Scion xD reliability
10-04-2008, 06:44 PM
#21
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 337
Another set of results coming in November. We remain a few xDs short of the minimum.
Vehicle reliability research
Vehicle reliability research
12-04-2008, 06:23 PM
#23
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 337
So far, not a single xD owner participating in the survey has reported a repair. Though the sample size is very small, this does suggest that the xD rarely requires a repair.
With more participants, we could provide more precise results. Especially need more 2009s.
For the full set of results, and to sign up to help:
TrueDelta Vehicle Reliability Survey results
With more participants, we could provide more precise results. Especially need more 2009s.
For the full set of results, and to sign up to help:
TrueDelta Vehicle Reliability Survey results
12-22-2008, 01:55 PM
#24
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 337
We've got another update coming in February. Let's bump the sample size:
Vehicle reliability research
Vehicle reliability research
12-23-2008, 01:03 AM
#25
Banned
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 174
Re: Scion xD reliability
Your data won't be scientifically defensible because the respondents opt-in.
In order to get real data, you need to poll a random sample of owners (preferable from a large pool of passive owners - folks who didn't sign up but are identified simply as "buyers").
Anyone who volunteers is just giving an opinion.
Didn't consumer reports or some other independent testing firm recently confirm that the xD was one of the most reliable cars on the road (initial quality?).
In order to get real data, you need to poll a random sample of owners (preferable from a large pool of passive owners - folks who didn't sign up but are identified simply as "buyers").
Anyone who volunteers is just giving an opinion.
Didn't consumer reports or some other independent testing firm recently confirm that the xD was one of the most reliable cars on the road (initial quality?).
Originally Posted by mkaresh
In late 2005 I started conducting reliability research. I'm reporting absolute stats like "trips to the shop" that make the differences between cars much clearer. Results are updated four times a year, so it's possible to provide reliability information on new models like the 2008 xD very quickly--if enough owners sign up to help out. The sooner enough owners of the 2008 get involved, the sooner others considering the car will have some reliability information to factor into their decision.
With first-year designs, reliability is always a question mark. Some do start out with problems, but the manufacturer often quickly identifies and addresses these. With TrueDelta's quarterly updates, any such improvement becomes apparent within a few months.
Participants report repairs the month after they occur on a one-page survey. When there are no repairs, they simply report an approximate odometer reading four times a year, at the end of each quarter.
To encourage participation, panel members will receive full access to the results for free.
For the details, and to sign up to help out:
Vehicle reliability research
Comments, questions, and suggestions welcome.
With first-year designs, reliability is always a question mark. Some do start out with problems, but the manufacturer often quickly identifies and addresses these. With TrueDelta's quarterly updates, any such improvement becomes apparent within a few months.
Participants report repairs the month after they occur on a one-page survey. When there are no repairs, they simply report an approximate odometer reading four times a year, at the end of each quarter.
To encourage participation, panel members will receive full access to the results for free.
For the details, and to sign up to help out:
Vehicle reliability research
Comments, questions, and suggestions welcome.
12-26-2008, 01:42 PM
#26
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 337
Re: Scion xD reliability
Originally Posted by PHATBLK
Your data won't be scientifically defensible because the respondents opt-in.
In order to get real data, you need to poll a random sample of owners (preferable from a large pool of passive owners - folks who didn't sign up but are identified simply as "buyers").
Anyone who volunteers is just giving an opinion.
Didn't consumer reports or some other independent testing firm recently confirm that the xD was one of the most reliable cars on the road (initial quality?).
In order to get real data, you need to poll a random sample of owners (preferable from a large pool of passive owners - folks who didn't sign up but are identified simply as "buyers").
Anyone who volunteers is just giving an opinion.
Didn't consumer reports or some other independent testing firm recently confirm that the xD was one of the most reliable cars on the road (initial quality?).
12-26-2008, 02:13 PM
#27
Banned
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 174
Re: Scion xD reliability
I stand by my statement. There is no scientific value to your study.
You contradict yourself--CR doesn't have a random sample, either. Aside from that, you clearly have not taken a close look (or any look at all?) at TrueDelta's actual research process, which mitigates the potential problems with a non-random sample in ways that CR does not. They're much more susceptible to respondent bias than we are.
Originally Posted by mkaresh
Originally Posted by PHATBLK
Your data won't be scientifically defensible because the respondents opt-in.
In order to get real data, you need to poll a random sample of owners (preferable from a large pool of passive owners - folks who didn't sign up but are identified simply as "buyers").
Anyone who volunteers is just giving an opinion.
Didn't consumer reports or some other independent testing firm recently confirm that the xD was one of the most reliable cars on the road (initial quality?).
In order to get real data, you need to poll a random sample of owners (preferable from a large pool of passive owners - folks who didn't sign up but are identified simply as "buyers").
Anyone who volunteers is just giving an opinion.
Didn't consumer reports or some other independent testing firm recently confirm that the xD was one of the most reliable cars on the road (initial quality?).
12-26-2008, 02:56 PM
#28
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 337
Re: Scion xD reliability
Whatever. Slamming my survey then citing Consumer Reports--which also uses an opt-in sample--is ridiculous.
Beyond this, there is no vehicle reliability survey that has both a random sample and a high enough response rate to derive much value from this random sample. Follow through on your logic, and we have absolutely no knowledge on vehicle reliability.
So good thing that your logic is flawed.
TrueDelta's methods deal with potential respondent bias extremely well, and the results bear this out. Are they accurate within a few percentage points? No, but they don't have to be to be useful.
Beyond this, there is no vehicle reliability survey that has both a random sample and a high enough response rate to derive much value from this random sample. Follow through on your logic, and we have absolutely no knowledge on vehicle reliability.
So good thing that your logic is flawed.
TrueDelta's methods deal with potential respondent bias extremely well, and the results bear this out. Are they accurate within a few percentage points? No, but they don't have to be to be useful.
Originally Posted by PHATBLK
I stand by my statement. There is no scientific value to your study.
You contradict yourself--CR doesn't have a random sample, either. Aside from that, you clearly have not taken a close look (or any look at all?) at TrueDelta's actual research process, which mitigates the potential problems with a non-random sample in ways that CR does not. They're much more susceptible to respondent bias than we are.
Originally Posted by mkaresh
Originally Posted by PHATBLK
Your data won't be scientifically defensible because the respondents opt-in.
In order to get real data, you need to poll a random sample of owners (preferable from a large pool of passive owners - folks who didn't sign up but are identified simply as "buyers").
Anyone who volunteers is just giving an opinion.
Didn't consumer reports or some other independent testing firm recently confirm that the xD was one of the most reliable cars on the road (initial quality?).
In order to get real data, you need to poll a random sample of owners (preferable from a large pool of passive owners - folks who didn't sign up but are identified simply as "buyers").
Anyone who volunteers is just giving an opinion.
Didn't consumer reports or some other independent testing firm recently confirm that the xD was one of the most reliable cars on the road (initial quality?).
12-26-2008, 08:18 PM
#29
Banned
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 174
Re: Scion xD reliability
Wasn't suggesting CR was a superior report - they were two separate comments. 1. Your survey is a childish effort with no scientific basis. 2. Didn't CR report...
Two completely separate statements.
Doesn't J.D. Power run the gold standard of reliability surveys? They contact a large sample and report the results.
Two completely separate statements.
Doesn't J.D. Power run the gold standard of reliability surveys? They contact a large sample and report the results.
Originally Posted by mkaresh
Whatever. Slamming my survey then citing Consumer Reports--which also uses an opt-in sample--is ridiculous.
Beyond this, there is no vehicle reliability survey that has both a random sample and a high enough response rate to derive much value from this random sample. Follow through on your logic, and we have absolutely no knowledge on vehicle reliability.
So good thing that your logic is flawed.
TrueDelta's methods deal with potential respondent bias extremely well, and the results bear this out. Are they accurate within a few percentage points? No, but they don't have to be to be useful.
Beyond this, there is no vehicle reliability survey that has both a random sample and a high enough response rate to derive much value from this random sample. Follow through on your logic, and we have absolutely no knowledge on vehicle reliability.
So good thing that your logic is flawed.
TrueDelta's methods deal with potential respondent bias extremely well, and the results bear this out. Are they accurate within a few percentage points? No, but they don't have to be to be useful.
Originally Posted by PHATBLK
I stand by my statement. There is no scientific value to your study.
You contradict yourself--CR doesn't have a random sample, either. Aside from that, you clearly have not taken a close look (or any look at all?) at TrueDelta's actual research process, which mitigates the potential problems with a non-random sample in ways that CR does not. They're much more susceptible to respondent bias than we are.
Originally Posted by mkaresh
Originally Posted by PHATBLK
Your data won't be scientifically defensible because the respondents opt-in.
In order to get real data, you need to poll a random sample of owners (preferable from a large pool of passive owners - folks who didn't sign up but are identified simply as "buyers").
Anyone who volunteers is just giving an opinion.
Didn't consumer reports or some other independent testing firm recently confirm that the xD was one of the most reliable cars on the road (initial quality?).
In order to get real data, you need to poll a random sample of owners (preferable from a large pool of passive owners - folks who didn't sign up but are identified simply as "buyers").
Anyone who volunteers is just giving an opinion.
Didn't consumer reports or some other independent testing firm recently confirm that the xD was one of the most reliable cars on the road (initial quality?).
12-26-2008, 10:03 PM
#30
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 337
Childish now?
My point is that your "two separate statements" contradict. If you believe surveys that use opt-in participants are not valid, you should not be citing CR.
JD Power releases a small amount of often misleading information to the general public. Their "target response rate" the only time I have seen it mentioned was 23%.
If you actually take the time to study how TrueDelta's methods and information compare to CR and J.D. Power, rather than shooting off flippant criticsms based on what you think you know, you'll find that we use superior methods and provide more information.
My point is that your "two separate statements" contradict. If you believe surveys that use opt-in participants are not valid, you should not be citing CR.
JD Power releases a small amount of often misleading information to the general public. Their "target response rate" the only time I have seen it mentioned was 23%.
If you actually take the time to study how TrueDelta's methods and information compare to CR and J.D. Power, rather than shooting off flippant criticsms based on what you think you know, you'll find that we use superior methods and provide more information.
12-27-2008, 03:47 PM
#31
Banned
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 174
No. Your survey is not scientific - peel off the other distractions and this is my CORE issue.
You may have the last word.
You may have the last word.
Originally Posted by mkaresh
Childish now?
My point is that your "two separate statements" contradict. If you believe surveys that use opt-in participants are not valid, you should not be citing CR.
JD Power releases a small amount of often misleading information to the general public. Their "target response rate" the only time I have seen it mentioned was 23%.
If you actually take the time to study how TrueDelta's methods and information compare to CR and J.D. Power, rather than shooting off flippant criticsms based on what you think you know, you'll find that we use superior methods and provide more information.
My point is that your "two separate statements" contradict. If you believe surveys that use opt-in participants are not valid, you should not be citing CR.
JD Power releases a small amount of often misleading information to the general public. Their "target response rate" the only time I have seen it mentioned was 23%.
If you actually take the time to study how TrueDelta's methods and information compare to CR and J.D. Power, rather than shooting off flippant criticsms based on what you think you know, you'll find that we use superior methods and provide more information.
12-27-2008, 04:43 PM
#32
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 337
The survey does not use a random sample. Historically, those who conducted surveys with a random sample labeled such surveys as "scientific" to distinguish them from those that did use a random sample.
The issue is not as black and white as you seem to believe.
In many situations, especially those that involve opinions or where it is critical to have highly precise results (e.g. medical research), it is imperative to have a random sample. Because of the subject matter and how the research is designed, this is not one of those situations. Even without a random sample this research has been providing useful information.
Check the results and you'll find that they possess a high degree of internal and external validity. Internal validity = consistency between results where you'd expect it. External validity = agreement with the results of other, similar studies.
The difference: prompt updates four times a year, actual repair rates, and free to everyone who participates.
The issue is not as black and white as you seem to believe.
In many situations, especially those that involve opinions or where it is critical to have highly precise results (e.g. medical research), it is imperative to have a random sample. Because of the subject matter and how the research is designed, this is not one of those situations. Even without a random sample this research has been providing useful information.
Check the results and you'll find that they possess a high degree of internal and external validity. Internal validity = consistency between results where you'd expect it. External validity = agreement with the results of other, similar studies.
The difference: prompt updates four times a year, actual repair rates, and free to everyone who participates.
12-28-2008, 02:17 PM
#34
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: MN
Posts: 111
Originally Posted by lostxD
hm why not be thankful that someone is making an effort in trying to test the reliability of the xD
“We’re not satisfied, until you’re not satisfied.”
Sometimes no response is the best response.....
12-28-2008, 03:10 PM
#35
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 337
Originally Posted by libima
Sometimes no response is the best response.....
He does make an argument that applies to nearly all online surveys. Just not this one.
12-28-2008, 10:04 PM
#36
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 192
Originally Posted by libima
Originally Posted by lostxD
hm why not be thankful that someone is making an effort in trying to test the reliability of the xD
12-31-2008, 04:15 AM
#37
Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 34
I dunno. Asking people to give their quality opinions, especially from a enthusiats site seems like it might be a little prejudiced.
I dont think the results mean much more than we like our cars.
I dont think the results mean much more than we like our cars.
Originally Posted by lostxD
hm why not be thankful that someone is making an effort in trying to test the reliability of the xD
12-31-2008, 01:35 PM
#38
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 957
isnt asking anyone who owns a particular car prejudiced? how many new car owners these days are going to down-right hate their car? generally, most people research a car before they purchase it... so they already like it before they buy it. this survey is about reliability/repair issues, so a car enthusiast site is the best place to go to find people who may have issues with their cars.
12-31-2008, 03:16 PM
#39
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 337
Originally Posted by RAGE
I dunno. Asking people to give their quality opinions, especially from a enthusiats site seems like it might be a little prejudiced.
I dont think the results mean much more than we like our cars.
I dont think the results mean much more than we like our cars.
Originally Posted by lostxD
hm why not be thankful that someone is making an effort in trying to test the reliability of the xD
The survey doesn't ask, "Is this a good car?" I even try to avoid talking about cars as "good" or "bad," preferring to report the repair rates and let people reach their own judgments.
The site also has an owner review area. But even in that case I assume that whoever bought a car bought it because they like it. So that survey asks about the good things with the purchased car, and the bad things with the second choice.
01-12-2009, 03:04 AM
#40
Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 34
Do you ask this question before you get them to participate? Do you tell people this is a survey of reliability before they participate? Just curious.
The key thing about TrueDelta's reliability survey is that, unlike some I've seen, it doesn't ask for opinions. Instead, each month it simply asks a question of fact: was the car in the shop for a repair last month? It either was or it wasn't.
The survey doesn't ask, "Is this a good car?" I even try to avoid talking about cars as "good" or "bad," preferring to report the repair rates and let people reach their own judgments.
The site also has an owner review area. But even in that case I assume that whoever bought a car bought it because they like it. So that survey asks about the good things with the purchased car, and the bad things with the second choice.
Originally Posted by mkaresh
Originally Posted by RAGE
I dunno. Asking people to give their quality opinions,
especially from a enthusiats site seems like it might be a little prejudiced.
I dont think the results mean much more than we like our cars.
especially from a enthusiats site seems like it might be a little prejudiced.
I dont think the results mean much more than we like our cars.
Originally Posted by lostxD
hm why not be thankful that someone is making an effort in trying to test the reliability of the xD
The survey doesn't ask, "Is this a good car?" I even try to avoid talking about cars as "good" or "bad," preferring to report the repair rates and let people reach their own judgments.
The site also has an owner review area. But even in that case I assume that whoever bought a car bought it because they like it. So that survey asks about the good things with the purchased car, and the bad things with the second choice.