Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

R K

Least Reliable Cars - Porsche, Land Rover, Bentley

Recommended Posts

Eighth win in a row for Honda
  • Japanese manufacturers perform well
  • Premium brands finish at bottom of table

Honda is the most reliable used car manufacturer in the UK, according to the annual survey of more than 50,000 car owners conducted by What Car? and Warranty Direct.

It's the eighth year in a row that the Japanese company has secured the top spot in the poll, which includes 38 manufacturers across Warranty Direct policies on vehicles of between three and eight years of age

Top 10 brands

1. Honda

2. Suzuki

3. Hyundai

4. Subaru

5. Toyota

6. Lexus

7. Chevrolet

8. Mitsubishi

9. Ford

10. Mazda

Bottom 10 brands

29. Jaguar

30. Mercedes-Benz

31. Audi

32. Jeep

33. Chrysler

34. SsangYong

35. Alfa

36. Porsche

37. Land Rover

38. Bentley

Seems to suggest Germany's glory days are behind her.

Expensive, unreliable cars trading on a bygone reputation and outmanufactured by Japan and Asia.

Full list and my model

http://www.whatcar.com/car-news/honda-tops-reliability-survey/266383/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a dealer, with a forecourt full of Landcruisers, once said to me 'Land Rovers are the best off-road vehicles in the world. That's where they spend most of their time ... off the road'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take these lists with a large grain of salt - a lot of differences boil down to the type of buyer rather than anything inherent in the car

Hondas & Toyotas mostly appeal to retired people who drive around like little old ladies

Porches & Ferraris mostly appeal to footballers who speed everywhere at double the speed limit

It shouldn't be a surprise which one breaks down more often, but importantly if a footballer bought a honda and drove it like a typical footballer, it would likely suffer the same failure rate as the porsche if not worse.

correlation <> causation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes these can be summarised as more complicated cars have more to go wrong with them. Most Land Rover products have sophisticated air suspension systems. for example, there's a whole load of potential problems that just aren't relevant to other makes. Pull the carpet up on a Range Rover Sport and there's the most ridiculous spaghetti of wiring looms you've ever seen.

There is also an issue with aspirational brands in that people that can't really afford them scrimp and save to buy one for the social status and is often then their only vehicle. They then aren't really au fait with a lot of the common faults on the vehicle and inclined to go to the dealers moaning 'you don't expect to spend £50k on a car and this go wrong etc.'. To a degree the financial stress intensifies the feeling of unreliability.

I don't really understand though how so many people afford to run Range Rover/Sport/Discovery second hand outside of warranty when really you're always a turn of the key away from a bill for thousands and you can only dream of seeing over 25mpg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take these lists with a large grain of salt - a lot of differences boil down to the type of buyer rather than anything inherent in the car

Hondas & Toyotas mostly appeal to retired people who drive around like little old ladies

Porches & Ferraris mostly appeal to footballers who speed everywhere at double the speed limit

It shouldn't be a surprise which one breaks down more often, but importantly if a footballer bought a honda and drove it like a typical footballer, it would likely suffer the same failure rate as the porsche if not worse.

correlation <> causation

So footballers are the only people that mistreat cars? :huh: Some Hondas take a huge amount of boy racer neglect, mistreatment and 'mods'...and aren't the car of choice for our...ethnic...population for no reason - beaten there only by the Corolla, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take these lists with a large grain of salt - a lot of differences boil down to the type of buyer rather than anything inherent in the car

Hondas & Toyotas mostly appeal to retired people who drive around like little old ladies

Porches & Ferraris mostly appeal to footballers who speed everywhere at double the speed limit

It shouldn't be a surprise which one breaks down more often, but importantly if a footballer bought a honda and drove it like a typical footballer, it would likely suffer the same failure rate as the porsche if not worse.

correlation <> causation

I'm a bit surprised at the Porsche position. They are solidly built and designed to be thrashed.

Also, DIY maintenance on Porsches is difficult because manuals are had to come by - owners are expected to use dealerships, and a full dealer (or approved third party) service history affects their secondhand value particularly. So many - most - Porsches have detailed service histories.

That said, I have been told by a Porsche dealer that Boxters tend to blow their engines up at around 70K miles. I'm not sure what the problem is.

Also, with more complex cars, there's more to go wrong I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say that I too am perplexed by this. Not so much that Honda and the other Japanese manufacturers top the charts- well made, generally boring cars bought, in the main, by responsible, slightly boring people :P

I'm a bit surprised at the Porsche position. They are solidly built and designed to be thrashed.

Also, DIY maintenance on Porsches is difficult because manuals are had to come by - owners are expected to use dealerships, and a full dealer (or approved third party) service history affects their secondhand value particularly. So many - most - Porsches have detailed service histories.

That said, I have been told by a Porsche dealer that Boxters tend to blow their engines up at around 70K miles. I'm not sure what the problem is.

The 996 generation 911s, and 986 Boxsters, have a well known problem with the engine, something to do with the half shaft oil seal I think (CBA to google it). It's not that expensive to fix relative to the value of the car- something like £1k-1.5k IIRC- but if it's not sorted the engine will sooner or later completely lunch itself, leading to £5k+ bills. But AFAIK they sorted it with the 997/987 generation, the earliest models of which are getting on for 10 years old now, so it's a bit perplexing.

Really without access to the raw data on how old the cars in question are the findings are a bit meaningless. To speculate on the other two of the bottom three, Land Rover's data may quite possibly still be being skewed by the Mk1 Freelander, which must have been their best selling car for many years- and which, if equipped with a K-Series 1.8, will almost certainly blow its head gasket at some point. The Disco 2 and P38 Rangie weren't famed for the reliability of their engines either- TD5s and Rover V8s :o But the Freelander 2 / Disco 3 / RR Sport got Ford/PSA diesels and the Jag V8 petrol, which post-Nikasil is fine.

As for Bentley, I just don't get it at all- I can only put it down to the cost of repairs and owner neglect, as the Conti GT and Flying Spur are basically rebodied and turbocharged VW Phaetons- and the Phaeton is famously one of the most over-engineered cars ever.

And finally:

3. Hyundai

18. Kia

Wut?! :huh: For a long time now Kias have been nothing more or less than slightly more sportily styled Hyundais- either it's 10+ year old cars skewing the figures, or something is amiss. Either way, anyone in the market for a new car who chooses a Hyundai over a Kia on the basis of this survey would be daft IMO. They should choose on the basis of what they can get a bigger discount on using a broker like drivethedeal or its competitors! ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These figures are from "Warranty Direct"

There are no details of how they select/measure balance this survey or how many cars were involved in the data, so I'm going to call ******** - this is a PR piece with no substance.

Heres the JD Power ratings, which I think follow a reasonable methodology

From best to worst:

NAMEPLATE RANKING

Problems per 100 2010 vehicles, average for all models:

• Lexus 71

• Porsche 94

• Lincoln 112

• Toyota 112

• Mercedes-Benz 115

• Buick 118

• Honda 119

• Acura 120

• Ram 122

• Suzuki 122

• Mazda 124

• Chevrolet 125

INDUSTRY AVERAGE 128

• Ford 127

• Cadillac 128

• Subaru 132

• BMW 133

• GMC 134

• Scion 135

• Nissan 137

• Infiniti 137

• Kia 140

• Hyundai 141

• Audi 147

• Volvo 149

• Mini 150

• Chrysler 153

• Jaguar 164

• Volkswagen 174

• Jeep 178

• Mitsubishi 178

• Dodge 190

• Land Rover 220

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take these lists with a large grain of salt - a lot of differences boil down to the type of buyer rather than anything inherent in the car

Hondas & Toyotas mostly appeal to retired people who drive around like little old ladies

Porches & Ferraris mostly appeal to footballers who speed everywhere at double the speed limit

It shouldn't be a surprise which one breaks down more often, but importantly if a footballer bought a honda and drove it like a typical footballer, it would likely suffer the same failure rate as the porsche if not worse.

correlation <> causation

You're sort of on the right track. But wrong.

If a team of automotive designers are briefed to design a car that will be driven hard and last for,say, 100,000 miles then they can do so, if the budget is big enough, and the cars sell for £60k each.

If the same team of automotive designers are briefed to design a car that will be driven normally, and last for 100,000 miles then they also can do so, if the budget is big enough, even if the cars sell for £15k each. Obviously, they'll have to sell 4 x more in the latter example, all things being equal.

'Normally' and 'hard' (or OAP and footballer in your argot) are subject to automotive industry standards in the field of durability analysis and fatigue analysis. Google those terms if you want an education.

Personally, I'm in awe of the marketing departments of the likes of BMW, Audi, and VW for still engendering the image of them being prestige marques, when they are really mass produced bread n butter motors, less well built than the industry benchmark that is Ford. Their resultant profitability must be huge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I guess "premium" cars have more shit to go wrong, like digital cocktail cabinets, and multi lingual dashboards! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hyun Dai?

And to think some people say the Welsh can't make good cars!

Yeah one of those. I used to call it beast but now referred to as the bus. 7 seat Santa fe, brilliant car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes these can be summarised as more complicated cars have more to go wrong with them. Most Land Rover products have sophisticated air suspension systems. for example, there's a whole load of potential problems that just aren't relevant to other makes. Pull the carpet up on a Range Rover Sport and there's the most ridiculous spaghetti of wiring looms you've ever seen.

There is also an issue with aspirational brands in that people that can't really afford them scrimp and save to buy one for the social status and is often then their only vehicle. They then aren't really au fait with a lot of the common faults on the vehicle and inclined to go to the dealers moaning 'you don't expect to spend £50k on a car and this go wrong etc.'. To a degree the financial stress intensifies the feeling of unreliability.

I don't really understand though how so many people afford to run Range Rover/Sport/Discovery second hand outside of warranty when really you're always a turn of the key away from a bill for thousands and you can only dream of seeing over 25mpg.

I geddit now...reliability expectations are the buyers fault?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These figures are from "Warranty Direct"

There are no details of how they select/measure balance this survey or how many cars were involved in the data, so I'm going to call ******** - this is a PR piece with no substance.

Heres the JD Power ratings, which I think follow a reasonable methodology

From best to worst:

NAMEPLATE RANKING

Problems per 100 2010 vehicles, average for all models:

• Lexus 71

• Porsche 94

• Lincoln 112

• Toyota 112

• Mercedes-Benz 115

• Buick 118

• Honda 119

• Acura 120

• Ram 122

• Suzuki 122

• Mazda 124

• Chevrolet 125

INDUSTRY AVERAGE 128

• Ford 127

• Cadillac 128

• Subaru 132

• BMW 133

• GMC 134

• Scion 135

• Nissan 137

• Infiniti 137

• Kia 140

• Hyundai 141

• Audi 147

• Volvo 149

• Mini 150

• Chrysler 153

• Jaguar 164

• Volkswagen 174

• Jeep 178

• Mitsubishi 178

• Dodge 190

• Land Rover 220

The Warranty Direct survey is not as poor as you suggest imo, the list you've posted is for cars as they hit the age they will be subject to their first MOT, but Warranty Direct's survey includes a lot of much older cars(the company sells aftermarket warranties so this is to be expected). I don't think the two lists are mutually exclusive and I'd be looking at both. You could see why, for example, a Porsche would be very reliable initially, but why it might require expensive repairs further down the line.

The real question is why anyone would touch a VW/Audi these days, they really have gone awry from days of old. Their cars are not reliable from the off as shown via JDpower, and they are not reliable when older either as shown via warranty direct.

Here's a page with the index used for particular models:

http://www.reliabilityindex.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My mini-disc does not work! Do I count this as a "fault"? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit surprised at the Porsche position. They are solidly built and designed to be thrashed.

My guess is it's a problem inherent with all low production volume marques, you just can't do quite the same amount of testing and development when you're selling 30,000 units of all models per year (Porsche 2011) as you can when your selling 1,000,000+.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So which would you buy if you needed to buy a car tomorrow?

A German one probably.

I'm irrational.

(it must be deeply upsetting for the German manufacturers to find themselves less reliable than even the French though!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say that I too am perplexed by this. Not so much that Honda and the other Japanese manufacturers top the charts- well made, generally boring cars bought, in the main, by responsible, slightly boring people :P

The 996 generation 911s, and 986 Boxsters, have a well known problem with the engine, something to do with the half shaft oil seal I think (CBA to google it). It's not that expensive to fix relative to the value of the car- something like £1k-1.5k IIRC- but if it's not sorted the engine will sooner or later completely lunch itself, leading to £5k+ bills. But AFAIK they sorted it with the 997/987 generation, the earliest models of which are getting on for 10 years old now, so it's a bit perplexing.

Really without access to the raw data on how old the cars in question are the findings are a bit meaningless. To speculate on the other two of the bottom three, Land Rover's data may quite possibly still be being skewed by the Mk1 Freelander, which must have been their best selling car for many years- and which, if equipped with a K-Series 1.8, will almost certainly blow its head gasket at some point. The Disco 2 and P38 Rangie weren't famed for the reliability of their engines either- TD5s and Rover V8s :o But the Freelander 2 / Disco 3 / RR Sport got Ford/PSA diesels and the Jag V8 petrol, which post-Nikasil is fine.

As for Bentley, I just don't get it at all- I can only put it down to the cost of repairs and owner neglect, as the Conti GT and Flying Spur are basically rebodied and turbocharged VW Phaetons- and the Phaeton is famously one of the most over-engineered cars ever.

And finally:

3. Hyundai

18. Kia

Wut?! :huh: For a long time now Kias have been nothing more or less than slightly more sportily styled Hyundais- either it's 10+ year old cars skewing the figures, or something is amiss. Either way, anyone in the market for a new car who chooses a Hyundai over a Kia on the basis of this survey would be daft IMO. They should choose on the basis of what they can get a bigger discount on using a broker like drivethedeal or its competitors! ^_^

It says in the link (first post) all cars between 3 and 8 years old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Warranty Direct survey is not as poor as you suggest imo, the list you've posted is for cars as they hit the age they will be subject to their first MOT, but Warranty Direct's survey includes a lot of much older cars(the company sells aftermarket warranties so this is to be expected). I don't think the two lists are mutually exclusive and I'd be looking at both. You could see why, for example, a Porsche would be very reliable initially, but why it might require expensive repairs further down the line.

The real question is why anyone would touch a VW/Audi these days, they really have gone awry from days of old. Their cars are not reliable from the off as shown via JDpower, and they are not reliable when older either as shown via warranty direct.

Here's a page with the index used for particular models:

http://www.reliabilityindex.com/

Agree. Plus they're still expensive to repair, at least at a VW/Audi franchised dealer.

Hence my point about German manufacturing losing its way. Quite appalling results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for Bentley, I just don't get it at all- I can only put it down to the cost of repairs and owner neglect, as the Conti GT and Flying Spur are basically rebodied and turbocharged VW Phaetons- and the Phaeton is famously one of the most over-engineered cars ever.

Unfortunately for the Germans, that doesn't make it reliable either. Lots of potential for big bills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree. Plus they're still expensive to repair, at least at a VW/Audi franchised dealer.

Hence my point about German manufacturing losing its way. Quite appalling results.

My wife has had a VW from new and things started to go expensively wrong from the 2.5year point. A few jobs costing a couple of grand covered by warranty and then a handfulof fixes costing £500-800 a time out of warranty (year 3-4) with 120k on the clock it was handed back to the lease company to be replaced by an... Audi A4 looks like we've jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife has had a VW from new and things started to go expensively wrong from the 2.5year point. A few jobs costing a couple of grand covered by warranty and then a handfulof fixes costing £500-800 a time out of warranty (year 3-4) with 120k on the clock it was handed back to the lease company to be replaced by an... Audi A4 looks like we've jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Do tell what needed done, plus what engine it had(if relevant), much appreciated if you wish to take the time to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 243 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.