So, J.D. Powers studied new vehicle reliability and found that, apparently surprisingly, makes such as Mercury, Buick, Lincoln, Jaguar and Cadillac made it onto the list alongside such predictable paragons of quality as Lexus, Toyota, Honda (but oddly, not Accura) and BMW.
But these numbers are based on three years of ownership.
Wouldn't the results be more interesting and perhaps even a reflect the real world more accurately if they were based on miles driven instead?
I don't have any hard data, but I'm willing to bet that Buicks and Mercurys are driven a heck of a lot less than Hondas. The buyers of Jaguar, Mercury, Buick, Lincoln, Cadillac, Lexus, Infiniti and possibly even Honda and Toyota vehicles may skew a little older than, say Scions or Nissans.
Could it be that these are perhaps the lesser-driven vehicles as opposed to most reliable?
Just asking. If anybody has any real figures about mileage driven as opposed to years owned, I'm all ears.
Read Article