How to read the reliability stats: internal consistency?

When looking over the results of our Car Reliability Survey, I check for consistency across model years. As the sample sizes grow, they’re consistent more often than not. When one result is out of line with the others, the question is then whether we’re looking at an inaccurate result, or whether that particular model year might actually require more repairs. The latter is most often the case when a design was in its first model year.

For example, number of repair trips per 100 cars per year for the Honda Accord:

2009: 34

2008: 26

2007: 36

2006: 18

2005: 28

2004: 34

2003: 82

With the possible exception of the 2006, the results from 2004 through 2009 fall within a tight range. This is generally what we see with sample sizes of 50+, as we have for all of these.

But what happened with the 2003? Unlike the others, it’s only about average. Well, this was the first model year of the 2003-2007 Accord, and it has consistently had a higher reported problem rate in our survey.

The 2008 was also a first model year car, but has done better. Honda apparently got most of the bugs out before launching this car.

Another example, the Audi A4:

2010: 30

2009: 64

2008: 48

2007: 48

2005.5-
2006: 78

2005: 154

2004: 135

2003: 119

2002: 159

The 2009 was the first model year of the latest A4. The 2010 is faring better, as is often the case with the second model year.

But the most notable difference is between the 2002-2005 and the 2005.5-2008. The reported repair rates for the more recent group are far lower than those for the older group. Well, the A4 was revised halfway through the 2005 model year, hence the 2005.5 designation, and the revised car has required far fewer repairs. Even with its “first model year” disadvantage, the 2005.5-2006 has been doing much better than the 2005 car it replaced.

Our latest set of results:

Car Reliability Survey results