerator reviews? Possibly.
For cars? Uh, no thanks.
My Canadian made Honda Odyssey and Canadian made Toyota Corolla have been pretty reliable. The Odyssey started having things go south after 90k miles. But it's been a reliable hauler for almost 10 years. My Ford Escort was also pretty reliable up until I had to replace the brake master cylinder. But that was more an issue of the mechanic and perhaps a bad aftermarket part. Anyway I digress. Most Toyotas and Hondas nowadays are manufactured in either the US or Canada. Very few are imported from Japan.
It seems clear that cars across the board are much better than they used to be just twenty five years ago. Back then, the quality disparity between American and Japanese cars was more pronounced. These days, less so.
My mechanic does house calls(!), and talking with him, he seems to echo somewhat DTM's line about parts for domestic cars being generally less expensive, and overall maintenance less expensive. My guess is that parts are more standardized rather than mass produced.
But where they do tend to do better is in limiting unexpected expenses to a bare minimum, and that alone is enough to make them popular with a lot of people (those who are willing to pay a premium for not having to deal with unexpected events).
I think there are an increasing number of consumers who are willing to pay a "premium" in every class of purchase to avoid "unexpected events". I'm what most people call upper middle class (but not "hyper wealthy"), have a family, and I value my time quite a bit. This comes from years of experience being on the leading edge of technology, or buying things with "whiz-bang" features. I consider simplicity of operation, likelihood of fitting with current and emerging standards (but I don't get too caught up in that last one... usually by the time the next standard becomes a standard, my current equipment is dead).
Every time I think about a purchase (car, computer, TV, washer, fridge) I think, "How much hassle is this thing likely to be". My purchases now tend to lag the industry quite a bit, and I tend not to go for the flashy features anymore - too much trouble and never worth it.
I suspect that's why lots of people are trending towards the slightly below median price and "boring" these days. Everything's (except at the very bottom) so "nice" compared to what it used to be, you can get away with spending below the median amount and getting something "good enough" that will last you a long time and give you no trouble.
Anecdotal evidence fever: catch it!
All I want in a car is that it has decent gas mileage and that it starts when I turn it on, and that I can use it every day. That's why I drive a Honda accord. My last one went for 150,000 miles with no real problems, despite the fact that I almost never change the oil or do scheduled maintenance. It's not pretty or fast but it just works. All the time.
BTW - The latest round of car reports from Consumer Reports makes it clear that Toyata and Honda's leads on quality are slipping, and in some particular models, Toyota has some actually worse quality than average in recent years.
All cars are better than they used to be, but there's no reason (except for fashion/consumerism) the cars in the next 10-20 years shouldn't be basically perfect (i.e. require even less preventative maintenance and no unscheduled maintenance if driven properly).
My father's motto was: "Never buy a car that was built on a Monday."
The cars are manufactured in the U.S for the most part even though the manufacturer is, for example, headquartered in Japan. But, the manufacturer is an internationally traded corporation.
pseudonymous in nc: Only an idiot would buy a car without at least looking at CR -- doesn't mean you should automatically follow their advice, but you'll get some essential information that you won't get in other magazines or the (hit and miss) experiences of friends/mechanics/etc.
Why, how stupid of me not to realize that buying a new car is one way to avoid meeting mechanics.
I tell ya, that Tyler Cowen is just a few blogposts short of the Pulitzer for economic writing and the Nobel for economic insights.
I bet low-end cars made by the Japanese in Japan are the same.
Well, it's a different market. You have the kei-cars, and other sub-subcompacts, but you also have a much larger segment of commuters.
Ford can't sell its (award-winning) European-spec Focus to Americans, because the price it would need to be sold at to keep its margins intact is way above what Americans are used to paying for that kind of car.
(There are production issues too: the boom in SUVs and trucks led to a ramping up of lines that are now supplying vehicles the market doesn't really need.)
Nissan less reliable than VW? Um, no. Almost nothing is less reliable than a newer VW.
I like my 1979 Corolla sedan.
Actually, VWs and iPods are the ultimate in shitty quality/ pretty-looking yuppie chic.
Google the Toyota sludge problem. The Toyota 6's from something like '98 to '02 cooked the engine oil. I had one but I had used Mobil 1 so my engine managed to last past the point where Toyota actually acknowledged a problem. They replaced the engine at 65k.
My Tercel SW from back in the day was an awesome car. My Siena, not so much. Doors don't open, handles break, parts fall off the dash, all the things that got me hacked at American manufacturers. But I hear good things from friends who own current Toyotas.
Get a Mazda 3, it's a fun car. But all the new little cars are tough on those of us over 6'. And forget the back seat.
Poor people in America don't buy Japanese cars
Which is a shame, because an old, used Japanese car is accessible to a poor car-buyer while also providing fewer maintenance issues that they would have trouble paying for.
This is a case where the differences break down more by class than by income-- the "middle class poor" of adjunct professors, grad students, and struggling immigrants tend to be the consumers of the "beater hondas/toyotas" with low up-front costs and fewer reliability issues while the less savvy on limited incomes are likely to end up with cars that are both cheap and unreliable.
The 100k+-mile Honda is really the VW Beetle of our era: the inexpensive, reliable "people's car."
Plus, there's a perception of the Honda Accord being its "flagship" vehicle. In my experience, Honda's flagship vehicle is the Civic, and the 4-cylinder Accord is just a jerry-rigged attempt at offering a larger car with parts meant to have been used in a Civic.
You're a sucker mc if you don't roll in a kia.
When I was growing up in the sixties the measure of success for the middle class was to have a late model car, then generally defined as new or a year old, after two or at most three years you traded it in, whereupon the dealer resold it to some working class guy that didn't mind working on his own car. Reliability was not much of an issue for the new car buyer, he wasn't going to own it when problems cropped up. Instead all the emphasis was on getting the cars bigger and bigger with ever more flash. Model lines that had started out essentially as sports cars ended up being as big as whales. In order to compensate for the larger size car companies started skimping on steel (most bumpers on 70's era US cars being strictly ornamental) and just as significantly on quality control.
There is a reason whay Ford has a slogan 'At Ford Quality is Job One'. Because for a long time it wasn't even on the list or job requirements, and people knew it. The US auto industry got lazy from top to bottom and simply wasn't prepared for the oil shock of the mid-seventies. The Japanese just coming out of an era of relative austerity which didn't allow for new cars every two years, and always having been reliant on imported oil, and having inherited street plans with narrow roads and alleys were ready with cheaper, more efficient and better built cars and just cleaned the clock of the (then) Big Four. Who in a lot of ways never entirely recovered.
Our Toyota lost its (very expensive) transmission at 57k. Which was 20k farther than our Buick went before it lost its transmission, at 37k.
After that we bought a Volvo, then another, and the damn thing won't break. I'd like another.
The best bet in getting the best value for your money when buying a car (taking into account maintenance costs as well) is to buy one of the top-ranked used cars from Consumer Reports. Most of them are Japanese, but not all.
The point about a lag between perceptions of quality and actual quality is true. I had a '92 Ford Taurus and that car was piece of crap. I took great care of it, but it still died at around 135k miles. Memories like that effect perceptions of Ford quality, but from what I've read, Ford's more recent cars are orders of magnitude better in terms of quality (though with domestic manufacturers, you never want to get the cheapest model, which will with the chintziest interior).
I went from a used Taurus to a used Lexus ES 300, which now has 180k miles. Drives like a dream. Major repairs are infrequent (e.g., replacing timing belt), but they aren't cheap. I also don't skimp on maintenance (e.g., using top-end synthetic oil). No complaints.
I'm sorry, but anecdotes are meaningless.
American cars have indeed improved in quality after applying the some of the same QA/QC that the Japanese have used (suggest you read "The Reckoning", by David Halberstam, which while a bit dated still is relevant to what is happening in the car industry today) but they still lag behind on average. The problem is with poor decisions at the top rather than with what is going on on the assembly line...
"(There are production issues too: the boom in SUVs and trucks led to a ramping up of lines that are now supplying vehicles the market doesn't really need.)"
...for example. In some cases, American based car manufacturers have simply chosen not to compete in the lower to mid-range price market either by not building or by churning out garbage to fill lots. Rather they have focused on mid-high range and have been making some of the same mistakes they made in the 1970's.
I'd also echo the sentiments earlier, that you'd be foolish to consider purshasing a new or used car without consulting CR and well as other car buying guides. Generally, you'll find the reliability statistics mirror one another. You'll also find that these sources rarely highly rank "cheap" cars. They are cheap for a reason, regardless of who sells them. To ignore reliability history these sources provide is just plain stupid.
"Which is a shame, because an old, used Japanese car is accessible to a poor car-buyer while also providing fewer maintenance issues that they would have trouble paying for."
Exactly, though I'd add that doing some research on reliability is important since some older Japanese models have some issues...
Re: You keep perpetuating the myth that Americans can't make cars and our domestic industry might as well close shop today.
A lot of "Japanese" cars are at least partly made in the USA. To the extent that "American" cars are less reliable I would chalk it up to design flaws, not to workmanship.
Personally, I think the wisest course is to buy a model that been in production for years, that way the workers are used to building it and the bugs are out. My 87 Dodge Omni, generally thought of as a piece of junk lasted 11 years with a grad school level of care (ie: almost none). Of course by then the guys who built it had been doing it for 10 years and most likely could put one together in their sleep. I have fantasies that its engine is pumping water in El Salvador right now. My current car, an 98 Prizm (Corolla in Chevy drag) has needed a transmission rebuild at 60 miles, which was a pain. Not sure if I can blame GM or Toyota for that one. My advice is to buy a Ponitac Vibe. That way you get a Toyota for thousands less!
My wife and I bought a used 1986 Accord in 1990. We put just shy of 200,000 miles on that car, in addition to the ~55K miles it had on it when we bought it. I think the only expensive repair was to the A/C system.
We bought a new 2000 Accord in January 2000. It's got 168K miles on it. We had to replace the master brake cylinder once, and that's been about it, other than routine maintenance.
We will keep on buying Honda Accords, at those rare intervals that we need new cars, until we buy one that gives us problems, or until we die. I'm betting the latter happens first.
Not a peep from the Kausians so far...
My 1998 Saturn's got 110K miles on it and I've never had anything done it except the brakes.
1) My parents had always owned American cars, not out of a sense of duty, but because that's just what they did. Then about 20 years ago, they bought an Accord. They also found a shop owned and staffed by mechanics who had worked at a Honda dealership for over ten years before starting their own business. They only work on Hondas/Acuras, and they only use genuine Honda parts. These guys also happen to be pretty honest and trustworthy. As a result, my parents have bought nothing but Hondas ever since. Both because of their excellent reliability, but also because they already know they have an excellent mechanic already in place.
2) Part of my problem with American companies is the idea they put forth that we're "supposed" to buy American. "Buy our cars because, as Americans, it's the right thing to do". That's probably the case when it comes to towels, and clothes, and other goods where the difference in price is neglible. But a car is a major investment. You're talking about a lot of money for something that's supposed to last for a long time, and isn't easily replaceable. I'm not going to sacrifice quality (and often price) for patriotism. It's very simple. Make better cars, and people will buy them.
3) My brother in law is a line worker at the GM Powertrain plant in Toledo. He hates the fact that we buy foreign cars, and takes it personally. I love my sister and my brother in law, but family isn't enough to make me consciously buy a poorer product.
4) After the crappy winter we had in Chicago, I'm now looking at Subarus. That all wheel drive is very appealing. My brother lives in Anchorage, and I swear every driveway has at least one Subaru.
A lot of "Japanese" cars are at least partly made in the USA. To the extent that "American" cars are less reliable I would chalk it up to design flaws, not to workmanship.
As my brother in law would point out, this isn't exactly true. Lots of foreign cars are "assembled" in the United States, but the parts are all built elsewhere. As someone who makes transmissions, he would very much like to note that distinction.
And a lot of American cars are built in Mexico.
While I'm waiting to get my Honda serviced at the dealer, I look at the cars in the showroom. I recall that the sticker on the Civic said 100% of the components are of US origin. Only the more exotic models like the S2000 sports coupe are imported from Japan. Honda's manufacturing plants around Marysville, OH makes much of the components for the Civics assembled there.
Actually, VWs and iPods are the ultimate in shitty quality/ pretty-looking yuppie chic.
Hmm. In Europe, you have a wide range of models on the VW A4 platform, and the sweet spot is below Audi and VW, with the SEAT and Skoda models. (No, really: Skodas aren't cool, but they do the job.)
an old, used Japanese car is accessible to a poor car-buyer while also providing fewer maintenance issues that they would have trouble paying for
It's also a consequence of financing. My guess is that a greater proportion of those 'old reliables' are bought through small ads with cash up front, compared to other models. Looking at the car dealers who advertise locally, both new and second-hand, it tends to be the domestic and Pacific Rim names that get the big push, rather than the people selling Civics.
If you have access to $5k in cash -- or a $5k bank loan -- you're heading towards a high-mileage, not-so-shiny 'beater' with a decent service and owner history. If not, you're off to the loan sharks cunningly disguised as dealerships to pay $X/month.
Do not buy a Saab! AHHH!!!
The sig other of a friend of mine always goes for the Swedish cars. She seems to think that $2500 to replace a fucking timing chain is a mark of status, or something.
Crap. Double Crap. Okay, for the record, Hondas and Toyotas are on average better cars than American cars - granted. But a lot of "reliability issues" are a reflection of the person driving the car. If you don't get regular oil changes, you red line it between stop lights or otherwise drive like a moron and that car will not be the same in a few years. Even a Honda can't take that kind of abuse. You keep perpetuating the myth that Americans can't make cars and our domestic industry might as well close shop today. Liberal yuppies are George W Bush's allies in turning this country into the third world.
Good points. My late, lamented Ford Escort made it to 200,000 miles with no more than than the expected clutch replacement at 100,000 miles, and its timing belt made it to double the spec'ed lifetime.
Anyway, so many "American" cars are actually made (and often designed) overseas, and so many "Japanese" cars are assembled here, that the foreign/domestic boundary is pretty hazy.
I think the meme on japanese cars being assembled not built in the USA is misplaced. The corolla is one of the most "American" cars you can buy. Moreso than the F-150. Everything from the conception, to the components used and actual assembly is largely done And consumer reports is to be taken with a grain of salt. The Toyota Matrix and Pontiac Vibe are the exact same car but the Toyota Matrix has a significantly better rating. American cars put out crap for awhile and the reputation has stuck but no longer be merited.
This isn't a point which is new to U.S. carmakers. One of the reasons the new Chevy Malibu appears to be a big success is that GM focused very, very on its competition -- the Camry's and Accords.
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/30/buyers-dropping-more-coin-on-the-2008-malibu/
In fairness, I should mention that we've had good luck with our 14 y/o Ford Explorer. However, we will be replacing it with either a Honda CRV or a Subaru, as exceptions only prove the rules once in a while.
Only an idiot would buy a car without at least looking at CR -- doesn't mean you should automatically follow their advice, but you'll get some essential information that you won't get in other magazines or the (hit and miss) experiences of friends/mechanics/etc.
Nowadays there's a whole universe of car-rating resources out there. CR has no special place. And I don't think it's very wise to write off a good mechanic's observations as "hit or miss". The guy I see has already demonstrated his honesty, and his shop is a minor Mecca for the local gearheads. He's got competence that I can see directly. Can't really say that about print media.
(So here's a plug: You won't go wrong at the Fenton Citgo station in Silver Spring MD.)
One way to avoid auto disappointments is to NEVER get a brand-new car, which will shed a big chunk of its value as soon as you take it off the lot, and may also be a kind of beta test site on wheels, if it's in its first year or two of production. There are car-rating services not just for makes and models, but also individual used cars, so it's not like you're taking a huge chance on getting somebody else's problems. Also, I really prefer writing one big managable check, instead of a seemingly endless stream of annoying, "affordable" payments.
I have owned three Hondas in my life. But I'm not sure I will be buying another one again soon. I think Honda has jumped the shark. Sure, their new cars are very nice on the inside and are "sporty." But I feel that they've become too enamored of their success and their "grow big" strategy. I owned two Accords in the 80s, and I don't recognize the current generation as a descendant of the ones I owned. The Civic is more like the old Accords, and even they are getting too big for my liking. Gas mileage is so so compared to the Toyotas, and frankly I'm more impressed by the price/quality ratio of Toyota and the Hyundai and Kias. I will be in the market to replace my wife's 10 year old Odyssey, and the current model has too many bells and whistles for my taste. I'm seriously looking at the Mazda or the Kia/Hyundais.
Since we're talking cars and maintenance and such:
The other day a guy at my job told me that GM is considering copyrighting (trademarking?) their parts, in order to knock third-party manufacturers out of the game.
It sure sounds like the kind of short-sighted, ultimately self-defeating legal gamesmanship that GM specializes in. I'm guessing that the very last thing GM needs is a reputation as the company which "offers" a sole-source premium on parts. On the other hand, I can't see how you can "trademark" something like a brake caliper or a fuel injector or a wiring harness.
Does anybody know if this rumor is true?
My 1998 Saturn's got 110K miles on it and I've never had anything done it except the brakes.
I've still got the 96 Saturn SL2 i got my sophomore year of high school. The engine runs well despite over a decade of driving that can be described as abusive at best. The sunroof however is a different story.
Almost nothing is less reliable than a newer VW.
...even if we use 'newer' to describe any built since 1973. Remember the Rabbit? The Dasher? The Scirocco? My '99 GTI has 83,000 miles and is ready for the crusher.
I got my 2000 Honda accord with around 35k miles on it several years ago. Right away when I got it the Honda dealership said the rack and pinion needed replacing and it was 850$. later the tranny needed replacement. Plus there have been a number of minor items additionally.
1) hondas break.
2) three cheers for hondacare transferable 100k mi. warranty on mechanicals on certified used hondas. Go Warranty!
Re: Lots of foreign cars are "assembled" in the United States, but the parts are all built elsewhere.
You are talking past my point. Nowadays your car and its parts may have been made all over the planet. Branding a car "American" or "Japanese" or "German" tells you where the headquarters is and something about the coporate culture. To the extent I've found American cars to have problems it's far more about the design and engineering than about the workmanship as such. This isn't 1979. American auto companies have largely resolved their poor workmanship issues. They have not resolved their poor design problems.
I should note that my Lexus seems to have been built in Georgia. Perhaps the craftsmanship is better there than in Michigan.
The American auto manufacturers' problems seem to me to deirve from the following key problems:
- High Labor Costs (when compared to other manufacturers)- This by the way they are correcting, through those buyouts of older workers who were under older union contracts.
The high labor costs have resulted in the American companies having to cut costs elsewhere:
Cheap Interiors: This to me has been their biggest problem from a marketing standpoint. As mush as the outside of the car is important, the visceral feeling one gets from a cheap plastic interior of say, a Chrysler is really off-putting. I would like to own a Chrysler, and had a soft-spot for them as the young sibling of the Big 3. But their interiors are the worst, and their car designs which were so forward looking 10 years ago, have seemed to hit a snag lately. I do like the exterior of the new sebring, but, again, the interior.
Engineering - again - due to the high costs of manufacturing, the car companies are forced to cut corners again, using older technology.
Until they get their labor costs to an appropriate level, they will continue to battle their current problems.
Finally - all of this may be moot, because American and European automanufacturing (save for luxury autos) is going to all move to China in the next 15 years. Cheri sends its first batch of cars over to the US in 2009.
And do not tell me this time is different. Anytime someone tells me that there is no way they can ship that overseas, guess what - it gets shipped overseas. And Boeing workers, 2025 people - you will all be out of work.
Seriously?
You've NEVER owned a car?
Wow.
"Asked how to choose a good mechanic, Tyler Cowen responds that you should buy a Honda or a Toyota and you probably won't need a mechanic to do anything beyond the super-routine. I've never owned a car, but in second-hand anecdotal terms that definitely seems to be the case -- folks who own Hondas or Toyotas, even pretty cheap ones, rarely have problems whereas American cars are plagued with reliability issues."
Ho hummer.
There was this kid at my former workplace who bought a 1990-something 4Runner with a hundred and some odd thousand miles on it. It appeared to be in perfect condition. He ended up spending thousands of dollars just making it okay.
The whole Japanese cars are reliable and American and European ones are not business has a grain of truth to it but there's another conventional wisdom that's equally powerful: a Japanese car may run okay for the first 200,000 ones but you can expect a world of trouble in the next 800,000.
And even the part about Japanese cars being more reliable in the first 200k is a partial truth. It really depends on the make, model, year, how well you take care of it, and your respective luck. There are plenty of American and European models with outstanding reliability records.
I've owned and worked on cars since I was in middle school; I've never owned a Japanese car. If they make such spectacular vehicles why is that a single Japanese car - the Toyota 2000GT from the late 1960s - is today worth more than when it was new?
For SUVs I like the smaller 4 door Jeeps (Cherokee, Liberty). For trucks I like turbodiesel Rams. For sedans I like old turbodiesel s-class Benzes and certain old gasoline s-class Benzes (especially the 450sel and 6.9). For sports cars I like almost anything without a rubber bumper made in the UK or Europe before 1976 (see CA emissions law).
Except nobody plans on owning a car for 200k miles, much less an additional 800k.
Up until I was 27 I had nothing but used cars (generally OLD used cars), and their reliability was always something of an adventure. Especially on my Jeep --- oh Lord, eventually the reliability was so bad that I couldn't even take it out to the desert anymore because I didn't want to be stranded in the wilderness.
By then I had a real job so I bit the bullet and bought a new car, a 2000 VW Golf, and I have to say that compared to my old used cars, owning this car has been a dream. Basically I have not had to worry about it; the glove compartment is broken and I've had the brakes replaced once, but overall I've put 170,000+ miles on it and it still ran fine until just yesterday when I began spewing transmission fluid all over... I have to take it in tomorrow. Anyway, up until yesterday it was running a lot better than my wife's 1999 Corolla, which has a lot lower mileage, like around 120K.
I should note that my Lexus seems to have been built in Georgia. Perhaps the craftsmanship is better there than in Michigan.
Union labor vs non-union labor. That's the difference.
My 1996 GMC suburban has 145000 trouble free miles and 2001 Dodge Ram just turned 100,000. Both get about 16 mpg which is the downside. Can't get a comparable ride in any japanese vehicle I have ever been in.
My wife's CIVIC is like riding in a tin can. The windup noise at 50 mph is unbelievable. 30+mpg though.
Rented a chevy cobalt in Denver that was a much better ride than the CIVIC and got 35 mpg.
Detroit was stuck in the high margin big car business for too long. So was middle class America. Those days are gone forever, I guess.
"Crap. Double Crap. Okay, for the record, Hondas and Toyotas are on average better cars than American cars - granted. But a lot of "reliability issues" are a reflection of the person driving the car. If you don't get regular oil changes, you red line it between stop lights or otherwise drive like a moron and that car will not be the same in a few years. Even a Honda can't take that kind of abuse."
Nathan, your analysis is flawed because it presumes that the drivers of American cars and Japanese have significantly different driving and maintenance habits. I suppose that it's possible, but unlikely (at least within similar classes of cars). If not, then the clear evidence of less frequent repairs speaks to quality. Now, I think the question of overall costs is legitimate (combining purchase price, costs of repairs, frequency of repairs, time costs associated with repairs).
I wonder how the incidence of repairs has changed through the years. My sense is that repairs for all cars are less frequent than 20 years ago. As a result, American cars could have improved substantially, but not relative to the competition. Does anyone know the data on this?
I see that no one has made any comments about the differences in the way that American car companies vs. Japanese car companies treat and use their engineers during the car's design and quality control investigations. Is there a reason so many of you are trying to get into a union vs. non-union argument, while ignoring the engineering side?
I suspect the public punditry talks and talks a lot about how they feel about the effects of unionization on the assembly line workers, so this leads people to think they are "well informed" about this issue, but no one talks or reports on engineering management differences within the car companies, so no one mentions it when trying to speculate about why quality is different across car companies.
For those who are interested, the Consumer Reports list of most reliable used cars, based on tens of thousands of subscriber surveys:
Acura Integra
Acura MDX
Acura RL
Acura RSX
Acura TL
Acura TSX
BMW M3
Buick LaCrosse
Honda Accord
Honda Civic
Honda Civic Hybrid
Honda CR-V
Honda Element
Honda Odyssey
Honda Pilot
Honda S2000
Infiniti FX
Infiniti G20
Infiniti G35
Infiniti I30, I35
Infiniti QX4
Lexus ES
Lexus GS (RWD)
Lexus GX
Lexus IS
Lexus LS
Lexus RX
Lexus SC
Lincoln Continental
Lincoln Town Car
Mazda Millenia
Mazda MX-5 Miata
Mazda Protegé
Mazda3
Mitsubishi Endeavor
Mitsubishi Outlander
Nissan Altima
Nissan Maxima
Nissan Murano
Pontiac Vibe
Porsche 911 (except '03)
Scion tC
Scion xB
Subaru Baja
Subaru Forester
Subaru Impreza
Subaru Legacy
Subaru Outback
Toyota 4Runner
Toyota Avalon
Toyota Camry (except '07 V6)
Toyota Camry Solara
Toyota Celica
Toyota Corolla
Toyota Echo
Toyota Highlander
Toyota Land Cruiser
Toyota Matrix
Toyota Prius
Toyota RAV4
Toyota Sequoia
Toyota Sienna
Toyota Tundra (except '07 V8 4WD)
Volvo S60
57 Japanese, 4 American, 3 European.
Here's the least reliable used cars:
Buick Rendezvous (AWD)
Buick Terraza
Chevrolet Astro
Chevrolet Blazer
Chevrolet Colorado (4WD)
Chevrolet S-10 Pickup (4WD)
Chevrolet Uplander
Chevrolet Venture
Chrysler Town & Country (AWD)
Dodge Grand Caravan (AWD)
GMC Canyon (4WD)
GMC Jimmy
GMC S-15 Sonoma (4WD)
GMC Safari
Jeep Grand Cherokee
Kia Sedona
Land Rover Discovery, LR3
Lincoln Aviator
Mercedes-Benz SL
Nissan Armada (4WD)
Nissan Titan (4WD)
Oldsmobile Bravada
Oldsmobile Silhouette
Pontiac Aztek
Pontiac G6
Pontiac Montana, Trans Sport, Montana SV6
Saturn Relay
Volkswagen Cabriolet
Volkswagen Jetta Sedan (turbo)
Volkswagen Jetta Sedan (V6)
Volkswagen Touareg
2 Japanese, 22 American, 6 European (yay, VW!), 1 Korean.
It's just as big a landslide for the Japanese brands as is conceivable. And remember, every car is used as soon as you own it!
"You keep perpetuating the myth that Americans can't make cars and our domestic industry might as well close shop today. "
Hmm. Detroit, last time I checked
- actively fought (and continues to fight) any attempts to improve CAFE or safety standards
- continues to pretend that CO2 is not a problem (and doesn't just pretend yo itself, but does active political harm in who it funds in this regard)
- decided to piss away such improvements in fuel efficiency as were invented over the past fifteen years by aggressively pushing SUVs rather than small cars.
There's plenty of reason to hate them, and to wish them bankrupt as soon as possible beyond the mere fact of their crappy cars.
Or, to put it differently --- what they teach you in sane business schools is that your customers care about more than just the bottom line, so if you as a business have a lick of sense, you will care likewise. Pretending that the only thing in the world that matters is this quarter's profitability always was and remains a stupid business strategy, and it is not the responsibility of the rest of America to bail out idiots who follow it.
Another trick - don't necessarily go for all the bells and whistles. The more gadgets the more complicated and necessary the fixes.
I had a 1986 Honda Civic hatchback with no power steering, no power breaks, not power windows, no onboard diagnostic system (OBD), and it was a standard transmission. I hardly ever say a mechanic.
I inherited a 1997 Volvo 850 and have had to go to the mechanic more times in the 3-4 years I have owned it than I it seems I ever had to go with the Honda and I owned that for near on 16 or so years I had that car. The damn OBD fails the DC inspection, the ABS light goes off and I never know if that actually means there are problems, the ignition had to be replaced, the entire panel with the odometer had to be replaces, etc., etc.
A pox on planned obsolescence.
My "data." My 2000 Accord, standard transmission, has 150,000+ miles on it, and still has its original clutch. There was a bad valve in it the first month, fixed on warranty (twice, actually), had brakes done, exhaust system is still the original, but that's about it. Looks like crap because people in the LaGuardia parking lot and on the street keep side swiping it, but runs like a charm.
My anecdotal data. I have owned 3 Toyota products. The first was in the 70s, it was a piece of junk, from which I learned auto mechanics (had to rebuild its engine myself), but they were known to be junk in the 70s. 1991 Corolla was pretty good, but not anywhere near flawless. 1995 Lexus, which I still own, is the second most unreliable car I've ever had, and far and away the most expensive one to keep running. $5000 worth of air conditioning work, transmission rebuild, numerous electronic failures, two catalytic converters replaced, etc. (BTW, I do none of the work on this car myself.) Never again. In the early 80s I bought a Buick and a Mazda 323. The Mazda wore out at about 94,000 miles, the Buick went over 200,000 with little trouble. Consumer reports rated the Mazda better than average and the Buick much worse than average. I'm sure Japanese cars are statistically more reliable, but the gap shouldn't be overstated, and if my experience is any guide, the standard deviation is huge. Nowadays I buy cars for design, not expectations of reliability.
The trouble with listings such as CP's (cited by calling all toasters) is that it doesn't take into account improvement over time. The vast majority of Fords and GMs being made today have fewer initial flaws (per JD Power*) than Lexuses made 15 years ago. The whole industry has gotten better, and the differences have shrunk to nothing. Where only the best cars were at 20 initial flaws/1000 in the early 90s, that's now a median number.
Point being, all of the "Never buy American, they all suck" comments are idiotic, unless the same people were saying, 15 years ago, "Never buy a Lexus, they all suck." American cars (and of course some are better and some worse) are mostly reliable and well-built. The fact that other makes may be marginally better is a dubious basis for making a major purchase ("Well, this car has a 1% chance of a mechanical problem in the first 100k, but that car has a .66% chance!" Ooooh.)
* Doesn't matter what you think of JD Power's methodology; it's been a consistent methodology over the past 30 years, and so it shows trends reliably, even if the specific data may not be the most useful/accurate/whatever. Just as polling data don't need to predict specific vote counts, because they're best for telling you which way things are moving
It's easy to generalize, but it's about "the odds."
I have a 98 Ford. It's been great. I also recognize that statistically, you are more likely to have a trouble free experience with an Asian brand. I also know of real people who have had trouble with individual Hondas and Toyotas.
But you cannot go further than that. You may very well have a trouble free experience with a domestic car...and you'll pay less to purchase it, ESPECIALLY if you purchase used.
The best values of all are good domestic models purchased used.
my 1982 Ford Econoline was still running fine at 220k miles, sold it because it didn't work with kids. Total cost of ownership, purchase plus repair costs for ten years, about $6000.
1998 Toyota Sienna, owned six years, $1-2k in repairs every year, TCO about $26 000. Currently at 150k miles and I can't sell it because there are so many things broken (oil leak, power steering leak, door handles broken off and $300 per handle for replacements, und so weiter). Never again.
It's also worth noting that Honda and Toyota don't depreciate: so it's nearly impossible to get a 'good deal' on a used one.
my 1982 Ford Econoline was still running fine at 220k miles, sold it because it didn't work with kids. Total cost of ownership, purchase plus repair costs for ten years, about $6000.
1998 Toyota Sienna, owned six years, $1-2k in repairs every year, TCO about $26 000. Currently at 150k miles and I can't sell it because there are so many things broken (oil leak, power steering leak, door handles broken off and $300 per handle for replacements, und so weiter). Never again.
It's also worth noting that Honda and Toyota don't depreciate: so it's nearly impossible to get a 'good deal' on a used one.
Nice try, JRoth, but problems with initial quality (what JDPower rates) is not at all the same thing as reliability. Every mechanics shop I've seen is doing great, and I can't recall if I've seen any go out of business. In my home town they've opened a VW dealership that doesn't sell cars--it only does repairs. Sure, VWs are crap, but still.
Surely this is the wrong mode of analysis. Doesn't consumer surplus count for anything? Let's see some rankings that recognize the low total cost of ownership of a poorly made and discount priced American vehicles like the Chevy Aveo. I get the sense that these days Toyota captures all the benefits of higher quality through their higher per vehicle profits. Buying Honda or Toyota to get higher vehicle reliability strikes me as a wash financially.
Surely this is the wrong mode of analysis. Doesn't consumer surplus count for anything? Let's see some rankings that recognize the low total cost of ownership of a poorly made and discount priced American vehicles like the Chevy Aveo. I get the sense that these days Toyota captures all the benefits of higher quality through their higher per vehicle profits. Buying Honda or Toyota to get higher vehicle reliability strikes me as a wash financially.
I had to rent cars a few months back, and I got a series of Aveos (which are made in Korea). I thought it was a terrific little car, and much more pleasant to drive than the roughly comparable Toyota (?) Echo. Of course, my experience didn't give me any idea of how reliable the Aveo is over the long haul.
Comments closed April 13, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Do not buy a Saab! AHHH!!!
Posted by Chuck | March 30, 2008 1:33 PM