The 2010 JD Power owner loyalty ratings are out. The no-surprises? Honda, Toyota, Lexus, of course. The happy surprise? Ford is now tied with Honda for the loyalty crown, and the Hyundai/Kia axis now sits firmly in the top half.
On the other hand, if you’re a Saab dealer, Jaguar salesman, or if your daddy was unlucky enough to take the Nissan/Infiniti axis instead of the ToyLexus one…
I’d like to hear your theories about why certain manufacturers placed where they did, and I’m sure you will oblige me, but I can’t help but have a few theories of my own:
- I can’t help but think that VW is sitting in the bottom half of the rankings solely due to their utterly loathsome dealer service. By and large, they now make pretty decent vehicles and their owner body tends to have a cultural/emotional attachment to the brand.
- Why is Scion retention so low? The naysayers will point at the crummy new xB, but perhaps it’s just that the Scionsters are returning to the dealership and leaving with Camrys.
- How is it that OMG FAIL LOLZ BAYLEEN FACE WHAILZ Lincoln is doing a slightly better job of customer retention than whiz-bang supercharged Cadillac, even though Cadillac still has the DTS to pull in the AARP repeaters?
- Shouldn’t Lexus, with its gold-toned customer service and its faux-upscale social image, be doing a better job at this than the local Toyota dealer, home of the sullen serviceman and the denied warranty claim?
- Mercury is beating Buick, even though Buick is the revitalized face of General Motors and Mercury has been officially killed stone dead. And they are both beating Chrysler. Hmm.
As for the Saab four-percent figure, I’d like to think that is all people who crashed their ’78 Saab Turbos, sustained significant head injuries, and wandered out of the local shop with a 9-7x Aero, but I could be wrong…
The woman who works with me drives a 2008 Saab 9-3 and is not into cars other than the badge, heated seats, and a moonroof. She got a 9-7x loaner once and was so excited. She loved that thing. The dealer said to her, “Why? It’s not that great”. Poor Saab…
I think I can guess why Acura’s numbers are so low. I know that when the time comes to replace my 2006 TSX there is nothing that they sell I want to replace it with.
For what it’s worth, I really like the new Lincoln front ends.
I think I can guess why Acura’s numbers are so low. I know that when the time comes to replace my 2006 TSX there is nothing that they sell I want to replace it with.
Been there, did that :)
“The dealer said to her, “Why? It’s not that great”.”
You’re right. What could the guy have been thinking? Any real salesman would have lied in order to get the upsale.
As for Scion – wasn’t the intent to transfer those “young” buyers into Toyotas when they were done? That may actually be happening.
SAAB – even their most loyal customers didn’t think they would make it another year (plus, they had very little to sell)
VW – I have one and and have been a fan for years but the DSG is tempramental and the dealer is no help and the first thing a friend asked when I told him about it was “has it been in the shop yet”. I think their current products are a little too interesting for mainstream buyers
The jump that Hyundai/Kia took was a HUGE surprise.
“the DSG is tempramental”
In what way(s)? We’re looking a possibly buying one, but that thing gives me the willies when I think about potential repair costs.
Steve65,
Even if it doesn’t break, look into the maintenance cost of the DSG. My friend with a 2008 GTI DSG told me that VW offered to extend the warranty on the DSG because of all their problems, but getting the extension means spending thousands on transmission services.
“VW – I think their current products are a little TOO INTERESTING for mainstream buyers…”
Don’t worry. The current Jetta and upcoming Passat replacement will fix that.
I owned a 2006 Jetta TDI with the DSG. I put 97,000 miles on this car and never had any problems with the DSG. That said, I would be very hesitant to buy a high mileage DSG because eventually something will go wrong and it wont be cheap to fix.
The one complaint I have about the DSG is the price of scheduled maintenance. The DSG should be serviced every 20,000 miles. The dealer charges around $350 for this. I asked why it cost so much for what is little more than a fluid and filter replacement. The service rep explained that the fluid must be siphoned out of the transmission with a thin tube resembling an I.V. line. This takes some time and runs up the service bill.
VW’s are designed to be difficult and expensive to service. The DSG service is one example. Another is the timing belt on VW’s four cylinder engines. This belt is looped around one of the motor mounts which means the engine must be supported with a lift and the mount unbolted before the belt can be replaced.
The one complaint I have about the DSG is the price of scheduled maintenance. The DSG should be serviced every 20,000 miles. The dealer charges around $350 for this. I asked why it cost so much for what is little more than a fluid and filter replacement. The service rep explained that the fluid must be siphoned out of the transmission with a thin tube resembling an I.V. line. This takes some time and runs up the service bill.
Joe, your dealer is selling you a line of crap. I do fluid changes with that sort of suction tool all the time.
( http://www.amazon.com/Mityvac-7201-Fluid-Evacuator-Plus/dp/B0002SR7TC )
You stick the tube in, pump down the vacuum, and go do something else for 10-15 minutes. If they’re claiming several hours labor for it, you need to find an honest mechanic.
@ Steve65 – I suspected as much. VW service departments are clip joints. The service reps at the dealer I used were always friendly and professional, but their prices are astronomical. I now own a Honda.
Joe is paying considerably less than a San Diego area VW dealer quoted my friend for DSG servicing. Perhaps it was in conjunction with other 40K scheduled maintenance on a 2008 GTI, but the total was well into four figures.
I erred in my first post. The DSG is due for service every 40,000 miles.
On VWs the 40,000 mile service is the first big one where they like to go over just about everything. I’m not sure how the California dealer gets the price up to four figures. I don’t want to know what this dealer charges for a timing belt replacement.
Replacement of the timing belt around the motor mount is no big deal. Done that job a couple of times and at home it involves lifting the engine with a floorjack and loosening the mount mount bolts. My Honda is the same way.
Kia? Really?
Am I behind the curve by thinking of them as low rent crap?
Yes…but only a couple years behind :D
A little, but you still can’t buy a CPO Kia. So that says something to me. Once the Hyundai/Kia juggernaut decides that KIAs are good enough for the same CPO warranty that Hyundai’s get, then I’ll be convinced of the rising quality.
Yes.
Glad that’s settled.
I recommended Kias to two people who bought them during the 2008 and 2009 model years. Neither of them will ever ask for my advice again. The ones they made this morning are supposed to be great though. Buy one and they’ll throw in a unicorn.
No. My 09 Sedona is just as nice a car, but much more reliable than my former 05 Odyssey, and a lot cheaper, too.
The ‘low rent crap’ comment sounds like what people said in the 1970s about Toyotas. It wasn’t true then, but it made people feel better.
CJinSD: “I recommended Kias to two people who bought them during the 2008 and 2009 model years…”
Weren’t you the same guy flogging Hyundai and pimping Honda in the thread earlier this week? I’m having trouble reconciling this assertion with the ones you made earlier.
cackalacka,
I got burned, or rather my friend and my land-lady got burned, and I learned from the experience. Try it out some time. Logic can make a difference in your life too.
Far be it for me to question your sincerity or honesty, CJ; we’ll let your feeble attempt to insult speak for itself.
Maybe Honda hasn’t lost its mojo after all. For all the grief Honda takes on this site, it looks like the 99.99999% of Americans who aren’t part of TTAC’s exclusive, self-celebrated B&B are generally happy with what the Sons of Soichiro are selling these days.
I thought Jeep would be higher.
This isn’t saying that Jeeps are bad vehicles and their owners are unhappy. It’s saying that all those people getting out of their 2006 Libertys and Cherokees for something better suited to $3 gas and a recession aren’t buying Jeeps because Jeep isn’t in that market.
Unless I’m mistaken, it states that only 34% of Jeep owners who bought a car in 2010 bought another Jeep. There could be myriad reasons – including dissatisfaction with their previous Jeep, the recession, whatever. No one is saying Jeeps are bad vehicles. I only mentioned it because my impression of Jeep owners has always been that they were pretty loyal. “It’s a Jeep thing” and all that.
Welp, you can certainly count me in the 38% of former Honda owners who stepped out of a H and into something else.
I was very pleased with the very vigorous reliability my old Accord gave me, lo these many years and hundreds of thousands of miles. To say nothing of the Civic that came before it.
But when she gave up the ghost, and I stepped into a showroom filled with ass-fugly V6s, looking for a 4-banger hatch, test drove a Fit, and went down the street.
Perhaps I would have stayed in the family if they had spent another 15 bucks on soft-plastics and fabric. What didn’t help was the salesman was chomping gum, and I had an opportunity to step into a used Fit and see just how poorly the already piss-poor fit and finish degrades over a year.
It ain’t 1982 anymore, Honda salesmen; remember that when you’re talking to someone who loved what the brand was, and is personally insulted by what the brand has become.
As for “No one is saying Jeeps are bad vehicles,” eh, that may be true, save for the poor suckers that own them (like my girl.)
I am definitely not loyal. When I’m done with the Wrangler, I’ll be old and decrepit and need something where I can at least lift the spare wheel (not a Buick though — anything but that).
Including any multibranded companies gets confusing, since Toyota’s stated goal is to gain lifetime customers through Scion, then Toyota, and eventually into Lexus. Any stats on the first two are going to be skewed, just like Nissan-Infiniti, Honda-Acura, and maybe to a lesser degree VW-Audi and the GM brands.
Further, newer brands like Scion and recently revamped brands like Kia/Hyundai should see their numbers go up for a while unless they’re really screwing something up. You can’t have a solid group of repeat buyers until you’ve had them in a GOOD product for around 5+ years.
My wife drives an ’02 CR-V. Our buying experience was so-so. The dearlership back then would only give us a couple hundred bucks off MSRP, but thru their Internet Sales Dept., the “discount” was doubled! Nullo Moddo needs to explain that to me!
We seriously considered a Jeep Liberty, but after driving one at that time and experiencing the bouncy ride, which we enjoyed, I convinced my wife she didn’t need a Sherman tank to go back-and-forth to work. One other point concerning the particular Jeep dealer salesman: he played the “I gotta pay my mortgage, too” card. We left immediately! Also considered a PT Cruiser – cute as a button, but too small. A Ford Escape? Doggone near bought one, but having a Ranger with a 4 cyl and experiencing absolutely no power when the A/C was turned on, and knowing their V6’s were gas-hogs, no way. A RAV 4? Uh-uh, a real tin can. The CR-V was the best option for our needs, although mileage isn’t good.
All in all, I still feel I over-paid, but wifey won out. We still have it and it is O.K., the dealership? They have a good service dept., but the buying experience left a negative feeling that persists. It remains the most I ever paid/spent on a vehicle. I refer to it as my “$22 grand picnic table”!
Good cars cost money, if Honda knew they had the best vehicle in the class in ’02 they had every right to charge more for it, you’ve got to make money when you can.
As far as your experience goes, there are differing sales techniques and philosophies for guys on the floor vs the internet sales departments. Just going up to whoever approached you when you pull up, you are working with someone whose goal is to sell you the car that day, and to ideally make some money on the transaction – nothing wrong with that, it’s how business works. Working with internet sales departments, the general goal is just to bring in business and get the sale regardless of profit on the deal (obviously they don’t want to take a loss, but they will accept a skinny deal so the dealer can make the money back on the service end). Generally those who are shopping via internet sales are getting quotes from multiple dealers, and you won’t even see the customer in person unless you come out with your best offer first, so, you come out with the big discount and hope that you beat the other guys’ offers or that you were the first one to get back to the customer and they appreciate your prompt response or insight in whatever materials you sent them.
I bought a new CR-V in 1999 and after 5-6 (!) dealers trying different ways to rob me I finally found a guy that wanted to sell me a car without screwing me in the process. 209K miles later and I’m still happy. I want something next time that doesn’t turn 4,000 rpm at 80 mph and that is quieter. Power has been fine, mpg has been 26 mpg all the time. The newest CR-V that I drove seemed to have addressed everything pretty well except that I can’t get it with a five or six speed manual tranny now… Grumble-grumble-grumble…
What the hell happened to Porsche? I haven’t bought a new one in quite a while so I have no direct knowledge of a current dealer experience. Anybody got any ideas?
All their former owners are buying Nissan GT-Rs, yo!
/jk
//good question
Darkhorse: Porsche is a niche car maker and existing customers may be driven to other brands by changes in life circumstances such as the need to haul kids or equipment or maybe they have traded their bachelor pad for a sizable mortgage etc.
Reeves, Florida Avenue, Tampa. They fix things that do not need to be fixed, with a smile and pizza.
It’s always harder for brands that don’t offer a full complement of models to post higher loyalty rates. For example Mini – they really only have one solid model so really isn’t anywhere else to go if you happen to get married or have kids or need to haul stuff.
They also had a full sized BMW load of problems baked into their tiny cars throughout the first generation. My gf at the time was an early adopter. We had pretty much everything break at least once except the Neon engine. She went from loving the car and planning on keeping it forever as a second or third car to giving it away in less than 4 years.
Is there maybe an odd chance that the people who buy Fords or Hondas (or like me, both brands :P) get what they want, or know what they want. Honda owners are often people who started buying japanese cars because they liked reliability, but still wanted an engaging driving experience, and who does not crave total silence and ‘thumping’ (as opposed to rattling) doors, as much as the typical German car buyer. People who enjoy the fact that they can outrun most other average cars without having an abundance of power.
And Ford buyers enjoy the ergonomic (well, everything is in the right place) well thought out interiors, and is content with having a little of everything instead of having a car that shines in only area. Someone that don’t care if the odd bit falls off from time to time as long as it’s still useable, and enjoy the fact that if something goes wrong, the parts are (or at least used to be) cheap. And can enjoy the fact that even if they do get outrun by a Honda, they payed less, and they always carry more stuff to use as an excuse to why they lost this time. (‘I’ll get’cha next time, when I’ve unloaded this dishwasher’…) Or do ‘we’ just not accept all the weird stuff other manufacturers try to sell us?
I think I agree with you. My family, when buying things new, goes for the bottom of the barrel base model. This has usually been Ford and that’s only been 4 (1 ’99 V6 Ranger – killed by a “friend” who decided it was okay to shift a car into neutral at 55mph, engage 4×4, and shift back to drive – again at 55 mph, 1 ’99 Escort, and 2 Foci ’10 and ’11) times that I can remember. When something minor like a button or temperature knob breaks they don’t think anything of it because the guts of the car, engine and transmission, have never given anybody problems. The minor things also don’t seem to break as often as one might expect. Our family doesn’t really expect much from our cars in terms of amenities (standard equipment – A/C – standard on most newer cars anymore and a CD player) are all we really need. However, since we usually buy used it’s a mixed bag and the loyalty numbers probably don’t count used car buyers.
There doesn’t appear to be an absolute correspondance between overall reliability and customer retention. The most surprising is Land Rover. They have the absolute worst reliability (according to Consumer Reports), and yet they have better customer retention than uber-reliable Scion and Infinity? Maybe Land Rover owners sell their cars before the warranty expires?
How dense do you have to be to by a car with a decades long reputation for being the worst built vehicle in the free world? Why would your own experiences change your ability to learn at that point?
Land Rover owners buy NEW Land Rovers before the warranty expires, obviously. And if you have the readies to buy (well, lease, typically) an $80K SUV, you have the readies to get a new one every couple years.
Victor and the boys really need to get the marketing in gear for Saab, every non-Saab enthusiast still thinks Saab is dead and gone. And I will second, Saab had NOTHING to sell to anyone for most of the past 18 months. Thier sales weren’t bad because people weren’t interested in buying thier cars, their sales were bad because they literally had no cars to sell. They factory was shut down. My local dealer went nearly 10 MONTHS between shipments of new cars! They had nothing but used cars to sell for six months, other than they bought a very few new cars from dealers that closed.
krhodes1,
Odd. An LA area Saab dealer I looked at had so much unsalable new stock a few months ago that you could get a new 9-3 for less than $22K. The same was true in Richmond, Virginia. Saab of Orance County doesn’t even list the prices for their cheapest 9-3s on their website, but you can still start negotiating down from $22,601 on one with some options.
http://www.saaboc.com/VehicleDetails/855173333
These cars are 2010 models, so I doubt they just showed up and were immediately discounted ten grand. Although I have seen that happen with the new 9-5…Maybe the CW is right about Saab being as good as dead.
CJ – very dense indeed. I bought *two* Discoveries in my lifetime – a ’96 Disco I (new) and an ’02 Disco II (used). No lie – they were two of the most reliable vehicles I have ever owned (not reliable as in “except for the transmission, HVAC unit and the ABS unit, they were perfect!) and I’ve owned over 20 cars of all stripes. I put 90K miles between the two of them and the only repair ever needed on either one was a water leak from the rear door of the ’96 that required regluing some weatherstripping. Otherwise – oil, filter, brake pads, repeat. I will never claim that LR makes a reliable vehicle – clearly they don’t – but my experience was stellar. Tank-like vehicles that were great fun to drive. But I don’t have the “readies” for a new one anyway.
Land Rover owners buy LR’s for the image they project. After all, when was the last time you saw a Jeep on some TV show or movie filmed in Africa? They are all Land Rovers! Follow the money.
Zack – not necessarily. The newer ones are over the top, but the Discoveries were pretty rugged, functional vehicles, and if you opted for base models (I did – my DII had vinyl seats) they weren’t that expensive compared to other BOF SUVs of the time. Except for abysmal fuel economy, I loved them. Projecting an image wasn’t a factor, for me at least. I actually did take them offroad – a lot.
Zack, I have to agree with you…Landies have the largest gap between “capabilities” and “usage” of any brand out there (speaking only for the US here).
It is THE de facto suburban transport for housewives too good to be seen in most other SUVs. I occasionally see a Disco with aftermarket offroad bits on it, and I tip my hat to those folks. But the Range Rover has just gotten out of hand, from American executives to British footballers to Brazilian gangsters and everyone in between.
The intenet is a funny place. There is always someone ready to get indignant about their perfect, 300K mile on one oil change first year Vega when a lifetime Chevrolet master technician says he remembers them being problematic.
The existence of any sizable number of repeat Land Rover owners proves that you can fool some of the people all of the time.
That they are not at the bottom with Jaguar proves that luxury truck buyers are more gullible than luxury car buyers.
@CJ There is always someone ready to get indignant about their perfect, 300K mile on one oil change first year Vega
I assume this was directed at me. If you read my post carefully, you may note that I said “I will never claim that LR makes a reliable vehicle”. Reading comprehension is your friend. I realize that my experience with my two Discoveries was an aberration, and I am perfectly aware that Land Rovers are, by and large, very trouble-prone. That doesn’t change the fact that, in my personal experience, the Land Rovers I owned were dead reliable. However, you will never hear me be that 300K mile Vega guy – getting two reliable LRs is probably akin to winning Powerball.
Count me in as a Powerball winner as well.
1997 – Disco SD five-speed
1999 – Range Rover 4.0S (my father’s)
2001 – Freelander SE
2003 – Disco 4.6 SE
No real issues, took them all off-roading, shucked ’em all before the odometers hit 50k.
Jack – my ’96 was a 5 speed as well. It was perversely fun to drive. Bought it new at MAG – it was the only manual they had on the lot. I remember the salesman giving me a look like “Really, you want the refrigerator white 5 speed with cloth seats??”
My two Discos saw a lot of off-roading and beach driving in New England. I also sold both before 50K. Wish I had them back though.
Isn’t the real story here Mazda? They basically make more desirable versions of Ford sedans, with the Mazda 3 being far superior to the Focus and the Mazda 6 being less generic than a Fusion. Meanhwhile, they are near the bottom of the list while Ford is at the top. I’m sure Ford truck customers help Fords statistics, but why should Mazda be so terrible? My theory is their new styling direction. A few women I know are not buying Mazda 3s because of the obnoxiously european new look who would have otherwise bought one.
I agree completely. My wife had a 1990 Protege that she loved – she owned it for 16 years and 140,000 miles, and it was stone cold reliable (nothing but maintenance). I wanted to buy her a Mazda 3 as a replacement, but she decided they were just too ugly and we didn’t even test drive one – we got a Jetta instead, which got dumped in only 3 years due to constant small problems.
I’ve since driven a Mazda 3 as a rental car, and it was among the best handling cars I’ve driven – too bad about the face…
Mazda has been a second/third tier brand in the US forever (just like they are in Japan). Low loyalty rates at Mazda are nothing new and cannot be blamed on recent re-stylings.
Here in Central CT, Saab dealer sites currently show very slim pickings in new vehicles and less-than-usual in pre-owned. The new 9-5 looks good, but for many traditional Saab owners, I suspect it’s too big and kinda pricey. Dealers say they sell all they can get, but they can’t get many. Can’t sell what ya don’t have.
Just out of curiosity, I stopped at the Chevy dealer in the next town to see the Cruze. They had one, it was locked, so we moved on. It seemed to have some curb appeal.
In my corner of the USA, Toyota dealers are practically giving away Corollas and Ford dealers are doing the same with Foci. If you just need a car and price is the consideration with durability a close second, I don’t know how anything else could make the short list. Civic fans seem to be waiting for the next generation.
The local “dealers row” in my town now has Toyota, Hyundai, Kia, VW, Subaru, and Mazda. Notice anything peculiar about that lineup? Ford used to be in the mix, but they’re long gone.
That is bizarre about the Saabs. You’d think the dealers in other states who are offering $10K discounts on $32K new Saabs that have had birthdays on their lots would be happy to sell them to dealers in regions where consumers aren’t as informed.
Not really bizarre.
OK, you’ve got three bad things: tons of story about SAAB being closed, then being sold to a DUTCH car maker that nobody has heard of, and the 10 month delay in inventory. That is all out there.
But the problem right now is some dealers over ordered on very generic base 2010 9-3 — and are having a hard time moving them to hard-core Saabinistas. And yes, the 9-5 AERO is too expensive, although I just saw in a big ad in the WSJ on the Turbo4 AWD model, which should be around 39K.
And a lot of saab owners in the last 5 years just came into the brand for a premium Euro feel with a GM cheap lease, and aren’t likely to stick around.
SAAB can survive on diminished volume. What is going to hurt them is losing dealers in the US and model refresh.
snabster,
You can get the new 9-5 Aero for $12K off and a $500 rebate in So Cal. That puts it at $41,620 with “Rear Passenger DVD Entertainment Package, Technology Package, 19″ Aluminum Wheels, And the Audio System with Navigation and a 40GB hard Drive.”
http://www.saaboc.com/VehicleDetails/796076753
I don’t understand why some dealers say they can sell all they can get and some dealers have inventory that they have to give away. You can look around at these dealer’s inventories on line and find that they have everything in the Saab catalog. There are 5 figure discounts on everything except the 9-5 Turbo4 Premium, but those are bound to happen when it is currently priced almost the same as the V6 AWD with everything.
CJinSD – around here (midsouth small town) nobody even knows what a Saab is these days. Had a guy ask me in my late-90s VW still had the engine in the trunk. He knew domestics inside and out though.
@joeaverage – I understand what you’re saying, but southern California isn’t one of those places where foreign cars are scarce on the ground. If our local dealers are considering insurance fraud to rid themselves of unsold new Saabs, it isn’t because nobody here knows what a Saab is. Richmond Virginia is another place where a European car comes with your college alumni sticker, and their dealers were forced to discount the new 9-5s on arrival too.
We’ve got imports but not Saabs, not the Astra when GM was selling that one and not the Fiesta (yet, the local dealer has them). Plenty of Asian cars and BMW/Mercedes/VWs. No Cruze either.
Scion is probably that low because they have a limited selection of vehicles. Unless a buyer goes back to get a direct replacement for their current ride(and who has either the lack of imagination or the conviction to buy the same vehicle twice?).
We shouldn’t expect them to compare well with “Mother Toyota” and their extensive line up.
Same deal with Cadillac. They only have one car that isn’t a dinosaur – the CSV. And if you’ve already had an Escalade, maybe you realize that you overpaid for a Blazer with puffier seats.
I love my 05 xB, but won’t be back to Scion for another vehicle. They’ve totally lost their zip.
If I was in the market today, I’d probably replace the xB with the new 2011 Elantra, or maybe a Leaf if it was actually available. I’ve had my taste of the “box” thing, so I wouldn’t even consider a cube or Soul.
Re: Scion’s poor showing. I doubt that Scion owners are trading in their cars for Camrys. The problem with going after the “youth” market is that that demographic slice is probably going to be less brand-loyal than any other group. They’re going to be trend seekers and are likely to be ambivalent, if not oblivious, to brand identity or reputation. Yesterday’s xB owner is more likely to be today’s Kia Soul or Nissan Cube owner, and possibly tomorrow’s Fiat 500 owner (if Fiat plays its cards right).
Another factor that can nearly as important as the car itself is the dealer experience. I buy Fords pretty much exclusively these days in part because the positive ownership experience I’ve had and in part because of the great experience I’ve had with my local dealer. They treat me fairly and with respect, both on the sales floor and in the service department and that means a lot. When Ford was unable to deliver my pre-ordered Fiesta to me in a timely fashion I wasn’t about to leave the brand because it would have meant having to leave the dealer. So instead I bought a 2011 Mustang from them. Turned out better, actually.
I guess it all depends on the dealer. My 2011 Mustang purchase was pretty unpleasant. But I live in a hick town where all the dealers are shady. The Toyota dealer I took my previous vehicle was like getting a root canal. And I do my own maintenance on my Civic just to avoid the local Honda dealer.
There’s always exceptions, but I generally think that Ford’s greatly-improved product line is too good for the dealers that sell them.
My point exactly — it does depend on the dealer. I had an experience at a different Ford dealer years ago that was bad enough that I walked out in the middle of the deal and never came back. Interestingly, that dealer is now out of business.
If I understand their press release properly, they are simply measuring the percentage of buyers that traded in a same-brand car. With the second hand market so hot, they are not counting the buyers that decide to sell the old car on their own. Also, they are probably not counting buyers moving up (or down) the chain, such as trading in a Toyota to buy a Lexus, as mentioned by others.
I’m not so sure VW’s dealers are their only problem. When my daughter was car shopping last year, VW was her first choice. I started doing research online, and man, there were a lot of cranky VW owners. And they weren’t complaining about the dealers, but the fact that their cars were constantly in the shop.
We were looking at 2000s-2005s, maybe they’ve improved a lot in the last few years.
VW isn’t _that_ low in the rankings. Also, their target demographic seems to be urban go-getters, the exact kind of people who will trade for something more “prestigious” come next promotion. In that vein, they share a similar problem with Scion; who by targeting teenagers and early twenties buyers, are pretty much designed to not have much brand loyalty. A case could even be made for repeat buyers into their thirties “dirtying” the Scion brand, by making it less attractive to those who want to be different from their parents.
If volume Town Car buyer are included in these stats, Lincoln beating Cadillac is pretty much inevitable. And even if not, the Town Car is a pretty distinct car by now; and those who liked it enough to bite once, may not be so easily weaned off.
Lexus is a brand in decline. Not a decline to some horrific level of decrepitness, but a decline nonetheless. When they debuted, they were obviously “better” than the Germans. Now; snore (at best ).
Mercury and Buick isn’t really far enough apart to be all that meaningful. Who introduced new models recently may be more important than anything systemic. Personally, I’l be biased and chalk it up to the Panther effect :) just like with Lincoln vs. Caddy. GM needs to get a big BOF cruiser built soon. They already have the Suburban and Corvette. Build something in between. That glorious pushrod engine of theirs is yearning for it.
As for Saab; after you have stopped selling cars, you can’t really expect many repeat buyers.
As much as I like the Panamera, I have a gut feeling people trading in their 911’s for more back seat room, more often than not are not looking for two “executive style” seats in the rear, but rather a bench for three. Not necessarily for practical reasons, but still… The stroller friendly hatch is epic for the class, though.
Mercury is beating Buick, even though Buick is the revitalized face of General Motors and Mercury has been officially killed stone dead.
What makes you think that people who liked the “old” Buicks would like the new ones? Buick isn’t Buick anymore. It’s Oldsmobile. Just like Lincoln is now Mercury. Both companies killed the wrong brand.
I actually think that Buick’s low retention rate could be a slight positive. It shows that a lot of new Buick buyers are first-timers.
Are there any new Buick buyers replacing the old ones? There isn’t a single Buick on the 32 model list of best sellers. Do they have enough different models to survive without having any that sell in numbers greater than 65 thousand a year?
I think a lot of people are surprised that the ‘quality’ of a car is not more important, but I can understand it perfectly. There is a lot more to a car than the ‘sum of it’s parts. Some cars are desirable, and some cars can do stuff other cars can’t. Land Rover is a great example. Only a Land Rover can do what a Land Rover does, and if you want a Land Rover, you won’t buy a Land Cruiser, at least not until after you’ve broken down to many of them. And Mazda and Infinity are brands that are often bought by people who can hardly tell them apart from Lexi’s and Toyotas. They buy them because they have AC, automatics , great mpg’s and are reliable, not because it’s a dream car or a car they need for a specific use. And Ford live off trucks, which are bought by people who buy trucks, and they usually buy the same brand every time. And there’s even the odd chance that the brand of their truck affects their choice of sedan too.
CJinSD: The new Mazda 3 has an obnoxiously European look? Is it that European cars look obnoxious or that Mazda is obnoxious to mimic European cars? Either way, they’ve got some nerve.
European is too broad; should be limited to Peugeot since Mazda’s guppy smile front fascia was lifted from Peugeot.
I used to analyze many of the JD Powers surveys, searching for ways to improve my model line. Comparing previous years to to current years, looking for confirmation that the issues I reported to the factory and the improvements made were reflected in increased ranking this year.
Conclusion, it never was clearly any quality improvement(s). The whole thing is a moving target driven by monetary incentives, brand loyalty inertia, new model design features, recall publicity, dealer attitude and more. In the past, I have tipped my hat to JD Powers for creating the survey products, selling their more detailed survey results to the manufacturers on the bottom half of the list.
Please do a plot of brand loyalty vs brand market share. It would be more enlightening.
Scion’s loyalty weakness is that they only offer a few vehicles in a very narrow price range.
It’s the embodiment of a niche brand. It would have been nice if Scion had been given some of the sportier and more off the cuff models that Toyota/Lexus has released as of late. Even more so than the bloatiness of their models, the lack of ‘new buzz’ has really hurt that brand.
Possible add-in’s to the Scion brand…
CT200
FJCruiser
A nee-Kei car with a turbo.