Renault's biggest problem is that they don't seem to know who owns their cars. I've had two recall notices for the Scenic now (relating to rear seat belt anchor points and an engine management software bug), which relate to a completely different chassis number, and which don't apply to my car when I've followed it up. Very annoying.
Cheers
DP
|
|
|
VOSA's website should answer this one.
Number of recalls by manufacturer for a dozen or so of the mainstream makes in the last five years:
Renault = 65
Peugeot = 85
Citroen = 84
VW = 60
Ford = 55
Vauxhall = 43
Honda = 21 (excluding recalls for power equipment and motorbikes)
Toyota = 76
Nissan = 38
Mazda = 41
Hyundai = 13
Kia = 18
Fiat = 67
These are raw figures, and it must be said that there did seem to be a significant amount of duplicates on that list for all manufacturers.
That said, the general pattern does seem to bear the French report out. Most Japanese firms have lower numbers of recalls than French ones do -- with the one spectacular exception being Toyota.
Problem being this does not take into account the severity of the recall (numbers affected are irrelevant), and how much of this is duplication (the same fault across an entire range might flag as 20 different recalls).
I'd have to spend about an hour filtering through the stats, and I'm not sure I can be bothered.
|
Thanks for the information jase. I should have included in my original post the number of recalls per manufacturer as you have done. Correction below:
Renault 93
Peugeot 87
Ford 67
BMW 65
Citroen 62
VW 55
Opel 50
Toyota 49
Fiat 47
Mercedes 47
I think when you consider this is number of recalls issued/manufacturer then I am not sure that total numbers sold is relevant. After all a recall is a recall whether for 100 cars registered or 10,000.
alfalfa
|
my point in referring to the number of cars sold, was with reference to a line in "Fight Club" where the Edward Norton character plays a character involved in such recalls, etc.
He quotes (thanks IMDB):
A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
valmiki
[edit] ok it's a film! but you get my point?
Edited by valmiki on 17/09/2008 at 14:50
|
Fair point, but a lot of the makes that are at the lower end (Japanese, Korean) may not be huge sellers over here but they do sell in big numbers overseas.
If they initiate a recall in the USA (where they'd have to by that measure) and not here there's hell on (this has happened in the past).
Ford and GM sell many more cars in the UK than in France, with PSA/Renault being the other way around, yet the figures prove similar across both realms.
I'm not entirely sure that numbers play a big role in this anyway. Yes, the cost of 500 court cases is less than the cost of 500,000, but then so is the cost of repairing 500 vs 500,000 cars.
Indeed I'd have thought that a class action suit of 500 people would cost more per person to the manufacturer than a 500,000 one would. So surely the bigger the manufacturer, the *less* likely they are to run with a recall surely?
Edited by jase1 on 17/09/2008 at 15:02
|
|
|
|
|
One parameter which you seem to have ignored is the readiness of a maker to issue a recall. If one is keen 'to do the decent thing' and recall whenever the public (or the posters on this forum) thinks they should, they would go to the top of this list - and we all know what conclusion is drawn from that. So much for 'league tables'.
|
Andrew-T I didn't miss it -- people just chose to ignore it.
Renault and Peugeot are at the top of the list despite some widely-publicised cases where they've had to be dragged kicking and screaming to issue a recall.
Tells you all you need to know really.
|
|
|
Andrew from comments by you and jase does this mean that Renault/Peugeot(lots of recalls) = bad and Toyota/BMW(also lots of recalls) = good.
Or can we draw no meaningful conclusions at all?
alfalfa
|
No conclusions in itself.
I would not consider a company with lots of recalls to be one to avoid -- as Andrew says it is just as likely that they are pro-active as it is that the cars are troublesome.
However, I point you to the Renault Clio bonnet catch fiasco of last year. Here was a fault that would cost Renault pennies per car to fix, and yet it took months and months of slog, investigations by Watchdog and finally VOSA muscling in before they did anything about it.
Peugeot had some similar reluctance recalling cars with dodgy odometers, and random stalling -- I think Ford were caught on that one as well.
So, these two companies do have history, and it makes you wonder what they've covered up over the years.
|
>>I would not consider a company with lots of recalls to be one to avoid -- as Andrew says it is just as likely that they are pro-active as it is that the cars are troublesome.<<
I find that an astonishing statement to be honest. The only reason they are pro-active is because their cars are troublesome and require a re-call. I don't think any car company sits their and thinks "we have a minor problem that does not need attention - but let's be pro-active and recall the fleet".
Any recall costs millions to a car company and they are forced to do it either through legislation because of a safety issue or because the market forces them to offer similar warranties and customer care as their competitors. In the cases you quote the bad press was getting so damaging they were forced into a recall situation.
|
The only reason they are pro-activeis because their cars are troublesome and require a re-call.
Toyota and BMW were high in the L'Automobile list of recalls. Do you reckon they make cars that are more troublesome than say Alfa Romeo, Chrysler and Land Rover?
alfalfa
|
>>Toyota and BMW were high in the L'Automobile list of recalls. Do you reckon they make cars that are more troublesome than say Alfa Romeo, Chrysler and Land Rover?<<
Yes I do think that they have been making cars that are more troublesome........why else would they recall their cars - because they are perfect and they just like to see their customers a little more often.
It is no secret that Toyota have recalled allot more cars than they would wish in recent years - and have had a major drive on improving quality recently to fix that. In fairness to Toyota they will fix issues, but read a quote below from a consumers affairs web site - admittedly back in 2006 but recalls take a while to filter through.
"Toyota prides itself on vehicle quality but the Japanese investigation highlights the pressure on auto executives dealing with reports of problems and is deeply embarrassing for Toyota.
The Japanese automaker is on track to overtake General Motors Corp. to become the No. 1 automaker worldwide. Toyota officials say they are working to maintain and improve quality, even as the company expands rapidly and absorbs thousands of new workers and managers.
Toyota quality came into question last year, as U.S. vehicle recalls of the brand more than doubled although recalls were down industry-wide. The increase at Toyota was due largely to the recall of 4Runner sport utility vehicles and Toyota pickups equipped with the faulty steering."
|
|
|
|
I find that an astonishing statement to be honest. The only reason they are pro-active is because their cars are troublesome and require a re-call. I don't think any car company sits their and thinks "we have a minor problem that does not need attention - but let's be pro-active and recall the fleet".
I was speaking relatively.
Some manufacturers need to be almost forced to admit anything is wrong. For these manufacturers, some marginal components will slip the net -- making their tally appear lower than it should be.
Others, such as Toyota and Honda, will get it sorted there and then. In some cases, the faults may never have been forced to the recall stage by the media. But, the recall was nonetheless deemed necessary by the manufacturer.
So, if you recall *before* the proverbial hits, you will inevitably have a higher effective tally.
If Hyundai can "get away" with only 13 recalls in five years, and Renault are known for not giving in without a fight, how come Renault don't also only have 13 recalls?
|
Others, such as Toyota and Honda, will get it sorted there and then. In some cases, the faults may never have been forced to the recall stage by the media. But, the recall was nonetheless deemed necessary by the manufacturer.
I hear what your saying jase but I suppose I was not trying to differentiate as too whether a recall is a recall or not. I agree the Japs are more honest about their recalls because I really believe honour is still an important part of Japanese culture - even in business. The fact that others seem to be forced into recalling their vehicles just shows they are dishonest in my view. Now would I sooner buy a car of someone who I thought would be more honest with me ? - yes of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
>Can we draw no meaningful conclusions at all? <
I am well aware of the 'fiascos' suffered by Renault et al, and I would not try to defend them. All I would say is that it is too easy to look at a 'league table' and just take it at face value. There are all sorts of factors to consider.
Many people will make blanket judgments based on unpleasant experiences suffered by them or their acquaintances, such as 'never buy one of those again' ... on samples of 2 or 3 cars. Not scientific.
|
I had a recall on my E46 - to replace a wiring harness to the passenger seat belt buckle, which is a little known problem -well who here had heard of it ?
Renault, despite a well publicised and allegedly widespread problem with a bonnet catch - how long did it take for Renault to recall those allegedly faulty Clio.
Draw your own conclusions. I have.
|
Apart from the well publicised problem with the Clio bonnet catch how do we know whether other manufacturers jumped at the chance to put things right or kept it hidden for as long as possible. I think we are guessing or fitting facts to suit our own conclusions (prejudices?).
Some time ago I had a ten year old Golf II recalled to replace the heater valve; should I have been delighted that VW cared about such an old car or been annoyed that it took them so long to find and sort the problem?
alfalfa
|
>>I think we are guessing or fitting facts to suit our own conclusions (prejudices?).<<
I'm not so sure about your comments re- prejudices - I am one of Toyota's biggest fans - I think they make some of the best quality cars you can get and everyone knows that they are the manufacturing and business benchmark the rest of the world copies - and they help even their competitors to do this.
I just don't think they are perfect and sometimes their cars go wrong and need a recall. The customer still has the right to be unhappy because the product has not met the standard advertised - just because your car has been recalled by Toyota, you should still feel let down - even they will say they have not delivered on their promise.
|
In general the Japanese do indeed have a more honourable way of conducting their businesses.
Mitsubishi was caught with its pants down on this issue -- several recalls were suppressed over quite a lengthy period. When it all came out it caused a [b]huge[/b] scandal over there, with executives being fired here, there and everywhere.
Just not in their interests to hide stuff. That's the outcome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
