New Titan: Nissan wants to sell more pickups

2016 Nissan Titan XD

Nissan was the first foreign brand to offer a truly full-size pickup with the 2004 Titan. But the Titan has made even less of a dent in Detroit’s share of this highly profitable segment than Toyota has with the Tundra. But far from giving up on the segment, Nissan is doubling down with a fully redesigned 2016 Titan.

The new truck will be offered in three rather than two cab sizes and three rather than two bed lengths. Step up to the new Titan XD, and you’ll even be able to pair a crew cab with a usefully long (6’6″) bed. This combination is enabled by a 151.6″ wheelbase, about twenty more inches than the longest current Titan. Beyond this long wheelbase, the new XD is simply a heavier duty truck–but it’s not an “HD” pickup. Instead, Nissan is betting that a meaningful number of pickup buyers need more capability than light duty pickups typically offer, but not as much as HD pickups now offer–the latter being overkill for most uses. The new XD will be able to carry up to a ton and tow up to 12,000 lbs. These figures don’t place the Titan XD as far from current light duty pickups as Nissan suggests. The towing figure is nearly as high as you’ll see with a light duty pickup–the strongest can tow just a bit more–but the maximum payload is two-thirds that of the new Ford F-150. Current HD pickups can be equipped to carry over 4,000 lbs. and tow over 30,000 lbs.

The biggest news with the new Titan is a diesel engine. Ram currently offers a 240-horsepower 3.0-liter diesel in the 1500. Ford has a similarly sized V6 diesel planned for the new F-150. Compared to these, the Titan XD’s 5.0-liter V8 Cummins diesel, with a pair of sequential turbochargers, is much stronger: 310 horsepower and 555 lb-ft of torque. But its no match for HD pickups’ 6.7-liters (or so) diesels, which can produce nearly 400 horsepower and over 800 lb-ft of torque. So with the new engine as well Nissan is seeking to claim some open ground between light duty and HD pickups.

2016 Nissan Titan XD Cummins 5.0L V8 Turbo Diesel

The new diesel engine has yielded one unfortunate aesthetic feature. To package the diesel’s intercooler, the new Titan’s nose is noticeably longer than the current trucks, yielding some less than ideal proportions. But will the typical pickup buyer notice? If they do notice, will they care? Probably not.

The real question is whether Nissan can successfully and effectively communicate the unique positioning of its truck. They emphasized one thing other than the diesel: this is an American product, designed in California, engineered in Michigan, and manufactured in Mississippi with engines from Indiana and Tennessee.

2016 Chevrolet Volt: redesigned with more range

Volt front quarter

The Chevrolet Volt hasn’t been the breakthrough product GM had hoped it would be, at least not in consumer perceptions, where Tesla has stolen whatever fire it initially possessed. But the roughly 70,000 people who have owned one have tended to love it–the car has outstanding satisfaction scores. For the 2016 model year, GM has drawn on extensive feedback and driving style data from these owners to redesign the Volt. There’s no revolutionary intent this time, but the evolutionary changes are notable.

The biggest changes have been made to the drive system. Like Toyota and Ford hybrids, the Volt uses a two-motor system so that one electric motor can power the wheels while another charges the battery pack. With the first-generation Volt, one of the two motors could only serve as a generator, so it was much smaller than the one that powered the wheels. With the second-generation Volt, the transmission includes a second planetary gearset, and this allows both electric motors to power the wheels when running entirely off battery power. With this change, both motors are now equal in size, and much smaller than the first-gen car’s drive motor, which when combined they match in power output: 149 horsepower. This change reduces the weight of the drive unit by over 100 lbs. It also improves both acceleration (zero-to-30 is 19 percent quicker, zero-to-60 improves less but still falls to a fairly quick 8.4 seconds) and fuel economy (by up to 12 percent).

Volt interior

Changes have also been made to the battery pack. Though the cell count drops by 96, to 192, capacity has increased from 17.1 to 18.4 kWh. To preserve battery life, the Volt has always used only a portion of its full capacity–it’s designed to never deeply discharge. But GM has been gradually increasing how much of the pack’s capacity is used. The more efficient motors, slightly larger battery pack, increased usage of its capacity, and other tweaks will combine to increase the car’s electric-only EPA-certified range from the current 38 miles to at least 50. Owing to this increase, GM predicts that nearly 90 percent of the trips driven by owners will be entirely powered by electricity, up from the current car’s 80 percent.

One thing that won’t change: the 2016 Volt still won’t be capable of Level III quick charging. GM claims that their usage data suggests little need for it–half of the car’s owners use only a standard wall outlet. My suspicion: quick charging tends to harm battery life, and GM doesn’t want to risk having to replace battery packs the way some electric car makers have been.

Volt front clip

When the battery reach its minimum level (not the same as empty), a new, aluminum (instead of iron) block 101-horsepower 1.5-liter gasoline engine will kick in to either recharge the battery pack or help directly power the wheels. GM is less bashful now about the gasoline engine sometimes directly powering the wheels, and once the battery reaches its minimum level will make more extensive use of this option. Directly powering the wheels is often more efficient than using the engine to recharge the battery and then use electricity to power the wheels. Partly as a result, EPA combined fuel economy is expected to improve from the current Volt’s 38 mpg to 41 mpg. Of perhaps greater importance to potential owners: the new engine, unlike the current car’s, runs happily on regular unleaded.

And the rest of the car? Exterior length increases by three inches, to 180.4, while the wheelbase and width increase just a bit. Interior dimensions change very little. Rear headroom is down a couple tenths of an inch, while rear legroom is up sixth tenths of an inch. Both remain marginal for seating adults in the back seat (at 5-9 I fit with little room to spare). In response to owner requests, GM has added a third seating position to the back seat, but this position straddles a tall console and is intended only for short-term use by children (though adults will fit in a real pinch). Cargo space hasn’t changed at all. Curb weight changes more dramatically, dropping from 3,781 lbs. to 3,543, thanks mostly to the new engine and drive unit.

Volt rear pillar

One then not captured by the specs: the base of the windshield is very high. I would personally prefer a lower cowl for better forward visibility.

And the new car’s styling? I’ll mostly let your eyes be the judge. To mine, the new design is more bland, both inside and out. Many critics have likened the new exterior to that of the Honda Civic or the Dodge Dart. Also, the exterior includes some poorly resolved details and cheats around the A- and C-pillars. That black triangle aft of the doors is a piece of plastic, not a real window. And the interior, is just an interior, with vivid displays but none of the Apple-like trim of the original. I’m a bit surprised GM didn’t come up with something more adventuresome.

Overall, I like what they’ve done with the powertrain, but not what they’ve done with the styling.

Volt side

New Design Language for Buick

Avenir front quarter

After introducing the Cascada compact four-seat convertible, which has been available as an Opel in Europe for nearly two years but which won’t reach the U.S. rebadged and retuned as a Buick until this time next year, General Motors had a surprise. A large sedan concept, tagged the Avenir, indicates the design direction that will be taken with future Buicks. The concept’s proportions are very much those of an athletic rear-wheel-drive car. Flowing yet controlled forms, with far more curves than you’ll find on a Cadillac, suggest British more than German design, and perhaps Bentley most of all, though some hints of BMW can be found in the front fender vents and the complex surfacing of the lower bodysides. Buick’s traditional “sweepspear” is perfectly integrated into the shoulders.

Avenir interior

Inside, flowing forms again dominate. Trim on the dash and center console has an embedded wave pattern that appears unusually deep. I’m told we’ll see this particular detail sooner rather than later. The controls–well, there aren’t many aside from the large, vivid displays. The artful yet minimalist aesthetic reminds me of Audi’s most recent concept, if with more curves.

Avenir trim

Could this car actually be produced? My initial thought: no way. And GM did emphasize that this is “just a concept.” But, after speaking with Manoli Katakis of gmauthority.com, production of a not terribly dissimilar car seems surprisingly likely. While some changes would likely be made in the interest of practicality, for the most part the Avenir’s shape is not too far fetched–the windshield is even fairly upright by current standards. A production version could well share basic dimensions and under-skin components–including a body composed of weight-saving aluminum (visible on the concept’s B-pillars when the doors are opened)–with the upcoming Cadillac CT6. If this car does happen, in design terms it will check off all the boxes: powerful yet elegant, traditional yet current. Buick hasn’t had such a suitable flagship in a very long time. I’m very eager to see how much of this concept makes it into the production cars, both a new flagship and the front-wheel-drive models (which will almost certainly have more upright proportions) lower in the range.

Avenir rear quarter

Major failures: how common are they?

Gas cap light

File this under things I should have done long ago. Autoguide’s Craig Cole (check out his fine wit) got in touch yesterday, wondering if we had any data on turbocharger failures. As these become more and more common, will car owners be experiencing a lot of pain down the road?

Well, I give turbocharger failures a unique code when reviewing survey responses for errors, but I’ve never used this and other problem type codes to see how common various types of repairs are. Should be doable, though.

So I modified the usual analysis script to only look at specific problems. Part of the reason I’ve never done this before is that our sample sizes are rarely large enough to provide stats for specific problems–the more rare something is, the larger the sample size you need to measure it. To help compensate, I modified the analysis to go back up to 24 months rather than up to 12. Also, if a problem is especially common, it will show up with our typical sample sizes.

What I found: fewer cases than I expected to. Only one case stuck out: the 2008 BMW 535i. With an average of 16 months of data on 33 cars, we have six reported turbocharger failures. This is high.

Two other cases might be about as high (one failure for every six cars), but the sample sizes are smaller so these could also be flukes: the 2007 Mazda CX-7 and the 2004 Subaru Forester XT.

One thing that probably isn’t a fluke: each case is the first year a turbocharger was offered in each model. The CX-7 is a well-known horror story. The Forester case also has a known cause. Subaru included a “banjo” joint with a small oil filter in the line that lubricates the turbo. Over time this small filter can clog, starving the turbo bearing of oil. Some owners have preemptively removed the filter.

Less defensible: it also looks like roughly one in twelve turbos has failed in the 2012 and 2013 Passat TDI (diesel), even though these cars have only 15 to 25 thousand miles on them.

The biggest finding, though: in the great majority of models with them, turbocharger failures have been rare over the past two years, perhaps two to three percent.

Q5 engine 350With the code in place, it’s possible to easily look at other systems. What about engine problems that required a replacement or thorough rebuild? Just three cases, none of which involved actual engine failures. About one in ten owners of the 2009-2011 Audi A4 2.0T and of the 2010 Chevrolet Equinox / GMC Terrain with the four-cylinder have had engines rebuilt to fix high oil consumption. (Some 2011 Q5s with the 2.0T engine have also required rebuilds, for the same reason.) The only other case where we have a decent sample size: about one in fifteen Jeep Wranglers has required a new cylinder head or two, apparently to eliminate a ticking noise. A common thread with the 2009 Audi and the other two: all were the first year for this particular engine in this particular model. (That the 2010 and 2011 Audis were also affected suggests that Audi wasn’t aware of an issue for the first year or two of production.)

A fourth case with very small sample sizes: a butterfly screw fairly often comes loose inside the engine of the 2004 Kia Sorento. When it does, the engine is badly damaged. Kia has recalled the engines for this problem, but some owners only learn of the recall after the problem happens.

If we had more models with sufficiently larger sample sizes, we’d likely capture a few more instances. But the overall finding is the same as with the turbos: there just aren’t many cases of common major engine repairs, and virtually none that rendered the cars undriveable.

Q5 carbon 350Many people have raised concerns with carbon build-up in direct-injected gasoline engines, and a number of owners have reported these. But, when you look at the frequency for specific models and years, it’s rarely high. In fact, it’s only high for two engines, both of which happen to be in 2007-2010 VWs and Audis: the 2.0T in the A3, CC, and Passat, and the V6 in the A6, Q5, and Q7. The frequency in these cases varies from one car in ten to one in six, so pretty high, but far from “all of them.”

My gut told me that transmissions are more likely to fail than engines. But even here failures just aren’t common. One well-known case sticks out: Acuras and Hondas with V6 engines from 1999 to 2003 comprise about half the list. I’ve also been well aware of wave plate failures in 2007-2008 GM large crossovers (Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia, Saturn Outlook). These have been running about one vehicle in ten. The same problem also affects the 2008 Saturn VUE V6. Automatic transmission failures also might be relatively common in the 2002 Hyundai Accent (very small sample size, possibly a fluke), 2003 Chrysler minivans (could affect adjacent model years), 2003 Golf and Jetta (ditto), 2006 Ford Explorer (first model year), perhaps one in ten first-year Nissans with the 4-cylinder and CVT (2008 Sentra, 2009 Rogue, 2009-2010 cube), 2011 Elantra Touring (probably earlier years as well, limited by sample sizes), and the 2013-2014 Nissan Pathfinder and Infiniti QX60 (but not the JX). Owners of the last commonly report a “judder” at low speeds, not outright failures.

Considering that we do have good sample sizes for over 700 model-model year combinations, once again not a long list.

Who will win NACTOY?

e-Golf front quarterUnlike other awards in the United States, the North American Car and Truck of the Year (NACTOY) is based on voting by dozens of journalists who work for many different websites and publications. So it might deserve a little more weight than the others. Or not. There have been some odd choices over the years, as the award often goes to a new car or truck based on what it signifies for the future of the brand or the segment, not on how good it is. Keep this in mind when guessing which of the finalists–announced yesterday–will win. To be considered, a car or truck must be new this year.

The cars: Ford Mustang, Hyundai Genesis, and VW Golf.

The trucks: Chevrolet Colorado, Ford F-150, and Lincoln MKC.

(Links are to reviews of the three I’ve evaluated.)

Each is a strong product. Based on other awards, the Golf and Colorado are the odds-on favorites. But NACTOY tends to operate differently than other awards, favoring models that have an impact across the industry, or that signify that a weak brand is on the way back.

MKC white front quarterBoth the Mustang and Genesis are dramatic improvements over the previous generation, with both now fully competitive with quasi-competitors that cost considerably more, but this probably isn’t enough. The MKC is the best Lincoln is recent memory, but this probably isn’t enough, either. It’s getting some well-deserved and much-needed recognition just by being among the finalists. On the car side, the Golf, available in multiple versions, all of them surprisingly good, looks hard to beat. The main thing against it: it has already won other awards.

The truck award is harder to call. The Colorado injects some much-needed new into the nearly dead compact pickup segment. While the F-150 is an attempt to re-invent the pickup with all-aluminum bodies and a small turbocharged V6. This attempt isn’t an unqualified success–the results haven’t blown anyone away–but it’s more audacious than offering a truck originally designed for international markets in the U.S.

Car reliability stats now cover through end of September 2014

Forester front quarterUpdated stats have been posted based on owner experiences through the end of September.

Anyone trying to choose between the new Forester and new CX-5 based on reliability, sorry, we can’t offer much help. For the 2015 Forester, 46 owners reported a total of zero repairs. For the 2015 CX-5, 31 owners reported…zero repairs.

Zero repairs were also reported through the end of September for the new A3, Genesis, and GTI, but with only 11-12 owners responding so far in each case we aren’t yet posting even an asterisked stats for these. I’m impressed regardless, as these are all-new cars.

We have an asterisked stat for the 2015 WRX, and it’s not a pretty one. With 16 owners responding, six repairs. Annualized, this works out to a bit over a repair trip per car per year. An accurate stat will have to await more data, but this isn’t pointing in a good direction.

Updated car reliability stats

TrueDelta: Ten Years

On September 30, 2004, TrueDelta went public as a car price comparison tool. The following February we started asking people to sign up to help with a car reliability survey. Around the one-year anniversary we started conducting the survey, and soon after the two-year anniversary we had our first reliability stats–though for just a few dozen cars. The latest results, our 32nd set, cover over 700 model-model year combinations.

Over the years since we’ve added many new areas to the site–for fuel economy, reviews, and new car suggestions. Things really picked up when Gayla joined the site four years ago, and took over the programming (I’m no longer allowed to touch the code). In a trial by fire, she managed the second redesign, and continues to tweak it. We’ll have some fun new features soon.

Most of all we’re grateful for having so many supportive members–and a total nearing 100,000. A big thanks to everyone for all your help over the past ten years. The next few should be the best yet!

Updated car reliability stats now cover through the end of June 2014

We’ve updated our car reliability stats to cover through the end of June 2014. With this, they’re about 14 months ahead of what you’ll find elsewhere.

Mazda3 front quarter 201 FBAmong 2014s, we’ve had absolutely no repairs reported for the Audi A4 and Toyota Camry. One of these is less expected than the other. The new Mazda3 and new Chevrolet Silverado / GMC Sierra have also been nearly problem-free. (With larger sample sizes, the Lexus IS and Toyota 4Runner would likely join this select group.) The new Subaru Forester also continues to score very well, if not as well as those already listed.

We have our first reliability score for the new Chevrolet Corvette, and it’s deep in the yellow zone. This might partly reflect a marginal sample size, though. Repairs have only been reported for two of 26 cars, not a scary proportion.

Clearly ugly among the 2014s: the large GM crossovers (despite being in their eighth model year), revised Grand Cherokee, and the new-for-2013 Nissan Pathfinder and Infiniti QX60. The Jeep continues to suffer from glitches with its new infotainment system, and these affect many other systems. The Pathfinder, like the Altima, continues to have driveability problems due to its new-generation CVT (continuously variable transmission). Nissan has now replaced the transmissions in some vehicles, and bought back some others.

Worst of all among the 2014s we have stats for: the new Acura MDX. Unlike with the RDX when it was new last year, it’s not clear what the common problems are yet. The overall count is just high.

The 2014 Tesla Model S would probably score even worse than the MDX, but we don’t have a large enough sample size for it yet. The 2013 Tesla continues to score poorly.

For the details on these and other models:

Car reliability stats

Updated car reliability stats now cover through the end of March 2014

Updated car reliability stats have been posted. These cover through March 31, 2014, making them nearly a year ahead of those you’ll find elsewhere.

The all-new Mazda3 and Mazda6 have required very few repairs, with none of the common glitches suffered by the related CX-5 in its first model year.

The Tesla Model S continues to require many repairs, over three times as many as the average 2013 model.

Updated car reliability stats, including new set for essential systems, now cover through the end of 2013

Since most car reliability surveys are annual, they are rarely based on recent information. Unlike the others, TrueDelta’s ongoing Car Reliability Survey updates quarterly. The most recent update, released to the public today, covers through the end of 2013. This puts it about eight months ahead of other sources.

CRS 1213

Also unlike elsewhere, TrueDelta reports repair frequencies, not just colored dots. These make it much clearer how much two car models differ in reliability. The average 2013 model required 27 repair trips per 100 cars during 2013. When you consider that this statistic includes even minor repairs, such as those for rattles, the average car today is very reliable. The averages for 2008 and 2003 model year cars were 44 and 73, respectively. Even ten-year-old cars aren’t averaging one repair trip per year.

Some car owners only consider repairs that render a car undrivable to be worthy of concern. With this update TrueDelta has released a second set of statistics that include only powertrain and chassis repairs. These are only about one-third of the total for 2013 models. Powertrain and chassis repairs are rare during the warranty period. But such repairs increase as cars age to become 64 percent of the total for 2008s and 75 percent of the total for 2003s.

Car Reliability Survey Results