Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 23:45:52 GMT From: Just Bob <uctraingnopsamanet.com> Subject: Re: Was 1996 A Bad Year For Saabs?
On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 11:02:56 GMT, "Mack Worrell" <cro_delete_wellmnopsamatlantic.net> wrote: >"Statistically speaking they are totally invalid"? Come on, CR's >reliability assessments are based on 500,000 responses to their >questionnaires. That's a pretty good population from which to conduct a >reliability assessment. Let me ask: You did study statistics before posting that, right ? I just have one thing to say concerning that: "Dewey wins election by a landslide" >You note that CR does not provide access to the raw data. Is that >unexpected? Its proprietary data! Does J.D. Edward provide access to their >raw data? The problem is that the categories are too wide. "Engine problems" can be anything from a minor problem like leaking valve cover gaskets to a serious problem like Mitsubishi "crank walk", where the main bearings give out due to lack of lubrication. Or, look at the Saab V6 - which gets low marks because owners ignore the factory spec'ed belt change intervals and hose the motors. Other categories cut the same broad swath and are equally useless. Without the backup data as to what specific problems they have, the generalization is not useful. Additionally, the 'surveys' are not objective and do nothing to account for the fact that a BMW owner may have higher expectations than a Chevy owner, and report accordingly. Bob
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
