Consumer Reports reliability ratings
- Thread starter Dewayne
- Start date
- Replies 24
- Views 4K
ClarityDoc
Active Member
I doubt that a forum is a good place to gauge reliability, since people with no problems will have no motivation to post.
Sent using Inside EVs mobile app
Sent using Inside EVs mobile app
I am not so sure how they would get reliability ratings on a car that has not been in production for more than a year. In most cases, you need to have the car on the market for some time to get enough samples in use to have a reliable sample to derive numbers from. (Last I saw it, only about 13,000 Clarity models have been sold).
Did they publish a reliability rating? I do not have a membership, but if you can tell us what the areas what CR said were the reliability concerns, I think many of use would like to hear what they found.
Did they publish a reliability rating? I do not have a membership, but if you can tell us what the areas what CR said were the reliability concerns, I think many of use would like to hear what they found.
KentuckyKen
Well-Known Member
And even among the posts here, the vast majority are extremely happy with the car and reliability, as far as reported here, has been very good. Most problems reported here are easily fixed with the software updates. CR has more reliability issues than the Clarity IMHO. It’s a shame, I used to trust and use their reports for my auto and appliance purchases. But, alas, no more.
KentuckyKen
Well-Known Member
Oh, Honda cares alright. Just apparently about their bottom line.
I am the only one that I know of that has reported the kind of issue I encountered and I think that it was an isolated case. I think that there may have been some kind of contamination on the primer when the top coat was applied. This should not be construed as a systemic model issue but rather an individual sample issue.
8 months and counting, only issue impacting me is the HV range bug. I'll get pending updates when I go for the 12 month oil change. A software update is so minor I'd count them as 25% of a real issue. Soon these updates will come over the air. CR has normalized issues of every kind for every car to the point where their ratings are almost meaningless. No way to tell how inconvenienced you'll be and whether there will be any long term impact.
MNSteve
Well-Known Member
Now there's a real can of worms.
jdonalds
Well-Known Member
I'm not aware of the paint issue. I think the high revving is designed in. Therefore I don't count it as a reliability issue.
No, the US got the Clarity PHEV before Japan. The reason for the old entertainment system is because the PHEV inherited everything from the older Clarity Fuel Cell. Well, not everything because it doesn't have the Fuel Cell's head-up display or the climate-control ionizer.
jdonalds
Well-Known Member
I don't consider some of the things I've experienced to be reliability issues; just minor annoyances. I think of a reliability issue as something that interferes with me driving the car, or something obviously broken.
1) I had the HV fix done. Not a reliability issue but rather a design choice Honda made that customers didn't like. I give Honda credit for altering their design to please the customers.
2) I had the problem with the dashboard lighting up like a Christmas tree. That was solved by Honda doing a reset. No broken hardware, nothing that kept the car in the garage.
There are a lot of complaints about things like no volume knob, windshield wipers not designed to work well, or high beams that aren't high. None of these are reliability issues.
It seems to me that CR is overstating quite a bit by calling the Clarity unreliable.
1) I had the HV fix done. Not a reliability issue but rather a design choice Honda made that customers didn't like. I give Honda credit for altering their design to please the customers.
2) I had the problem with the dashboard lighting up like a Christmas tree. That was solved by Honda doing a reset. No broken hardware, nothing that kept the car in the garage.
There are a lot of complaints about things like no volume knob, windshield wipers not designed to work well, or high beams that aren't high. None of these are reliability issues.
It seems to me that CR is overstating quite a bit by calling the Clarity unreliable.
PHEV Newbie
Well-Known Member
I'm impressed with the paint quality of my Clarity. One of my friends used to work as a mechanic at a Honda dealership. He told me that the number of new cars that need bodywork after arriving would shock me. A lot of new cars have minor bodywork done to them before they're sold so that could be the cause of the paint problems. BTW, I've had no problems whatsoever after nearly a year. Only issue is the HV mileage estimate, which is super minor.
Emanuel Green
Member
If you take it solely on the basis of the number of issues reported divided by the number of cars that have been produced, CR is probably accurate.
Basically everybody has the HV range issue, unless they don't plug their cars in. And the multiple warnings problem seems to be somewhat common (though fortunately I have not experienced it myself). There are also silly little bugs like the climate/charging timers not updating for daylight savings time.
The good news is that almost everything wrong with the car is a software problem, and that software can be updated. And there's nothing that prevents the car from driving. The issue with CR's reliability numbers is that they make no distinction between "my estimated range is higher than it should be" and "my transmission fell out".
I do think that things will get better as Honda irons out the software issues. And I feel confident that my car will start every morning and take me wherever I need to go, which is the most important thing to me from a reliability standpoint.
Basically everybody has the HV range issue, unless they don't plug their cars in. And the multiple warnings problem seems to be somewhat common (though fortunately I have not experienced it myself). There are also silly little bugs like the climate/charging timers not updating for daylight savings time.
The good news is that almost everything wrong with the car is a software problem, and that software can be updated. And there's nothing that prevents the car from driving. The issue with CR's reliability numbers is that they make no distinction between "my estimated range is higher than it should be" and "my transmission fell out".
I do think that things will get better as Honda irons out the software issues. And I feel confident that my car will start every morning and take me wherever I need to go, which is the most important thing to me from a reliability standpoint.
Actually on the methodology page they do mention this.
Driving, transmission and other major items get 1 point. Infotainment, safety measures that support like BSM, backup camera sensors etc get half a point. So they scale them. Except I think it should continue to evolve into something better than just having weights.
For ex: Tesla fixes a lot of software bugs OTA. so the reliability posted before is not valid if it fixes like half of the points. This also seems to be the case with clarity.
I do think they should just publish 4 different categories in general that car buyers are interested.(with clarity in mind, I wrote examples)
1) general reliability - will engine give up, doors lock/engine acting up, computer acting up, gear change, motor issues
2) new safety measures dependability - how much LKAS/ACC be trusted
3) Driving score - Power in different modes, quietness, handling, tires, braking, acceleration, engine revving issues
4) bells and whistles - infotainment issues, auto windows/seats, vacuum cleaners, HUD, sound systems etc.,
Driving, transmission and other major items get 1 point. Infotainment, safety measures that support like BSM, backup camera sensors etc get half a point. So they scale them. Except I think it should continue to evolve into something better than just having weights.
For ex: Tesla fixes a lot of software bugs OTA. so the reliability posted before is not valid if it fixes like half of the points. This also seems to be the case with clarity.
I do think they should just publish 4 different categories in general that car buyers are interested.(with clarity in mind, I wrote examples)
1) general reliability - will engine give up, doors lock/engine acting up, computer acting up, gear change, motor issues
2) new safety measures dependability - how much LKAS/ACC be trusted
3) Driving score - Power in different modes, quietness, handling, tires, braking, acceleration, engine revving issues
4) bells and whistles - infotainment issues, auto windows/seats, vacuum cleaners, HUD, sound systems etc.,
Including software issues at all is the dumb part. If there was a mechanical/electrical issue with those systems, sure, give them a half point. (e.g., the radar doesn't work half the time or the camera resolution is terrible (the one in the Clarity isn't exactly great)).
I like your solution about separating them out. Considering all the bells and whistles in cars, not doing so is a disservice to the subscribers and can be detrimental to manufacturers. I want to see this car succeed and ill-informed articles like this are not good for business. Most people aren't going to search out a forum to get input prior to purchase to get a wider range of input.