KrazyLexus

http://biz.yahoo.com/weekend/worstcar_1.html

Autos
The Worst Cars 2005
Forbes.com
By Dan Lienert

Author J. Bryan III once wrote, "My Uncle Jonathan's first car, circa 1910, was an E.M.F. The initials represented the manufacturers, Everitt, Metzger and Flanders of Detroit. But a long series of breakdowns led to their being translated as 'Every Mechanical Fault'" (or "Every Morning Fixit," as Nick Georgano states in the 2000 edition of The Beaulieu Encyclopedia of the Automobile).

Fortunately, no car today could merit such nicknames, right? Wrong.

According to the newest data from Consumer Reports, Nissan Motor's full-size Infiniti QX sport utility vehicle has the worst ratings possible for the reliability of its electrical system, brakes, body integrity, power equipment and body hardware. It is 300% less reliable than the average car, and a QX owner must feel the way an owner of an E.M.F. model felt: What's going to go wrong with my car today?


Go to Forbes.com to view a slideshow of the worst cars


We really enjoy the $50,000 QX. It is extremely opulent and sophisticated, but remember a basic rule: The more complicated something is, the greater the number of things is that can go wrong. This is especially true for such an expensive guinea pig as the QX: It was not only an entirely new car when it went on sale in early 2004, but it was also the first Infiniti built in North America.

Ironing out the kinks in the QX's manufacture has not gone well for Infiniti, as the model is the least-reliable new car on the market. We talk more about it in the slide show that follows this introduction, and we talk about other vehicles that make up our list of the ten worst cars on the market at press time.

Even now, in the early days of the 2006-model year, several vehicles stand out for subpar performances in several important categories--in some cases, matters of life and death, such as safety.

Our list of the worst cars is based on three criteria: the worst crash-test scores, the lowest projected reliability and the lowest projected residual values--that is to say, the list features the worst cars in each of those categories, not in a combined ranking. We thought about castigating cars for multiple recalls, but the 2006-model year is too young to do so (most recalled '06 models have been recalled only once so far). Furthermore, consumers often ignore such issues as recalls--unless they are for universally dangerous reasons, such as spontaneously exploding gas tanks--in favor of style, sex appeal and raw power.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the cars in the slide show are not particularly sexy. Several of them are among the cheapest cars on the market.

The source for all crash-test scores is the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the branch of the U.S. Department of Transportation that administers vehicular safety laws. No car currently sold in the U.S. suffers the indignity of a one-star crash-test rating (out of five stars). But several have achieved two-star ratings, and we have included all of those models on the list.


Go to Forbes.com to view a slideshow of the worst cars


Whatever your current political leanings, we advise you to trust the government when it says you and your kids could have a 21% to 25% chance of serious injury in an accident in a particular car. At least trust it enough not to buy that car.

NHTSA has not tested every 2006 model car. For example, it has no crash-test scores for Audi's A6 sedan or General Motors' Hummer H3 SUV. But the agency is the authority on vehicle safety, and we feel confident criticizing 2006-model cars based on the NHTSA scores that are currently available.

For reliability, we looked to Consumer Reports. For projected residual value, we went to the bible of the automotive resale world: the Kelley Blue Book Residual Value Guide.

Forbes.com phoned all of the manufacturers mentioned in the slide show for responses to this article. Ford Motor, DaimlerChrysler, Mitsubishi and Kia could not immediately be reached for comment. Representatives from Nissan told us over the phone they would call us back or e-mail us with a comment on the Sentra sedan's sub-par crash-test results, but at press time they had not.

Nissan's Infiniti subsidiary e-mailed us a statement about the QX's last-place ranking in Consumer Reports' study--a statement which included the line, "Naturally, we are disappointed with the Consumer Reports projected reliability for some of our 2006 models."

Read on to see which vehicles earned warnings from the government and to see the rest of the worst 2006-model cars.

* Note: At press time, NHTSA had not returned multiple e-mail messages from Forbes.com seeking verification of information found on their Web sites.

flipside909

Interesting article, but as expected, not a surprise.

encore888

This story made the frontpage of Yahoo.com yesterday! "Infiniti SUV ranked worst..." Ouch!

Trexus

I never really liked the Infiniti QX56. It was a brand new vehicle with no heritage. The comparable LX470 has the heritage of the Toyota Landcruiser which no one can deny has the reliability and luxury that Lexus can produce.

PhilipMSPT

iTrader: (5)

It's a sad, sad day for Nissan/Infiniti. And to think, Ranault/Nissan wants to buy Jaguar and fix it's problems regarding reliability, safety, and electronics. Ford looks a little better now.

mmarshall

No. This is an often misunderstood stereotype that is simply not true. Many people are seriously misled by this statement. The QX56 is not unreliable because of complexity. The likelihood of automotive equipment breaking down is determined not by how complex it is but by other factors such as the quality of the materials used, the design of the parts involved, the quality of the engineering, how well the assembly plant is managed, how well the workers do their jobs, how well the vehicle is taken care of and serviced, etc...... There are MANY factors involved, not just complexity. Indeed, Lexus has proved time and time again that a vehicle can be both complex AND reliable. And cars like the Dodge Neon, entry-level Renaults and Fiats, and OLDER Hyundai and Kia products prove that cars can also be simple AND unreliable.

Lexmex

We have only the Pathfinder Armada down here, but I think of both it and the QX56 as land barges like the Hummer. Both of which can't even fit in a lane properly on even big Mexican avenues down here. I have to treat them like 16 wheelers.

Skulinex

even though I know toyota/Lexus would make sure they have a good quality product, this is the why im against them on replacing the current LX with a sequoia based suv

GS3Tek

iTrader: (8)

Hmmm, I never thought about these 3 criteria to be labeled for "THe Worst Car."

When we we're shopping for a 3 row suv, we test drove the QX and didn't think it was that bad. It was roomy, had lots of power, and handled pretty great for that size. It was about the same price as the GX but was way too big for us though.

SoCalSC4

A friend of mine bought a Nissan Pathfinder Armada (same platform as the QX 56) about four months after they were introduced here in the States. After numerous trips to the dealer to try and resolve the low-frequency "flutter" the cabin had at freeway speeds (very annoying) and numerous front brake rotor replacements (warped every 3,000 miles), Nissan ultimately bought it back from him as a Lemon.

Now he has a Honda Odyssey.

LexFather

The part of this I am enjoying the most is when I and others were stating this truck would be unreliable and it was unreliable, we got called Nissan haters, we don't know what we are talking about etc etc

It is now common knowledge avoid this truck like the plague. I think I will go back and find quotes of people saying these things

They should rename it Infiniti Bird Flu 56.

mmarshall

You sure didn't get any comments from me like that. You are one of the people on CL that usually DOES know what he is taking about in the auto and truck world.

I think, though, that the problem is more with the plant than with the truck itself. Some plants CAN open up in their first year and produce reliable vehicles....the idea that first-year vehicles are unreliable is not always true. That has NOT been the case, though, with the Canton, MS plant.....it has had its share of problems ever since it opened up. If the QX56 was built in a Japanese Nissan plant, or even Nissan's Smyrna, TN plant not too far away, it likely would be more reliable. And...as the Canton plant gets more experience and they work some more bugs out of it....look for the QX56's reliability record to improve at least some. The new ones being sold right now will probably be a little better than the ones of just a year ago......much of the data used for the QX56's current very low rating came from early-production vehicles.

UptownGS

man whats been going on.... i've been recently shopping for a new car and QX56 was definitely one of my interests but fuel economy made me scratch it.... now I'm glad b/c i just read this article.....

I also scratched the Nissan Titan off my list b/c of various reviews that show how problematic the brakes were.....

Nissan/Infiniti have really let me down lately... I definitely wont be purchasing the M45 or any other inifiniti now....

rominl

iTrader: (4)

my uncle thought about getting that car too, but eventually got the lx470 instead, go figure

imho the brakes problem alone is enough to turn down that car. it's ok if a car doesn't go fast, but i mind a lot if the car can't stop. and that's one heavy car...

KrazyLexus

I would own a M45 over any other car out there in the same price range. It is the best car at the moment IMHO.