Consumer Reports Motorcycle Reliability data | GTAMotorcycle.com

Consumer Reports Motorcycle Reliability data

C

CafeRay

Well-known member
Forum Sponsor
Motorcycle media and press never talk about motorcycle build quality and reliability, because they all rely on advertising revenue. Basically, everything is awesome.
They do however, love to reinforce myths and reputations that could be 30 years out of date.
Consumer Reports decided to start collating reliability data from owners a few years ago and released the first report last year. CR gets no advertising revenue, and they get their data directly from polled customers.

I can't post the actual link because its for subscribers only, but you can see a report about the report here:

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/02/22/consumer-reports-motorcycle-reliability-report/

Basically, Yamaha has least major problems, one in ten bikes. BMW, by far the worst, at one in three, close to Harley at one in four. They only had enough statistically significant data to report on BMW (30%), Harley (25%) , Yamaha (10%) , Kawasaki (13%) and Honda (14%).

Strangely, 75% of Harley owners say they would buy a Harley again, and 74% of BMW owners.

Rare problems: engine and transmission (<5%). common problems: brakes and electrical (>20%).

Over to you, internet.
 
Last edited:
does the report state where some of the other European brands fall? Triumph, Ducati, Aprilia, Moto Guzzi, KTM
 
Chaos said:
does the report state where some of the other European brands fall? Triumph, Ducati, Aprilia, Moto Guzzi, KTM
Click to expand...

No. Not enough data to even include Suzuki. They only report data with robust enough numbers for stats (ie. if three guys respond with brand X and one complains of a problem, they cannot report it as 30%).
 
That is pretty interesting. It goes to show that reliability isn't everything when it comes to making sales. Clearly there are other factors at play including marketing, branding and feel.
 
Chaos said:
does the report state where some of the other European brands fall? Triumph, Ducati, Aprilia, Moto Guzzi, KTM
Click to expand...

The article mentions Triumph stating there were not enough responses for them to be statistically reliable, but stated that the response the did receive indicated Triumph was less reliable than the Japanese brands.

If the images below are cut off for you, right click and open in a new tab or browser, then you should be able to read the whole article.



vxMmm6X.png

p1jxBtp.png
 
caius said:
That is pretty interesting. It goes to show that reliability isn't everything when it comes to making sales. Clearly there are other factors at play including marketing, branding and feel.
Click to expand...
Yup. Selecting a motorcycle is a hugely visceral response; we're first attracted to the look of the thing before anything else. It's funny, riders will pore over stats related to HP, torque, latest tech, etc. but I'm willing to bet that reliability statistics are way down the list, if they're even considered. I think reputation plays a large part too. I was surprised to see BMW had a relatively poor showing; I had bought into the myth of German engineering and manufacturing being uber alles when it comes to quality.
Brand loyalty also comes into it, as does personal experience. If, as cited, 3 out of 4 Harley owners experienced no problems, it's not so strange that 3 out of 4 would buy another one. But if you happen to be the 1 in 10 that gets a bad Yamaha, chances are you'll stay away in the future.
I've had Harleys, Hondas, Suzuki, Kawasaki and a string of (pre-Hinckley) Triumphs. Both the best and worst for reliability were Hondas (I don't count the Triumphs because, Lucas). The two H-Ds have been problem free over 14 years/+100,000kms combined, but do require more maintenance than other bikes I've had. Both the Suzuki and Kawasaki had electrical issues that were eventually sorted out.
 
CanadianBiker said:
I had bought into the myth of German engineering and manufacturing being uber alles when it comes to quality.
Click to expand...

This is where CR reports busts that myth on German made cars. They actually show an inverse correlation between quality and price. BMW got its reputation when the competition was British bikes, which, by all measures, were crap for reliability, which is why they disappeared so quickly when the Japanese showed up.
I know an executive at BMW Canada, and they study all the factors and understand the customers in great detail. You don't have to worry about reliability or resale values when 80% of your customers lease their cars.

What is surprising about the BMW and Harley problems is that the majority of those bikes are not performance bikes. What is good to see is that across all brands, major engine and transmission problems are rare. For some reason, the motorcycle industry has not been able to source reliable ABS brake systems from either Nissin or Bosch.
 
CanadianBiker said:
Yup. Selecting a motorcycle is a hugely visceral response; we're first attracted to the look of the thing before anything else. It's funny, riders will pore over stats related to HP, torque, latest tech, etc. but I'm willing to bet that reliability statistics are way down the list, if they're even considered.
Click to expand...

Prior to May 2013, there were no stats available to motorcycle customers on reliability.
 
This is a very interesting topic. One should note the data is not based on a random cross section, but on the people that A) Subscribe to Consumer Reports, B) Have a motorcycle, C) would respond to a survey, and D, E, F, ... , Z) other factors. Only the year, make and models of these people is represented in the data. eg. Would these people more likely buy a brand new Yamaha sportbike, or a Yamaha cruiser?

Edit: I haven't fully read the images above.
 
WoBblyCaT said:
This is a very interesting topic. One should note the data is not based on a random cross section, but on the people that A) Subscribe to Consumer Reports, B) Have a motorcycle, C) would respond to a survey, and D, E, F, ... , Z) other factors. Only the year, make and models of these people is represented in the data. eg. Would these people more likely buy a brand new Yamaha sportbike, or a Yamaha cruiser?

Edit: I haven't fully read the images above.
Click to expand...

You raise an excellent point. Doubtful that the sample size is statistically significant; it's anecdotal at best and people will use it to prop their existing beliefs. Not to say it's without merit but it would be foolish to think it's conclusive.
I doubt any actuary, statistician, or even pollster would consider it conclusive.
 
CanadianBiker said:
You raise an excellent point. Doubtful that the sample size is statistically significant; it's anecdotal at best and people will use it to prop their existing beliefs. Not to say it's without merit but it would be foolish to think it's conclusive.
I doubt any actuary, statistician, or even pollster would consider it conclusive.
Click to expand...

Furthermore, it is not clear which problems are the fault of the manufacturer. Perhaps BMW owners are a bit more complacent about servicing given the sterling reputation of their machines. The box discusses the importance of maintenance: almost certainly the reported problems include those caused by negligence (e.g. improper storage as mentioned in the article). It is simply not feasible that 1 in 5 bikes "experience a major problem". There is surely significant owner responsibility.

The report also does not weigh the severity of the problems. Even though the survey was intended for "serious problems or repairs" the article later claims that "most repairs were fairly inexpensive and performed quickly". Do we have Harleys with faulty indicators (serious at the time but a doddle to fix) being lumped in with Yamahas that have buggered transmissions?

Disclosure: I ride a Honda. Indestructable (with an hour a month of tlc).
 
Furpo said:
Furthermore, it is not clear which problems are the fault of the manufacturer. Perhaps BMW owners are a bit more complacent about servicing given the sterling reputation of their machines. The box discusses the importance of maintenance: almost certainly the reported problems include those caused by negligence (e.g. improper storage as mentioned in the article). It is simply not feasible that 1 in 5 bikes "experience a major problem". There is surely significant owner responsibility.

The report also does not weigh the severity of the problems. Even though the survey was intended for "serious problems or repairs" the article later claims that "most repairs were fairly inexpensive and performed quickly". Do we have Harleys with faulty indicators (serious at the time but a doddle to fix) being lumped in with Yamahas that have buggered transmissions?

Disclosure: I ride a Honda. Indestructable (with an hour a month of tlc).
Click to expand...

Again, excellent points. Clearly, "any" data is not, in fact, better than no data. At least with no data, you're not likely to jump to conclusions or make sweeping generalities.
As Will Rogers said, "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics."
 
CanadianBiker said:
I had bought into the myth of German engineering and manufacturing being uber alles when it comes to quality.
Click to expand...
You have clearly never owned an Audi.

One other problem relating to reliability stats with bikes is that I find a lot more bikers are more mechanically apt than the general car loving population. So when minor problems arise, we'd rather fix them ourselves than take the bike in, and be without it for a week.
 
This is a stupid survey. statistically meaningless. CR has become a joke. Motorcycle problems need to be fixed. Barring owner corrective work, the smart move would be to carefully pole independent mechanics in a manufacturer representative manner. Almost all seriously broke bikes get fixed by the pros. You could have a close look at recalls as well. Did they do either of these?
 
Buzzomatic said:
This is a stupid survey. statistically meaningless. CR has become a joke. Motorcycle problems need to be fixed. Barring owner corrective work, the smart move would be to carefully pole independent mechanics in a manufacturer representative manner. Almost all seriously broke bikes get fixed by the pros. You could have a close look at recalls as well. Did they do either of these?
Click to expand...

You don't understand how CR gets data. They survey owners who report problems, doesn't matter who fixed it.
 
CanadianBiker said:
You raise an excellent point. Doubtful that the sample size is statistically significant; it's anecdotal at best and people will use it to prop their existing beliefs. Not to say it's without merit but it would be foolish to think it's conclusive.
I doubt any actuary, statistician, or even pollster would consider it conclusive.
Click to expand...

The CR report clearly states statistical significance, and lack of significance for Suzuki and Triumph, which is why numbers were not reported.
Also, its clear from these posts people don't understand what "significant" means in statistics.

When these reports surface about reliability of luxury brands, people immediately get their backs up because its not what they want to hear, so if you don't like CR, then go to a listing of major recalls on motorcycles with "do not ride" warnings. You won't like the answer there either.
But, this is 2014, and data is no longer considered valid, and thanks to Fox news, is just ignored in favor of popular opinion.

The reality is people believe what they want to believe, and ignore what they don't want to hear. Good example: General Motors. In the face of all the documents that showed the company knew of a design flaw that affected as many as 30 deaths, congressional investigations and recalls numbers that the company cannot possibly deal with, GM sales have gone UP.

The point is, paying luxury prices does not guarantee quality, it just makes companies more profit, which is why HD and BMW Motorrad have been reporting record profits in the last few years.
 
CafeRay said:
The CR report clearly states statistical significance, and lack of significance for Suzuki and Triumph, which is why numbers were not reported.
Also, its clear from these posts people don't understand what "significant" means in statistics.

When these reports surface about reliability of luxury brands, people immediately get their backs up because its not what they want to hear, so if you don't like CR, then go to a listing of major recalls on motorcycles with "do not ride" warnings. You won't like the answer there either.
But, this is 2014, and data is no longer considered valid, and thanks to Fox news, is just ignored in favor of popular opinion.

The reality is people believe what they want to believe, and ignore what they don't want to hear. Good example: General Motors. In the face of all the documents that showed the company knew of a design flaw that affected as many as 30 deaths, congressional investigations and recalls numbers that the company cannot possibly deal with, GM sales have gone UP.

The point is, paying luxury prices does not guarantee quality, it just makes companies more profit, which is why HD and BMW Motorrad have been reporting record profits in the last few years.
Click to expand...

I understand what significant means. Do you understand what "Meaningful" means? Fanboys are going to report how problem free their bike is and angry owners with bikes with lots of problems are going to report their disappointment. Statistics like this are supposed to help people make informed decisions in the future, not validate past ones. CR should have chosen the respondents randomly. Also their sample size was pathetic even for the manufacturers they did report.

PS I'm insulted that you think I care who wins and who loses. I only care that it accurately represents the truth! Otherwise what's the point?
 
Thats why I always buy Yamaha...of all the years riding I always go back to Yamaha because literally they have never given me a problem.
 
Buzzomatic said:
I understand what significant means. Do you understand what "Meaningful" means? Fanboys are going to report how problem free their bike is and angry owners with bikes with lots of problems are going to report their disappointment. Statistics like this are supposed to help people make informed decisions in the future, not validate past ones. CR should have chosen the respondents randomly. Also their sample size was pathetic even for the manufacturers they did report.

PS I'm insulted that you think I care who wins and who loses. I only care that it accurately represents the truth! Otherwise what's the point?
Click to expand...
I don't know about the statistical methodology used, but I find it hilarious that you talk about fan boys under reporting problems when BMW and Harley are both reported at 30% of owners with problems -- I cannot think of a bigger group of fan boys than riders from those two groups!
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom