Audi Returns to Top of Consumer Reports Brand Ranking, FCA Returns to the Bottom

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

The automaker that can’t seem to catch a break in overall quality rankings — or more comprehensive ones — doesn’t get a reprieve in Consumer Reports‘ latest brand ranking.

In its 2017 list of the best and worst brands, which combines scores for predicted reliability, road testing, safety and owner satisfaction, a familiar German brand returned to the same podium it occupied last year. Unfortunately for Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, the bulk of its brands languished — once again — on the lowest steps of the pyramid.

For a second year in a row, Audi took the coveted top billing, followed by Porsche, BMW, Lexus and Subaru. Porsche moved up two spots from last year, as did BMW. Meanwhile, Subaru dropped two spots while Lexus dropped one.

The rest of the top 10 includes Kia, Mazda, Tesla, Honda and Buick. Tesla didn’t make last year’s list at all, as CR averages the results of at least two models in order to qualify the brand. It would seem that its appearance in the top 10 pushed one well-respected brand out of the upper echelon: Toyota. That automaker, generally synonymous with reliability and repeat customers, slipped from seventh place to 11th.

Even within the top 10, there’s plenty of variability among individual models. CR notes that Audi’s stellar road test scores pushed it to the top, despite other automakers scoring higher in the satisfaction and reliability fields.

“Only Porsche, BMW, and Mazda earned a recommendation on every model we tested,” stated Consumer Reports. “Audi, Honda, and Hyundai lead the other brands, with 86 percent of their tested lines being recommended.”

Subaru, Volkswagen (23rd) and Mini (24th) all dropped in rank due to reliability ratings. Mercedes-Benz fell from 14th to 20th, while Hyundai and Nissan stayed nearly static in the 12th and 22nd spots.

Among domestic makes, Ford dropped from 16th to 21st place, even though its overall score (65 out of a possible 100) only dropped a single point. The Blue Oval’s luxury marque, on the other hand, rose — Lincoln improved in both standing (17th place to 15th), and score (65 to 68 points). points). Chevrolet rose three spots and three points, ending up at 17th (with 67 points).

There was good news for Cadillac in this year’s list, as GM’s flagship brand moved up six spots to 18th and added eight points to its overall score (58 to 66). The General’s lowest-ranked brand, GMC, slotted in at number 25 with the same score as last year — 60 points.

At Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, the only bright spot was the elevation of the sparse Chrysler brand, but it was the newfound dearth of models — there’s now only two — that helped its ascent. For 2017, Chrysler, now consisting of the venerable 300 and new Pacifica, ranked 19th, with a score of 66. That’s up from last year’s 26th place and 58 points.

Of course, that’s where the good news ends. At number 31, Fiat maintained its dead-last standing, though its overall score rose from 38 to 41. (The sound you hear is not champagne corks popping in Auburn Hills.) Jeep again ranked second-last, with a score that rose to points to 43. Dodge sunk from the 27th to 25th spot and saw its score drop two points to 56.

The Ram brand doesn’t make an appearance on the list.

Jeep stands to potentially improve its brand fortunes next year, thanks to new product and the elimination of two models — the Patriot and first-generation Compass — that consistently dragged it down.

While FCA scored poorly overall, it had company. Mitsubishi again ranked third-last with a score of 51, preceded by Land Rover and its score of 52.

[Image: Fiat-Chrysler Automobiles]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 113 comments
  • SteveMar SteveMar on Mar 01, 2017

    I have several problems with CR's recent changes to its scoring system, since they combined test scores with reliability and satisfaction. In the past, CR rated based on their road test and then recommended based on overall reliability. This meant that a score could test out very well and still be recommended, as longs as reliability is average or better. The new system works on a formula -- that I do not see them disclose -- that combines all of this information into one score. It assumes that every reader evaluates the importance of this information the same way. Now a car that performs worse, but has excellent reliability, can have the same score as a car that scores much higher, but has reliability that is average. Buyers may vary in the importance they give to these ratings, but CR has now taken that away from the reader with its overall score rating. Personally, I value CR's road test information - they have improved the quality and caliber of their evaluations and generally are clearer on their scoring rubric. However, I have less trust in their survey information for reliability and satisfaction. As a subscriber, I have taken their surveys for years. How I evaluate a serious problem may vary from another respondent. I have seen models veer widely in their reliability based upon changes to small components - for example, reliability of in dash electronics. Yet the rest of the vehicle may be reliable in its major components. Or I may see a problem as serious, but another person considers it minor and doesn't report it. I appreciate CR's survey data but think they have made a BIG mistake in basing their overall ratings by overweighting information over which they have no control. I want to know what the publication thinks about a car, as well as whatever survey data they have. But let me determine the overall weight of these data points in developing my own overall rating/

    • Brn Brn on Mar 01, 2017

      I agree about it being confusing. Until I can look at their list and understand why they rank Volvo higher than Ford, despite Volvo being worse in all categories, I don't know how to interpret their ranking.

  • 05lgt 05lgt on Mar 01, 2017

    OMG the SKY is falling because I can't figure out who was in 3rd place last year. For a second year in a row, Audi took the coveted top billing, followed by Porsche, BMW, Lexus and Subaru. Porsche moved up two spots from last year, as did BMW. Meanwhile, Subaru dropped two spots while Lexus dropped one. Audi stays on top. Porsche moves from 4th to 2nd. BMW moves from 5th to 3rd. All good so far. Subaru dropped from 3rd to 5th and Lexus moved from 3rd to 4th. POP!

  • Akear Does anyone care how the world's sixth largest carmaker conducts business. Just a quarter century ago GM was the world's top carmaker. [list=1][*]Toyota Group: Sold 10.8 million vehicles, with a growth rate of 4.6%.[/*][*]Volkswagen Group: Achieved 8.8 million sales, growing sharply in America (+16.6%) and Europe (+20.3%).[/*][*]Hyundai-Kia: Reported 7.1 million sales, with surges in America (+7.9%) and Asia (+6.3%).[/*][*]Renault Nissan Alliance: Accumulated 6.9 million sales, balancing struggles in Asia and Africa with growth in the Americas and Europe.[/*][*]Stellantis: Maintained the fifth position with 6.5 million sales, despite substantial losses in Asia.[/*][*]General Motors, Honda Motor, and Ford followed closely with 6.2 million, 4.1 million, and 3.9 million sales, respectively.[/*][/list=1]
  • THX1136 A Mr. J. Sangburg, professional manicurist, rust repairer and 3 times survivor is hoping to get in on the bottom level of this magnificent property. He has designs to open a tea shop and used auto parts store in the facility as soon as there is affordable space available. He has stated, for the record, "You ain't seen anything yet and you probably won't." Always one for understatement, Mr. Sangburg hasn't been forthcoming with any more information at this time. You can follow the any further developments @GotItFiguredOut.net.
  • TheEndlessEnigma And yet government continues to grow....
  • TheEndlessEnigma Not only do I not care about the move, I do not care about GM....gm...or whatever it calls itself.
  • Redapple2 As stated above, gm now is not the GM of old. They say it themselves without realizing it. New logo: GM > gm. As much as I dislike my benefactor (gm spent ~ $200,000 on my BS and MS) I try to be fair, a smart business makes timely decisions based on the reality of the current (and future estimates) situation. The move is a good one.
Next