Car Chat General discussion about Lexus, other auto manufacturers and automotive news.

reliability - how do you define it, and how important?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-08-18, 03:27 PM
  #16  
05ls430518
Pole Position
iTrader: (1)
 
05ls430518's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: New York
Posts: 2,261
Received 190 Likes on 168 Posts
Default

Reliability would be normal maintenance, and the ability to still run even if neglected and beat the hell out of such as the ls430, or the ford crown vics. An unreliable car would be something that is being fixed at least 1 or more times every 4 months, like a 2000 mitsubishi eclipse(my first car). The squeaks and rattles issue is poor engineering and build quality, which is a completely seperate issue.
05ls430518 is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 03:30 PM
  #17  
05ls430518
Pole Position
iTrader: (1)
 
05ls430518's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: New York
Posts: 2,261
Received 190 Likes on 168 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hoovey2411
Funny thing is most of the time its just user error. They write how horrible these systems are, and while they're not perfect, a few hours doesn't tell the whole story always. Sometimes there are adjustments in the settings menu, sometimes its just how the person is using the controller etc..
Agreed its the exact same thing when people test drive performance cars with out the electric nannies and say that the car has terrible handling, when in reality its the nut holding the steering wheel lol.
05ls430518 is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 04:00 PM
  #18  
Htony
Lexus Champion
 
Htony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: AB
Posts: 2,047
Likes: 0
Received 134 Likes on 124 Posts
Default

Also some drivers are lazy. At first sign of something going they should react not waiting until problem grows big.
Penny wise, pound foolish!
Htony is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 04:01 PM
  #19  
UDel
Lexus Fanatic
 
UDel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: ------
Posts: 12,274
Received 296 Likes on 223 Posts
Default

Reliability is extremely important. I can't deal with unreliable cars and won't buy them even if I really like them.

I define it as a car that needs almost no repairs or things that go bad before 120K miles, just regular maintenance.

A car that can go at least 200K miles with no major issues and still holds up.

I don't mind some squeaks and rattles, every car has them and they are generally not too hard to fix or stop.
UDel is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 04:24 PM
  #20  
bitkahuna
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Present
Posts: 74,976
Received 2,459 Likes on 1,613 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Kense
There are too many auto reviews and blogs that call cars unreliable because of their infotainment systems. Which I think is complete BS.
i don't think reviews would consider infotainment issues as a 'reliability issue'. now consumer reports and their bogus 'reliability surveys' will take any and all negativity as unreliability, which as you say, can include Luddite confusion about infotainment systems, which is absolutely NOT a reliability issue.

Originally Posted by 05ls430518
Reliability would be normal maintenance, and the ability to still run even if neglected and beat the hell out of such as the ls430, or the ford crown vics. An unreliable car would be something that is being fixed at least 1 or more times every 4 months, like a 2000 mitsubishi eclipse(my first car). The squeaks and rattles issue is poor engineering and build quality, which is a completely seperate issue.
i probably agree with this. by these definitions i'd say ANY vehicle built in the past 10-15 years should be EXTREMELY reliable. i don't think there's much variance across brands or models, at all.

Originally Posted by UDel
I define it as a car that needs almost no repairs or things that go bad before 120K miles, just regular maintenance.
well i've never owned a car to 120k mi. i don't believe, but close... a couple over near or a little over 100k. the only car i would have considered becoming unreliable was my first car, a 1983 honda prelude, which with its carburetor SUCKED in PA cold winters and would often simply not start. i got rid of it after a couple of winters. but the world has clearly come a loooong way since then. i've never had what i would consider a reliability issue with any vehicle since.

A car that can go at least 200K miles with no major issues and still holds up.
interesting... do you keep cars at least 200k mi? whenever i see cars with that kind of mileage i pretty much always turn my nose up because they look so crappy (faded paint, cracked upholstery and dash, scratches, dings, etc.). even if 'reliable' i don't wanna drive one, but clearly tons of people do. there's LOADS of really old ford trucks on the road for example.
bitkahuna is online now  
Old 02-08-18, 05:02 PM
  #21  
coolsaber
Lead Lap
 
coolsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: In your head
Posts: 4,086
Received 275 Likes on 246 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Kense
There are too many auto reviews and blogs that call cars unreliable because of their infotainment systems. Which I think is complete BS. I care more about the mechanics of the car than whether or not my back up lines show up late or not.
I disagree with that statement, IMO infotainment is technically a mechanically piece of the car. You need to change radio stations...infotainment...use the navigation function without pulling up your phone...change the seat warmers or heat.....

Paying for a car that has a poorly built set of fog-lights that impair nighttime visibility is as bad as paying for an infotainment that is soo hard to operate that your focus is distracted while driving.....
coolsaber is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 05:05 PM
  #22  
coolsaber
Lead Lap
 
coolsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: In your head
Posts: 4,086
Received 275 Likes on 246 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hoovey2411
Funny thing is most of the time its just user error. They write how horrible these systems are, and while they're not perfect, a few hours doesn't tell the whole story always. Sometimes there are adjustments in the settings menu, sometimes its just how the person is using the controller etc..
if this was the standard across the board, then I get it, writing how poor a system is one thing, but when a lot of other systems do things well...do you really want to blame consumer error? Thats similar to when Steve Jobs said it was consumer error in regards to the antenna gate issue that plagued iPhone 4 owners...Almost everyone Non-Apple had no issues with antennas....?
coolsaber is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 05:14 PM
  #23  
MattyG
Lexus Champion
 
MattyG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: RightHere
Posts: 2,300
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

The term "reliability" is very subjective because of course, we know there is an intangible called brand loyalty. So if you ask a BMW or Benz owner if their vehicle is reliable - they'll tell you, absolutely reliable or it's just how things work with German cars, Italian cars or American cars.

A better measure would problably be how long do owners of various brands hang on to their vehicles and what do they spend until they find it's too much. There are some people who will complain relentlessly because their Toyota was the one with an oil sludge issue which might have even been due to a number of factors. There are German luxury car owners who lucked out and will tell you their car is fantastic.

A reliability index will usually be: do you spend more than the average on yearly fixes, repairs and maintenance vs other brands or do you spend less. That's usually a good indicator. Even the most reliable used Camry is still going to run about $600 - $900 a year to keep in top shape when it's older. But a German car owner will tell you that a couple of thousand a year to keep a 5 series is worth it because it's a great driving experience and it goes with the territory.
MattyG is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 05:17 PM
  #24  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,306
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hoovey2411
Funny thing is most of the time its just user error. They write how horrible these systems are, and while they're not perfect, a few hours doesn't tell the whole story always. Sometimes there are adjustments in the settings menu, sometimes its just how the person is using the controller etc..
That's generally true, but there are indeed occasional cases of design or quality problems with the software......can't blame everything on people having butterfingers. According to Consumer Reports (and I don't know just exactly how much truth there is to it), much of it stems from the automakers sub-contracting with makers of what are essentially household computer systems and software, designed to be used mostly indoors, stationary, at room temperature, and not necessarily up to the rigors of typical automotive use.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 05:24 PM
  #25  
Hoovey689
Moderator
iTrader: (16)
 
Hoovey689's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: California
Posts: 42,305
Received 125 Likes on 83 Posts
Default

not to derail the topic of reliability, just want to respond since you asked a question.

Originally Posted by coolsaber
if this was the standard across the board, then I get it, writing how poor a system is one thing, but when a lot of other systems do things well...do you really want to blame consumer error? Thats similar to when Steve Jobs said it was consumer error in regards to the antenna gate issue that plagued iPhone 4 owners...Almost everyone Non-Apple had no issues with antennas....?
I didn't single out any specific system. Just saying when I see reviews lambasting a cars infotainment, part of the problem is sometimes the review operator doesn't understand certain functions, inputs, or know how to adjust the settings that could improve the experience etc.. I won't blame the consumer 100%, but I don't see why the company should shoulder ALL the blame if the system works, just takes some getting use to, which brings me to my point that an hour test drive doesn't always tell the whole story.
Hoovey689 is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 06:33 PM
  #26  
coolsaber
Lead Lap
 
coolsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: In your head
Posts: 4,086
Received 275 Likes on 246 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hoovey2411
not to derail the topic of reliability, just want to respond since you asked a question.



I didn't single out any specific system. Just saying when I see reviews lambasting a cars infotainment, part of the problem is sometimes the review operator doesn't understand certain functions, inputs, or know how to adjust the settings that could improve the experience etc.. I won't blame the consumer 100%, but I don't see why the company should shoulder ALL the blame if the system works, just takes some getting use to, which brings me to my point that an hour test drive doesn't always tell the whole story.
Mind you maybe my views are different on tech interfaces, but a review operator needing to know certain things seems like a generalization and at this point we are almost a decade into widespread smartphone usage,

Common complaints that I see and read (list from cars.com)
  • Touch-screens that are slow to respond or have indistinct touch points (not really something a consumer can fix with RTFM)
  • Screens that freeze or go blank (not really something a consumer can fix with RTFM)
  • Voice commands that fall on deaf ears (not really something a consumer can fix with RTFM)
  • Poor sound quality using Bluetooth streaming (not really something a consumer can fix with RTFM)
  • Unintuitive controls that flummox even tech-savvy users (not really something a consumer can fix with RTFM)
coolsaber is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 06:36 PM
  #27  
coolsaber
Lead Lap
 
coolsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: In your head
Posts: 4,086
Received 275 Likes on 246 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
That's generally true, but there are indeed occasional cases of design or quality problems with the software......can't blame everything on people having butterfingers. According to Consumer Reports (and I don't know just exactly how much truth there is to it), much of it stems from the automakers sub-contracting with makers of what are essentially household computer systems and software, designed to be used mostly indoors, stationary, at room temperature, and not necessarily up to the rigors of typical automotive use.
The best way forward is to standardize infotainment system interfaces across the board, but how can the Rolls Royce Navigation System be operated and graphically the same as a BMW 1 series unit...

The constructs of the auto industry will always have a setup which is extremely good, user friendly, or a system which is designed to be basically deemed to complex.
coolsaber is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 06:44 PM
  #28  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 31,218
Received 64 Likes on 55 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by coolsaber
The best way forward is to standardize infotainment system interfaces across the board, but how can the Rolls Royce Navigation System be operated and graphically the same as a BMW 1 series unit...

The constructs of the auto industry will always have a setup which is extremely good, user friendly, or a system which is designed to be basically deemed to complex.
what do you mean standardize? Like make them all the same for all manufacturers?
Toys4RJill is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 06:57 PM
  #29  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,306
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by coolsaber
The best way forward is to standardize infotainment system interfaces across the board, but how can the Rolls Royce Navigation System be operated and graphically the same as a BMW 1 series unit...
It probably doesn't need to be the same. BMW 1-series, unlike RRs, aren't (usually) driven by professional chauffeurs.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 02-08-18, 07:42 PM
  #30  
coolsaber
Lead Lap
 
coolsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: In your head
Posts: 4,086
Received 275 Likes on 246 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Johnhav430
There used to be an expression, "five 9's." That's reliability.

Having purchased a 1998 Nissan Maxima brand new in March 1998, I consider it reliable. Since March of 1998, there were only three times that it didn't start, when the original starter failed. Then, when the replacements failed, twice. I would expect that many Lexus models would do the same. Perhaps there is someone with a 1990, purchased in Sept. 1989, who can say their car has never failed since new. Would not be a surprise.

edit: agreed, being reliable means never being placed on a flatbed

p.s. amazing on Doug's review of a brand new Range Rover Velar, the screens froze on him, and turning off and on 3X did not fix it. I guess even though that's not a flatbed, that would imply unreliable
Not to fear monger but to add to what I was saying. Take for instance here where everything climate control, has basically been digitized, you incur this issue...what then?

coolsaber is offline  


Quick Reply: reliability - how do you define it, and how important?



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:19 AM.