Cost of ownership is cost of ownership. Warranties, free service and everything else is accounted for.

 

Well, to some extent, we see the same thing with Hyundai and Kia....and with Ford and Lincoln. Same basic mechanicals, yet Kia usually ranks several points higher in the dependability surveys....as does Ford over Lincoln.

 

Yep, same situation largely.

 

I also think some of it also has to do with the plants they are built in. If vehicles with the same mechanicals are built in different plants, with different employees, equipment, plant-managers, QC-Inspectors, etc..... that could also affect how well the vehicle is built, and explain why some vehicles with the same mechanicals are more reliable than others.

 

I really don’t think that’s what it is. I think it’s just the way different owners use the product and the different expectations they have.

 

This is a BIG component of reliability/satisfaction surveys.

 

Right, there is no difference in reliability between a Chevy and a GMC and a Buick as an example. They are literally exactly the same thing, especially the GMC and the Chevy.

 

We can't have that logic here.....must worship the charts and ignore the reality that a buyer of an 100k+ car is far more discerning and picky on average than an entry level car.

One of those people is moving lease to lease and is used to high ends or is making a major step up and wants the experience to be perfect

The other is very likely coming from a mainstream used car and will be ecstatic to be in anything new

 

Yes, owner-use (or abuse) of a vehicle is certainly a big factor in ultimate reliability, but there is at least some evidence that what particular plant a vehicle is made in also plays a role. Some plants.....such as the old Mitsubishi/Chrysler Diamond-Star plant in Normal, IL, and the Ford/Lincoln plant in Chicago that turns out Explorers and Aviators, have been disasters.

 

Then the cost of ownership for the first three years is effectively zero across most brands. That's what incentivizes people to actually take their car for maintenance and fixing any problems.

 

Cars don't get scrapped after 3 years. Average age of a vehicle in the United States is over 12 years so yes cost of ownership is king. Why do you think Toyota became so successful?

 

The first three years are all that matter to manufacturers because that's the lease period and the period of ownership of the first owner. They don't care what the second or third owners do or don't do to take care of their cars, and those are the type of people who would be more stingy on paying for maintenance and repairs.

 

I also mostly agree with this but it's a little further out, usually CPO length

 

I was thinking about that but it really depends on the brand. BMW definitely cares about CPO but other brands like JLR (2 year oil change intervals) are just a joke.

 

Oh they are horrible for sure. Insane intervals with oil that is only used in the US to meet CARB when all the overseas cars use more stable oils.....it's a wonder they take 60k miles to blow up!