Buick ties Lexus for dependability study

[Punisher Bass]

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/09/b...cle-dependabi/

You would expect Lexus to be No. 1 in vehicle dependability, just like it has been in J.D. Power's Vehicle Dependability Study for the past 11 years. It is No. 1 again for 2007, but for the first time, Lexus has tied with another automaker for the top spot, and you'll never guess who it is – Buick.

Three-year old (2004) Lexus and Buick vehicles each scored 145 problems per 100 vehicles, the lowest scores of all automakers in the study. The results kind of make you wonder when we're going to cut our own domestic automakers some slack and begin admitting they're turning things around, building better, longer-lasting vehicles. Also consider that Cadillac (162) took the third spot, and Mercury (168) the fourth. Honda (169), meanwhile, earned the fifth spot.

Though Buick ranked highest among nameplates, none of its vehicles managed to earn the highest ranking in their respective segments. Lexus vehicles, however, led five categories, the most for any nameplate. Its parent company, Toyota, also added an additional four vehicles that led their segment, while Ford, Honda and... what?... Oldsmobile each had two vehicles that led their segments. Remember, this study focuses on 2004 model year vehicles, which means Oldsmobile was still operating when these cars were built. The Bravada and Silhouette each led their segments in dependability, which likely means those workers building Oldsmobiles near the end took pride in their work.

Buick might be turning out bland cars, but atleast they are still reliable as ever.

[bartboy9891]

Out of the top 5, Cadillac and Honda are the only ones who make cars that are probably decent to drive.

[SuperStalin]

I wonder if the results of these surveys have anything to do
with the fact that old and/or extremely careful people drive some of these brands

[sonza68]

Not terribly suprising to me. Ford and GM have been making reliable cars, but the perception is that American cars are crap and perception is a very hard thing to change.

[C53A_4G63T]

But look at how simple the Buicks are compared to the Lexus's. To me, Lexus are ahead seeing as they offer vehicles with more technology and extras compared to Buick's.

What are you going to have less problems with? A rowboat or a cruise ship?

[jetsetter]

Originally Posted by C53A_4G63T

But look at how simple the Buicks are compared to the Lexus's. To me, Lexus are ahead seeing as they offer vehicles with more technology and extras compared to Buick's.

What are you going to have less problems with? A rowboat or a cruise ship?

Not always a good thing. GM had HUDs and touch screens in their cars in the 80s and 90s. Much of the technology is gimmicky and can affect reliability.

Buick touch screen from the 80s.

+ YouTube Video

[Spectre]

The difference is that the Lexus technology all works, and the Buick stuff didn't/doesn't - so they don't bother with it any more.

A Lexus is a reliable starship. A Buick is a reliable wooden barge.

[thedguy]

Originally Posted by Spectre

A Lexus is a reliable starship. A Buick is a reliable wooden barge.

Compare Lexus and Buick in 2 sentences... thats pretty much how you do it.

Funny this comes up, earlier today I saw a Buick lucerne and saw it do something a Buick has never done before... it didn't float. It hit a bump in the road "bounced" once then settled. I've NEVER seen a Buick, new or old, do this in my life. They always continue to float like a boat on water.

Jetsetter: I don't think I've ever seen a functioning one of those HUD's/touchscreens.

[No Boss]

Originally Posted by Spectre

A Lexus is a reliable starship. A Buick is a reliable wooden barge.

Wow.... Wow man that's just flippin' poetry right there.

Originally Posted by thedguy

Jetsetter: I don't think I've ever seen a functioning one of those HUD's/touchscreens.

My fathers old car (GM) had a HUD and it barely worked, and the touch screen in his Caddy has a few bugs in it as well.

[epp_b]

Naw, the only reason Buicks rate as reliable is because the old biffers who drive them just buy a new one when something goes wrong or die before that even happens

[jetsetter]

I don't think I've ever seen a functioning one of those HUD's/touchscreens.

That's what I am getting at. The Japanese Auto manufacturers didn't get their reputation of reliability from their most complicated cars, they got it from some of their simplest.

[Spectre]

Partially wrong. The Japanese got their start with their simplest cars being stupidly reliable - then built on that with hypertech wonders.

The old Z31 300ZX Turbos with the digital dashboard are a great example. Unlike every American or European digital dashboard I've ever seen from the era, these kept working for decades. Mine had a control module failure... when it turned *20*. Most of the GM and Jaguar units didn't even make it out of warranty with a problem. Nissan automatic climate controls? Yup, most of them are still working 27 years later. Toyota stereos? Yup, same thing.

GM? Ford? Eh... not so much.

[TomCat]

Originally Posted by C53A_4G63T

But look at how simple the Buicks are compared to the Lexus's. To me, Lexus are ahead seeing as they offer vehicles with more technology and extras compared to Buick's.

What are you going to have less problems with? A rowboat or a cruise ship?

I guess that explains BMW, MercedesBenz, and Audi not taking the top spots. But also, if simplicity alone explains why Buick ranked high, then why are other, even more simple brands, towards the bottom? Jeep is below average? What is there in a Jeep that could cause a problem? Does flipping on the trail count as a reliability issue?

There are very technical and very simple car brands mixed all over that list.

[Austere]

145 problems per 100 vehicles? Is it me or does that seem a tad high?

Surely having any problems at all in the first three years is uncommon. Let alone more than one problem.

[Punisher Bass]

My Buick has a HUD, and I've never had a single problem with it. Infact I find it hard to drive any car that doesn't have it. It's so nice not having to look down at the speedo, it's projected right there on the road for you.

The 88 Park Avenue we had also had several fancy things (no touchscreen though) that worked at best half of the time. The keypad on the drivers door for keyless entry comes to mind.

[Hidden_Hunter]

what's the common link between buick and lexus?

they both make uninteresting cars I wouldn't want to own

[GM_IV]

Originally Posted by Spectre

The old Z31 300ZX Turbos with the digital dashboard are a great example.

My Cressida's digital dash is still the same as it was from the factory. My dad during the car's early years was worried when he heard a lot of the other digital dashboards had serious failures and the costs of repairing one.

Originally Posted by Spectre

Toyota stereos? Yup, same thing.

Interesting note, the Technics stereo in my Cressida has had much more significant usage and outlasted every stereo I have in my house. When it started to show its age, my dad for whatever reason smacked the side of the center console and it hasn't had a problem since.

[thedguy]

Originally Posted by TomCat

I guess that explains BMW, MercedesBenz, and Audi not taking the top spots. But also, if simplicity alone explains why Buick ranked high, then why are other, even more simple brands, towards the bottom? Jeep is below average? What is there in a Jeep that could cause a problem? Does flipping on the trail count as a reliability issue?

There are very technical and very simple car brands mixed all over that list.

Buick still uses the old reliable 3800. Much of what they are running is tried and true designs. The Jeeps in the last 10 years have had a lot of redeveloped bits. Plus it's a Chrysler product

Originally Posted by jetsetter

That's what I am getting at. The Japanese Auto manufacturers didn't get their reputation of reliability from their most complicated cars, they got it from some of their simplest.

Keep in mind I was only referring to the GM ones, as pointed out before, the ones in Toyota's and Nissan's worked for quite a long time.

[Donington]

Originally Posted by epp_b

Naw, the only reason Buicks rate as reliable is because the old biffers who drive them just buy a new one when something goes wrong or die before that even happens

There's the truth!

[SoxXpupPeT]

Flipping sweet! gj GM