Threxx

This report speaks highly of, among other cars, the Lincoln Zephyr and the Buick Lacrosse. Two cars that don't excite me greatly but are at least comfortable, plus in the Lincoln's case, nicely featured and made of nice materials, and in the Lacrosse's case, very cheap to maintain/repair... but most interestingly to me, they're both excellent used car values.

So while the masses of people trip over themselves to buy 3 year old ES330s for 25 grand with average reliability and a high cost of repair, I'm looking over at these two which I could snag up for more like 12-16 grand, apparently get better reliability out of, and especially in the case of the Lacrosse, keep running for cheaper.

mmarshall

The Zephyr, now, is known as the MKZ....Lincoln changed the name a year or two ago. It has an AWD version if you want additional sure-footedness in bad weather. I agree that the Zephyr/MKZ interior quite nice. It cannot match the Lacrosse in ride comfort, however (and the Lacrosse also has a nice, though different, interior than the MKZ.....somewhat more conventional-looking).
The LaCrosse's nice ride, however, is accompanied by rather poor handling, slow steering response, and marked body roll..........noticeably more than in the firmer-sprung and more-aggressively-tired Lincoln.

The Lacrosse reliability rating (Consumer Reports) has varied from average to better-than-average. The MKZ has been better-than-average in FWD form, average in AWD form.

Gekko

i believe my own experience. if a third party report validates it, so be it. if it contradicts it, i will be rightfully skeptical.

mmarshall

Well, that is why Consumer reports is so good with the reliability charts. They take hundreds of thousands (now over a million) people with experience "just like yours", put it all together, and publish the result. So, instead of seeing how just ONE Camry or Accord holds up, we know how large numbers of them, on average, do.

So, for example (and this is just a hypothetical example, it doesn't necessarily refer to you personally), if you have one of the rare Honda or Acura problematic vehicles built after about 2003 or so (yes, it happens), and you go around panning Honda and Acura products, the thousands of other people who have reliabile Hondas and Acuras are naturally going to be a little skeptical about what YOU say. It doesn't mean that you are wrong about YOUR individual car, but would certainly be wrong about THEIRS.

THAT's the job of Consumer Reports (and J.D. Power, too)....to take YOUR comments, plus THEIR comments, analyze them, and publish the result. While Power does an OK job, in general, IMO, CR does it much better.

Threxx

In 30,000 miles my 2006 Audi A4 had one problem... a laughable one at that... a burnt out map light.

In 38,000 miles my friend's 2005 Acura TL had more problems than I can count on both hands and many of them were pretty significant.

I'd be close minded and borderline idiotic if I believed that this was evidence enough to be seriously skeptical of JD Power's results after surveying many thousands of owners of these same cars.

You have to understand how statistically insignificant 1 or even 10 personal results are on a survey of this magnitude.

mmarshall

I'm not saying this is the case with you, Threxx (and it probably isn't, as you seem to know cars pretty well), but one big problem with getting accurate samples is that lot of people have car problems they are not aware of. They simply don't know how to recognize a problem when they HAVE one. I don't know how many times I've asked "How is your car doing", and they say "Fine, no problems", and if they ask me to ride somewhere with them (or ask me to check the car out myself), I find all kinds of things like steering-wheel shimmy, brake-pedal pulsation, pulling left or right on a level surface, tire pressures way down or tires unevenly worn and and cupped, abnormal drivetrain noises like U-joints and bearings, steering wheels off-center, turn signal-flashers not working.....all kinds of things. Then I point them out and they say, "Gee, I din't notice that until you mentioned it".

And it can work the other way, too....some people get worked up over nothing. One young girl, in my neighborhood, recently came up to me, terrified, said that her small SUV was making a HORRIBLE grinding and brake noise.....like the whole front end was going to fall apart. (It had been raining for several days, and she had not driven it much). Immediately I suspected something very simple.......rust on the brake rotors from prolonged moisture contact (I get it myself when I wash my own car). I tried the vehicle myself, and sure enough, the brake-pedal noise grinding was awful. But all it took, (as it does on most vehicles) was about a half-mile and a couple more stabs at the pedal to rub off the rust layer, and the brakes were as good as new. So, she now knows what it is, and what to do, if it happens again. Of course, I warned her, though, that if the brakes get down to the "screecher" wear-indicators that mean low-brake-pad wear, that was a different situation altogether, and, of course, that means a brake job ASAP with new pads.