http://www.leftlanenews.com/ford-com...da-toyota.html

 

They're kidding, right?

And what would one suppose a "Ford-commissioned" study to say?

"Yeah, after careful analysis, we've discovered our cars are crap and we thought we would share that with out customers."

 

The same people do these studies for other manufacturers and in the past, the results have mirrored the results from JD Powers.

 

I'm not disputing that the data might not be accurate, I'm questioning the possibility of bias creeping in to any study a company commissions to analyze its own products.

I mean, I know all corporations are squeaky clean, but...

 

Well, like I said, they do these types of studies other manufacturers. If they start biasing the results in each manufacturers studies then the aggregate results will look awefully inconsistent don't you think?

 

I wouldn't expect them to be quite so obvious in their methodology. But a little tweak here and there - who's to know?

All of which is academic, because it sounds from your reply as though this company is hired by numerous manufacturers to do this, so one would expect the results to be "unfiltered" or "cooked".

I think it's quite clear now that Ford's overall quality is significantly on the rise. All that remains is to make product more universally appealing and they'll be there.

 

Agreed.

 

hahahahahaha

that's hilarious.

not even close. If it wasn't for the awesome body and the rumbling, gurgling, burbling V8, this POS turd would get traded in so fast...

I'm at 12,000 miles and have oodles of rattles and shimmies already..... I cant wait to get to 50,000!

If they want quality, kill the unions and the ridiculous costs they create and get some legitimate performance pay incentives going and they will be on the right track....

 

I wanna know how Fords 1284 problems is par with 1250 of honda and toyota.. On par would be Ford at 1250 as well, so they are doing better but still have not equaled the big 2 from japan.

 

Ford must be using the "new math" people have been talking about for the longest time!

 

You're talking about less than a 3% difference. I'd call that on par.

 

But how can you set a % that is considered par and not par. so if 3% is ok then how come not 4% or 5% or 10%....

In this kinda of study there are only 3 posible outcomes.

Being worse (where Ford is)
Being same (what par whould be)
Being better (where we want Ford to be)

 

You'd have to ask a statistician what would be a statistically acceptable variance. Ever seen how in many polls, they'll say something like "the 5% difference is statistically insignificant"? Perhaps the experts at RDA told Ford that the less than 3% variance was insigificant?

At any rate, in my non-professional opinion, it's close enough to say it's "on par".

 

+1 They're doing better now, but have still a long way to go, quality wise. Best wishes to Ford on its road to self improvement.

 

5% variance is usually considered within the margin of statistical error.

 

Me-commissioned study finds my driving skills on par with Michael Schumacher.

Who publishes such things?...

 

I don't think they have a long way to go quality-wise. I think they have a long way to go perception-wise.

 

Just about every major corporation has them done. I work for one of the largest Fortune 500 companies and we have them done every year. Of course, the only ones that get published are the ones with a favorable outcome. Ford's been doing them for years but it's no accident this is the first time they've published the results.

 

I think we have to define what "quality" is, too, because that definition is often a matter of perception.

Is quality defined as reliability?

Is quality defined as fit & finish (both inside and out)?

Is quality defined as "gotta have it" styling?

Is quality defined as customer service (both before and after the sale)?

Is quality defined as vehicle performance; vehicle power and dynamics (vis-a-vis the competition); usability of features; desirability of content; minimal obvious cost-cutting, etc, etc, etc.

Ford has made great strides on some of the above issues; moderate progress on others; and is still behind the eight ball in a few other categories (depending, of course, upon which model we're discussing).

 

See my answers above. Out of my "YES" answers, the customer service is only one Ford still needs to address.

IMO, the "NO" answers don't represent "quality". You could design a car with "gotta have it" styling and tons of features but if it breaks down all the time, it isn't "quality".