[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
[Profile/Gallery]
, Fri, 17 Sep 2004 12:08:39
Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup
Just checked the CR ratings for the Saab 9-5. (And while the CR heading indicates the chart covers both the 9000 and the 9-5, the ratings appear to cover only the '99 9-5 and later models.) In fact, the ratings don't indicate that the 99-02 9-5 "sucks." It suggests that the car is "average" in overall reliability, while the 03 is "above average" and therefore check-rated.
Whatever bias CR might have about the Saab (or any other marque) in terms of the car's driveability/features/etc don't figure into the reliability ratings. The latter are based exclusively on the responses of CR subscribers to the annual survey. Each model is compared to other marques of the same year to derive the ratings.
Examining the individual ratings in 14 areas (which don't by the way include such subjective areas as "driveability"), indicates that the "electrical" system drove down the reliability ratings of the 9-5 from 1999 to 2001, with "average" and "above average" scores for 2002 and 2003.
This is both consistent with the comments on this board about the DIC and not unusual for models from all marques, where "electrical" and "brakes" tend to be problematic for most marques, and where Japanese brands stand out (positively.)
One might well want to take CR's reviews with a grain of salt. (I think the same applies to Car and Driver/Road and Track/etc.) They're subjective responses that reflect the biases of the editors. In terms of reliability, however, the ratings are a reasonable guide (much more reasonable than counting posts on this forum, for example) to the problems experienced by other owners of a certain model.
In the case of the Saab 9-5, for example, the data indicate that more than 15% of the respondents of the 99 and 00 model experienced "electrical" problems, much worse than average. In 2001, the percentage dropped to between 9.3% and 14.8%; in 2002, the percentage was between 5% and 9.3%; and in 2003, less than 2%. Whether this represents greater reliability in later models or failures at higher mileage cannot be answered from the data. It does appear, however, that the greater reliability of the post-2002 DIC suggested on this board is reflected in the CR data.
All in all, imho, CR provides useful information not generally available elsewhere. It's not a Bible, especially in terms of subjective analysis of a car's features/driveability/etc. On the other hand, its reliability ratings generally conform to the experiences of many owners and, again imho, are a much better guide to expected problems than the experiences of my friends and neighbors. (Just as national polls are a much better guide political opinions than the views of my friends and neighbors.)
posted by 24.17.20...
, Fri, 17 Sep 2004 12:08:39, Sat, 18 Sep 2004 14:22:41
, Sat, 18 Sep 2004 12:03:36, Fri, 17 Sep 2004 12:37:22, Fri, 17 Sep 2004 12:24:21
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
