I don’t think Dodge cars really fit in the Peugeot line, and then there’s Peugeot name recognition. They might try adding Peugeot cars at Dodge dealers, but it’s way too soon to dump the Dodge name.
Latest I read is that they’re rethinking that whole ‘bring Peugeot back to the US’ thing. No decision made.
Me, I’d move the Pacifica over to Dodge, get rid of the Chrysler and Fiat brands in the US. I don’t see a route to creating a luxury car brand for them, they’ll make lots of money off of expensive Jeeps, Rams, and crazy powerful Dodge Hemi cars.
1 Like
I’ll add one more data point. 1998 T100, SR5, 3.4V6, 4WD. Just turned over 400,000. Had to spend $1800 on front end work at 395,00 and about $1300 on differential rebuilt. Maybe a alternator or two, and I think, one starter over the past 22 years. And probably 7 or 8 sets of tires. That’s about it.
Consumer Reports’ data on car problems and/or repairs are those reported by owners of the cars in their annual surveys. There will be, I’m sure, the usual comments to this, such as “It’s only cars owned by CR subscribers,” as if their cars are somehow different than the same models owned by others, and “Some cars get bad results because their drivers are hot-rodders.” All of them? Also, this thread is about Toyotas, which, so many say, are not owned by youngsters. In any event, I know of no report of car problems (or lack thereof) than that of CR. (Please don’t say J.D. Powers.)
Okay… How about J.D. Power?
I know it’s heresy but I put very little value in CR. I still get regular specials to join again but really I just don’t put much faith in what they say, if all they do is collect responses from subscribers. Like I said before, I’ve never heard of some of their best rated products/models like a $2500 refrigerator. They just don’t seem to have much to say about the products I use, and I’m not interested in their vitamin reports.
Now to cars, maybe Toyota is better, but it looks like their service departments are not the best based on reports here by folks. Maybe none of them are. What I would be interested in is knowing why they are more trouble free? Do they use roller bearings in their alternators instead of bushings? Are their electronics hardened or tested more? Are their fabrics a higher thicker grade? Do they use heavier duty or larger bearing components in their engines and transmissions? Thickness of the steel and so on. This goes to a more quality build regardless of what the CR subscribers think but the info seems to be elusive. I’ve never owned one, but I’ve had good luck with GM and Acura.
1 Like
@Remazz I subscribe to Consumer Reports and I dutifully complete the surveys. I use CR as a starting point when making a major purchase. However, I do take a couple of things into consideration when treading the reliability ratings. While the cars CR subscribers own are not different than non CR subscribers own, the subscribers to CR may drive or maintain their cars differently.
I once owned a Ford Maverick. The same car with the same engine and drivetrain was sold as a Mercury Comet. Yet the Mercury Comet had a better reliability rating than the Ford Maverick. I wrote to Consumer Reports about this discrepancy. CR did answer my inquiry and the response was “That is the way the data came out”. The question is “Why did the data come out this way”?
I looked in some old Popular Mechanics magazines in the library. Popular Mechanics used to do a survey of owners of new cars. What I discovered looking at the demographics of owners of Fords and Mercurys which were the same cars with different nameplates was the average age of the owners of the Mercury was about seven years older than that of the Ford. The same pattern held for Plymouth/Dodge twins. Now obviously this goes back forty five years. All I am saying is that CR subscribers may be different and not representative of the population in general.
I have owned three Toyota products, a 2003 4Runner which we still own, a 2011 Toyota Sienna which my son now owns and the 2017 Sienna which we now own. I also owned a 2006 Chevrolet Uplander which my son also owns. The 2011 Sienna had to have a water pump at 90,000 miles and an alternator at 140,000 miles. The Chevrolet Uplander has 230,000 miles and has never had a major repair and has never had an alternator or water pump replacement. On the 2011 Sienna, I had to replace tires between 35,000 and 40,000 miles and I kept my tires inflated and rotated the tires every 5000 miles. The Uplander tires didn’t need replacement until 55,000 miles. The tread depth on my 2017 Sienna is down to 4/32" at 36,000 miles and I will be replacing the tires very soon. Now CR reliability rating is much better for the Sienna than the Uplander. This hasn’t been my experience.
I’m not knocking Consumer Reports nor am I saying that Toyota products don’t deserve their reputation for longevity.
The Sienna isn’t an exciting vehicle to drive. If I only had to take myself to musical gigs and not my fellow musicians with their instruments, I would have a Mazda Miata for just me and my horn.
My neighbor’s wife for years drove a Toyota Camry convertible, partly because of its looks. At over 200,00 miles she finally gave it up, but it wa still one of the best looking cars on the street.
CR responded properly that they were furnishing the data as reported. It is not their function, and financially impossible, to determine why, say, 2014 Mustang transmissions have a number of problems (if they do.)
Popular Mechanics surveyed owners of NEW cars. CR is furnishing information on used cars to help potential buyers thereof. PM readers were no more representative of car owners in general than CR is. The only way to have a survey that doesn’t reflect the experience of a group of respondents is to survey every car owner in the country.
Large surveys, like CR’s, have scientific credence; anecdotes do not.
A financial expert discussing why Toyotas have fewer problems than other makes said, “Ford and GM want to sell you your next car; Toyota want so sell you your next five cars.”
You contradict your point. If younger people aren’t as interested in exciting cars, they’d buy more Toyotas, not fewer.
@Remazz I was looking for why in Consumer Reports that a Ford Maverick for the year 1971 would have a worse repair record than the 1971 Mercury Comet which was identical except for name plate. What I found in Popular Mechanics Owners’ Reports was the demographics of those who had purchased the Ford/Mercury twins. All I am suggesting is that the older buyers bought the Mercury name plate while the younger buyers bought the Ford. Perhaps the younger buyers drove their cars harder or were not as conscientious with routine maintenance.
One would not have to survey every owner. A truly random sample would be sufficient to generalize to the population. Problems occur if the sample is not random. One example was that in 1936, a telephone survey was conducted to predict the outcome of the Presidential election between Franklin Roosevelt and Alf Landon. The telephone numbers were selected randomly. Based on this telephone survey, Alf Landon was the winner. The problem was that the more affluent people had telephones and these people tended to vote for the Republican candidate. Many voters did not have telephones because the country was in the great depression. These voters were struggling to put food on the table and a telephone was a luxury. This segment of the population tended to vote for the Democrat candidate which was Roosevelt.
Now I am not certain that Consumer Reports subscribers are representative of the car buying public. My guess is that the subscribers of Consumer Reports are more sophisticated buyers. This is not a criticism of Consumer Reports, and their surveys may suggest a trend. I am saying to keep this in mind while using the data reported by CR.
That’s much better. Thanks.
Looked at a new Nova in the early 70’s that had a ventura logo on the dashboard.
It’s not known if the Mavericks and Comets were identical in every respect, built in the same plant by the same people, serviced by the same dealers. You have theories, “guesses” and “certainties” and anecdotes, this time about a phone survey some 80 years ago. I find them deficient. There’s no point to further posts.
A random sample of owners of all model vehicles going back years? Piece of cake, and wouldn’t cost more than the DOD budget.
Members of CR who furnish survey information are , by definition, representative of CR car owners. Ergo, the survey information is of value to them, and possibly not for subscribers to “DIY Hot Rod.”
@Remazz As I remember, Popular Mechanics did a random sample from new car registrations and sent the survey to the people sampled.
It is very difficult to get a random sample in many cases. One interesting case when I was a graduate student and part of my assistantship duties was to consult with people doing studies was with a library science student. He had done a survey of over 5000 Midwest librarians. He had a sample of over 1000 of these librarians. My first question was “How did you select your sample”? The library science student responded that he had taken the list of the 5000 librarians and used a table of random numbers to choose the librarians who would receive his survey. He had an 80% return. “What’s the problem”? I asked. His problem was that one member on his committee said his sample was too small. I proved to him that a random sample of 100 of the 5000 would have been sufficient let alone his random sample of 1000.
I do look at the survey results in Consumer Reports but I use it in conjunction with other information. When I considered purchasing a new car, and the university where I taught has that make and model in its fleet, I talked to the head mechanic in the motor pool. He was a wealth of information on which vehicles were reliable and which ones were problematic. These vehicles were driven by many different people. When we had a locally owned appliance store with its own service department, I would talk to the service technician about which one of the different makes of washing machines had the least problems. Unfortunately, that appliance store and its service personnel are long gone. When we had to replace our 27 year old washing machine back in November, I had to rely solely on Consumer Reports.
However, when I bought a minivan back in 2010, I talked to the mechanic at the independent shop. Both he and Consumer Reports recommended the Toyota Sienna.
I guess I would just suggest that a survey of mechanics might be a better way to determine dependability rather than the owners/CR subscribers. I harken back to 1957 where Dad carried an oil can to squirt oil on the rocker arms of the 57 Ford from time to time. There wasn’t a Ford mechanic that didn’t know this was because the oil passage was drilled wrong.
@bing Outside oil lines to get oil to the rocker arm shafts were often fitted to Ford products in the 1950s with the Y block V-8 engines.
Tying this in with the earlier discussion about Consumer Reports, back in 1962, I bought a used 1955 Pontiac from the Rambler dealer. His service department had overhauled the engine. When I researched that model in Consumer Reports, it had a good reliability record. Unfortunately, that 1955 Pontiac was the worst car I ever owned. The oil wasn’t getting into the stud mounted rocker arms. There was no way of fitting an outside oil line. On the other hand, the Mercury of that year had a worse than average repair record, but it had the Ford Y block engine and every mechanic knew how to solve the Ford engine problems.
1 Like
My room mate had a 55. I had a 59, and my other room mate had a 61. So we were a Pontiac group. On a cold day, that 55 would never start, but he’d never bother. Just caught a ride to school and waited for a warmer day. Mine started because I’d go out and drive it at 2:00 am.