[Noir]

Originally posted by Chicane

As for your definition of quality, it leaves a lot open to interpretation. A distinguishing characterstic? How about a decently built vehicle at a fair price? That would seem to fit your definition(s).

I am rating a vehicle based on quality and reliability, not based on price. Let's not add too much to the soup.

As for JD power associates.. they count 'problems'... where do they get this information? Do they personally drive the vehicles, or do they take data from the dealerships? Perhaps the reason Audi is considered 'sub par' is not beause their cars are sub-par, but their owners are extremely picky and finicky. Who knows?

JD Power gets data from many sources. Also look at what they are saying about European vehicles vs. Domestic for the country of United States.

All I know is that I've owned a chrysler product, and it gave me a couple problems. The headgasket blew due to a faulty design (which was fixed in 1998, but CR still reported them as unreliable for an additional 5 years for some unknown reason), and the door popper made some noise.

Well there you go. IT GAVE YOU A COUPLE PROBLEMS. Think if it gave majority of the buyers a couple problems, I guess that would warrant a poor quality product. Unfortunately, the problems listed by JDPA probably is each 'different' problem which would mean there is more than a 'few'.

What's weird is that people who drive European cars, I see quite a few of them taking their cars into the shops, but they never mention it's a 'lack' of quality or dependability, it's just because the Euro vehicle is so 'precise' that eveyrthing hast to be perfect.... however, if it was the same problem on a domestic, owners would be more likely to call it a 'fault'.

I have seen many reports where European cars with problems and concerns for long term reliability. Maybe you should read more. If you read that last JDPA report it states that Domestics are looking better than Europeans in the long run.

Do you consider the SVX a 'quality' vehicle? My neon had fewer problems than most SVXs, so maybe the neon is of higher quality, purely because the SVX has more 'problems'? Not so. The SVX is of EXTREMELY high quality. Something can be high quality, and have problems. Something can be of low quality (neon) and not have problems.

I think the SVX is a good quality car. I have not had any problems with either of the two I've owned. I have the car inspected whenever I take it into my mechanic and if anything looks like it needs to be changed before problems arise, I change it. It's called preventive maintenance. Is it cost effective? No, but are we talking about price here? Nope.

What you mentioned above is a matter of your own opinion. I stated before that quality of a vehicle is depends on the number of problems and failures experienced from engineering or production. A neon could be a high quality product if that particular car has few problems. Do not confuse luxury with quality. Please explain how 'high quality can have many problems'.

As for my 'false statements'... instead I'd like YOU to provide some data, because I don't see how they're false.. The 2.4 liter engine in minivans... is a reliable engine. So's the V6. I've never heard otherwise. Transmissions don't last.... but the engines seem fine. It's quite common to find older minivans with over 200k, which I deem pretty good. So prove that Chrysler engines suck.

Well Robby, I did a search and I did find common issues with the Chrysler's engines. Chronic issues as many put it. I recommend you do the same. I also checked JDPA's site to see if they rate individual models. They do. Chrysler's Voyager (I just picked one) did not look very good. Remember that the engine is only one part of the equation. There are mechanical issues. One source cited for the Voyager (i used this as one model from your loved Chrysler Corp):

Transmission problems
Motor mounts problems
Distributor issues
Stalling problems
Lose valve guides
Breaks drive belts
Wear out tensioners
Failing inner CV joints

Oh, just because a car can tick up to 200k miles does not mean there was no maintenance done to prolong the life of the engine, nor does it prove that the engine was not replaced, nor does it mean that major mechanical work was done to the engine multiple times.

Prove me wrong Robby.

Please. Also, I stated that it's pretty ignorant to say a whole 'marque' sucks when a few of their models have problems. I equated it to saying "subaru sucks becuase the SVX eats wheel bearings, warps rotors, and destroys 4heats!", which was obviously tongue in cheek, since I love my SVX. How is that false? I don't see it. Someone makes a blanket statement, and I point out that making a statement like that seems a bit hypocritical when they're driving and in love with a car that has it's share of 'issues'. So please, prove that statement false, I'd like to see that.

I understand your point. I'm just stating that your comparison between Chrysler and Subaru is incorrect. You are right, the SVX has some issues. Unfortunately, Chryslers has more issues than the SVX. I'm not saying that Chrysler sucks. I'm saying that Chrysler has lower quality products. You could compare Chrysler with another Marque that has similiar number of problems but you can not compare two that has a difference of 50%. There is a big difference between $20k and $30k right?

We can keep going if you'd like.

I thought we were having a civil discussion. Dig?