[SVTSHC]

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

That's being objective ? Sorry, it's called "wishful thinking", pure speculation. Comparing apples to apples is objective, not comparing apples to oranges. Conflating luxury and non-luxury is just silly - they are different classes, one is usually is twice the price of the other. I do give the domestics credit for improving the reliability of their luxury brands, and would not hesitate to pick up an ATS if I was in the market for that type of vehicle.

They're the exact same platforms with the difference being in the quality of interior materials (leather over pleather, stitched leather over hard plastics, etc..) and number of creature comforts available. I'd hardly call that "wishful thinking". When you can get the more complex version right what makes you think cleaning up the stripped variants is going to be so far off?

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

Nice try at changing the playing field. I never talked about "the Asian and European competition" - only the Japanese (and more specifically the bigger Japanese players in my last post). By that standard you've got three of the biggest above Ford and Chevy, with only one (Nissan, long the scum of Japanese automakers in the reliability department) at the bottom.

Changing the playing field? Why because I mentioned the European competition too? The two that I mentioned weren't doing fantastically anyway, I mentioned them because they're competitive with the other makes listed. Competition is competition and when compared to the competition the point of listing everything was to show that domestics are doing average with their blue collar lines right now. It's hardly fair to make them out to be doing terribly. Also, now you're discrediting Japanese manufacturers below the domestic brands? Nissan's the sixth largest automaker worldwide and they're far from considered the "scum of the Japanese automakers."

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

This huge drop in one year points to the weak methodology used by JDPower. Drastic shifts like that only happen due to small sample sizes. Scion sales are relatively low, and the Power survey sample size isn't big enough to reliably take that into account.

So first you reference them, then I use them because you referenced them and now their methodology is weak when it doesn't suit your needs? If you sell 100 vehicles and they use 100 vehicles then that's what your judged on. Making the excuse of Scion having a smaller sample size and JD Power using weak methodology is irrelevant. When your boss wants a project done and selects 5 employees at random to do it you think it matters whether that boss has 100 or 1000 employees to pick randomly from? What your boss cares about are the results, giving an excuse after that just looks like what it is "an excuse".

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

Without seeing the category breakdowns, that's a speculative leap as to the cause of their rating being below industry average; even if true, it was still Ford that OK'ed the systems' release to production.

2010 was the year that god awful sync version two was put into production. The issues with version two were incredible and one of the big reasons Ford did so badly in regards to issues per 100 vehicles. An issue is an issue, since then a lot of the issues with sync; they've since moved to version three which although it still has it's bugs here and there is largely improved. That should reflect in the 2015 reliability study when they review the 2012 vehicles.

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

You're flailing at a dead horse here. I acknowledged earlier that they have improved, but they are still behind the Japanese competition. I notice you just ignored the inconvenient CR data which makes this abundantly clear to anyone without an axe to grind.
Here comes the old anecdotal evidence bias. CR's data may not be perfect, but a sample size of over one million is infinitely better than a sample size of one.

I did look at your CR data and it pointed out what I said before at least in regards to Ford. Sync was a major problem and a factor in why they fell so far after doing well the year before. But that's fine you can assume I ignored it.

Originally Posted by Sport-Tech

Ad hominem attacks - the last refuge of the desperate. JDPower and CR are the only significant players in long-term reliability surveys, so this is just so much blather.

Telling you you're putting your foot in your mouth isn't an attack. It's telling you you're putting your foot in your mouth. Do you take caution signs as personal affronts also? And let me get this straight, JD Power is a significant player with weak methodology.
I'm not arguing this anymore, it's a waste of time; it's not as though suddenly either of us is going to "see the light" anyway. I'm just going to take your view of domestics and chalk it up to subjective opinion, and you can do the same with mine.