Reliability would be normal maintenance, and the ability to still run even if neglected and beat the hell out of such as the ls430, or the ford crown vics. An unreliable car would be something that is being fixed at least 1 or more times every 4 months, like a 2000 mitsubishi eclipse(my first car). The squeaks and rattles issue is poor engineering and build quality, which is a completely seperate issue.

 

Agreed its the exact same thing when people test drive performance cars with out the electric nannies and say that the car has terrible handling, when in reality its the nut holding the steering wheel lol.

 

Also some drivers are lazy. At first sign of something going they should react not waiting until problem grows big.
Penny wise, pound foolish!

 

Reliability is extremely important. I can't deal with unreliable cars and won't buy them even if I really like them.

I define it as a car that needs almost no repairs or things that go bad before 120K miles, just regular maintenance.

A car that can go at least 200K miles with no major issues and still holds up.

I don't mind some squeaks and rattles, every car has them and they are generally not too hard to fix or stop.

 

i don't think reviews would consider infotainment issues as a 'reliability issue'. now consumer reports and their bogus 'reliability surveys' will take any and all negativity as unreliability, which as you say, can include Luddite confusion about infotainment systems, which is absolutely NOT a reliability issue.

i probably agree with this. by these definitions i'd say ANY vehicle built in the past 10-15 years should be EXTREMELY reliable. i don't think there's much variance across brands or models, at all.

well i've never owned a car to 120k mi. i don't believe, but close... a couple over near or a little over 100k. the only car i would have considered becoming unreliable was my first car, a 1983 honda prelude, which with its carburetor SUCKED in PA cold winters and would often simply not start. i got rid of it after a couple of winters. but the world has clearly come a loooong way since then. i've never had what i would consider a reliability issue with any vehicle since.

interesting... do you keep cars at least 200k mi? whenever i see cars with that kind of mileage i pretty much always turn my nose up because they look so crappy (faded paint, cracked upholstery and dash, scratches, dings, etc.). even if 'reliable' i don't wanna drive one, but clearly tons of people do. there's LOADS of really old ford trucks on the road for example.

 

I disagree with that statement, IMO infotainment is technically a mechanically piece of the car. You need to change radio stations...infotainment...use the navigation function without pulling up your phone...change the seat warmers or heat.....

Paying for a car that has a poorly built set of fog-lights that impair nighttime visibility is as bad as paying for an infotainment that is soo hard to operate that your focus is distracted while driving.....

 

if this was the standard across the board, then I get it, writing how poor a system is one thing, but when a lot of other systems do things well...do you really want to blame consumer error? Thats similar to when Steve Jobs said it was consumer error in regards to the antenna gate issue that plagued iPhone 4 owners...Almost everyone Non-Apple had no issues with antennas....?

 

The term "reliability" is very subjective because of course, we know there is an intangible called brand loyalty. So if you ask a BMW or Benz owner if their vehicle is reliable - they'll tell you, absolutely reliable or it's just how things work with German cars, Italian cars or American cars.

A better measure would problably be how long do owners of various brands hang on to their vehicles and what do they spend until they find it's too much. There are some people who will complain relentlessly because their Toyota was the one with an oil sludge issue which might have even been due to a number of factors. There are German luxury car owners who lucked out and will tell you their car is fantastic.

A reliability index will usually be: do you spend more than the average on yearly fixes, repairs and maintenance vs other brands or do you spend less. That's usually a good indicator. Even the most reliable used Camry is still going to run about $600 - $900 a year to keep in top shape when it's older. But a German car owner will tell you that a couple of thousand a year to keep a 5 series is worth it because it's a great driving experience and it goes with the territory.

 

That's generally true, but there are indeed occasional cases of design or quality problems with the software......can't blame everything on people having butterfingers. According to Consumer Reports (and I don't know just exactly how much truth there is to it), much of it stems from the automakers sub-contracting with makers of what are essentially household computer systems and software, designed to be used mostly indoors, stationary, at room temperature, and not necessarily up to the rigors of typical automotive use.

 

not to derail the topic of reliability, just want to respond since you asked a question.

I didn't single out any specific system. Just saying when I see reviews lambasting a cars infotainment, part of the problem is sometimes the review operator doesn't understand certain functions, inputs, or know how to adjust the settings that could improve the experience etc.. I won't blame the consumer 100%, but I don't see why the company should shoulder ALL the blame if the system works, just takes some getting use to, which brings me to my point that an hour test drive doesn't always tell the whole story.

 

Mind you maybe my views are different on tech interfaces, but a review operator needing to know certain things seems like a generalization and at this point we are almost a decade into widespread smartphone usage,

Common complaints that I see and read (list from cars.com)

• Touch-screens that are slow to respond or have indistinct touch points (not really something a consumer can fix with RTFM)
• Screens that freeze or go blank (not really something a consumer can fix with RTFM)
• Voice commands that fall on deaf ears (not really something a consumer can fix with RTFM)
• Poor sound quality using Bluetooth streaming (not really something a consumer can fix with RTFM)
• Unintuitive controls that flummox even tech-savvy users (not really something a consumer can fix with RTFM)

 

The best way forward is to standardize infotainment system interfaces across the board, but how can the Rolls Royce Navigation System be operated and graphically the same as a BMW 1 series unit...

The constructs of the auto industry will always have a setup which is extremely good, user friendly, or a system which is designed to be basically deemed to complex.

 

 

It probably doesn't need to be the same. BMW 1-series, unlike RRs, aren't (usually) driven by professional chauffeurs.

 

Not to fear monger but to add to what I was saying. Take for instance here where everything climate control, has basically been digitized, you incur this issue...what then?