The latest TrueDelta Vehicle Reliability Survey results have been posted. These are for the year ending September 30, 2007.
For the 2004 Mazda3, I have an average of 6.4 months of data on 17 cars. This is an insufficient sample size, so the result is asterisked. The stat of 33 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.3 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2004 model.
For the 2005 Mazda3, I have an average of 7.6 months of data on 29 cars. The stat of 27 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.3 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2005 model.
For the 2006 Mazda3, I have an average of 8.7 months of data on 36 cars. The stat of 35 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.4 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 5.9 months of data on 42 cars. The stat of 24 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.2 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, these results wouldn't have been possible otherwise. Thank you also to Antoine and MazdaForums, for being so supportive.
Those who aren't yet helping out, I hope you'll consider doing so. It would be nice to get rid of that asterisk on the 2004. I'd also like to have a result for the 2008 in February.
Other results:
TrueDelta Vehicle Reliability Survey results
For the 2004 Mazda3, I have an average of 6.4 months of data on 17 cars. This is an insufficient sample size, so the result is asterisked. The stat of 33 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.3 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2004 model.
For the 2005 Mazda3, I have an average of 7.6 months of data on 29 cars. The stat of 27 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.3 per vehicle) is better than average for a 2005 model.
For the 2006 Mazda3, I have an average of 8.7 months of data on 36 cars. The stat of 35 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.4 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 5.9 months of data on 42 cars. The stat of 24 successful repair trips per 100 vehicles per year (0.2 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, these results wouldn't have been possible otherwise. Thank you also to Antoine and MazdaForums, for being so supportive.
Those who aren't yet helping out, I hope you'll consider doing so. It would be nice to get rid of that asterisk on the 2004. I'd also like to have a result for the 2008 in February.
Other results:
TrueDelta Vehicle Reliability Survey results
