For Long-Term Dependability, Check the Initial Quality
- Thread starter Thai
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Thai
Elite Member
Yup...this is why 2 out of 3 cars in my garage are Toyotas!
Bright spot from this for me...at least, Mercedes is not dead last! Thank goodness there is Land Rover to make everyone feel better about themselves and bring the average down!
US govt should award LR for making US auto look better!
Bright spot from this for me...at least, Mercedes is not dead last! Thank goodness there is Land Rover to make everyone feel better about themselves and bring the average down!
US govt should award LR for making US auto look better!
Thai
Elite Member
Here is a statistical analysis of the chart above by a member on another forum to really showcase LR's problems:
"Avoiding the more advanced approaches (utilizing distributional analysis and incorporation of Monte Carlo model predictions), I shall stick with simple high school level statistical analysis.
Take the raw data from the chart and assume a normal distribution (i.e. that the observed variablility is due to many additively interacting varibales.... something that I do not think is true; there may be multiplicatively interacting variables (yielding a log normal distribution) or exponentially interacting variables (yielding other more complex distributions such as Weibull)) and run a simple statitical analysis. This is what you get:
mean = 244 problems per 100 vehicles over 3 years
median=241 (which indicates that the distribution may not be normal since the mean and median are equal in a normal distibution)
standard deviation = 57
so LRs value of 438 is 3.4 standard deviations from the mean. A direct interpretation says that it is highly unlikely that any manufacturer could possibly do worse than the LR performance (approx. 0.7% chance that another manufacturer could score a higher value). The next closest manufacturer is Saab at 1.42 standard deviations from the mean, where there is an approx. 25% chance that another manufacturer could score a larger value. This is a very large difference (almost two orders of magnitude)
A less direct, but more plausible, interpretation is that LR is not even a part of the population being analyzed... that it is an outlier and represents a manufacturer that operates in a very different way to the rest of the group. This gets at the LR corporate culture and level of engineering excellence and is not something that any of us have much intimate knowledge of. But, as a corporate executive in a high reliability industry (medical devices), I can say that this performance is a marker of a very problematic situation and one that will likely require a substantial change to mitigate.
note: I took the data from the chart and it is apparent that there exists additional data not on the chart since the mean from my analysis is 244 and the chart indicates that 227 is the "industry average". There may be values from other smaller manufacturers (e.g. Ferrari, Bentley, etc.) but the ones that matter are in fact on the chart. It would be interesting to conduct an anlysis of just the "luxury" brands (and only their "luxury" vehicles (i.e. exclude the likes of the Discovery, LR3, etc.)). Perhaps such performance is typical of that population.... I doubt it however as Porsche, Lexus, and BMW are well distanced from LR."
"Avoiding the more advanced approaches (utilizing distributional analysis and incorporation of Monte Carlo model predictions), I shall stick with simple high school level statistical analysis.
Take the raw data from the chart and assume a normal distribution (i.e. that the observed variablility is due to many additively interacting varibales.... something that I do not think is true; there may be multiplicatively interacting variables (yielding a log normal distribution) or exponentially interacting variables (yielding other more complex distributions such as Weibull)) and run a simple statitical analysis. This is what you get:
mean = 244 problems per 100 vehicles over 3 years
median=241 (which indicates that the distribution may not be normal since the mean and median are equal in a normal distibution)
standard deviation = 57
so LRs value of 438 is 3.4 standard deviations from the mean. A direct interpretation says that it is highly unlikely that any manufacturer could possibly do worse than the LR performance (approx. 0.7% chance that another manufacturer could score a higher value). The next closest manufacturer is Saab at 1.42 standard deviations from the mean, where there is an approx. 25% chance that another manufacturer could score a larger value. This is a very large difference (almost two orders of magnitude)
A less direct, but more plausible, interpretation is that LR is not even a part of the population being analyzed... that it is an outlier and represents a manufacturer that operates in a very different way to the rest of the group. This gets at the LR corporate culture and level of engineering excellence and is not something that any of us have much intimate knowledge of. But, as a corporate executive in a high reliability industry (medical devices), I can say that this performance is a marker of a very problematic situation and one that will likely require a substantial change to mitigate.
note: I took the data from the chart and it is apparent that there exists additional data not on the chart since the mean from my analysis is 244 and the chart indicates that 227 is the "industry average". There may be values from other smaller manufacturers (e.g. Ferrari, Bentley, etc.) but the ones that matter are in fact on the chart. It would be interesting to conduct an anlysis of just the "luxury" brands (and only their "luxury" vehicles (i.e. exclude the likes of the Discovery, LR3, etc.)). Perhaps such performance is typical of that population.... I doubt it however as Porsche, Lexus, and BMW are well distanced from LR."
Thai
Elite Member
Insightful article about the article above
The latest JD Power Dependability Survey ranks Land Rover a distant last. The news comes fresh on the heels of the recent Forbes Magazine report (using data from both JD Power and Consumer Reports) which ranked the LR3 and the latest 2006 Range Rover as the least reliable luxury vehicles sold in the US. All this will come as no surprise to the average Land Rover owner, and will no doubt be followed by the usual announcements from the factory about how they are improving radically.
In the dependability survey, J.D. Power questions owners of 3 year old vehicles about problems they are experiencing. Last-place Land Rover lagged far behind the second-to-last brand, Saab. Land Rover owners reported 438 problems per 100 vehicles, while Saab owners reported 326. Owners of top-rated Toyota vehicles reported only 136.
Usually, the better-known Initial Quality survey gets more attention -- (of course Land Rover came last in that as well), but as a JD Power spokesman said, "the dependability survey is important for automakers because how owners feel about their vehicles three years on can have a big impact on their decision to buy another veicle of the same brand, or to look elsewhere".
The results of the 2006 Initial Quality Survey also recently came out. Sure enough, Land Rover came last with exactly twice as many complaints per vehicle as top-rated Lexus. This puts the kybosh on any claims that quality has radically improved in the past couple of years. In fact, the number of problems reported per Land Rover vehicle actually increased from 190 in 2003 to 204 in 2006 (see July 2003 JD Power Survey). Some people note that the quality rating systems are biased against vehicles like Land Rovers that use cutting edge technology. However, that argument does not hold water when makes like Lexus, that are just as advanced, come first. For example, a J.D. Powers spokesman stated "You won't have failures related to a parking assist system if you don't have a parking assist system," he said. But, "Then Lexus comes out with one and customers don't have any problem with it." The same applies to the notoriously unreliable Land Rover air suspension systems, even though other makes have used very similar systems for years with no problems.
The fact that Land Rover ranks last in both surveys is unlikely to shock most Land Rover owners, who seem to be resigned to this state of affairs. Land Rover has managed to maintain a remarkably consistent reputation for quality problems over many years, regardless of whether British Aerospace, BMW or Ford has owned the company. Rovers still seem to be the most common cargo seen on flatbed trucks, especially in relation to the modest numbers sold. The latest attempt to solve this problem is to produce the new Freelander/LR2 at the Jaguar factory -- since Jaguar has a better build quality reputation. However the Jaguar-based drivetrains in the latest 2006 Range Rover, LR3 and Range Rover Sport seem to be generating their own slew of annoying problems.
Meanwhile, if you own a late model Land Rover or Range Rover, be sure to get an Extended Warranty, preferably before your factory coverage runs out. Because of Land Rover's reputation, few companies will cover them, but some will.
The latest JD Power Dependability Survey ranks Land Rover a distant last. The news comes fresh on the heels of the recent Forbes Magazine report (using data from both JD Power and Consumer Reports) which ranked the LR3 and the latest 2006 Range Rover as the least reliable luxury vehicles sold in the US. All this will come as no surprise to the average Land Rover owner, and will no doubt be followed by the usual announcements from the factory about how they are improving radically.
In the dependability survey, J.D. Power questions owners of 3 year old vehicles about problems they are experiencing. Last-place Land Rover lagged far behind the second-to-last brand, Saab. Land Rover owners reported 438 problems per 100 vehicles, while Saab owners reported 326. Owners of top-rated Toyota vehicles reported only 136.
Usually, the better-known Initial Quality survey gets more attention -- (of course Land Rover came last in that as well), but as a JD Power spokesman said, "the dependability survey is important for automakers because how owners feel about their vehicles three years on can have a big impact on their decision to buy another veicle of the same brand, or to look elsewhere".
The results of the 2006 Initial Quality Survey also recently came out. Sure enough, Land Rover came last with exactly twice as many complaints per vehicle as top-rated Lexus. This puts the kybosh on any claims that quality has radically improved in the past couple of years. In fact, the number of problems reported per Land Rover vehicle actually increased from 190 in 2003 to 204 in 2006 (see July 2003 JD Power Survey). Some people note that the quality rating systems are biased against vehicles like Land Rovers that use cutting edge technology. However, that argument does not hold water when makes like Lexus, that are just as advanced, come first. For example, a J.D. Powers spokesman stated "You won't have failures related to a parking assist system if you don't have a parking assist system," he said. But, "Then Lexus comes out with one and customers don't have any problem with it." The same applies to the notoriously unreliable Land Rover air suspension systems, even though other makes have used very similar systems for years with no problems.
The fact that Land Rover ranks last in both surveys is unlikely to shock most Land Rover owners, who seem to be resigned to this state of affairs. Land Rover has managed to maintain a remarkably consistent reputation for quality problems over many years, regardless of whether British Aerospace, BMW or Ford has owned the company. Rovers still seem to be the most common cargo seen on flatbed trucks, especially in relation to the modest numbers sold. The latest attempt to solve this problem is to produce the new Freelander/LR2 at the Jaguar factory -- since Jaguar has a better build quality reputation. However the Jaguar-based drivetrains in the latest 2006 Range Rover, LR3 and Range Rover Sport seem to be generating their own slew of annoying problems.
Meanwhile, if you own a late model Land Rover or Range Rover, be sure to get an Extended Warranty, preferably before your factory coverage runs out. Because of Land Rover's reputation, few companies will cover them, but some will.
