Well, JD Powers released the Initial Quality Survey for 2003 vehicles. It looks like the Cayenne might have had a slight effect on Porsche's placement. OUCH!

However, in my own personal experience, I happen to have one of those first allocation 2003 vehicles and I have not had nearly the problems that others have mentioned, and I have over 22k miles on it now.

Anyways, here is a quote from the TCC article:
"Individual products came make - or break - a manufacturer's overall score, as Porsche painfully discovered. Its 911 is the top-quality nameplate in the Premium Sports Car category, but overall, Porsche experiences a 36-percent decline, to 159 PP100s, due to the troubled debut of its Cayenne SUV.

"In the past, it was always a risk to buy a new vehicle," said Walters, yet despite the Cayenne's problems, "Our data now show there's less of risk in buying a vehicle its first year out on the market.""


2004 IQS Results:

Lexus 87

Cadillac 93

Jaguar 98

Honda 99

Buick 100

Mercury 100

Hyundai 102

Infiniti 104

Toyota 104

Mercedes-Benz 106

Audi 109

BMW 109

Oldsmobile 110

Volvo 113

Acura 117

Chevrolet 119

IND. AVERAGE 119

Chrysler 120

Dodge 121

Lincoln 121

Pontiac 122

Subaru 123

GMC 127

Ford 130

Mitsubishi 130

Saab 133

Jeep 136

MINI 142

Land Rover 148

Saturn 149

Suzuki 149

Kia 153

Nissan 154

Mazda 157

Scion 158

Porsche 159

Volkswagen 164

HUMMER 173


Here is the complete article: http://www.thecarconnection.com/inde...&sid=175&n=156

 

Not too bad for a brand new car platfrom....

 

I can't seem to believe these surveys.

BMW is having major issues with the 7 series and i think the 5 series is too. How can they rank as high as they do.

I also can't believe Porsche is near the bottom and MB is as high as it is when their cars (MB) have become some of the most problematic on the road.

 

Kinda related, my friends 745's "i drive" broke off just yesterday and now he has a "nub" to control his functions.

Funny if ya ask me

 

Maybe Porsche engineers didn't believe in the Weiderleeeeking vision either?

 

If you think about it, 159 defect per 100 cars is 1.6 per car, and my TT has had far more than that. While I've had more than my fair share of these defects, my dealer has fixed every one of them, although I just got a recall notice on the seat frame.

 

well, my S certainly offset the survey quite a bit. it has >10 defects and has stayed in the shop for more than 1 month since I got it last April.

but heck, after struggling to go down the lemon path and some unpleasant experiences with the dealer, the car makes me so happy after all the problems are fixed.

 

Also remember that in all likelyhood, those with numerous problems were probably more inclined to fill out the survey, while generally those without problems are less likely to return the surveys, as they have no gripe.

 

I have a 2003 Cayenne Turbo, and I think they have had too many problems. I never fill out the surveys. I would rather just vote with my dollars in the future. It will be interesting to see how many buyers will buy a second Cayenne. Mine was in the shop for three days and they could not get all the parts needed for it. One trim piece came broken from the factory and I have been waiting over a year for the replacement.

I also have a 911 Turbo Cab, and part of the difference maybe perception. I expect the Cayenne to run everyday, no matter what. The Turbo Cab is only for fun, and I will keep buying 911's. I may change my mind, but I doubt I would buy another Cayenne. There are other everyday drivers that are more reliable.

I wonder how many of the first time Cayenne buyers will be repeat buyers. I think Porsche needs most of them to repeat. The market segment is only getting more crowded.

 

Those surveys list based on total number of problems reported to dealers, ignoring what the problems were. Tranny failure and a rattling cupholder are each one reported problem.

Notice how far apart Ford, Lincoln and Mercury are on that list? Or Lexus and Toyota? They sell the same cars, badged differently. Part of this is probably a factor of how well dealers find and fix small things before they're noticed, how hard the avarge owner of a model is on thier car, and how likely the ower is to notice or care that some small thing isn't working right.

 

From today's NY Times (about the JD Powers study):

 

Everybody (Cayenne and Toureg at least) is justifying their problems (usually small ones) by saying that it is OK because of production of a new model. Think about when Toyota introduced the Lexus sedan or the new SUV they did not have the problems and immediately jumped to the top of the quality ratings and they are still there. The problems that are being experienced by new Porsche buyers should NOT happen. Perhaps if Porsche tried to put a little more money into quality control instead of trying to be the world's most profitable car company they would be producing better trucks (oh yes, and cars!)

 

The new vehicle argument does not make sense to me. I am driving a 2003 and the order guides are already out for the 2005 model. They still have problems with the 2004 models. Considering that it is normally a seven year cycle, does it make sense that 2 years out of 7 should have quality problems?

 

I think it's reasonable to expect more problems in the first year of a new vehicles, but no excuses from the 2nd year onward. That's a good point about Lexus/Toyota - they seem commited to getting the quality right from the start. Sometimes it seems Porsche is more focused on padding that profit margin instead. It took them several years to work out the kinks in the Boxster line.

 

Model year 2003 was only about 3 weeks long - I wouldn't count that one.

My Turbo was just returned to me today after roughly 40+ business days in the shop. It is very nice to have it back again but I am just about out of patience. My hope is that all is well now as I really enjoy this vehicle.