Spin9k

2006 Total Quality Award Winners

"The Total Quality Index score is calculated using multivariate statistical techniques that measure the correlations of all aspects of the vehicle ownership experience including product, reliability and dealership (independent variables) against multiple outcome measures (dependent variables) which include the following:

• Satisfaction with the complete ownership experience
• Perception of quality
• Owner reported delight
• Future purchase intent
• Emotional attachment to vehicle

The correlations derived from this complex procedure are transformed into a 1000 point scale to facilitate comparisons. The scores typically range from 750 to 900. Generally, scores over 800 are terrific, although in some segments a score in the low 800's is not very competitive."

MORE... http://www.strategicvision.com/auto_tqa.php

-----------------------MAZDA WINNERS----------------------------

Small Car - MAZDA 3 - 2ND PLACE

http://www.strategicvision.com/auto_...ward=TQA&seg=1

Small Multi-Function Segment - MAZDA 3 5 DR - 3RD PLACE

http://www.strategicvision.com/auto_...ard=TQA&seg=24

Medium Car Segment - MAZDA 6 SEDAN - 4TH PLACE

spork

Hmmmm...

That's kind of interesting since the Accord and Camry rate so lowly. I'm kind of skeptical about the rating because of that. I can understand the Accord and Camry being lower on the "delight" and "attachment" categories, but seriously... being #10 and #14 in their segment?

ZoomZoomH

iTrader: (1)

links don't work

Spin9k

Check your own computer, they surely do work.

Spin9k

Skeptical? Do you follow the boards of these other makes problems? Who's to say other makes/brands don't have problems? People on the board seem to be on Mazda sucks campaign lately.... ok, however, it's getting a bit old... and I think many people are short sighted and fail to comprehend that we aren't alone in our problems - cars cause many consumers problems.... why? ... because cars are so pivital in our lives, and they **** us off when they do something we don't like/want/have time to deal with, or fail to meet our fantasies/perfection goals.

All cars have problems for some percentage of those that own them, certainly some are 'better than others, but not for everyone.

Mazda doesn't hava a corner on problems... Toyota has recently had a spate of unbelievable quality issues, Honda too. I get Rondel, the BMW magazine, most letters to the editor are negative blasting BMW losing it's way, poor quality product, lousy expensive incompetent service etc. Sound familiar? Pick almost any brand you want, you can find the same.

Mazda can have winners too, my take - these are them.

spork

What the heck? I'm totally confused. What's with all the comparisons to Mazda? I don't recall ever mentioning Mazda once. Ugh, you're spending so much time trying to defend Mazda when I'm not even commenting about them.

I'm pointing out that 2 cars that are highly rated by almost all reviewers and usually return with very high customer satisfaction (usually the highest) were rated #10 and #14 respectively. That strikes me as strange. Again, notice that this paragraph does not mention Mazda once (until now), so you really don't need to go out of your way to sound indignant for Mazda.

Are you telling me it's not strange to find the the Accord and the Camry as #10 and #14 cars in their segment? Especially by a report called "Total Quality"?

Spin9k

My bad - I thought your reference to "I'm kind of skeptical about the rating because of that" refered to the Mazda satisfaction rating - the topic of the thread - about Mazda....not Honda's and Toyota's low rating, which was nowhere in the original post.

But about that - I don't find it particularly strange that they are low ranked ... the ratings speak for themselves, whatever they are. All cars experience problems of their own. Check this storie out as an example...

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/...ess/toyota.php (Toyota Aug 6, 2006)

In American commerce there are plenty of 'emperor cloths' stories, i.e., what appears to be true is not, regardless of what urban legand says or what might have been true last year or several years ago. Perhaps the fact that many Hondas and Toyotas are not of Japanese origin anymore has something to do with these results...I really have no idea.

ZoomZoomH

iTrader: (1)

ok it works for me now, curious why it didn't work when i tried to view it this morning...

one thing i noticed for the mid-size sedan rankings, 3 of the top 4 are structurally/mechanically the same car (Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Mazda6), just tuned to each intended audience's liking.

says a lot about the quality of that chassis for a midsize sedan.

therm8

They're boring, commonplace, rather lackluster cars that have been getting bigger and bigger. Perhaps people are just losing interest in them. This survey rates more than features, quality and reliability. Mazda's, for example, are usually fun to drive cars, across the model range. Honda only has 2 models that could fall in that category, and Toyota has none (this is discounting their "luxury" brands). You can only make the same old car for so long before people move on to more interesting things (in thought as well as reality).

Razz1

really? I thought we were all sheep.. bahh.......baa.........

spork

That's not true, I took my older brother car shopping yesterday and just judging from dealer stock, the Camry is selling INSANELY well. There's definitely no interest lost for the Camry. In fact, when we went to the Toyota dealership, they told us no test drives just because they only had 3 Camrys on the lot and they only test drive when they have a bunch. All 3 Camrys weren't sold because of the color I'm pretty sure; all 3 were red. The salesman didn't even try to keep us around. Pretty much just a "well, I'm sorry, but have a nice day!" The Accord they had a decent amount on the lot but only 2 of the trim he wanted (EX v6, w/ navi). They were heavily pushing the sale though. This dealership was INSANELY crowded. The Mazda 6 actually they didn't have any of the ones he wanted (Grand Touring, v6, w/ navi) that they could find but there were a lot of other Mazda 6s around. So all three cars are selling well as far as I could see, but the Camry, just from that experience, was selling the best.

And Spin9k, for "ratings speaking for themselves", does that mean the RX-8 IS one of the ugliest cars? We were voted into the top 10 ugly cars by some random list (Ward's Auto). I discounted that because of what other cars were voted in. This review I would believe it if it was more consistent with other reviews. The fact that this review goes against pretty much every other review I've read and it comes from a source I'm not familiar with makes me doubt the legitamacy. I mean I can accept the Camry and Accord losing some ground esp with fun to drive, and emotional attachment thrown in, but to slip that far?

Like I said before I'm not really saying anything against Mazda. I've actually seen reviews where the Mazda 6 comes out very highly compared to the other cars. In fact, I think it was Car and Driver that gave the Mazda 6 a second place behind the Accord. I was even the one pushing my brother to test drive a Mazda 6 since he was pretty against even giving it a try due to it's reliability ratings.

My problem with this list is just I think it has no credibility by rating the Camry and the Accord so low (and I'm not really even a Camry or an Accord fan). Like if someone had a report called "BEST SPORTS CARS" and had the Eclipse as #1, the Tiburon as #4, the RX-8 as #5, the M3 as #12, various Ferraris at #20+, and the Lotus Elise at #40 you would probably be like... "uh, something looks fishy here". That's just how I feel about this one. Like if someone told me "hey, look the Fusion is the best car in that segment!" I would scan the list and tell him "whatever, that's a dumb list."

therm8

They do sell very well...now. That'll change in the next few years. They will still sell a lot of them, but not nearly what they do now (based on the current evolution of the product). There are people out there that have never owned anything other than a Camry (poor uninspired saps that they are), and will continue buying the car for as long as they drive. But the less entrenched are going to see better options for the total driving experience and will move back to domestic.


From the survey company:
"Total quality is a unique and complete measure of the total ownership experience. Strategic Vision knows that all aspects of the experience of buying, owning and driving a vehicle interact to form an overall impression. Other measures that fail to recognize this interaction can be misleading."
If you read the basis behind their rating system, it becomes more clear.

Honda and Toyota offer the world's worst warranty for a major brand. The salespeople I've encountered from both were the most pushy and used every high pressure tactic in the book. I don't know anything of their service departments, having never owned one. But other than the S2000 (never been in an Si), the "driving experience" ranks up there with a truck. Heck trucks are more fun to drive. Driving experience is the largest part of ownership. That's what you do with the car 99.99% of the time. It should justifiably be a large portion of any survey worth its salt, imo.

Many "Honda people" I know have downgraded from the Accord to the Civic recently, because the Accord is overpriced and too big. The current Civic is the same size as the Accord was in its previous incarnation. In the 2010's, Honda and Toyota will be the GM and Ford of the 2000's if they don't watch out.

In my opinion, of course.

Sephiroth

I can't understand why the Camry is so popular. It has always been so ugly, had enormous body roll, disproportionate body to wheel ratio, and relatively lifeless engines. They are getting bigger and bulkier, although the new model has improved on the looks somewhat.

My parents owned 1 for a brief period and it didn't impress me at all. They now have a Mazda6 and i can say without a doubt that the 6 is an overall better car.

Having said this i wouldn't say the 6 is really fun to drive, its the better of the family sedans. It's how a family car should be: reduced body roll, an engine that makes some noise and can be reved a little, smooth shifting and smooth ride, good gas mileage.

spork

The answer is simple. Most people don't really like to drive. The average person uses their car to get from point A to point B. They like their ride to be comfortable and reliable, which is exactly what the Camry is. The Mazda 6 is more fun to drive than the Accord and the Camry but it's definitely less of a passenger car than those two.

The Mazda 6 isn't a good family car compared to the Accord/Camry. It's a good car for someone who needs a family car but wants some performance too. When someone wants to pick up a family car, they'll probably put the Mazda 6 lower on their list. Just simply because when you hear "family" car you're talking about a car you take a family out in. The Mazda 6 is worse than the Accord/Camry in
1) Gas Mileage. Not by much but it's lower than the Accord/Camry. Well, I'm not sure about the Camry but the Accord is rated higher.
2) Reliability. The v6 Mazda 6 has gotten a below average reliability rating from Consumer Reports. (Hopefully no one pipes in here about how Consumer Reports has a secret vendetta vs Mazda and how Toyota/Honda pays them off).
3) Comfort. The Mazda 6 is more fun for the driver. The other two are nicer for everyone else in the car... and when you're talking about a FAMILY, you probably have at least 2 other passengers in the car.

The problem here is this board is made up of enthusiasts who actually care about the driving experience. I'm pretty we're in the minority here. I pushed my brother into test driving the Mazda 6 cuz he was telling me he was kinda bored of driving his car. He liked it but he said he didn't really care about driving experience that much esp since his fiancee was gonna drive it most of the time. His fiancee, who sat in the back seat during the test drive (she was tired), flat out said she didn't like the Mazda 6 much considering it was bumpier in the back and had more road noise.

You don't buy a family car for performance. And you don't buy a family car to "show off". You buy a family car because it's convenient. And that's what the Accord/Camry give you: convenience. It's kinda weird I'm sitting here defending two cars that really don't need defending (the car reviewers all agree that those cars are great FAMILY cars), especially since I'm not really even a big fan of those cars.

Spin9k

I think you've hit it right spork. Convenience and comfort (like a couch with a good stereo and a place for snacks) is what most desire. Driving is the distraction they are forced to endure to do to get from A--B. Anything to remove them from that reality is looked at as a positive.

Not that there's too much wrong with that. Too many places have too many cars on the road to allow for enjoyable driving anyway. So people try to make the best of a really bad situation. Althought there are many, many, many better cars to make the ride even nicer and more pleasant, those two work for the masses.

therm8

How anyone can find the rolling around in a boat feeling you get with the Camry comfortable, I'll never understand. The thing feels downright dangerous to drive. It feels like your driving an 80's Buick. Really that applies to any "family" car.

Anyone who thinks the Mazda 6 rides harsh needs to spend a few hundred miles getting their kidneys pounded by an F-body .

spork

The Camry is comfortable *for the passengers*. It's not a drivers car at all. I used to drive one. My parents gave me their Camry to drive after I graduated college. I gave it back when I got my 8 and never looked back.

And the Mazda 6 thing... consider the fact that before the Mazda 6 she sat in the back of the Acura TSX, Acura TL, and Honda Accord EX. And not only that the first Mazda 6 she sat in was the Grand Sport model which obviously was stiffer than normal. I don't think it's harsh at all, but I could definitely tell it was MORE harsh than the other 3 cars.

I have a feeling they're not gonna get the Mazda 6 though. My older bro I think would've really considered it if his fiancee liked it. But she didn't even test drive the car herself (that was the last dealership we went to and she was dozing off in the backseat during that test drive).

But back to the matter at hand, like I said before, I can easily see those two cars losing out on fun to drive factor and emotional attachment. But they do well on sales and service IIRC (from that one link someone found before) and they definitely do well on reliability. If the report said they weighted the fun to drive factor and the emotional attachment factor more than the reliability, sales, service factor, then sure I can accept this. But as it is... I know the Mazda 6 wins in fun to drive and emotional attachment. I know Mazda service sucks (32nd place out of 36 in that one rating) and that their sales is strictly average at best (from that one rating too). I know the reliability ranges from average or above average (I-4 model) to below average (v6). If they're looking at the whole picture as they say, the Mazda 6 shouldn't rate so highly.

GulfCoast

Reputation in the market is hard to change. Honda and Toyota have the reputation for being solid, trouble-free cars. Whenever I see a thread on a Board about reliability, invariably Honda and Toyota will be mentioned.

I considered a used Accord, but then decided against it when I found out that there were significant transmission problems with them in the late 90s/early 00s, I think. Yet, if people talk about transmission problems, they'll talk about Fords, not Hondas.

It bothers me that American companies are often not given credit when they build a good car, but Japanese companies (especially Honda and Toyota) are given a pass when they build a mediocre car. The Camry is a decent vehicle, but it's been boring, boring, boring for a very long time. I thought the original Lexus IS250 looked suspiciously like a rebadged Corolla (the new IS350 is a quantum leaps better), but no one cried "Cimarron" (remember that Cadillac debacle?).

As Toyota and Honda grow to GM size, they may find that it's a lot easier sniping at the heels of GM than it is BEING GM (that is, #1 in the world). Size has advantages, but also significant disadvantages: it's a lot harder to move that much mass, to change that many plants, and to ramp up for a new direction when you have so much invested in what may not be "in."

As for the original post, I'm not surprised if numbers in a single report reveal problems or dissatisfaction. We'll see how they play out year after year.