New car quality survey crowns Porsche, Jaguar, Lexus, Hyundai and Toyota
DETROIT — The race to fill vehicles with the latest technology is hurting quality.
Buyers reported more problems in their new cars and trucks this year than last year, according to rankings released on Wednesday by the consulting firm J.D. Power. It was the second straight increase since 2012, when the average number of problems in new cars and trucks hit an all-time low.
Automakers are feeling pressure to add technology and update vehicles quickly so they don't get stale. But car buyers are frustrated with Bluetooth systems that won't connect to their phones, voice recognition systems that don't understand them and navigation systems that are not getting them where they need to go.
“Anytime you make a significant change to a vehicle, you have the opportunity to introduce more problems,” said David Sargent, vice president for global automotive at J.D. Power.
Porsche, Jaguar, Lexus, Hyundai and Toyota were the best-performing brands in this year's survey. The worst performers were Fiat, Jeep, Mitsubishi, Scion and Mazda.
Buyers reported an average of 116 problems per 100 vehicles in the first 90 days of ownership, up 3 percent from last year. J.D. Power surveyed 86,000 owners between February and March.
One major brand, Tesla, is not included because J.D. Power didn't have enough data from owners.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Experts: If health insurers’ safeguard goes broke, consumers could pay
- Scented society is killing cheap perfume industry
- Rules could kick door open for nuclear power
- Camera prevalence approaches sci-fi realm
- Visa limits vex businesses
- Nike, Under Armour invest in watching exercisers’ steps
- ‘Promposals’ can be small as burritos, big as Jumbotrons
- Paper’s prevalence unlikely to diminish
- MedExpress bought by United Health Group
- Pittsburgh union serving TV, film production looking for lots of help