BROKEN BRANDS

Herric Tam, via email

I AM a regular Wheels reader and quite appreciate the information that you offer a car nut like myself. However, I am a little intrigued – and concerned – about the way you seem to recommend certain brands and vehicles over others based pretty much purely on vehicle dynamics, paying no attention to their potential (un)reliability.

May I suggest that you take into account this very important issue?

You often have very positive comments to make about, and enthusiastically recommend, vehicles from brands like Jeep, Fiat, Renault and even Volkswagen and Land Rover. One look at JD Power’s surveys of vehicle reliability and dependability studies in the US (and even a cursory Google search for “reliability” along with some brand names) would show them to be notorious for unreliability.

Being the one aspect of motor vehicles that Wheels typically overlooks, you guys continue to recommend them while more consumer-focused organisations and publications at least imply a caveat for prospective buyers.

A prominent publication such as Wheels, in my opinion, should take this issue of reliability more seriously.

After all, at times you’ve barbed criticism of certain cars, and your Car of the Year is aimed at encouraging continuous improvement in the car industry for the benefit of the consumer.

Certainly protecting newcar buyers from spending a fortune on something that gives them grief should be a priority.

I’ll believe you when you say that a Land Rover or VW Golf is a greater pleasure to drive than a Prado or Corolla.

But that’s only when they’re working. Personally, I’d stick with Toyota, thanks.

Wheels tests new cars and their performance while on test. If they fail, we always say so; if not, we can’t speculate on “potential unreliability”. – Ed