Why are FCA owners so delusional that their unreliable pieces of shit bring them joy...

>not having transmission issues

>street sweeping day
>neighbors Subaru cannot be moved to avoid a ticket
>broken transmission

Bait thread is bait, but whatever.

Daily driven my Challenger R/T for five years. It's better than your car. Fuck yourself.

>Kia is more reliable than Tesla
Fuck me thats embarrassing.

Fiat, Dodge, Jeep, and Land Rover are all where I expected them to be at the bottom of the trash heap.
Though I didn't know Buick would have higher reliability than Lincoln.
Going by this it seems that Mazda and Lexus are the only Jap brands worth owning too which I'm somewhat surprised by. I thought Honda would have scored higher.

>have a 4 year old Punto
>almost 70k on the clock
>only oil and filters changes
>thrash it everywhere
>no rattles whatsoever
Still waiting for that bad reliability meme to appear.

We have the best marketing in the business and people still think that we are still an American automotive company. We actually have better than industry average in certain parts of our vehicles. Our major weak points are transmissions and exteriors. Quality's customer is the assembly line in our plants not the person buying our vehicles.

J.D. Power had Lexus and Porsche as #1 and #2 for vehicle dependability in 2016. In 2017 they were tied for first place. Worth noting is that Porsche scored one less point in engine dependability, while Lexus had one less point in accessory electronics
In the initial quality study however Porsche stayed at top of the pack while Lexus fell to the middle.

jdpower.com/press-releases/2016-us-vehicle-dependability-study-vds
jdpower.com/cars/articles/jd-power-studies/infographic-key-stats-and-findings-2017-us-vehicle-dependability
jdpower.com/press-releases/2017-us-initial-quality-study-iqs

Nowhere is Chevy comparable to these top end makers.
Consumer reports is useful data because its coming from end users, but the CR audience itself carries its own biases. It can't be taken as an accurate snapshot of given product in the hands of the general public. At best one should take data from multiple sources like CR and JDP to cross reference.

Statistics don't mean much to the individual, your sample size is always going to be one. If something has a 50% chance of breaking down then 50% of people are going to continue on having no issues. People can still strike gold even with a lemon.

Ironically the 124 spider has less complaints in certain categories compared to the miata.

>it's VAG shill episode
How novel.

These charts are always so worthless.
An actually useful metric would be cost of repairs per year.

>tfw I actually believe this
Why are there still cars without manual options?

On the contrary, these charts are actually extremely useful. Only caveat is that you must understand the data. The sample size, sample selection, and grading criteria are important to take into account.
For someone choosing a new car the annual IQS and VDS reports are useful tools for decreasing your chances of running into major issues with your new purchase. How often a car will be needing to go in for repair can have as much of an impact as the cost of repairs themselves.

0 problems after 100.000km?

>Volvo and land Rover have low predicted reliability
Definitely made by normies
Also I'm laughing at all the people in this thread who didn't read the word "predicted"

>Kia above Honda and Toyota
Where did it all go so right?

Our job postings specifically call request for individuals with experience using 3rd party metrics such as JD Power and Consumer Reports. JD Power actually sells services to automotive manufacturers to help them reduce problems in the field by providing data and analytics.

>Though I didn't know Buick would have higher reliability than Lincoln.

Because Buick is a rebadged German carmaker, Opel.

>muh VAGhating
how novel.