Thread: Land Rover does not well in survey

Spot on Quiggers.

Originally Posted by Quiggers

I may be wrong, but I may not be... The original KIA Carnival used a 2.5 litre V6 which KIA acquired from Mazda and remade it (obviously badly) for their own purposes. Later, when KIA was acquired by Hyundai, the drivetrain is common to all 'bigger' Hyundais...and 'bigger' KIAs.

Having studied statistics for a while at Uni, they can be used to prove (or disprove) anything, just depends on how the survey sample is done and what criteria and correlates are employed.

IE: 100% of Land Rover owners drive a 4WD. Sounds silly? It's wrong, and I'm sure there are statisticians beavering away to disprove, or otherwise, this 'fact'.

IE: 100% of Freelander owners drive a vehicle where the engine will fail.
It's correct. All in the wording and the timing...



GQ

Cash for comment, if you do it on the radio you get reamed but put it in print and everybody believes it.

It doesnt matter where Landrover is as if you love Landies then you'll buy one anyway but I dont know anyone who loves their Kia.

Statistics are always loaded, I sat in the lunch room the other day and prooved it with the AFL nuts at work.

One bloke who barraks for Hawthorn would take statistics and load them to look better for Hawthorn and Another who Barraks for Essendon did the same thing for essndon.

Now these are prooven stats, apparently published buy the Herald sun but then in some other print media there were other stats that were loaded the other way so as you can imagine one bloke went with the HS stats and the other for the other News papers, point prooven.

The people who do the data collection are not trained to collect data properly and can weigh it what ever way they want and then the people giving the information may not be asked questions properly or phrase questions properly as to not get correct answers.

I think it's just another thing to take with a grain of salt lol

Originally Posted by mcrover

The people who do the data collection are not trained to collect data properly and can weigh it what ever way they want and then the people giving the information may not be asked questions properly or phrase questions properly as to not get correct answers.

I think it's just another thing to take with a grain of salt lol

Yes and no, mcrover.

That sounds sus already )

The questions in collecting the data is the key. Well trained in stats, anyone can use the data for any purpose and skew it, (or skewer it).

Like this: Toyota sell more 4wds than anyone else, therefore Toyotas must be better than other 4wds...

Or: Toyota sell more 4wds to idiots than anyone else, therefore Toyota 4wd owners are idiots.

Stats can prove all of these.......

GQ

I just re read this an found the 'key' line: "Mazda places first among a total of 33 manufacturers, with just 8 per cent of its customers making a claim on their non-manufacturer-warranty policies."

One could assume they don't overly offer a 'non-manufacturer-warranty'...


What is that? Mazda (or anyone else) offers a warranty, but is non-manufacturer? But they know? Or do they? Que?

When I sell the Falcon I'll offer a non-manufacturers warranty, should be able to get one from a Cornflakes box, or Chery Cars in China....or Ssangyong.......or Zil.... on ebaaaaayeee for $1.49 (plus postage)

GQ

I think the "survey" is a collation of claims on one of the UK after market warranty people. I read somewhere sometime about such a survey

If this is so, it would refer to serious problems only as we all know how hard it is to get an aftermarket warranty claim honoured.

In any case, I was reading the Freelander 2 test in the NYT on Sunday
and guess what, the D3 is the worst vehicle in the JD Power surveys also.
The reviewer gave the Freelander 2 a pretty good report.
So its pretty poor when land Rover comes last in just about every survey!!! even with the new "improved" models.
I was reading the trip report of a D3 on the CSR, I think on Exploroz. Thank god, he made it, and the suspension only went down 10 times or so.
By the way , here is a web article referring to the Kia's use of the Rover V6. "I am not always right but I am not often wrong"
Kia's new factory-backed Australian outfit inherits Carnival engine failure
claims

By NEIL McDONALD 23 March 2006


KIA Motors Australia will continue to honour engine failure claims for its
soon-to-be-replaced Carnival people-mover on a "case-by-case" basis.

According to the company's new chief operating officer, Steve Lotter, any
new claims would be evaluated on their merits.

Kia Motors Australia, which assumed distributorship of Kia vehicles in
Australia on March 1 from Ateco Automotive, has a specific case management
program in place for the estimated 3000 V6-powered Carnival models that were
affected by engine gasket problems.

In June last year, GoAuto revealed that Ateco was forced to replace affected
engines with a short (without transmission) engine free of charge, provided
the vehicle was still under warranty.

This warranty was extended to five years and Mr Lotter said Kia had now put
the issue largely behind it.

"I know that within the industry the problem has been addressed very well by
Ateco and Kia Motors," he said.

"But anything like that... the best way to overcome it is to make sure you
handled the problem well, honestly, openly and quickly and then you make
sure it doesn't happen again.

"And certainly on Carnival you wouldn't expect it to happen again."


Mr Lotter said the fix was put in place in 2002 "so this is an old problem
that's been lingering because the Carnival is so successful".

"I think in terms of volume Carnival was probably the most successful in
relative terms, in Australia, and maybe we ended up with a bigger share of
the problems.

"There have been no problems since that change, so there won't be a problem
with the new model."

Mr Lotter said all car companies had problems "from time to time".

"But how you deal with them and how quickly you deal with them is what
determines the impact on the brand going forward," he said.

About 40 per cent of the 7208 Carnivals sold in Australia between the
seven-seat wagon's September 1999 release date and March 2002 suffered
engine failure.

The problem arose through a gasket failure that allowed water into the
cylinders.

The previous-model Carnival's 130kW/220Nm 2.5-litre V6 was a K-Series engine
supplied by the now-defunct Rover Group.

The engine was subsequently replaced by a new (Hyundai-Kia Motors) 184kW
3.8-litre V6 in the second-generation eight-seater Grand Carnival. The new
engine will also appear in the short-wheelbase seven-seater Carnival, which
goes on sale in June.

Carnival's real cost
GOAUTO has uncovered details about the full extent of engine problems with
Kia's Carnival people-mover sold in Australia.

A massive 7800 models were affected, with 5200 engines being changed and 580
models receiving "multiple" engine changeovers.

GoAuto understands that former distributor Ateco Automotive Group had asked
Kia Motors in South Korea to recall the people-movers but this was not done.

During the peak of the problem, 230 loan cars had to be put into service
while cars were being fixed. Management was also concerned about a backlash
from owners in the form of legal action but this did not eventuate.

Kia Motors Australia, which assumed distributorship of the brand here from
Ateco on March 1, has said it would honour any future claims relating to the
Rover-sourced 2.5-litre V6 on a "case by case" basis.


About time they got rid of the POS rover V6.
--
Regards
Dan

Regards Philip A


.

Thanks for that, I stand corrected, maybe.....

By that report does the current (and recent) Carnival REALLY run a 3.8 litre V6? AFAIK all big Hyundais and KIAS use a 2.7 litre donk...

Hmmmmm.

Press releases.....

Hmmmmm........

Oh, looks like I'm wrong, just got a press release from KIA saying a 3.8 is optional on the lwb carnival.....(wonder if they got it from Holden )


GQ

Some fantastic responses......

Thanks guys. It makes me feel a lot more happier and relieved about my new purchase......

Still about 8 weeks away........DAMN !!!

Yeah, but the last statement about Toyota owners is true, statistics prove it.
So does common sense.

Originally Posted by Quiggers

Yes and no, mcrover.

That sounds sus already )

The questions in collecting the data is the key. Well trained in stats, anyone can use the data for any purpose and skew it, (or skewer it).

Like this: Toyota sell more 4wds than anyone else, therefore Toyotas must be better than other 4wds...

Or: Toyota sell more 4wds to idiots than anyone else, therefore Toyota 4wd owners are idiots.

Stats can prove all of these.......

GQ