JD Power Ratings
 

I wonder how JD Power comes up with those vehicle reliability ratings? I just did a side-by-side comparison of the Mazda 6 with the Camry, Accord, and Altima. The 6 had the lowest score for overall mechanical and powertrain reliability(2.5 out of 5 or "average" reliability) compred to the others. But what I found interesting was that the Ford Fusion, which is based on the Mazda6, got a rating of 4.5 out of 5! How could this be?

RE: JD Power Ratings
 

no idea
but that sucks

RE: JD Power Ratings
 

Don't pay attention to JD survey's. They are not a credible resource. The Fusion is a a copy of the 6. Plus the Fusion is made in Mexico. If the employee's in Mexico are working for a few cents an hour and are making better cars then the UAW, we have a bigBIG problem! However it would not surprise me. I supervise union employees. I know how many of the union employeescost US companies billions of dollars each year.

RE: JD Power Ratings
 

Doesn't make any sense, I dont trust JD, they are paid money...Consumer reports does not accept any donations...

RE: JD Power Ratings
 

The JDPower results are based on surveys that they send out to hundreds of customers of all makes/models. I believe for the reliability survey they look at vehicles with 3 years in service (so 2004MY) That was right near the launch and there were a few issues early on that have now been ironed out. (as with any completely new vehicle)

RE: JD Power Ratings
 

Doesn't make sense. From what I can tell from the JD Power site, the 2 1/2 stars for mechanical reliability is supposed to apply to '07 cars only (rating the first 90 days of ownership), not all Mazda6 models throughout the entire model run, or for specific older models. It was the same when JD Power sent me a survey for our '98 Passat nearly a decade ago.

Perhaps Fusion buyers just aren't as critical, or simply have lower expectations from a Ford-badged product...that way what they found with the Fusion has been a pleasant surprise (just a guess)...

RE: JD Power Ratings
 

the 6 shares the v6 with older ford models that may be what is costing it in the mechanical design/reliability aspect. the 4cylinder model i would suspect to have much higher reliability/ owner satisfaction

RE: JD Power Ratings
 

The Duratec V6, while not neccessarily the best perfance engine, is well designed. It has been used in mumerous Ford, Mazda, and Jaguar models. The current version of the 6 (along with Jaguar's X-Type) uses a 3.0L version of this engine that features variable valve timing. The upcoming Mazda6, Ford Fusion, Mercury Millan and Lincoln MKX will use an even more powerful 3.5L version of the Duratec V-6 (oh, don't forget the Mondeo). So if Duratecs were really all that bad, the folks at Ford would be foolish to have continued using it for so long without exploring other options. My only gripe (especially with the price of gas being what it is) is that the engines are not particulary fuel effecient. They get OK milage, but I wish it were better. BTW, from what I understand, the new Duratec35 *should* be swapable with the current version.

RE: JD Power Ratings
 

I seem to remember hearing somewhere that the Noble M400 ran off a turbocharged 600hp version of the duratec as well, though I could be wrong. *shrugs*

-Cameron Keffer

RE: JD Power Ratings
 

The 6.0L V12 used by Aston Martin is essentially (2) 3.0L blocks fused together. (I got to see one running on a dyno....header collectors were red hot.). It's a solid powertrain.