Ok guys i am a little bit confused. i was looking in the vehicle section in the consumer report guide and low and behold the 2006 mustang v8 was in the cars to aviod section... i thought the 2005 and up were very reliable cars. what gives here? i have a 2007 gt and that year is not on there but 2006 is close and they are pretty much the exact same car. Any one know why the 2006 is a car to aviod?

 

What areas did they rate it below average? If you look at all of the TSB's associated with our S197's you'd think Ford had their heads up their butts when they were designing and building it. It doesn't take too many things that send you back to the dealer to rate a car lower than another. My 2008 4Runner hasn't had 1 TSB related to a design flaw, design deficiency or operability issue that sent me back to the dealer. Our S197's are chock full of them. Regardless, I think highly of my and my g/f's S197's. But what I consider reliability is night and day between my Stang and my Toyota.

 

i was just surpised.. In the 3 years i have had my 07 gt i had one minor problem with mine...(Knocking on virtual wood) um the problems were drive train, fuel system, electrical sysytem, and a few body and trim problems. all not good!

 

Consumer Reports ratings seem to jump all around. I think when I bought my 2007, it was on their recommended list. Then I think it fell off that list. It's confusing to try to follow what is going on. The recommendation for a particular product changes so often. Also, I don't think that CR does a good job of differentiating between minor problems and major problems. If, for example, you're talking about a fuel problem, it would be helpful to know if it's just a case of needing to jiggle the pump nozzle at the gas station in order to get gas in the car's tank, or whether the fuel stops flowing when you are driving at 70 mph.

The only warranty issue I had was a bad battery. That could count as an electrical problem. So could a major problem with the SJB. But I think CR treats them the same.

 

art i see what your saying and that makes sence. i guess its not my year so i shouldnt be worried

 

It's been awhile since I was a subscriber to Consumer Reports but when I was, I used to complete their surveys on cars, appliances, tools... you name it. If I recall, they broke down automotive issues by cost of repair and another category or 2. Considering they were asking the general public for info, I think their ratings are a very good representative of overall reliability. Unfortunately, I think their info is skewed for vehicles that have been in-service for only 2-3 years. Warranty work is not always a good reflection of a cars down-the-road reliability. Accumulate more data points after 4-5 years and about 50,000 miles or more and that's when true reliability data begins to shake out.

 

thats true to i didnt think of that nuke. Guess we all will have to wait and see how reliable they are

 

So, I guess what I left out is, don't sweat the info for the first year or 3 for a particular model. BUT, keep it in the back of your mind as potential fore warning.

 

Im approaching 50k quick (48xxx now) and i have no problems with my car other then some rattles and an occasional knock i cant pinpoint around start up. I drive alot of highways miles but when im on backroads or some city roads im a little rough on the car.

 

the passenger side leaking and fueling issues probably didn't help the early models ratings