|
This
page has been updated to include the data that became available in 2005.
Percentranks:
A
model's Reliability Percentrank is a ranking of that model's Reliability Score
relative to all other Reliability Scores for the given model year and age range.
The percentrank was computed using the Percentrank function of Microsoft's Excel
2002 and, as the first part of the compound word percentrank suggests, is
a value between 0.00 and 1.00. If a model's Reliability Percentrank is near
0.00, it has a very low Reliability Score, and if a Percentrank is near 1.00, it
has a high Reliability Score. For a more detailed explanation of Reliability
Percentranks and Reliability Scores, click
here to be taken to the Methodology page.
The Reliability Percentranks and Percentrank Averages for 1988 to
1997 are
based on the performance of approximately 6 to 8 year old vehicles; those for
1998, on the performance of approximately 5 to 7 year old vehicles; those
for 1999, on the performance of approximately 4 to 6 year old vehicles;
those for 2000, on the performance of approximately 3 to 5 year old
vehicles; those for 2001, on the performance of approximately 2 to 4 year
old vehicles; those for 2002, on the performance of approximately 2 to 3
year old vehicles.
Benchmarks:
Site manager's conjecture is that if a person cares little about
what he or she drives, he or she still likely would not want to drive anything
worse, or easily noticeably worse, than a typical Big Three vehicle. This is why
Big Three Reliability Percentrank Averages are used to benchmark the bottom. At the other end, site
manager's conjecture is that if a person has an eye for quality, he or she likely
would not want to own a vehicle that is much, if any, less than a typical
Reliable Two (Toyota-Honda) vehicle. This is why Reliable Two Reliability Percentrank
Averages are used to
benchmark the top.
Extrapolations: The extrapolation of Chrysler Reliability Percentrank
averages is provided to give the visitor an idea as to the relative reliability of
the Chrysler line for model years
2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009. The extrapolations are linear regressions of
degree one and are based on vehicular ages that range from 2-3 years to 6-8 years, as noted
above. If the visitor plans to purchase a new Chrysler vehicle and own it
for less than 3 years, the projections may have less applicability.
Note: The Reliability Percentrank averages for the Chrysler
Town & Country is the average over all of the editions of the Town & Country.
Advisories:
1.
This
site gives a Reliability Percentrank of .6 or below a Reliability Grade of F,
per the high standards, and a Reliability Percentrank of .76 or below a
Reliability Grade of F, per the exacting standards.
To view the table giving the Reliability Grades - High Standards for the
Chrysler line, click here.
2.
Nothing
on this web page should be viewed as suggesting that site manager considers a
model-year with a Reliability Percentrank below .9, or a model with a 5-year
or 10-year Reliability Percentrank average below .9, to be acceptable for
purchase or lease.
3.
Some
models appearing in the Reliability Percentranks table for the Chrysler Line may
not have a separate chart above.
To
view the table giving the Reliability Percentranks for the Chrysler line,
click here.
4.
Chrysler is a former division of DaimlerChrysler AG.
For those disposed to trawl trenches or troll at depths, the
following chart of Big Three Reliability Percentrank averages and extrapolations is provided.
For reference, the Reliability Percentrank averages, and an extrapolation
thereof, for Toyota Motor Corporation are included.
The extrapolations are linear regressions of degree one.
The above chart shows (1) a quite steady decline in the Reliability Percentrank
average of Chrysler through 1994, followed by a rather steady, but modest recovery, (2)
a quite steady decline in the Reliability Percentrank average of General Motors
Corporation through 1997, followed by a very modest recovery, and (3) a very
steady rise in the Reliability Percentrank average of Ford Motor Company from
1990 through
1997, followed by a rather steady decline toward the averages of Chrysler and
GM. The more recent decline by Ford suggests that its lofty extrapolation is
highly questionable. (See the
Bottom Line on Auto Reliability.)
Likely a better
guide to the reliability of a typical product for any of the Big Three comes
from an extrapolation of the Reliability Percentrank averages for the Big Three
as a group. The following chart provides this. Again, the extrapolation of the
Reliability Percentrank averages for Toyota Motor Corporation provides
reference.
Disclaimer:
Site manager views the purchase of any Big Three-engineered vehicle as ill-advised.
|
Charts of 2008 Reliability Predictions |
|
(Each chart is linked to a news article providing additional
information.) |
|
Links to Articles on Consumer Reports' 2008 Reliability
Ratings for Model Years 1998 through 2007 |
|
(Each chart is linked to a news article providing additional
information.) |
| Some
Charts and Tables Pertaining to Reliability and Durability |
|
(Each chart is linked to a news article providing additional
information.) |
 
|
Table I: Number and Percentage
of Entries in CR's 2008 List of the Worst
of the Worst, by Manufacturer |
|
Auto Manufacturer |
Number of Entries |
Percent of Entires |
|
General Motors Corporation |
18 |
58.1% |
|
Volkswagen AG |
4 |
12.9% |
|
Chrysler LLC |
3 |
9.7% |
|
Nissan Motor
Company |
2 |
6.5% |
|
Ford Motor Company |
2* |
6.5% |
|
Daimler AG
(Mercedes-Benz) |
1 |
3.2% |
|
Kia Motors
Corporation |
1 |
3.2% |
|
All Others |
0 |
0% |
|
*
One is from Ford's North American group and one is from its Land Rover division.
Ford hopes to dispose of the Land Rover division shortly. |
|
Source: "Worst of the Worst," Consumer Reports,
April 2008, p. 85 |
Additional Charts and Tables appear below the list of
news articles.
Some Chrysler-related news articles:
|
March 2008:
February 2008 U.S. Safety Recalls by Land Rover (1), Volkswagen (1), Chrysler (1), Ford Motor Company (5), Porsche (1), Mitsubishi (1), Nissan (1), Honda (2), and Toyota (1) |
 November 2007: The Best and Worst 2008 Automobiles by CR's Reliability-Verdict History: Toyota Models Dominate Best and Account for All Perfect Reliability-Verdict Histories of 6 or More Years; GM Models Dominate Worst |
|
July 2007: The 2007 Reliability-Durability Updates: For Vehicles 7-to-9 Years Old, Toyota and Honda Account for 11 of 12 Best, GM - 22 of 41 Worst: Will a Typical Toyota at 30 Years of Age Be as Troublesome as a Typical GM at 3 Years of Age? |
|
May 2007: DaimlerChrysler Jettisons Chrysler; Cerberus Does Salvage; Where to from Here? |
|
May 2007: Toyota Reliability Drops Some, But Toyota-GM Gap Remains Near Record |
|
April 2007: The Best Models by CR's 2007 History of Reliability Verdicts: The Reliable Two Shine; Big Three Score Zip |
|
April 2007:
The Reliable Two Dominate Greenest Dozen; Big Three Score Zip |
|
April 2007:
Toyota and Honda Dominate CR's 2007 Top Picks and Alternates; Nissan's Infiniti Division Accounts for CR's Upscale and Luxury Top Picks; Big Three Score Zip |
|
April 2007:
By Yet Another Quality Measure, Toyota and Honda Are Best and GM and DaimlerChrysler - Worst: The UCS 2007 Environmental Report |
|
March 2007:
Chevrolet Upholds a Tradition: GM's Chevrolet Line Worst by CR's 2007 Vehicles-to-Avoid List |
|
March 2007:
GM Expands Lead on CR's Used-Cars-to-Avoid List, a Tad |
|
February 2007:
Does GM Mean Junk of the 7th Level of Abomination? |
|
January 2007:
Big Three Dominate 2006 and Cumulative U.S. Safety Recalls |
|
January 2007:
In the U.S. in 2006, Consumers Quicken Their Pace to Quality: Toyota Sales Soar and Honda Sales Rise as Big Three Sales Plunge |
|
November 2006:
By CR's Predicted Short-Term Reliability for Model Year 2007, Toyota and Honda Dominate Best and GM, Ford and DaimlerChrysler Dominate Worst, per Detroit News Table |
|
November 2006:
NHTSA Safety Investigations: More Seat Fires for Chrysler and More Engine Compartment Fires for Ford, Plus Summary and Others |
|
October 2006:
U.S. Consumer Shift to Quality Outpaces Big Three Price and Production Cuts; Big 3 Inventories Get Big, But How Big? Three for One, Anyone? |
|
September 2006:
Reliability Updates: Best and Worst Cars and Trucks Tables: A Chart Summary |
|
August 2006:
Reliability Updates: For Model Year 2002, Toyota Accounts for 11 of 16 Best, GM - 16 of 53 Worst |
|
August 2006:
In the U.S. in July 2006, Toyota Sales Surge to New Monthly Record and Past Ford's; Legendary Corolla Sales Soar Again; Honda Sales Jump Past Previous July Record; Big Three Sales Remain In or Near Friction-Free Free Fall, But GM's Prospect of Multiple Bankruptcy Filings Dims Again |
|
July 2006:
Toyota and Honda Dominate CR's Ten Best Family Sedans with Above Average Predicted Reliability; Big Three Score Zip |
|
July 2006:
In the U.S. in June 2006, Toyota Sales Surge to Set a New June Record; Legendary Corolla Sales Soar; Honda Sales Squeak Past Previous June Record; Big Three Sales Remain In or Near Friction-Free Free Fall, But GM's Prospect of Multiple Bankruptcy Filings Dims |
|
June 2006:
Chrysler Gets NHTSA Safety Probe; Nissan Issues Stop Sell Order to Dealers |
|
June 2006:
Toyota and Honda Dominate CR's 2006 Higher-Reliability, Higher-Owner-Satisfaction Quick Picks; Big Three Score Zip |
|
May 2006:
Toyota and Honda Account for 75% of CR's Top Picks, Alternatives, and Runners-up; Subaru and Nissan Account for Balance; Big Three Score Zip |
|
May 2006:
U.S. Safety Recalls by General Motors (2), Ford (3), Chrysler (4), Mazda (1), Nissan (3), and Toyota (1) |
|
February 2006:
General Motors and DaimlerChrysler Again Dominate CR's Used-Cars-to-Avoid List |
|
February 2006:
Into the Pits and Down and Under Charges the General; General Motors Sets Record Share of CR's Much-Worse-Than-Average |
|
December 2005:
By CR's Predicted Short-Term Reliability for Model Year 2006, Toyota and Honda Dominate Best, GM and Ford Dominate Worst |
|
October 2005:
In the U.S. in September 2005, Quality Four Sales March On, GM and Ford Sales Plunge |
|
September 2005:
2005 Reliability Updates: Big Three Appear Hopelessly Stuck in Quality Quagmire; Selling Dirt Cheap May Be Best Route to Survival |
|
August 2005:
For Vehicles 6-to-8 Years Old, Toyota Garners 7 of Top 10 Reliability Percentranks, General Motors Gathers 23 of Lowest 36 |
|
July 2005:
Mini-Survey Points to Toyota Dominance in Overall Quality and Customer Satisfaction |
|
June 2005:
DaimlerChrysler Gets Reduction in Punitive Damages for Manufacturing Collapsing Front Seats |
|
June 2005:
NHTSA Ratchets Up Investigation of Chrysler Minivans for Headlight Failure, Opens Investigation on Ford Expedition for Windshield Leak |
|
May 2005:
Toyota-Big Three Quality Gap Huge, and Growing |
|
April 2005:
Chrysler Group Recalls 70,000 Minivans |
|
April 2005:
In the U.S. in March 2005, Toyota and Nissan Sales Advance, Ford and GM Sales Drop |
|
March 2005:
Chrysler Issues Safety Recall of Its 2005 Pacifica Sport Utility Vehicle; Mitsubishi Issues Safety Recall of Its 2004-2005 Endeavor Sport Utility Vehicle |
|
March 2005:
Toyota and Honda Dominate Consumer Reports 2005 Overall Quick Pick List; Big Three Score Zip |
|
March 2005:
Toyota and Honda Dominate Consumer Reports Owner Satisfaction Quick Pick List; Big Three Score Zip |
|
March 2005:
Toyota and Honda Again Dominate Consumer Reports Good Bets List |
|
March 2005:
General Motors and Chrysler Dominate Consumer Reports Used-Cars-To-Avoid List |
|
March 2005:
General Motors Dominates Consumer Reports Much-Worse-Than-Average Reliability List, Again |
|
March 2005:
Toyota and Honda Again Dominate Consumer Reports Good Bets List |
|
March 2005:
Toyota Dominates Consumer Reports Reliability Quick Pick List; Big Three Score Zip |
|
March 2005:
In the U.S. in February 2005, Toyota and Nissan Sales Advance, Ford Sales Drop, GM Sales Plummet |
|
February 2005:
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Commences Investigations of Mercedes-Benz's M-Class SUV and Chrysler's Minivans |
|
December 2004:
Chrysler Recalls a Bundle |
|
October 2004:
The 2004 Auto Reliability Updates: Toyota Continues to Govern; GM Stays Stuck ... Deep, Down and Under, and Below |
|
May 2004:
Toyota's Reliability Continues to Advance: Gap with Big Three Grows |
The visitor may find the following tables and charts useful as well.
|
Cumulative Number of Auto on Info
Auto Manufacturer Awards for Motor
Vehicle Quality |
|
Cumulative Number of First Place Positions in Auto on Info's
Auto
Manufacturer Awards for Motor Vehicle Quality |
|
Auto Manufacturer |
Awards |
Auto Manufacturer |
First Place Positions |
|
Toyota |
42 |
Toyota |
39 |
|
Honda |
34 |
Honda |
5 |
|
Mercedes-Benz |
2 |
Mercedes-Benz |
0 |
|
Nissan |
1 |
Nissan |
0 |
|
BMW |
1 |
BMW |
0 |
|
Volvo |
1 |
Volvo |
0 |
|
General Motors |
0 |
General Motors |
0 |
|
Ford |
0 |
Ford |
0 |
|
Chrysler |
0 |
Chrysler |
0 |
|
This table is current as of 14
August 2007. |
This table is current as of 14
August 2007. |
|
Shares of Consumer Reports' 2005 Quick Picks, by Auto
Manufacturer and Motor Vehicle Line |
|
Manufacturer |
Share of
2005 Reliability Quick Picks |
Share of
2005 Owner Satisfaction Quick Picks |
Share of
2005 Fuel Economy Quick Picks |
Share of
2005 Overall Quick Picks |
|
|
Vehicle Line |
|
Toyota |
.63 |
.47 |
.46 |
.33 |
|
|
Lexus |
.11 |
.16 |
0.00 |
.14 |
|
|
Toyota |
.53 |
.32 |
.46 |
.19 |
|
Honda |
.21 |
.26 |
.38 |
.33 |
|
|
Acura |
.11 |
.11 |
.08 |
.05 |
|
|
Honda |
.11 |
.16 |
.31 |
.29 |
|
Subaru |
.05 |
.11 |
0.00 |
.14 |
|
Nissan |
0.00 |
.05 |
0.00 |
.14 |
|
|
Infiniti |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
.05 |
|
|
Nissan |
0.00 |
.05 |
0.00 |
.10 |
|
Mazda |
.05 |
.05 |
.15 |
.051 |
|
BMW |
0.00 |
.05 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Mitsubishi |
.05 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Ford, Chrysler,
General Motors, and all others |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
1
Mazda's one entry,
the Mazda3 i, may have been pulled from Consumer Reports'
Overall Quick Pick List due to a
"Poor"
side-impact crash test rating by the Insurance Institute for
Highway Safety. The Insurance Institute's rating did cause
Consumer Reports to pull the Mazda3 from its recommended
list. |
|
All shares are rounded to two
significant digits. |
|
CR 2005 Quick Picks are quick pick
models of model year 2005. |
|
Note: A rebadge of a product
engineered by Toyota, but sold by another auto manufacturer, is
omitted from the latter's share. |
|
Source for Consumer Reports' Good
Bets: "Quick Picks," Consumer Reports, April
2005, P. 31 |
|
Shares of Consumer Reports'
2007 Good Bets for Model Years
1997-2006 with Selected 1998-2002 Reliability Percentrank Averages,
by Auto Manufacturer and Motor Vehicle Line |
|
Manufacturer |
Share of CR 2007 Good Bets
with a 1998-2002 Reliability Percentrank Average1 Greater
Than or Equal to .80 |
Share of CR 2007 Good Bets
with a 1998-2002 Reliability Percentrank Average1 Greater
Than or Equal to .85 |
Share of CR 2007 Good Bets
with a 1998-2002 Reliability Percentrank Average1 Greater
Than or Equal to .90 |
Share of CR 2007 Good Bets
with a 1998-2002 Reliability Percentrank Average1 Greater
Than or Equal to .95 |
|
|
Vehicle Line |
|
Toyota |
.54 |
.55 |
.72 |
.83 |
|
|
Lexus |
.16 |
.19 |
.28 |
.50 |
|
|
Toyota |
.38 |
.35 |
.44 |
.33 |
|
Honda |
.27 |
.32 |
.22 |
.17 |
|
|
Acura |
.11 |
.13 |
.06 |
0.00 |
|
|
Honda |
.16 |
.19 |
.17 |
.17 |
|
Subaru |
.03 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Nissan |
.14 |
.10 |
.06 |
0.00 |
|
|
Infiniti |
.08 |
.10 |
.06 |
0.00 |
|
|
Nissan |
.05 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Mazda</ | |
Supporting Auto on Info
