USPSALIMITED
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2014
- Threads
- 27
- Messages
- 615
- Reaction score
- 29
- Location
- Southern Indiana
- Vehicle(s)
- G6 GT PP Guard
- Thread starter
- #1
So I got my March 16 issue & page 60 gives the BMW the only "much better than average" predicted reliability rating of the 15 cars listed.
Mustangs are rated "much worse than average" and the icon of sporty reliability Mazda MX-5 only comes in at "better than average".
I am now confused after having owned Mustangs and the Miata & thoroughly researched the 235 as well as the first two cars. I ran away from the BMW based on what is going on with the 335's in maintenance costs after the cars get some miles and time on them.
So I dig out the 2016 consumer reports buying guide. The 13-15 Mustangs are good to very good in every category except 'noises and leaks' (13 is worse than average and 14-15 are average) , but the 13 and 15 cars are rated 'much worse than average' as a whole and the 14 only average???
BMW 1 & 3 series do about as well as the Mustang in individual catagories but get a good bit more love in the overall verdict ratings. The 2 series has one good year (2015) but I assume that like the 1's and some of the 3's , the lions share of cars sold are 4 cylinder cars that are driven more by soccer Moms than hooligans.
When I consider the above and also all the soft factors for reliability comparison (representative sample size, typical driver, relative costs of repairs) , it seems to me that CR was extremely off base in their conclusions, but perhaps I am just a Mustang fan boy ?
(Being honest they will have to pry my GT from my cold dead hands, so maybe it is just me).
Mustangs are rated "much worse than average" and the icon of sporty reliability Mazda MX-5 only comes in at "better than average".
I am now confused after having owned Mustangs and the Miata & thoroughly researched the 235 as well as the first two cars. I ran away from the BMW based on what is going on with the 335's in maintenance costs after the cars get some miles and time on them.
So I dig out the 2016 consumer reports buying guide. The 13-15 Mustangs are good to very good in every category except 'noises and leaks' (13 is worse than average and 14-15 are average) , but the 13 and 15 cars are rated 'much worse than average' as a whole and the 14 only average???
BMW 1 & 3 series do about as well as the Mustang in individual catagories but get a good bit more love in the overall verdict ratings. The 2 series has one good year (2015) but I assume that like the 1's and some of the 3's , the lions share of cars sold are 4 cylinder cars that are driven more by soccer Moms than hooligans.
When I consider the above and also all the soft factors for reliability comparison (representative sample size, typical driver, relative costs of repairs) , it seems to me that CR was extremely off base in their conclusions, but perhaps I am just a Mustang fan boy ?
(Being honest they will have to pry my GT from my cold dead hands, so maybe it is just me).
Sponsored