J.D. Power Kizashi Overview

[DesRado]

http://autos.jdpower.com/research/Suzuk ... /index.htm

http://autos.jdpower.com/research/Suzuk ... atings.htm


Apparently, they don't project the Kizashi as being very reliable, or of good quality. However, the APEAL study looks like a solid assessment.

[KuroNekko]

J. D. Power studies should be largely ignored. They are biased to the core, largely due to their innate structure. They are a research firm paid for by companies to collect data and conduct surveys. In essence, they do research for those who pay them. Hmm, no risk of bias here!
I learned of their inner workings from a Mercedes-Benz Customer Experience executive who told me they pay J. D. Power to conduct surveys and studies.

Suzuki used to get decent scores from J. D. Power until they stopped paying J. D. Power for research. "Coincidentally", J. D. Power started rating Suzukis as poor. The evidence? That APEAL study was conducted while Suzuki was paying them. The Kizashi got rather high marks and even won an award. After Suzuki stopped paying J. D. Power as they neared bankruptcy in North America, ratings of Suzuki vehicles plummeted inexplicably, including the Kizashi's.

One should also examine what these questionable studies are actually measuring. The "Initial Quality Study" examines new owner experiences in the first 90 days of ownership. It's basically asking owners how the car is holding up in the first 3 months yet consumers are led to think it's some sort of quality or reliability measure. Keep in mind J. D. Power has ranked Jaguar as the #2 brand in their "Initial Quality Study" a few years ago. Anyone who knows cars knows that Jags are rather unreliable. It's been known for decades and many studies have revealed this, including just about every Consumer Reports reliability report I've ever seen. However, J. D. Power would make it seem Jags are more high quality and problem-free than every Japanese car other than Lexus. Are Jags... High performance? Yes. Luxurious? Yes. Reliable? Hahahaha. I'd want a tow truck on speed dial if I owned one.
Maybe they've improved but I have strong doubts they are more reliable than Acuras, Toyotas, Subarus, etc.

Going back to the Kizashi; it's damn-near inexplicable how a car that has high owner satisfaction (as the APEAL study measures) can have low scores in the "Initial Quality Study" a year later. How can a car that has alleged poor quality as experienced by owners in its first 90 days still have high owner satisfaction? How can one firm have such different findings in two different studies that asks the same people roughly the same thing just at different times?

While I know a lot of people don't like Consumer Reports (especially among the Suzuki fan base), they are actually the only independent research group. They aren't paid by companies to conduct their studies. CR actually buys all the cars they test and rate. These aren't loaners with perks. They also poll their subscribers for reliability and even go into each component system to get details on what system is problematic.
In essence, they aren't doing the research for the manufacturer like J. D. Power. They are doing it for their subscribers who are consumers. Hence, they are called Consumer Reports.
They also provide longitudinal data so you know what model years have issues and when they were resolved. This makes for valuable data when buying in the used car market.
So how did CR rate the Kizashi? They gave it a 82/100. They gave the Subaru Legacy a 83/100 for comparison. They didn't have reliability data in 2012 for the car because they didn't have enough owners to poll. Yet, J. D. Power somehow does and creates two conflicting studies on the Kizashi.
While I'll certainly state CR has its bias and flaws, they are far more reputable in my mind in comparison to J. D. Power. They actually have more valid studies and much more meaningful data, especially for the consumer. I consider their reliability data second to none and find that it's quite valid in the real world. J. D. Power is measuring other criteria and producing questionable reports, mainly for the manufacturers who pay them.

[nytq]

Got to love the fortune tellers. Just like the guys that come up with what oil will cost in 6 months. Always, Always, Always wrong. Yet the investors drool on speculation. Anyhoo these studies are crap for any car that has only been around for a couple of years. The info they do get is usually from cars with problems, and being there were not that many made, not to mention sold in the US, the bad rap is only highlighted. God forbid they actually spoke with the current Kizashi Owners.

[redmed]

I didn't realize how unreliable my Kizashi is until I read that JD Power report. I had a rattle in the rear last year until I discovered it was just a can rolling around in the trunk. I guess I should have taken that more seriously.

[bootymac]

J. D. Power studies should be largely ignored. They are biased to the core, largely due to their innate structure. They are a research firm paid for by companies to collect data and conduct surveys. In essence, they do research for those who pay them. Hmm, no risk of bias here!
I learned of their inner workings from a Mercedes-Benz Customer Experience executive who told me they pay J. D. Power to conduct surveys and studies.

Suzuki used to get decent scores from J. D. Power until they stopped paying J. D. Power for research. "Coincidentally", J. D. Power started rating Suzukis as poor. The evidence? That APEAL study was conducted while Suzuki was paying them. The Kizashi got rather high marks and even won an award. After Suzuki stopped paying J. D. Power as they neared bankruptcy in North America, ratings of Suzuki vehicles plummeted inexplicably, including the Kizashi's.

One should also examine what these questionable studies are actually measuring. The "Initial Quality Study" examines new owner experiences in the first 90 days of ownership. It's basically asking owners how the car is holding up in the first 3 months yet consumers are led to think it's some sort of quality or reliability measure. Keep in mind J. D. Power has ranked Jaguar as the #2 brand in their "Initial Quality Study" a few years ago. Anyone who knows cars knows that Jags are rather unreliable. It's been known for decades and many studies have revealed this, including just about every Consumer Reports reliability report I've ever seen. However, J. D. Power would make it seem Jags are more high quality and problem-free than every Japanese car other than Lexus. Are Jags... High performance? Yes. Luxurious? Yes. Reliable? Hahahaha. I'd want a tow truck on speed dial if I owned one.
Maybe they've improved but I have strong doubts they are more reliable than Acuras, Toyotas, Subarus, etc.

Going back to the Kizashi; it's damn-near inexplicable how a car that has high owner satisfaction (as the APEAL study measures) can have low scores in the "Initial Quality Study" a year later. How can a car that has alleged poor quality as experienced by owners in its first 90 days still have high owner satisfaction? How can one firm have such different findings in two different studies that asks the same people roughly the same thing just at different times?

While I know a lot of people don't like Consumer Reports (especially among the Suzuki fan base), they are actually the only independent research group. They aren't paid by companies to conduct their studies. CR actually buys all the cars they test and rate. These aren't loaners with perks. They also poll their subscribers for reliability and even go into each component system to get details on what system is problematic.
In essence, they aren't doing the research for the manufacturer like J. D. Power. They are doing it for their subscribers who are consumers. Hence, they are called Consumer Reports.
They also provide longitudinal data so you know what model years have issues and when they were resolved. This makes for valuable data when buying in the used car market.
So how did CR rate the Kizashi? They gave it a 82/100. They gave the Subaru Legacy a 83/100 for comparison. They didn't have reliability data in 2012 for the car because they didn't have enough owners to poll. Yet, J. D. Power somehow does and creates two conflicting studies on the Kizashi.
While I'll certainly state CR has its bias and flaws, they are far more reputable in my mind in comparison to J. D. Power. They actually have more valid studies and much more meaningful data, especially for the consumer. I consider their reliability data second to none and find that it's quite valid in the real world. J. D. Power is measuring other criteria and producing questionable reports, mainly for the manufacturers who pay them.

Good to know! Thanks for sharing

[DesRado]

Cool info Kuro, I didn't know that about JD Power. I have liked CR and don't really have an issue with them so much. I just came across it in my searches for Kizashi stuff. 82/100 is pretty darn respectable, but it's not like that matters to me what others think. I bought the car for me, myself and I alone and if others don't like it, that's their problem.

[ragmopp01]

Ah...Consumer Reports....

It reminds me of a cartoon I saw many years ago in (I think) Road & Track.
You see two guys talking to each other in the foreground and in the background are these cars going off a cliff. The caption reads: I see that Consumer Reports is testing cars again. Loved that cartoon.

Although I do agree that Consumers does have great info in researching for a car (with the exception of Suzuki and Isuzu in the past). Their is usually lots of information you can get from them to help a person in making a decision on a auto purchase. Although in my case for the Kizashi, it was the look and the driving experience that sold me.

[KuroNekko]

It's CR's reliability data that is admirable. Their "Recommendations" and other comments aren't to be taken too seriously if you're an auto enthusiast. They rate cars much like appliances so their views aren't for everyone. For example, they often give the Jeep Wrangler a very poor review and rating. However, the Wrangler is a purpose-specific vehicle and has a design which puts offroad performance foremost. So while it may make a poor everyday road vehicle, it's an excellent offroader... as it was designed to be. Car people get this and buy a Wrangler for its unique characteristics. However, CR likes to compare the Wrangler to the likes of a Honda CR-V and puts everyday driving in top consideration. They then demerit the Wrangler for not being as good on the road.

Also, Suzuki fans hate CR mainly due to the roll-over dispute and consequent lawsuit. Long story short, CR bought a Suzuki Samurai and rolled it when they were turning suddenly at high speed. They then publicly claimed that the Samurai "easily rolls over in turns" and therefore unsafe. As a result, the Samurai became notorious and sales dwindled. Despite being one of Suzuki's most popular cars in previous years, it was shortly discontinued in the US market. Years later, Suzuki tried to sue CR given their statements did not reflect the reality that the car didn't pose a serious risk of rolling over in routine driving conditions. They ended up settling the matter but the damage was done to Suzuki. The Samurai was discontinued and its descendant, the Suzuki Jimny Sierra, never came to the US market despite being offered all around the world.

[Ronzuki]

JWhile I know a lot of people don't like Consumer Reports (especially among the Suzuki fan base), they are actually the only independent research group. They aren't paid by companies to conduct their studies.

BS...I know you've seen the audible test videos of the multiple failed attempts to actually cause a roll-over. If the Samurai's sales surge was allowed to continue at the pace it was going, at that time, Jeep would've been the one going extinct instead. Think about it, one vehicle model was all they had to offer the first couple years and they were selling like hot-cakes. Jeep sales were pitiful before the Samurai arrived. We don't even need to talk about comparing quality and reliability between the two.

Oh yeah, don't be naïve...somebody at CU got PAID, and paid well, to kill the Samurai. Maybe not in the public eye paid, on the corporate statements, but somebody got paid.

Worthless rag and I'll never give them an opportunity to blow any of their opinions up my ass.

[WESHOOT2]

.....any car, of any brand, at any price, can either be a good car or not.

It's the one you have.




The one I have, my 2011 AWD Kizashi S, has been the most reliable car I have ever-ever owned.
Lucky me.





Right front fender liner mostly unattached......