Honda top reliability poll, again

Spunj99 said:
How dare you post this in this BMW forum. Big cojones. :D

Toyota still 5th even though "everyone that drives one will die."*




*facts from FoxNews
Click to expand...

I lol'd and yeah, media hysteria at its best

[TW]Fox;16898387 said:
I dont think anyone here except the deluded 'I earn 20p a week and have £9000000 of credit card debts but I'm still going to buy a BMW because they cost nothing to run' squad have ever argued that a BMW is a totally reliable choice of car.

It's why I spend so much time in BMW threads making sure people realise this. In my opinion the ownership of a BMW is well worth the expense and faff, mind.
Click to expand...

Its you thats put me off them to be fair! I was all for trying out a BMW at one point
 
They are great but they are not cheap. You dont buy one and expect it to be like running a Focus.

Well actually people do, which is why there are so many scabby nails with bodged fixes and ruined suspension on the roads.
 
stoofa said:
Skoda once again beating VW, Audi and Seat :)
Click to expand...


Now doesn't that make you wonder. If they're the same cars under the skin, then why the differences? Is it:
1. They have the same number of claims, but Audi charge more per claim?
2. Skoda have the least complex (or highly stressed) versions of the cars, thus have less to go wrong
3. Maybe VAG have a QC system which categorises parts by their probably reliability and Skoda get the top of the pick to improve their image in the marketplace.

Potentially more interesting is whether Audi owners will wise up to the fact that there IS a difference between perceived highly quality (nice interior) and actual high quality (i.e. reliability of components).
 
As WD offer the ability to use a main dealer and most Audi drivers will pay for this in the policy the repair costs will be higher. Also audi have a bigger more complex engine range. Not many 3.0 diesel skodas.
 
As WD offer the ability to use a main dealer and most Audi drivers will pay for this in the policy the repair costs will be higher. Also audi have a bigger more complex engine range. Not many 3.0 diesel skodas.
 
Also maybe Skoda owners just drive their cars more sensibly and so prolonging their car's "reliability" compared to the VW/Audi owners - certainly seems valid considering what you see on the roads these days :p
 
Surely these polls are meaningless? They're just there to increase the size of a Honda owners' penis (penii?).

A Ford Fiesta may be super reliable, and a Focus super unreliable. Where does that put Ford?
 
Based on the reliability poll I will make a Honda Civic my next car! But hang on, a Civic may not be the most reliable car of it's type! The poll lies! :eek:

(Before people get the wrong end of the stick, I'm not saying a Civic is unreliable.)
 
Because its based on the manufacturer and not the specific models obviously, I see you're point, its just weird in a way that you are disspointed so looking to slate it for some reason :confused:

Hey guess what, bet they win it next year :)
 
Relentless81 said:
Because its based on the manufacturer and not the specific models obviously,
Click to expand...

Which is why the poll is pointless.

Relentless81 said:
I see you're point, its just weird in a way that you are disspointed so looking to slate it for some reason :confused:

Hey guess what, bet they win it next year :)
Click to expand...

I have no qualms with Honda. I think they're a manufacturer producing some really good cars for the mass market. However, I'd react the same if Ford, BMW or Reliant were at the top.
 
[TW]Fox;16898365 said:
It's not really a suprise to see the results as they are, after all Honda have mechanical reliability absolutely nailed, as you'd expect for a company that spent all of the 'Perceived quality' budget at R&D stage into 'Reliability'.

However you should be careful how you interpret these figures. I suspect they are based on Warranty Directs 'Reliability Index'.

This is not a measure of how reliable a car is, it is a measure of how much a car costs to maintain. The Reliability Index is a score made up of a combination of how often the car requires work and then when it does, how much it costs.

Therefore if you have a complicated car which breaks down once every 2 years but costs £1500 to fix when it does, it will have a poor reliability index when compared to something like a Fiat which breaks down every month but can be fixed with 50p and some chewing gum.
Click to expand...

It's there in black and white.. :)

article said:
Of the 32 companies studied, Land Rover proved the least reliable company - 53per cent of its cars suffered a fault
Click to expand...
Sounds conclusively like it's the number of faults, irrespective of 'cost per fault'..

Not trying to 'spin' this to make it look better for the prestige brands ? ;) :D

Yes, I know of course you aren't... ;)
 
Last edited:
Ricochet J said:
Which is why the poll is pointless.



I have no qualms with Honda. I think they're a manufacturer producing some really good cars for the mass market. However, I'd react the same if Ford, BMW or Reliant were at the top.
Click to expand...

Fair enough each to their own etc, I take it for what it is, a good indication of whats good and whats to avoid, whats getting better and whats getting worse
 
If you have a look at the warranty direct reliability index website you can see how these numbers are broken down. You can see how each model performs and can even see which parts of the car are more reliable than others.

Suzuki is now top of the reliability index so any Honda phallus should be in limp mode now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom