The latest TrueDelta Vehicle Reliability Survey results have been posted. These are for the year ending June 30, 2007. Late responses could lead to further changes, but these are unlikely to be large.
For the 2004 Mazda3, I have an average of 5.3 months of data on 16 cars. This is an insufficient sample size, so the result is asterisked and (except for here) is only visible to site members. Anyway, the stat of 29 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.3 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2004 model.
Very much need more 2004s, to get rid of that asterisk next time.
For the 2005 Mazda3, I have an average of 7.4 months of data on 29 cars. The stat of 22 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.2 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2005 model.
For the 2006 Mazda3, I have an average of 8.0 months of data on 35 cars. The stat of 21 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.2 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2006 model.
For the 2007 Mazda3 (about one-third of which are MS3s), I have an average of 5.0 months of data on 30 cars. The stat of 32 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.3 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2007 model. The only reported repair that might be engine-specific was a failed mass airflow sensor. The turbo four does not seem to be having the issues, usually minor, that it has been having in the CX-7 and MS6.
Notably, the repair rates are essentially the same for all four years. A tenth of a repair per year is within the range of random variation.
While the sample size for the 2004 is insufficient, the result for that year is consistent. Often the first year of a design will have a higher repair rate, but that does not appear to be the case here.
Everyone who has been helping out with this research, thanks, I literally couldn't have done it without you. Those who aren't yet helping out, I hope you'll consider doing so. It would be nice to get rid of that asterisk.
Other results:
TrueDelta Vehicle Reliability Survey results
For the 2004 Mazda3, I have an average of 5.3 months of data on 16 cars. This is an insufficient sample size, so the result is asterisked and (except for here) is only visible to site members. Anyway, the stat of 29 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.3 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2004 model.
Very much need more 2004s, to get rid of that asterisk next time.
For the 2005 Mazda3, I have an average of 7.4 months of data on 29 cars. The stat of 22 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.2 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2005 model.
For the 2006 Mazda3, I have an average of 8.0 months of data on 35 cars. The stat of 21 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.2 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2006 model.
For the 2007 Mazda3 (about one-third of which are MS3s), I have an average of 5.0 months of data on 30 cars. The stat of 32 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.3 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2007 model. The only reported repair that might be engine-specific was a failed mass airflow sensor. The turbo four does not seem to be having the issues, usually minor, that it has been having in the CX-7 and MS6.
Notably, the repair rates are essentially the same for all four years. A tenth of a repair per year is within the range of random variation.
While the sample size for the 2004 is insufficient, the result for that year is consistent. Often the first year of a design will have a higher repair rate, but that does not appear to be the case here.
Everyone who has been helping out with this research, thanks, I literally couldn't have done it without you. Those who aren't yet helping out, I hope you'll consider doing so. It would be nice to get rid of that asterisk.
Other results:
TrueDelta Vehicle Reliability Survey results
