Genesis nailed J.D. Power again for 2020

[Beefer]

Genesis Wins Race for Most Dependable Car Brand

J.D. Power has released its 2020 U.S. Vehicle Dependability Study. Small South Korean luxury brand Genesis tops the list.

247wallst.com

 

[EdP]

Looks like Fiat definitely had an influence on Chrysler. Great partnership.

 

[MrMegadeth]

Pretty sure Subaru has fallen waaaaaaay down. They used to always be near the tippy top. Maybe now that they are a division of Toyota it'll help.

 

[Toddasaurus]

Pretty sure Subaru has fallen waaaaaaay down. They used to always be near the tippy top. Maybe now that they are a division of Toyota it'll help.

I'm not surprised. My wife's WRX is a cheap, shoddy POS. I've replaced the battery twice, alternator once. I've replaced splash guards/cowling under the bumper and in the wheel wells 3 times, and I've replaced the bumper-to-fender clips. Cold sided charge piping has popped off twice. The brakes suck and suspension feels like it's riding on 4 large rubber dildos. Fog light housings have shattered, and replacements are ridiculously expensive. This is a stock, never modified 2014, driven exceptionally gently, only 50k miles on it, and I keep it very well maintained.

 

[Backslack]

While this is good for Genesis PR, JD Power never meant much to be as a test for reliability since they count the number of problems rather than their severity. The fact that this is the only reliability assessment on the internet where German and American brands are ranked higher than Mazda, Hyundai, and Kia really speaks volumes.

Take a look at some more legitimate studie likes on iSeeCars for some actual measures of longevity.

 

[EdP]

While this is good for Genesis PR, JD Power never meant much to be as a test for reliability since they count the number of problems rather than their severity. The fact that this is the only reliability assessment on the internet where German and American brands are ranked higher than Mazda, Hyundai, and Kia really speaks volumes.

Take a look at some more legitimate studie likes on iSeeCars for some actual measures of longevity.

View attachment 26878

But what does that really mean? Do Toyota buyers keep their cars longer because they are reliable or do Genesis/Lexus/Audi buyers just like to buy cars more frequently and have the fiscal ability to do so? In my younger years buying cheap used cars I did get rid of a couple because of reliability but every car bought new was replaced because I just wanted a new one.

Toyota has a long reputation for quality. 15 years ago, 2005, Hyundai was just starting to build better cars. The typical long term buyer was barely looking at the brand back then. Genesis did not exist. I don't thing this chart is totally meaningless but has to be interpreted with all the facts. Genesis is not on it so what does that mean?

 

[Backslack]

The importance of the study is to show which brands can actually LAST 15 years. Notice how not a single American brand can make it on the chart other than Chevy and GMC, at the bottom. And really, there's no excuse for the Germans not making that list when Lexus can. True, luxury owners can switch cars out of boredom rather than lack of reliability, but the same could be said about Lexus owners.

I don't understand why you're so keen on separating Hyundai from Genesis. Even back in 2005, Hyundai was a decent company making decent econoboxes. Let's not forget that had been in the US for over a decade at that point. Whatever the case, this chart is far more indicative of actual longevity than anything from JD Power.

 

[EdP]

The importance of the study is to show which brands can actually LAST 15 years. Notice how not a single American brand can make it on the chart other than Chevy and GMC, at the bottom. And really, there's no excuse for the Germans not making that list when Lexus can. True, luxury owners can switch cars out of boredom rather than lack of reliability, but the same could be said about Lexus owners.

I don't understand why you're so keen on separating Hyundai from Genesis. Even back in 2005, Hyundai was a decent company making decent econoboxes. Let's not forget that had been in the US for over a decade at that point. Whatever the case, this chart is far more indicative of actual longevity than anything from JD Power.

Well since the Genesis brand did not exist it would not be on there. Just as Toyota and Lexus are both listed. They are separate brands.

Chevy made the list but Buick and Caddy did not. Is that because Chevy makes better cars or because the typical Caddy buyer will replace his car more often than the Chevy buyer?

The only thing this truly proves is that Toyota and Subaru owners keep cars longer than Chevy, Buick, Jaguar and Lamborghini. It is not an assurance of a better made car.

 

[Backslack]

Again, no idea why you keep bringing up Genesis. The brand is less than 3 years old so of course it wouldn't be on that chart, which measures vehicles over 15 years old. That's why I'm talking about LONGEVITY- which is what that chart measures.

The list can be interpreted two ways- how long an owner keeps their car, and how long a car lasts. These are not mutually exclusive. Ford and Chrysler are all cars around the same price as Chevy and the Japanese brands, and not considered luxury. So why can't they make that chart? Seems to me like you are making excuses for the brands that can't make this chart by dismissing its legitimacy. If you can explain to me what makes JD Power a better assessment of longevity and reliability than this chart, please do so.

I understand some people here who own Jaguars and BMWs don't want to be told that their preferred brands are inherently less reliable than a Lexus, but that is reality.

 

[EdP]

Again, no idea why you keep bringing up Genesis. The brand is less than 3 years old so of course it wouldn't be on that chart, which measures vehicles over 15 years old. That's why I'm talking about LONGEVITY- which is what that chart measures.

The list can be interpreted two ways- how long an owner keeps their car, and how long a car lasts. These are not mutually exclusive. Ford and Chrysler are all cars around the same price as Chevy and the Japanese brands, and not considered luxury. So why can't they make that chart? Seems to me like you are making excuses for the brands that can't make this chart by dismissing its legitimacy. If you can explain to me what makes JD Power a better assessment of longevity and reliability than this chart, please do so.

I understand some people here who own Jaguars and BMWs don't want to be told that their preferred brands are inherently less reliable than a Lexus, but that is reality.

I bring up Genesis as this is a Genesis forum. Genesis cannot make the list.
No, it does not measure longevity of the brand, but how many owners of a particular brand keep it. For instance, it shows that more Toyota owners keep their cars 15 years than Chevrolet or any brand not on the list. Does that prove than brands not on the list are lesser quality?

If you want to show quality, show how many cars built in a given model year are registered and on the road after 15 years. That would give an indication that they actually last longer, even if it had four owners in that time. IIRC, Subaru did something like that in their ads a few year back.

Making excuses? No, stating facts. There is some correlation on the top brands listed but it is not definitive of anything other than Toyota owners keep their cars for a longer time than the average Ford owner. Reliability is important they last 15 years but that is not the only reason they keep them that long.

I did not say the J D Powers list was better. It only measure problems per unit in a given time. It is saying that a car that had, lets say a radio knob fall off and a window button stick is not as good a quality as the other car that had the transmission fall out.

Both lists are marketing tools. There is a rough correlation but not a definitive that one is better than the other. As a personal instance, I had a car that easily would make the top of JDP since it was perfect from the factory. Two years later it began to deteriorate and was one of the most problematic cars I ever owned, all out of warranty. The only benefit was it got me to visit other dealers and I bought my first Hyundai.

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[dingyibvs]

Again, no idea why you keep bringing up Genesis. The brand is less than 3 years old so of course it wouldn't be on that chart, which measures vehicles over 15 years old. That's why I'm talking about LONGEVITY- which is what that chart measures.

The list can be interpreted two ways- how long an owner keeps their car, and how long a car lasts. These are not mutually exclusive. Ford and Chrysler are all cars around the same price as Chevy and the Japanese brands, and not considered luxury. So why can't they make that chart? Seems to me like you are making excuses for the brands that can't make this chart by dismissing its legitimacy. If you can explain to me what makes JD Power a better assessment of longevity and reliability than this chart, please do so.

I understand some people here who own Jaguars and BMWs don't want to be told that their preferred brands are inherently less reliable than a Lexus, but that is reality.

No it doesn't show longevity. You're INFERRING longevity from how long the first owner keeps the car. There's probably a good correlation and your ultimate conclusion (i.e. Asian brands are more reliable than American brands) is probably correct, but none of us can say that for sure because that chart does not directly measure that.

 

[Backslack]

I bring up Genesis as this is a Genesis forum. Genesis cannot make the list.

So you refuse to acknowledge any reliability study if Genesis is a brand is not mentioned on it, despite vehicles like the Hyundai Genesis existing some 8 years before Genesis became its own brand? Granted, it's not part of the 15+ year longevity chart either, but Genesis will never be counted in any long-term reliability study until it actually becomes old enough to do so. So right now, we're left with Hyundai.

Does that prove than brands not on the list are lesser quality?

Quality =/= longevity. German vehicles have much higher quality materials and fit and finish than a Hyundai Elantra- doesn't mean they'll outlast an Elantra.

If you want to show quality, show how many cars built in a given model year are registered and on the road after 15 years.

Again, that's not what "quality" means. If you're referring to longevity, then yes, that would also be a decent assessment. But if a car is passed around 4 times in 15 years with low miles, that's a sign that none of the owners were very happy with the car to each keep it in such a short span of time.

There is some correlation on the top brands listed but it is not definitive of anything other than Toyota owners keep their cars for a longer time than the average Ford owner.

That a first owner would keep a car 15 years demonstrates their satisfaction with the vehicle. For most, satisfaction would be simply be having their car run without breaking down on them. Like it or not, that list doesn't deviate much from other reliability assessments online like Repair Pal, which measure cost, severity, and frequency of issues:

I did not say the J D Powers list was better. It only measure problems per unit in a given time. It is saying that a car that had, lets say a radio knob fall off and a window button stick is not as good a quality as the other car that had the transmission fall out.

It measures the frequency of problems reported to dealerships, not the severity of the problem itself. A transmission falling out would be counted the same as a window stick button in value. That's why its rankings are inconsistent with most other assessments that place German and American brands where they belong in reliability and longevity- at the bottom.

Both lists are marketing tools.

I'd love to see the last time iSeeCars was ever featured in a car commercial.

No it doesn't show longevity. You're INFERRING longevity from how long the first owner keeps the car.

If any owner keeps their vehicle 15+ years, it's a sign that the vehicle itself can last over 15+ years and not troubling to the extent where the owner feels they're better off without it. If you can find me a better definition of "longevity", go ahead and do so.

 

[EdP]

So you refuse to acknowledge any reliability study if Genesis is a brand is not mentioned on it,

It measures the frequency of problems reported to dealerships, not the severity of the problem itself. A transmission falling out would be counted the same as a window stick button in value. That's why its rankings are inconsistent with most other assessments that place German and American brands where they belong in reliability and longevity- at the bottom.

Genesis is not a Hyundai. I see that Toyota and Lexus scored differently so you cannot equate Genesis to Hyundai. It does not belong on a 15 year chart. Does not qualify.

As you state, frequency of problems. Pretty meaningless is true measure of overall quality. You can have the door panes covered with the finest of wood and leather bit it is not quality if it falls off when you open the door.

 

[Backslack]

Genesis is not a Hyundai. I see that Toyota and Lexus scored differently so you cannot equate Genesis to Hyundai. It does not belong on a 15 year chart. Does not qualify.

As you state, frequency of problems. Pretty meaningless is true measure of overall quality. You can have the door panes covered with the finest of wood and leather bit it is not quality if it falls off when you open the door.

In the case of JD Power, Genesis most certainly IS a Hyundai. Why? Because it's measuring the 2017 Genesis G80, which itself is a rebadged Hyundai Genesis. Morever, Lexus has existed since 1989, of course it's been around long enough to make it onto long-term assessments. My original posting had nothing to do with Genesis- it was merely a way for me to state that JD Power is crap. I find it strange that what offends you is the notion that Genesis and Hyundai are the same, when my original point had nothing to do with Genesis itself. Does the badge bother you that much?

As for frequency of problems, a Cadillac can have a blown transmission but a rattle-free interior, while a Hyundai can have an interior full of rattles and slow infotainment but with a flawless drivetrain. According to JD Power, the Hyundai would be ranked below the Cadillac because the one major problem with the Caddy is less than the two minor issues with the Hyundai. That's why JD Power really doesn't mean much.

 

[Beefer]

^ J.D. Power is well respected and not crap. WTF are you talking about ?!?!

Stop talking out your ass.

iSeeCars proves zilch. It’s a shitty used car website that ran a few studies. Garbage.

Move the f$%k on.

 

[Backslack]

Explaining what JD Power explicitly measures is "talking out my ass" now? Wow, how will I ever be able to come to terms with myself.

Personally, I prefer Consumer Reports, which is considered on par if not better than JD Power, since their feedback from consumers actually takes severity of problems into account. And Consumer Reports doesn't agree with JD Power either.

 

[Beefer]

Jesus f$%k...go away and stop being a troll. You work for them or something?

I started this thread to present the accolade...not read your useless shit.

 

[Backslack]

And how am I trolling? Who am I working for? Are we not allowed to talk about JD Power in a thread about JD Power?

Yes, I get it, it's good for Genesis. But it being good for Genesis doesn't mean that JD Power itself is any good. I don't need JD Power to know that Genesis is a good brand, there's a mountain of other online assessments on each of their vehicles that already came to that conclusion.

How about you learn to grow up before calling anything you don't agree with "shit", little boy.

 

[Toddasaurus]

I have no doubt that Japanese and S. Korean cars in that list last longer than their US counterparts, and are generally better engineered. Even so, when it comes to statistics and studies we must always remember that correlation does not equal causation. That said, the only difinitive thing about that graph is that a specific number of owner's keep their specific brand of cars longer than others. After that, we can only make assumptions. Why do these specific individuals do this? Could be a variety of reasons, maybe their Asian cars are more fun to drive, maybe gas mileage was a factor, maybe poorer individuals bought Asian cars....or maybe there was just a stigma that originated from the US oil crisis that led people to firmly believe that Asian cars are just more efficient in general, and are worth keeping around. Point is, we can't say for sure, because we don't have enough evidence to prove such assumptions or inferences.

That being said, I don't think you're wrong; but we can't really make more definitive statements of facts with that info...

 

[Backslack]

I hate to break it to you, but there isn't a single online assessment that actually measures "reliability", because "reliability" itself is not a numeric quantity. Every "reliability" assessment online assumes correlation to equal causation, even if that isn't what it measures. There's all sorts of biases that exist. Things that bother some people like squeaks and rattles or a slow infotainment may not be considered by others to be a problem worthy of getting fixed or reporting online. And the frequency of vehicles breaking down in the middle of the road is something that will likely happen to a tiny fraction of modern cars, so most people won't have to deal with that. Essentially, all these assessments do is measure risk. Not every car will have all or maybe any of the problems.

What does matter though is CONSISTENCY of results across each of these assessments. JD Power's assessment goes completely against most other online assessments that claim to measure reliability, like I mentioned before with iSeeCars, Repair Pal, Consumer Reports, etc. But this can be explained because what JD Power measures is not the same as what others measure, since they count only the frequency of problems. This is what people need to take into account before using JD Power as a tool for any kind of presumed reliability.