I hear you! it's been 16 years since I gave up mine. I'm ready!
Yep. They have several takes on it. I think zero deductible, 100, 200, 300? I took the 200 for 2700 bucks. I just lost an engine in my Ford van to the tune of 13,000 dollars (Long story, wouldn't be a warranty issue, and I didn't have to pay for it, but it shows you what a new modern Ecoboost engine costs to replace) and my JK had the transmission replaced for nothing at 116k, thanks to the lifetime warranty. I think it is worth it because I'm planning to keep this thing until it dies. My JK is 10 years old and hasn't reached its half life. It looks and feels new. I wouldn't even consider it otherwise. I think they came down from like 3400 or something on it. In my mind I was shooting for $2600, so I wasn't far off. Heck, my JK just had O2 sensors and heater core hoses replaced, and the rear parking brake fixed for $1200. All that stuff would be covered by the Maxcare warranty. It covers MUCH more than my JK lifetime powertrane warranty.
True. Nothing beats the testing of the owner community. True, the Wrangler is a new vehicle that despite all its testing, and all the proven ability of many its components, still has to integrate those components successfully.
Because their desire to have that vehicle now, rather than later, exceeds their own risk profile for being a 1.0 model owner. Of this group I'm sure some threw some caution into the wind, maybe too much so, while others calculated their own aversion to risk, the likelihood they felt problems would surface, and the likelihood if they did that FCA would address them.
I can only speak for myself, all as I know others feel some of this stuff too. A new vehicle has so many moving parts that increase the likelihood of something not only failing, but not being detected as problematic before public release. For all of FCAs testing, and I think it was extremely thorough, nothing beats getting a problem to surface when a wider audience gets its hands on a product that they use for longer periods of time. Components may have miscalculated MTBFs (mean time between failure) metrics, or their integration with other components may have miscalculated system MTBFs, that prove inflated, only after enough time using them reveals their premature fatigue.[/QUOTE]
I hope so. Quality assurance testing, like addressing defects after sale are numbers fueled decisions. For money you can get better testing. The actuaries develop models that predict defect improvement for testing dollars spent, and what the better customer experience translates into in dollars not lost in both servicing problems and consumer good will lost.
All true, but not FCAs end goal. FCAs end goal is profit, and they'll make trade offs in the above you mention if the dollars saved are predicted to be greater than the dollars they spend, if any, dealing with issues that might have not arisen in more costly testing.
And I would know, not think (and not to be obnoxious but to make a point) that FCA would not release the new JL until their actuaries provided them with concrete evidence demonstrating that whatever problems were uncovered, that the cost of fixing them, or holding up the release, was greater than dealing with them another day. That is the profiteers definition of the "solid" you describe. It differs from, and is less than NASAs, in part because of this agency's more "not for profit" mission: despite this agency's devotion to their craft and failures.
I do! I think in large part FCA ironed out testing bugs and will stand by those it hasn't.
Is there any real data to support that claim? I bought the jku as soon as it came out with no real issues, I did however have issues with my 2012. This is the most tested Jeep ever and when they do come out with a new wrangler the design is around for 10 years. They are also under warranty.
I think this was more of an issue back in the 70's and 80's. Manufacturing processes have improved a lot since then. I bought a first year, 2005 Toyota Tacoma, never had a problem with it. Yeah, it was a Toyota, but still.
Well yea just a tad
I am a part of design team at a large company, and am very familiar with our own designs and designs we use from other vendors. Regardless of what you are designing the first production run on a new design statistically is going to have issues (there are outliers but not of any consequence). We also have teams that look at the auto industry reliability/quality (and many more data types) comparisons since they are one of the most mature industries (best data for us to use).
