Bottom of Consumer Reports ratings

[BS FE 21]

Years ago there was japan version and usa version of the same car made in the same factory. The only difference was a different badge. The usa vehicle was rated one and a half stars lower than the japan vehicle by CR. Maybe it was the difference in manufacturer reporting problems or maybe in was bias. I've doubted CR ever since.

Sponsored

 

[VI Bob]

This contradicts everything that I've read. If you're going to post something like this, please provide a link so others can also read it. Cheers.

 

[Jmuns]

I hope this deters people from buying one. That way I’ll see less of them and if anything happens I’ll get parts quicker.

 

[rocks]

I hope this deters people from buying one. That way I’ll see less of them and if anything happens I’ll get parts quicker.

Warranty parts you will need?

 

[Jmuns]

Warranty parts you will need?

Lmao. I am almost due for some new tires. Could claim a warranty on the fact that the car caused the tires to go bad from driving, making it Fords fault. They made the car so it’s their responsibility somehow.

 

[69cuda340s]

And I wonder what fraction of the Bronco Sports produced are Badlands.

I believe its like 15 percent Ford never intended them to be the high volume trim...

 

[RPYLE50]

IMO, no car is perfect, far from it. I have owned Hondas, Toyotas, Mazdas, and now a Ford. All of them had issues or nits. My 2015 Honda Accord ate tires every 25k miles, regardless of tire brand. I do think that CR is slightly biased towards Japanese brands. I have had zero issues with my 23 Outer Banks (I only have 9k miles however, so time will tell.) My advice: Buy what you like, enjoy the hell out of it, and realize it will have some issue that will drive you crazy. Good travels to all!

 

[TSO_NJ]

IMO, no car is perfect, far from it. I have owned Hondas, Toyotas, Mazdas, and now a Ford. All of them had issues or nits. My 2015 Honda Accord ate tires every 25k miles, regardless of tire brand. I do think that CR is slightly biased towards Japanese brands. I have had zero issues with my 23 Outer Banks (I only have 9k miles however, so time will tell.) My advice: Buy what you like, enjoy the hell out of it, and realize it will have some issue that will drive you crazy. Good travels to all!

DITTO!

 

[sajohnson]

you are linking one cause to the whole ordeal - that is incorrect. CR had no data prior to 2021, so they make educated assumptions based on vehicle parts, usage (especially from the Escape…)…
Then in 2022, they started to pile more data…some with 2023….

now CR has 3 years of data, they can predict reliability with more precision…and here we are. Recalls over that time period is just ONE data point, add surveys, data gathering to that…

Absolutely correct. That's exactly what happened.

The point I've been trying to make is that CR (which I typically defend) should have a separate category for recalls, and reserve judgement on long-term reliability.

Recalls are fairly common, and many cars that are subject to a recall go on to be extremely reliable. Of course others are not, but recalls alone are not a good predictor of long-term reliability.

Another analogy: Suppose a couple buys a new house and it has a couple defects that are corrected by the builder. Does that mean they should quickly unload the house because is is going to have never-ending problems? Maybe, but probably not. Most likely if it is a reputable builder, the house is fine overall.

 

[sajohnson]

Again, I understand your point, and I agree with you to a certain extent, just not as it pertains to the way CR rates vehicle reliability. The issue is--I think--that its reliability surveys are generally meant for people looking to buy a new car, not older cars with 200K miles on them. In that case, a consumer wants to know how often they can expect their new car will require a visit to the service department. For those people, CR's reliability data makes sense.

The page at this link covers in detail the way CR determines reliability ratings.

Thanks for the link. I've been a CR/CU member for about 35 years. I'm not suggesting that their reliability data does not make sense. I have used it countless times over the years. They have ratings for both new and used cars.

I thought I knew how they determine auto reliability. I learned something new:

"For reliability, we ask members to note any problems with their vehicles that occurred in the previous 12 months. They are asked to identify problems that they considered serious (because of cost, failure, safety, or downtime). We ask them to include problems covered by warranty, but not the ones resulting from accident damage or due solely to recall.

So apparently CR has been doing what I've been suggesting -- not counting recalls in the "reliability" score.

So that begs the question -- is the steep decline in BS reliability due solely due to problems NOT related to accidents and/or recalls? If so, that's pretty ugly, because it has fallen off a cliff. Note that they continue to test/rate only the 1.5L models:
https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/ford/bronco-sport/2024/ratings-specs/?pagestop

Quote: "CR’s Auto questionnaire is one of the largest scientific surveys conducted in the U.S. Our 2023 surveys, which were sent to members of Consumer Reports magazine and CR.org, gave us feedback on members’ experiences with over 330,000 vehicles."

For those who say CR is biased toward Japanese mfrs, that is an old discredited trope. If there is any 'bias' it is with their subscribers. However, in such a large group, any bias is negated.

Quote: "However, our reliability questions do not ask respondents about their attitudes or opinions about the reliability of their cars, where one might expect different groups of individuals to have different perspectives. Instead, we ask for factual information about whether specifically defined problems occurred..."

 

[Mark S.]

So apparently CR has been doing what I've been suggesting -- not counting recalls in the "reliability" score.

Well, there ya go. Given this is a survey, I wonder how many owners don't fully read and/or ignore the request to exclude recall work?

 

[CherylD]

The 1.5L will continue to be a sore spot for the model. I love the BS but hate the 1.5L. Adequate power but I just don't trust it. Fortunately, I don't do many miles per so I took the chance. Ford should have had a 2.0L option. The 2.0L makes the BS a much better vehicle. I had the 2.0L in two Lincolns and it was great.

The Badlands is a 2.0 model. So there is one, just not available on all trims.

 

[rocks]

The Badlands is a 2.0 model. So there is one, just not available on all trims.

I know. Too bad it's not an option for the BB and OBX trims.

 

[CherylD]

I know. Too bad it's not an option for the BB and OBX trims.

From what I see on group pages, most who buy the BB model do so out of mpg and price concerns. Perhaps an option on the OBX trim makes more sense.

 

[rocks]

From what I see on group pages, most who buy the BB model do so out of mpg and price concerns. Perhaps an option on the OBX trim makes more sense.

That would have worked for me. I would have gladly spent the extra buck for a 2.0L option.

Sponsored