Reliability index by car manufacturer

Nasher · 26 Mar 2017 at 14:00

adolf hamster said:
i wouldn't describe your average modern audi as being uncomplicated?

They aren't any more complicated than other modern cars. It's just that Audi likes to build them in strange ways and make things hard to access.

muon · 26 Mar 2017 at 15:47

Firestar_3x said:
The reason is WD place a massive weighting on repair costs, so a Bentley which goes wrong once yet costs 8k to fix is somehow less reliable than a Daihatsu which may go wrong every other week yet cost 50p to fix each time.

It's explained in the link that isn't the case.

Its based on frequency.

What they really need to provide is how many vehicles they have on cover. They probably have 1 daihatsu and 1 bentley which makes them meaningless.

Housey · 26 Mar 2017 at 15:50

The issue I see, just like tyre tests, is the nature of the cars and drivers. I would argue that those in the top 10 are mainly plodder cars driven by older people so don't do the miles, don't get driven as hard and simply don't get the hard life that reps cars etc do. Simplistic but I think this needs to be taken into account.

chaparral · 26 Mar 2017 at 15:58

muon said:
What they really need to provide is how many vehicles they have on cover. They probably have 1 daihatsu and 1 bentley which makes them meaningless.

At least 50 vehicles are needed

Not all models are present on the Reliability Index - only when we have data for at least 50 vehicles will we display the results - this ensures the integrity of the Index.

http://www.reliabilityindex.com/what-is

muon · 26 Mar 2017 at 15:59

chaparral said:
http://www.reliabilityindex.com/what-is

That's okish then.

Daihatsu really sits out as an outlier then.

chaparral · 26 Mar 2017 at 16:04

muon said:
That's okish then.

Daihatsu really sits out as an outlier then.

This is strange...If you go to "Car Reliability Search" there no Daihatsu cars to choose :confused:

http://www.reliabilityindex.com/reliability

muon · 26 Mar 2017 at 16:05

I think I'm wrong on the frequency comment. You guys were right, takes cost into account and length if repair which is just bizarre.

adolf hamster · 26 Mar 2017 at 16:12

muon said:
I think I'm wrong on the frequency comment. You guys were right, takes cost into account and length if repair which is just bizarre.

yeah, i guess it would make sense from a standpoint of being representative of how much it costs to run a particular car, but the weighting of how much influence repair cost has is going to be the killer as to wether or not the data is reliable.

at the end of the day the only true way to know how reliable a car is is to own one, because a raked diahatsu sure ain't gonna be as reliable as a well cared for bentley.....

chaparral · 26 Mar 2017 at 16:17

adolf hamster said:
because a raked diahatsu sure ain't gonna be as reliable as a well cared for bentley.....

I wouldn't bet on that as a cheap Daihatsu car will most likely be far more simple then a Bentley so will have far less things to go wrong..

Dis86 · 26 Mar 2017 at 16:24

chaparral said:
I wouldn't bet on that as a cheap Daihatsu car will most likely be far more simple then a Bentley so will have far less things to go wrong..

Which is also part of how this survey is meaningless! Fewer things to go wrong doesn't make something more reliable. Just means there are fewer things to go wrong.
The engine might fail more but it doesn't have power steering, air con, electric windows to have failures in. To me that's less reliable.

muon · 26 Mar 2017 at 16:25

Dis86 said:
Which is also part of how this survey is meaningless! Fewer things to go wrong doesn't make something more reliable. Just means there are fewer things to go wrong.
The engine might fail more but it doesn't have power steering, air con, electric windows to have failures in. To me that's less reliable.

In my world if something is simpler with less to go wrong, then it is more reliable?

Dis86 · 26 Mar 2017 at 16:30

muon said:
In my world if something is simpler with less to go wrong, then it is more reliable?

No. Reliability is about frequency of failures to a thing. Not multiple things.

For example your engine fails every six months say. But that's it. The car has nothing other than an engine.

Or...your engine fails every twelve months and your in car entertainment bugs out every 9.

Car A scores higher in this survey but realistically car B is more reliable as the components fail less frequently.

muon · 26 Mar 2017 at 16:32

The thing is the car though.

Not how many things in the car.

You don't use the same logic when deciding on how reliable your TV or Washing Machine is?

adolf hamster · 26 Mar 2017 at 16:40

muon said:
In my world if something is simpler with less to go wrong, then it is more reliable?

yes and no, simpler for a car means it'll only have the bare minimum to function as a car, so any failure is going to affect it as a car, be an mot failure or make it undrivable etc. doesn't mean that those core components are going to be any more reliable than on a more premium model.

if you want an example of simple things not being reliable try running an rc 2 stroke engine for any length of time- no electronics and only 3 moving components has got to be a reliable engine right?

Dis86 · 26 Mar 2017 at 16:42

muon said:
The thing is the car though.

Not how many things in the car.

You don't use the same logic when deciding on how reliable your TV or Washing Machine is?

Yeah I split it down depending on features. My washing machine has one feature. It washes clothes. My TV has more since its a smart TV.

My car has many features. I'd certainly expect more issues to potentially occur with it than I would my first punto that would now be 25.

It's a ratio between number of things to go wrong and how often they go wrong.

muon · 26 Mar 2017 at 16:48

Its a subjective thing, but I can also understand when people define it as anything going wrong.

adolf hamster · 26 Mar 2017 at 17:05

muon said:
Its a subjective thing, but I can also understand when people define it as anything going wrong.

This is the case of importance that folk are mentioning, given the premium marques are more likely to have owners to return them for minor (but expensive because premium) defects that other marques wont, for example yes you wont have diahatsu owners returning their cars for broken satnavs that arent there, but then that doesnt mean the core components for reliability in terms of engine/drivetrain etc are going to be any better than a more expensive car.

chris4652009 · 27 Mar 2017 at 09:40

This is the funniest thing I've seen in a while, just what I needed on this Monday morning.

Thank you OP for lifting my spirits