# JD Powers: Ford Mustang better than a BMW



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

... in initial quality. 
Srsly?

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-bu...-power-top-quality-cars.html?mod=family-autos


----------



## Burrogs (May 2, 2005)

It's probably a safe assumption that Ford owners hold their cars to a lower standard than BMW owners. 

1. They pay less = expect less
2. "Improvement" stats are meaningless. Quality has nowhere to go but up for Ford.


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

Burrogs said:


> It's probably a safe assumption that Ford owners hold their cars to a lower standard than BMW owners.
> 
> 1. They pay less = expect less
> 2. "Improvement" stats are meaningless. Quality has nowhere to go but up for Ford.


Is that how JD Powers' surveys work? They ask owners about the reliability?
I thought they measure actual defect claims... :dunno:


----------



## MikeLogan (Feb 27, 2009)

I don't have much respect for JD Power and Associates. I remember back years ago when I had my eclipse, the dealer said that if I filled the form out with all positive marks, they will give me a free tank of gas...I'm getting they weren't the only dealer to do this. I'm sure other things will have a higher rating than BMW. I don't see many BMW dealers passing out those surveys. BMW's don't need a public survey to describe how great they are.


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

MikeLogan said:


> I don't have much respect for JD Power and Associates. I remember back years ago when I had my eclipse, the dealer said that if I filled the form out with all positive marks, they will give me a free tank of gas...I'm getting they weren't the only dealer to do this. I'm sure other things will have a higher rating than BMW. I don't see many BMW dealers passing out those surveys. BMW's don't need a public survey to describe how great they are.


We're talking reliability here.
BMWs are not known for reliability. 
The surprising part is that Ford is doing better than BMW.


----------



## 6 Brit (Jan 19, 2009)

not a surprise...with technology sometimes comes problems
which a mustang should not have because it a what 10-15 year old chassis they are still using...tried and true seems to be working for them and their customers, does not make it better or worse, some people prefer top of the line technologically advanced stuff which they know going into it usually is not as reliable...some people like to live like the flinstones...to each their own


----------



## k1200rsvt (Mar 30, 2009)

Burrogs said:


> It's probably a safe assumption that Ford owners hold their cars to a lower standard than BMW owners.
> 
> 1. They pay less = expect less


That is exactly what I was thinking when I looked at the lists...Either they don't care or they figure they will bring it in once they have a whole list of items and it ends up being past the 90 days of initial quality.


----------



## Burrogs (May 2, 2005)

Boile said:


> Is that how JD Powers' surveys work? They ask owners about the reliability?
> I thought they measure actual defect claims... :dunno:


I believe it's both, I have filled out a couple of JD powers surveys after purchasing new cars. Regardless, is 90 days an adequate amount of time to "measure" reliability :dunno:


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

Burrogs said:


> I believe it's both, I have filled out a couple of JD powers surveys after purchasing new cars. Regardless, is 90 days an adequate amount of time to "measure" reliability :dunno:


As long as they use the same questionaire to cover all car brands, it's fair.
That's what they want to measure: initial quality = defects in assembly.
There's no evidence that owners of any particular brand take longer to find them than others brands.


----------



## fuz (Feb 6, 2002)

I could buy a $500 audio system and find the initial quality to be as good as a $5000 system. Doesn't mean it's better. If anything, I expect the lower priced system to be easier to use and set up for more instant gratification, compared to the more expensive unit which may take weeks of burn-in and tweaking. Never mind the difference in how critically discerning the demographics are for the buyers of those two price points.

Initial quality is something very questionable to quantify into a single ranking with so many variables.

Something else I've seen reported in the past is the 2-year quality survey where domestics do fine on, but have an alarming increase in problems after that 2-year period which really questions the value of such a survey. Coincidentally and strangely conveniently, most 3rd party surveys do not extend past that two year mark.

Also, looking at the best is not really important; it's probably more important to see what brands and cars are failing and avoid those.


----------



## cwsqbm (Aug 4, 2004)

Initial quality? I can see Ford being better. My last F150 had zero issues for the first couple years. My e46, on the other hand, had an electrical module crap out when it had under 5k on it, requiring a 4 day visit to the dealership. I won't mention the standard e46 coupe door trim issue, as that's so commom its laughable.


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

fuz said:


> I could buy a $500 audio system and find the initial quality to be as good as a $5000 system. Doesn't mean it's better. If anything, I expect the lower priced system to be easier to use and set up for more instant gratification, compared to the more expensive unit which may take weeks of burn-in and tweaking. Never mind the difference in how critically discerning the demographics are for the buyers of those two price points.
> 
> Initial quality is something very questionable to quantify into a single ranking with so many variables.
> 
> ...


Some good points there.
I agree with most, except the last sentence.
I think there's a large contingency of people that think like me: I tend to be less atracted to cars models that have been arround 3 - 4 years. In today's short design cycle world, those cars are at the end of their life anyways, due to be replaced by a redesign.
So, no, I don't have time to wait for 3 years before buying a car. That's when these surveys are helpfull.

Other than that, it does sound like this initial quality marker is an industry self pat on their own backs.


----------



## Lanc3r (Sep 5, 2004)

Simpler and far older design = better reliability. BMW used to know this.


----------



## TeamM3 (Dec 24, 2002)

The Ford engineers used BMW vehicles as the benchmark during the design & testing phases

A Shelby Mustang will obliterate a BMW M5 on an autox course

BMW in general and BMW NA in particular need to collectively pull their heads from their @sses, they sold out their motorsports tradition here long ago ...

.


----------



## Burrogs (May 2, 2005)

TeamM3 said:


> The Ford engineers used BMW vehicles as the benchmark during the design & testing phases
> 
> A Shelby Mustang will obliterate a BMW M5 on an autox course
> 
> ...


Are people actually cross shopping these cars (Shelby and M5)?

From the reviews I've read with actual performance figures, from a purely paper racing standpoint the new Shelby GT500 would have it's hands full with a 135i around a autox course.


----------



## cruise_bone (Jun 6, 2007)

I am driving a Ford Mustang this week as my rental car in Atlanta. I must say it is better than expected, but it's no BMW.


----------



## TMARCUSK (Oct 21, 2007)

This is still what I think of when people mention Ford.

F o r d:

Found On Road Dead *or* Fixed Or Repaired Daily. They worked hard for that reputation in the 70's, 80's and into the 90's.

I think over the last several years Ford has made a concerted effort to pump Quality out the door rather than Quantity. I think they have come a long way in that regard. The Mustang is without a doubt their best offering. That said, I find it hard to believe that it ranks best in initial quality. Regardless of what JD Power and Associates says.


----------



## cwsqbm (Aug 4, 2004)

.


----------



## cwsqbm (Aug 4, 2004)

TMARCUSK said:


> . That said, I find it hard to believe that it ranks best in initial quality. Regardless of what JD Power and Associates says.


Why let proof get in the way of a good bias.

I love the way e46 drives, but quality wise its only par. Maybe we should have the 335i owners chime in about HPFP.


----------



## Lanc3r (Sep 5, 2004)

cwsqbm said:


> I love the way e46 drives, but quality wise its only par.


And even then you are being generous. Window regulators, sunroofs, window trim, pulleys, cooling system, front control arms, rear sub frame, etc.

We give a lot up in quality for style and perceived performance.


----------

