WHEN J. D. Power & Associates announced the results of its 2006 study of new-car initial quality on Wednesday, there were surprises at both the top and the bottom of the list.
Porsche, near the low end of the standings in 2005 — below Kia and barely above Land Rover, a perennial poor finisher — leapfrogged to No. 1.
On the other hand, BMW and Mercedes-Benz, both prestigious German brands that earned high ratings in earlier studies, fell well below the industry average in the study that Power, the market research company, has conducted for 20 years. Hyundai, meanwhile, continued its upward climb, placing third in 2006, between Lexus and Toyota.
While Power's research includes surveys of customer satisfaction and long-term reliability, the Initial Quality Study tallies the number of problems customers experience in the first 90 days of ownership. The ratings were based on responses to a 217-item questionnaire from more than 63,000 people who bought or leased new vehicles.
As in previous studies, changes in the standings sometimes reflect troubled introductions of new models, said Joseph W. Ivers, executive director for quality and customer satisfaction research. For instance, the Mercedes-Benz R-Class, with 190 problems per 100 vehicles, helped drag the nameplate down 20 places from its fifth-place ranking last year (when it tied with Cadillac at 104 problems).
Other factors influenced the standings, too. The study was revised this year to distinguish between distinct categories of quality problems, separating those caused by production defects from those that result from design shortcomings. The first type indicates manufacturing quality: a malfunction like power door locks that do not work or a defect in the paint finish.
Problems in design quality are not failures or malfunctions, but features that do not perform as the customer expects — for instance, floor mats that do not stay in position or a computer interface that works as the engineers intended but that owners cannot figure out.
For consumers, the enhanced study offers an opportunity to learn whether an automaker's poor score resulted from problems that require a trip to the dealership or because of frustrations over the quirks of operating a climate-control system. "With all of the new technology and functionality in new vehicles, customers are being challenged to figure out how to operate them," Mr. Ivers said.
And that is where the revised study may stir up controversy. Do design problems have a place in a study that measures quality, or is it better captured in other J. D. Power studies?
"We have always had both in I.Q.S.," Mr. Ivers said. It is just that the company is now drawing a "bright line" between them by breaking out the information. In the course of redesigning the study, Mr. Ivers said, consumers said design issues were as important to quality as defects.
This suggests that an operating system that requires hours of instruction at a dealership, like BMW's iDrive electronic interface, is as frustrating and important as a defect that necessitates a trip to the shop.
The 2006 Initial Quality Study found wide variations in how well automakers performed on the two measures.
Brands with the fewest problems in production quality — defects and malfunctions — included BMW, Chrysler, Hyundai, Lexus, Porsche and Toyota. Brands with the fewest design problems included GMC, Hyundai, Jaguar, Lexus, Nissan and Porsche.
This year's industry average, combining both production and design problems, was 124 problems per 100 vehicles; of that number, 64 were production issues, 52 were design defects and a few did not fit neatly into either category.
BMW's standing was especially hard hit by design problems. In manufacturing defects and malfunctions, BMW tied with Toyota, the king of defect-free vehicles, Mr. Ivers said, but BMW wound up well below the industry average basically because owners of the new 3 Series cannot figure out how to use the features and controls. Voice commands for the climate controls were not recognized and there were problems with the audio and navigation systems. One problem was the iDrive electronic interface, despite BMW's attempts to simplify the system as it filtered down from the 7 Series, Mr. Ivers said.
Hyundai has been moving up in the quality ranks; this year it took third place. In terms of production quality, Hyundai ranked fifth, with 53 problems per 100; Toyota was slightly better at 52.
But when it came to design, Hyundai ranked second, with 41 problems per 100. Porsche, the leader, had only 35. Toyota was eighth, with 47 problems.
"Almost everybody's defect-related benchmark for years has been Toyota, and Honda to some degree," Mr. Ivers said. "That's not changing. But what I've been hearing more and more from the car companies is that they are watching Hyundai's design quality, even some of the luxury brands. Hyundai tends to get the details right."
He added: "The vehicle that is the best argument for the improvement in Hyundai's quality is the new Sonata. It has 99 problems per 100 vehicles. That's very good. And it's a brand-new model, being manufactured in a plant that didn't exist a year ago."
Hyundai's improvement is not a fluke, Mr. Ivers said. "Each generation they come out with tends to be quite a lot better than before."
In addition to the overall nameplate rankings, Power releases the top three individual models within segments — which can confuse shoppers who read that Hyundai tops Toyota as a brand but find what seems to be conflicting reports in advertisements. In each of the segments in which Hyundai competes with Toyota, the Toyota vehicle wins, Mr. Ivers said.
Toyota models ranked first in five categories, more than any other nonluxury brand, with the highest-ranked vehicles being the Corolla, Solara, Camry, Highlander and Sequoia. The Hyundai Tucson ranked first among compact multi-activity vehicles, and four Hyundai models were among the top three in other segments.
Of course, J. D. Power isn't the only game in town when it comes to quality studies. Other market research firms like AutoPacific and Strategic Vision also study quality and customer satisfaction, as does Consumer Reports magazine. Still, the Power initial quality study is highly respected for the breadth of consumers surveyed and depth of the questionnaire, according to David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich.
