996 Reliability Survey - Admin Approved!
05-06-2010, 05:36 PM
#77
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We all assume that if someone reports a repair then the repair actually occurred, because there's really very little reason to assume otherwise
There is similarly very little reason to assume that someone is taking the time over a period of many months to report on a car that does not actually exist.
There is similarly very little reason to assume that someone is taking the time over a period of many months to report on a car that does not actually exist.
The great majority of car repairs are not dependent on how the car was driven or cared for. It is not possible to maintain the electrical system, to give a key example. And, even with those repairs that could have been influenced by how the car was driven and cared for, most cars are cared for well enough that they should not have required these repairs.
Major mechanical repairs before 120,000 miles are rare these days, in nearly all car models. In those cases where they are relatively common, the reason is not primary because of how the car was driven or maintained, but because of how the car was engineered.
Major mechanical repairs before 120,000 miles are rare these days, in nearly all car models. In those cases where they are relatively common, the reason is not primary because of how the car was driven or maintained, but because of how the car was engineered.
05-06-2010, 06:10 PM
#78
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do follow up more aggressively if there's something unusual in the data, but this isn't often necessary. It might prove necessary in this case, but no way to say at this point.
I certainly did not intend to "lecture" you on anything medical, and don't think I even contradicted anything you said with regard to the field of medicine. I did suggest factors that would make medical research much more complicated than my survey. Were these not true?
On the factors behind car repairs, I've spent countless hours personally reviewing every repair that's submitted, over 1,000 of them a month at this point. So these aren't preconceptions. Perhaps they're postconceptions.
Here's a list of the ten most recently reported repairs:
1. Coil and oxygen sensor replacement
2. Front window motors replaced - windows would not go up and stay up (anti-pinch sensors bad).
3. Replaced heated seat module on passenger side.
4. Ignition coil failed.
5. Drivers side window control stopped working. Part replaced under warrenty.
6. Check engine lite on with code - bad O2 sensor - replaced and problem gone
7. Rear bushings replaced under extended warranty
8. Replaced struts, shocks, upper bearings
9. ABS, Traction Control sensor went bad. Front hud had to be replaced. Also replace deck lid struts. All repairs covered under warranty minus $100.00 deductable.
10. Front brakes started locking up. Mechanic released them but couldn't bleed one side ended up replacing both front calipers. Recommended replacing rotors stating they had over heated and where compromised Calipers where warranty, rotors $245.
This is a fairly typical set. None of these parts, with the partial exception of the brake calipers (on a 2008 minivan with 53k km), is a part subject to routine maintenance. The suspension bits could be effected by the types of roads a car is driven on, but there's no reason to suspect that the factor would be any better controlled for with a random sample of vehicles. The sensors, window motors, and modules--all very common repair items--are affected neither by how the car is maintained or how it is driven.
I certainly did not intend to "lecture" you on anything medical, and don't think I even contradicted anything you said with regard to the field of medicine. I did suggest factors that would make medical research much more complicated than my survey. Were these not true?
On the factors behind car repairs, I've spent countless hours personally reviewing every repair that's submitted, over 1,000 of them a month at this point. So these aren't preconceptions. Perhaps they're postconceptions.
Here's a list of the ten most recently reported repairs:
1. Coil and oxygen sensor replacement
2. Front window motors replaced - windows would not go up and stay up (anti-pinch sensors bad).
3. Replaced heated seat module on passenger side.
4. Ignition coil failed.
5. Drivers side window control stopped working. Part replaced under warrenty.
6. Check engine lite on with code - bad O2 sensor - replaced and problem gone
7. Rear bushings replaced under extended warranty
8. Replaced struts, shocks, upper bearings
9. ABS, Traction Control sensor went bad. Front hud had to be replaced. Also replace deck lid struts. All repairs covered under warranty minus $100.00 deductable.
10. Front brakes started locking up. Mechanic released them but couldn't bleed one side ended up replacing both front calipers. Recommended replacing rotors stating they had over heated and where compromised Calipers where warranty, rotors $245.
This is a fairly typical set. None of these parts, with the partial exception of the brake calipers (on a 2008 minivan with 53k km), is a part subject to routine maintenance. The suspension bits could be effected by the types of roads a car is driven on, but there's no reason to suspect that the factor would be any better controlled for with a random sample of vehicles. The sensors, window motors, and modules--all very common repair items--are affected neither by how the car is maintained or how it is driven.
05-20-2010, 12:23 PM
#80
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Response to this thread has been better than I expected.
Total of 144 owners now signed up, and four model years are now at least halfway to the minimum.
The 2002 is closest.
Not yet signed up? Details here:
Car reliability research
Total of 144 owners now signed up, and four model years are now at least halfway to the minimum.
The 2002 is closest.
Not yet signed up? Details here:
Car reliability research
05-20-2010, 05:35 PM
#84
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, it feels kind of like that here.
But it turns out that the people posting in this thread don't represent everyone, or even the majority.
If I have to take a few hits in order to get enough people involved, I'll take them.
More owners have signed up today, and the 2002 is now 2/3 of the way to the minimum.
But it turns out that the people posting in this thread don't represent everyone, or even the majority.
If I have to take a few hits in order to get enough people involved, I'll take them.
More owners have signed up today, and the 2002 is now 2/3 of the way to the minimum.
05-20-2010, 08:36 PM
#85
Quod erat demonstrandum.
(Do you think that maybe you could continue your recruiting process without taking potshots at Rennlisters?)
Last edited by BruceP; 05-20-2010 at 08:36 PM. Reason: Spelling correction
05-20-2010, 08:43 PM
#86
Nordschleife Master
144 owners have signed up, and you feel you can conclude from this that the people who posted to this thread don't represent the majority.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
(Do you think that maybe you could continue your recruiting process without taking potshots at Rennlisters?)
Quod erat demonstrandum.
(Do you think that maybe you could continue your recruiting process without taking potshots at Rennlisters?)
Main Entry: ma·jor·i·ty
Pronunciation: \mə-ˈjȯr-ə-tē, -ˈjär-\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural ma·jor·i·ties
Date: 1552
1 obsolete : the quality or state of being greater
2 a : the age at which full civil rights are accorded b : the status of one who has attained this age
3 a : a number or percentage equaling more than half of a total <a majority of voters> <a two-thirds majority> b : the excess of a majority over the remainder of the total : margin <won by a majority of 10 votes> c : the greater quantity or share <the majority of the time>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(statistics)
Representative sample
Definition
Small quantity of a targeted group such as customers, data, people, products, whose characteristics represent (as accurately as possible) the entire batch, lot, population, or universe.
Yeah dude, you like totally nailed both of those!
I actually kind feel sorry for you that you feel the need to take potshots at others in order to draw attention to yourself.
05-20-2010, 11:03 PM
#88
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it interesting that the person with the "Ph.D. in stamp collecting from a community college" is the one supposedly taking potshots. Or by "taking potshots" did you mean receiving them?
I have no idea who is in the majority. Could be one way, could be the other. It doesn't really matter, since there's no need for everyone to do one thing or the other.
It is clear, though, that some here would like to dictate behavior for everyone. It's not good enough that they themselves don't participate. They want no one else to participate, either.
I have no idea who is in the majority. Could be one way, could be the other. It doesn't really matter, since there's no need for everyone to do one thing or the other.
It is clear, though, that some here would like to dictate behavior for everyone. It's not good enough that they themselves don't participate. They want no one else to participate, either.
05-20-2010, 11:18 PM
#89
I find it interesting that the person with the "Ph.D. in stamp collecting from a community college" is the one supposedly taking potshots. Or by "taking potshots" did you mean receiving them?
I have no idea who is in the majority. Could be one way, could be the other. It doesn't really matter, since there's no need for everyone to do one thing or the other.
It is clear, though, that some here would like to dictate behavior for everyone. It's not good enough that they themselves don't participate. They want no one else to participate, either.
I have no idea who is in the majority. Could be one way, could be the other. It doesn't really matter, since there's no need for everyone to do one thing or the other.
It is clear, though, that some here would like to dictate behavior for everyone. It's not good enough that they themselves don't participate. They want no one else to participate, either.
The potshot I referred to was your gratuitous comment that posters to this thread didn't represent an important constituency. It was unnecessary and just got people fired up again.
I do appreciate you reversing your position on "the majority", though. That, at least, is progress.
Speaking for myself, if you want to continue recruiting and reporting on results, you're welcome to do it and you won't hear a word from me. But as soon as you want to start sticking your tongue out at board members, I'll probably call you on it again. Just sayin'.
05-20-2010, 11:29 PM
#90
Nordschleife Master
I find it interesting that the person with the "Ph.D. in stamp collecting from a community college" is the one supposedly taking potshots. Or by "taking potshots" did you mean receiving them?
I have no idea who is in the majority. Could be one way, could be the other. It doesn't really matter, since there's no need for everyone to do one thing or the other.
It is clear, though, that some here would like to dictate behavior for everyone. It's not good enough that they themselves don't participate. They want no one else to participate, either.
I have no idea who is in the majority. Could be one way, could be the other. It doesn't really matter, since there's no need for everyone to do one thing or the other.
It is clear, though, that some here would like to dictate behavior for everyone. It's not good enough that they themselves don't participate. They want no one else to participate, either.
I know you find this so very hard to believe, but this is not about dictating anything. People are free to do whatever dumb thing they like, and as you're proving they frequently do. I'm fine with that. Live and let live.
This is about scientifically accurate methodology. Several of us have pointed out the statistical flaws in your endeavor and you refuse to listen. You may as well pull numbers out of your butt because that's about as valuable as your "results" will be. The sad thing is that your "data" will be misinterpreted by those that don't know any better as being more meaningful than they are.
You took a potshot at those of us that are trying to correct your assertions that your study has meaning. We have kept this at a professional level so far, but if you want to throw snide comments at those that are qualified to point out the flaws in your study, then you should be careful as we're also Olympic gold medal winners in snide comments and the facts are not currently on your side.
You want to know why some of us are speaking out against this effort? Plain and simple, we hate to see scientifically flawed methodology represented as being meaningful and sound when it is not.
As Bruce said, we had let this go and you had to go and start swiping to stir things up again - you reap what you sow.
