Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Thursday August 21, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > News & Rumors > Non-Subaru News & Rumors

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-03-2012, 12:36 AM   #1
speedyHAM
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 48377
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: "They eat fish soaked in lye"
Vehicle:
1996 Gutted, built
XP class Impreza L

Default 10 most reliable cars

http://autos.yahoo.com/news/10-most-...191458088.html

Quote:
Four years ago, Motor Trend named the Toyota Tundra the 2008 Truck of the Year, calling it one of the biggest, strongest and most capable trucks on the market. Its launch, said the magazine, was “a seismic event for the industry” – a Japanese truck that could finally challenge its Detroit rivals.

The coveted award was just one of many accolades that have since been showered on the Tundra. J.D. Power & Associates last year named the 2008 Tundra the most reliable pickup after three years of ownership, and Consumer Reports called the Tundra a “good bet” based on its history of “better than average” reliability.

Ask an auto mechanic, however, and you might get a different story. The ’08 Tundra ends up in the shop more often than most vehicles and the repairs typically cost Tundra owners a pretty penny, according to CarMD, which analyzes repair trends on roughly 136 million vehicles up to 10 years old.

CarMD gives the 2008 Tundra a “D” grade due to frequent failures and moderately high repair costs. The most common repair on the truck is “Replace Air Injection Pump” at an average cost of $969.

Car shoppers have no shortage of resources available when researching which vehicle to buy. But the problem with most vehicle rankings, surveys and awards is that they are usually opinion-based and are typically skewed toward new cars.

Consumer Reports comes up with its reliability ratings by asking its subscribers to report serious problems they’ve had with their vehicles in the prior 12 months. It then uses that data to predict how well cars on sale now will hold up. Predicted-reliability scores are based on a car’s track record over the three most recent model years (provided the model wasn’t redesigned in that time).

But today’s vehicles are built to last longer – the average age of cars on the road today is almost 11 years — so even three years isn’t long enough to rate the true reliability of a vehicle.

CarMD says its Vehicle Health Index, based on actual repair data, looks past the new car ‘honeymoon’ period to help car shoppers get a true picture of what to expect as vehicles age. It looks at real-life repair data for one full calendar year on 10 model years worth of vehicles, weighing the frequency of repairs and the cost of those repairs equally. It gives each vehicle a letter grade for reliability, along with a list of the most common repairs and the repair costs, based on the car’s mileage. This helps buyers anticipate what problems might crop up at a certain mileage, and helps them figure possible repair costs into their budget and even decide whether to buy an extended warranty.

The 2007 Honda Civic is another example of a highly rated car that might need costly repairs down the road. Consumer Reports rated the 2007 Civic tops in vehicle dependability for its class. But CarMD gave it a “C”, with frequent failures and average repair costs. The most frequent repair is “Replace ABS Module Assembly” at a cost of more than $942.

Where does CarMD get its crystal ball? From your car’s “check engine” light. Since 1996, the U.S. has required each vehicle to have an onboard diagnostic computer to monitor everything from engine to transmission sensors to look for emissions-related problems. The “check engine” light alerts drivers to problems that could be as simple as a loose gas cap or a misfiring spark plug to something far more important – and costly – like a faulty oxygen sensor or catalytic converter.

CarMD downloads data from each of these “check engine” incidents, and combines it with repair information uploaded from a network of 3,000 participating service technicians at dealerships and independent repair shops. The result is a rich database about how certain vehicles perform over time.

For its newly released 2012 Vehicle Health Index, CarMD analyzed more than 163,000 specific repairs during a one-year period ending Sept. 1, and estimated repair costs, based on several standard sources.

To measure the frequency of repairs for a particular vehicle, it compared the percentage of reported check engine failures for that model to its share of all 136 million 2002-2012 model-year vehicles on the road. For example, if 20 percent of check engine light problems reported came from a certain vehicle but it made up only 10 percent of the vehicle population it would have an index of 2.00 (20 percent divided by 10 percent). It’s most likely a car to avoid. An index of 1.00 means that the frequency of failures is matched to its percentage of vehicles on the road, and thus, has average reliability.

The most reliable vehicles had an index far less than 1.00, including the 2010 Toyota Corolla (.080), 2008 Ford Taurus (.083), 2010 Subaru Forester (.099) and 2010 Hyundai Sonata (.111).

Here’s a look at the 10 Most Reliable Vehicles, according to CarMD:

2010 Toyota Corolla

The Corolla consistently ranks high in reliability studies and CarMD's analysis of vehicle repairs confirms it. It has few problems, and the average cost of repairs is $283.13. Despite a rash of highly publicized safety recalls, Toyota is the most reliable of any manufacturer, according to CarMD.

2008 Toyota Yaris

The tiny Yaris is a good bet, based on its showing in CarMD's analysis of vehicle repairs. It had a low incidence of "check-engine" problems and the average repair cost was $259.33.

2009 Honda Pilot

The Pilot doesn't even show up on J.D. Power's annual Vehicle Dependability Study, but CarMD says it's the most reliable full-size SUV on the road. Average repair costs are just $141.

2009 Honda Accord

The Accord is another vehicle that's not included in the J.D. Power dependability rankings, but its low failure rate and modest repair costs ($201.74) earned it a Top 10 ranking at CarMD.

2010 Subaru Forester

Subaru has some of the most dependable vehicles on the road, which probably explains why Subaru owners hang on to them longer than most other brands. The Forester rarely needs repairs, and when it does, the average cost is just $116.33.

2007 Lexus ES 350

The Lexus ES 350 is rated the most reliable luxury model on CarMD, with average repair costs of $377.71. But a "check engine" light is fairly rare in this car.

2011 Hyundai Sonata

Hyundai had the lowest average repair cost for the Top 10 manufacturers, at $271.86. Toyota's average, by comparison, was $490.72. But Toyotas have fewer repair incidents, so it outranks Hyundai overall. The Sonata, with average repair costs of $336.30, was the top-ranked vehicle from the Korean manufacturer.

2011 Chevrolet Impala

GM will introduce a newly redesigned Impala next year. It can only hope it's as reliable as the outgoing one, which had few problems and average repair costs of just $184.30.

2010 Subaru Outback

Subaru had two cars in the Top 10. The Outback holds up well, and repair costs average just $110.43. A testament to the longevity of Subarus: the most common repair is replacement of the catalytic converter, a part which fails only after extensive wear and tear.
Funny that the Toyota Tundra was best on CR's list, but lousy in the rear world.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
speedyHAM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 06:21 AM   #2
sxotty
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 95600
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Vehicle:
2003 WRX wagon
Silver

Default

Funny that and Impala did good I honestly would never have expected that.
sxotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 09:29 AM   #3
bblacha
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 60238
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Vehicle:
2005 Forester X

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sxotty View Post
Funny that and Impala did good I honestly would never have expected that.
Just like the A-bodies (Oldsmobile Ciera / Buick Century) reached very good reliability by GM tinkering with them over a decade without major changes, just incrementally improving. Then killing the A-bodies in the mid-90's.

So the Impala gets really good just before getting fully redone. So it goes.
bblacha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 01:21 PM   #4
Snowphun
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 1800
Join Date: Jul 2000
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Way South Shore MA
Vehicle:
WRX /Cooper S/Miata
awd/fwd/rwd

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by speedyHAM View Post
http://autos.yahoo.com/news/10-most-...191458088.html

But today’s vehicles are built to last longer – the average age of cars on the road today is almost 11 years — so even three years isn’t long enough to rate the true reliability of a vehicle.
I find this hard to believe.
Snowphun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 02:57 PM   #5
samagon
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 26859
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: undisputed COMBAT! champion
Vehicle:
of TXIC
I also like (oYo)!!!!

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowphun View Post
I find this hard to believe.
Shouldn't.

Car engines these days can easily, very easily, make it 150k miles with regular maintenance.
samagon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 04:05 PM   #6
skywaffles
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 82470
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Vehicle:
. let's take
an ussie

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by samagon View Post
Shouldn't.

Car engines these days can easily, very easily, make it 150k miles with regular maintenance.
Car engines of the past 20 years can easily make it to 150k. 150k is nothing nowadays.

Cars these days may actually do worse. New engines are running higher compression, leaner, and hotter than ever before in search of efficiency. Couple that with unproven (longterm) technology like DI, CVTs (which already have laughable reliability), and electronically controlled EVERYTHING.
skywaffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 04:22 PM   #7
4wdwrx
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 72042
Join Date: Oct 2004
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Sunshine
Vehicle:
2002 WRX impreza
WRB "Blue Mammoth"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skywaffles View Post
Car engines of the past 20 years can easily make it to 150k. 150k is nothing nowadays.

Cars these days may actually do worse. New engines are running higher compression, leaner, and hotter than ever before in search of efficiency. Couple that with unproven (longterm) technology like DI, CVTs (which already have laughable reliability), and electronically controlled EVERYTHING.
People say that with engines ten years ago, twenty, thirty... People always think complex electronics means less reliability, which is very incorrect.

Also, for the past twenty years engines are getting better in reliability, so your saying engineers gave up on the twenty-first year.
4wdwrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 04:31 PM   #8
skywaffles
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 82470
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Vehicle:
. let's take
an ussie

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4wdwrx View Post
People say that with engines ten years ago, twenty, thirty... People always think complex electronics means less reliability, which is very incorrect.

Also, for the past twenty years engines are getting better in reliability, so your saying engineers gave up on the twenty-first year.
Hence "may." DI can lead to carbon buildup which fouls up engines pretty badly. CVTs tend to be sealed meaning if anything goes wrong you have to replace the entire unit. CVTs tend to go wrong quite often. There have been electronics in the past, but not to the extent today. Everything is interdependent. I'm not saying all new cars are going to catastrophically fail. They are just working a lot harder.

Plus look at modern emission controlled diesels. Their reliability SUCKS.
skywaffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 05:12 PM   #9
Predwolf
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 54292
Join Date: Feb 2004
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Maple Ridge
Default

My old MR2 might have been a rare one, but when I sold it in 2010 with 355,000kms on the clock, the only major thing it had replaced since it was bought was the clutch, which was replaced at 305,000kms (it went the day I bought it). That was a car built in 1989 and driven hard every single day.

Compared to my 2002 Alero, which has had the front hubs replaced, warped rotors replaced twice, fuel pump replaced, and now it throws an ABS/Trac/Service vehicle light randomly even though the car drives fine. I cannot wait to get rid of this.

Anyway, the article doesn't really make much sense to me that they're comparing a bunch of 2010-2011 models for reliability when they haven't even been on the road that long.
Predwolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 07:03 PM   #10
JustyWRC
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:
2005 Baja Turbo
09 WRX

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skywaffles View Post
Hence "may." DI can lead to carbon buildup which fouls up engines pretty badly. CVTs tend to be sealed meaning if anything goes wrong you have to replace the entire unit. CVTs tend to go wrong quite often. There have been electronics in the past, but not to the extent today. Everything is interdependent. I'm not saying all new cars are going to catastrophically fail. They are just working a lot harder.

Plus look at modern emission controlled diesels. Their reliability SUCKS.


Subaru's CVT has not been going wrong often.
JustyWRC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 07:18 PM   #11
DeadGeneration
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 313753
Join Date: Mar 2012
Vehicle:
2012 WRX
Dark Gray Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowphun View Post
I find this hard to believe.
The economy is playing a factor, people are buying used and keeping their autos longer.
DeadGeneration is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 07:31 PM   #12
m1r4g3
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 220476
Join Date: Aug 2009
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Racine
Vehicle:
2--> 06 STI & 12 Leg
WRB & SWP

Default

yay subaru!!! where is ford?
m1r4g3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 07:37 PM   #13
tibug
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 273906
Join Date: Feb 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Nonsense Poopy Pants!
Vehicle:
2003 Outback
RUST

Default

tibug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 07:52 PM   #14
Hanakuso
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 326061
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: SoCal
Vehicle:
2013 Scion FRS

Default

Nice to see Hyundai moving up in the world. I wouldn't even consider them back in the 90s
Hanakuso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 08:21 PM   #15
JustyWRC
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:
2005 Baja Turbo
09 WRX

Default


Loved that series. A guy at my firestation got one because of that. My question had always been "Sure, it had better mpg and can tow better; but, can it do both at the same time?". Meaning, what kind of mpg is it getting while towing 10,000lbs vs the mpg of the V-8s while doing the same thing. My friend loved it, but found out the MPG wasn't working for him. He wasn't getting near what was said. He drove it aggressive though, so that is why I still have that question. Real world mpg on the EcoBoost compared.

Just like that last part racing in the desert. They said it was using half the fuel, but didn't say if they were going as fast as their V-8. Did they finish in the same time they would have with the other engine?
JustyWRC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 08:25 PM   #16
daveyboy
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 35419
Join Date: Apr 2003
Default

My Tundra has been the most reliable vehicle I have ever owned--and I have well over 6000 miles at 8000 GVW, not including the countless miles towing.

The AIP replacement mentioned by CarMD is somewhat strange as Toyota has extended the warranty on these items to something like 10 years.
daveyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 08:36 PM   #17
tibug
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 273906
Join Date: Feb 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Nonsense Poopy Pants!
Vehicle:
2003 Outback
RUST

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustyWRC View Post
Just like that last part racing in the desert. They said it was using half the fuel, but didn't say if they were going as fast as their V-8. Did they finish in the same time they would have with the other engine?
Ha, they conveniently didn't mention which place it came in. They just applauded the truck for finishing when so many Baja drivers didn't even finish.

I just watched the video where they remove the engine from the Baja truck to have it shipped out for the teardown. They pull the engine out and put it in the bed of a Silverado to haul away......
tibug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 09:05 PM   #18
skywaffles
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 82470
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Vehicle:
. let's take
an ussie

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustyWRC View Post
Subaru's CVT has not been going wrong often.
You mean the one that's been on the market for all of 13 seconds? SHOCKING!
skywaffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 10:05 PM   #19
tibug
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 273906
Join Date: Feb 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Nonsense Poopy Pants!
Vehicle:
2003 Outback
RUST

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skywaffles View Post
You mean the one that's been on the market for all of 13 seconds? SHOCKING!
What CVTs are you referring to? I know that Nissan has had issues with their CVTs, but there's many cars with CVTs out there that have had no more issues than conventional automatics have. CVTs have also been around quite a long time. All Toyota and Lexus hybrids since 1997 have used a CVT, for example. I don't know how you got to the conclusion that they are less reliable than conventional autos (EDIT: that could be true, I just don't know how you know). The CVT was really a godsend on the Mitsubishi crossover rental that I had a few months ago...the thing was so gutless that it had to be in high RPMs to be able to get out of its own way, which it still had trouble doing.

The Justy used a CVT way back when. EDIT: I'm not saying that the Justy's CVT was anything like modern CVTs, just to be clear, Clarence.
tibug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 10:20 PM   #20
skywaffles
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 82470
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Vehicle:
. let's take
an ussie

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tibug View Post
What CVTs are you referring to? I know that Nissan has had issues with their CVTs, but there's many cars with CVTs out there that have had no more issues than conventional automatics have. CVTs have also been around quite a long time. All Toyota and Lexus hybrids since 1997 have used a CVT, for example. I don't know how you got to the conclusion that they are less reliable than conventional autos (EDIT: that could be true, I just don't know how you know). The CVT was really a godsend on the Mitsubishi crossover rental that I had a few months ago...the thing was so gutless that it had to be in high RPMs to be able to get out of its own way, which it still had trouble doing.

The Justy used a CVT way back when. EDIT: I'm not saying that the Justy's CVT was anything like modern CVTs, just to be clear, Clarence.
Audi ditched CVTs (they tried it out in the FWD A4) due to reliability issues.
Nissan's CVTs are so bad they had to extend the warranties of nine models 10 years/120k miles.
Ford ditched CVTs (tried them out in the Freestyle) due to huge reliability issues.
MINI ditched CVTs due to reliability issues.

Toyota style hybrid CVTs are a completely different beast. They rely on planetary gear sets instead of belts.

CVTs offer little benefit over a modern torque converter automatic or DSG. They suck to drive, have little to no benefit for efficiency, and are impossible to repair for the most part.
skywaffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 10:39 PM   #21
tibug
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 273906
Join Date: Feb 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Nonsense Poopy Pants!
Vehicle:
2003 Outback
RUST

Default

Thanks for the distinction between the Toyota CVT and others. I didn't know that.

It seems to me that CVTs are becoming more popular as a whole, so I would think the auto industry would have some reason for it.
tibug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 10:45 PM   #22
AllAWD
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 17079
Join Date: Apr 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Alexandria, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skywaffles View Post
Car engines of the past 20 years can easily make it to 150k. 150k is nothing nowadays.

Cars these days may actually do worse. New engines are running higher compression, leaner, and hotter than ever before in search of efficiency. Couple that with unproven (longterm) technology like DI, CVTs (which already have laughable reliability), and electronically controlled EVERYTHING.
I've often wondered about that myself. Pushing materials to extreme limits for greater efficiency and advances in engineering design accuracy mean there could be less margin of safety built into the design and inherently shorter life. Don't forget lighter oil running for longer duration and extended maintenance intervals on everything.

Trading a few percent more in fuel efficiency for less overall lifetime would be a poor trade in the total energy cost for a car.
AllAWD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 10:50 PM   #23
speedyHAM
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 48377
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: "They eat fish soaked in lye"
Vehicle:
1996 Gutted, built
XP class Impreza L

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustyWRC View Post
Loved that series. A guy at my firestation got one because of that. My question had always been "Sure, it had better mpg and can tow better; but, can it do both at the same time?". Meaning, what kind of mpg is it getting while towing 10,000lbs vs the mpg of the V-8s while doing the same thing. My friend loved it, but found out the MPG wasn't working for him. He wasn't getting near what was said. He drove it aggressive though, so that is why I still have that question. Real world mpg on the EcoBoost compared.

Just like that last part racing in the desert. They said it was using half the fuel, but didn't say if they were going as fast as their V-8. Did they finish in the same time they would have with the other engine?
Real world driving my EcoBoost vs. one of my neighbors (we work at the same place) I get about 0.8 mpg better than he does. Not quite what was advertised, but close enough for rounding.

Towing is where the EcoBoost really shines. It's better than any truck I've ever towed with that had a gas engine. So far I've gotten 1.5 mpg better than my average in an older F150 with the 5.4L, 1 mpg better than the Nissan Titan, 2 mpg better than the Chevy 1500 (w/ the 5.3L), and 3 mpg better than a V6 Chevy Blazer hauling an open 5000lb car trailer. It's not so much the improvement in mpg when towing, it's the POWER. Even vs. the new dodge I tried it feels a lot stronger towing.

The racing in the dessert I have no idea. But real world I like this engine. Hopefully it holds up after 200K miles. (crosses fingers)
speedyHAM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 10:01 AM   #24
Rootus
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 89821
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: A Series Of Toobs
Vehicle:
2015 STI LE

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowphun View Post
I find this hard to believe.
Why? It's not a new phenomenon. It goes up a little every year as cars become more reliable. 20 years ago it was around 8 years.
Rootus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 02:26 PM   #25
steve
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 4718
Join Date: Mar 2001
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Location : Location
Vehicle:
~ too
many to list

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daveyboy View Post
My Tundra has been the most reliable vehicle I have ever owned
I'm at 45,000 miles on mine and it's going strong.
Looking forward to the second year of the next Tundra. Until then my 2010 will do just fine.
steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.