CONSUMER REPORTS BULL@!#*
08-23-2001, 09:26 AM
#1
Audiworld Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CONSUMER REPORTS BULL@!#*
DID ANYONE SEE THE LATEST ISSUE OF CONSUMER REPORTS ON THE BEST AND WORST USED CARS? THEY SLAMMED OUR BELOVED A6 FOR POOR RELIABILITY, ESPECIALLY THE 1998. EVERYTHING JAPANESE GOT RAVE REVIEWS, THOUGH. I WONDER WHO IS THROWING THEM THE MOST MONEY TO PRINT WHAT THEY WANT.
08-23-2001, 09:31 AM
#2
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 7,555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's all get upset about it and write all-caps rants about CR... that will help!
Fact is, Audis have more problems than Japanese cars, but we're all obviously dealing with them and don't have a problem with it, or don't have problems period. I personally don't care what reviews or reports say about my car... I'm happy and satisfied with it and no opinion or generalization about reliability will change that...
Audi sales aren't doing too bad last I checked, either.
Audi sales aren't doing too bad last I checked, either.
08-23-2001, 09:46 AM
#3
Audiworld Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Let's all get upset about it and write all-caps rants about CR... that will help!
EXACTLY, MY POINT IS THAT I HAVE HAD BOTH JAPANESE AND EURO CARS, AND ALL CARS HAVE QWERKS, BUT WHEN THEY RATE A TOYOTA COROLLA HIGHER THAN AN A6, BECAUSE OF NO ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS, IT MAKES ME STOP AND REALIZE COROLLA'S DON'T EVEN HAVE PWR WINDOWS OR LOCKS, ECT, SO HOW CAN THEY HAVE PROBLEMS ELECTRICALLY? NOT MAD, JUST DEFENDING MY AUTO.
08-23-2001, 09:59 AM
#5
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 7,555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a valid point... I wonder if they do consider the...
... potential failures in an Audi vs a Japanese car. Also remember this is just reliability. Everyone knows an A6 is better than any Toyota!
I don't read CR, and don't know how they arrive at their ratings, but the difference between minor and major problems might not be reflected, but rather just the number.
Also remember the fuel sender issue and how that might affect ratings... I think it got the A6 to the top of some lemon list.
I don't read CR, and don't know how they arrive at their ratings, but the difference between minor and major problems might not be reflected, but rather just the number.
Also remember the fuel sender issue and how that might affect ratings... I think it got the A6 to the top of some lemon list.
08-23-2001, 10:17 AM
#6
AudiWorld Member
Dude, release that Caps Lock key.
08-23-2001, 10:20 AM
#7
Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The head of CR auto testing drives/owns an A4, which is "recommended". The A6
was also recommended in 2000, but, for recent "below average reliability" ratings in recent surveys, it no longer is. Maybe the A6 deserves it?
Trending Topics
08-23-2001, 10:29 AM
#8
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 2,310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Based on their criteria, it's accurate. . .
Remember that the parameters for any given analysis will greatly determine it's outcome. They have put together criteria to measure reliability etc . . .
That criteria indicates that Audi (A6's in particular) have a less reliability than other vehicles run through the same parameter set. In reality, they are correct. The degree of how unreliable is not reported so you are going to get a summary result.
The A6's do have a greater degree of reliability based issues than some of the other cars they tested. Audi did hit a bump in the road with part supply problems coinciding with massive growth in sales. It was a double whammy.
Therefore, when the sample was taken by CR to determine reliability you have a greater number of people with a greater number of problems. If the problems were resolved quickly and without difficulty fewer problems would have been reported and consequently a higher level of reliability.
It is a mixed subjective/objective analysis. That is also why you have seen reliability in the A6 decline in most reports over the last 24-36 months. It mirrors the growing pangs Audi experienced with their success of the redesigned A6.
I agree, the reliability of the A6 is worse than many other cars of many other manufacturers during the same period. Japanese, Korean, Turkish or whatever, if a company is able to achieve a supply/part/build quality goal that is very high it will translate into better reliability. The Japanese have been very focused on the internals of their vehicles and also avoiding significant changes in anything but aesthetics.
In addition, a Corolla is twice as expensive as an Audi A6 when you look at part count/technology in the vehicle as compared to sale price. The Corolla is an outstanding example of automotive excellence when looking purely at build process, simplification, life cycle duration, and retail price. It shows in it's reliability.
Remember, it's only their opinion based on their criteria conducted for their research. It is yet another piece of information a consumer SHOULD add to their knowledge aresenal when considering a purchase. It's not bad data, it's just data.
Weigh the data with additional information from various sources and your own research. I use consumer reports data because it is reasonably accurate but I certainly do not hang my hat on their words.
We cannot be mad at them for reporting that their data shows a higher degree of problems associated with the A6. That's what their sample showed and from my own research, I would tend to agree. Take it with a grain of salt like every other info tidbit.
Brian
That criteria indicates that Audi (A6's in particular) have a less reliability than other vehicles run through the same parameter set. In reality, they are correct. The degree of how unreliable is not reported so you are going to get a summary result.
The A6's do have a greater degree of reliability based issues than some of the other cars they tested. Audi did hit a bump in the road with part supply problems coinciding with massive growth in sales. It was a double whammy.
Therefore, when the sample was taken by CR to determine reliability you have a greater number of people with a greater number of problems. If the problems were resolved quickly and without difficulty fewer problems would have been reported and consequently a higher level of reliability.
It is a mixed subjective/objective analysis. That is also why you have seen reliability in the A6 decline in most reports over the last 24-36 months. It mirrors the growing pangs Audi experienced with their success of the redesigned A6.
I agree, the reliability of the A6 is worse than many other cars of many other manufacturers during the same period. Japanese, Korean, Turkish or whatever, if a company is able to achieve a supply/part/build quality goal that is very high it will translate into better reliability. The Japanese have been very focused on the internals of their vehicles and also avoiding significant changes in anything but aesthetics.
In addition, a Corolla is twice as expensive as an Audi A6 when you look at part count/technology in the vehicle as compared to sale price. The Corolla is an outstanding example of automotive excellence when looking purely at build process, simplification, life cycle duration, and retail price. It shows in it's reliability.
Remember, it's only their opinion based on their criteria conducted for their research. It is yet another piece of information a consumer SHOULD add to their knowledge aresenal when considering a purchase. It's not bad data, it's just data.
Weigh the data with additional information from various sources and your own research. I use consumer reports data because it is reasonably accurate but I certainly do not hang my hat on their words.
We cannot be mad at them for reporting that their data shows a higher degree of problems associated with the A6. That's what their sample showed and from my own research, I would tend to agree. Take it with a grain of salt like every other info tidbit.
Brian
