AutoOnInfo.net: The Guide to Past, Present and Future Automobile Quality
Skip Navigation Links: Automobile Reliability: Menu and Summary of 2012 GPAs: Worst SUVs in 2012

Shop Amazon.com via Auto on Info.

2012 Auto, Brand, and Manufacturer Reliability GPAs and Grades

Skip Navigation Links
Home Page
Automobile ReliabilityExpand Automobile Reliability
Automobile DurabilityExpand Automobile Durability
Automobile QualityExpand Automobile Quality
Brand Grades + Mkt SharesExpand Brand Grades + Mkt Shares
Shares of CR's Bad CarsExpand Shares of CR's Bad Cars
CAA's Excellence Awards
RI's 2007 Top 200
HI's 2006 Best and Worst
True Values of Big 3s
High Mileage Roster
History of Ford Fires
DaimlerChrysler Letter
Auto Ezine Articles
Auto ArticlesBase Articles
Visitor Comments
Website Awards Received
PDF Files
Site Manager
Best Answer Cites
Charts for Reports
History of AutoOnInfo.net
 
 

2012's Worst SUVs Sold in North America: Table and Charts
by James Bleeker

This page provides the table giving the 2012 Auto Reliability GPAs of the worst sport-utility vehicles in 2012, charts of manufacturer shares of the worst SUVs in 2012, and a chart depicting the Overall Reliability GPAs of the 15 best SUVs in 2012 and the 15 worst SUVs in 2012.

The Table

The table below provides the 2012 Auto Reliability GPAs and Grades of the worst of the sport-utility vehicles sold in the U.S.

Reliability GPAs for 4 age ranges are given so that the visitor may examine more closely the age range that is of greater interest to him or her.

Letter grades for automobile reliability are determined thusly: A if the Auto Reliability GPA is 3.50 to 4.00, B if the Auto Reliability GPA is 2.50 to 3.49, C if the Auto Reliability GPA is 1.50 to 2.49, D if the Auto Reliability GPA is 0.50 to 1.49, and F if the Auto Reliability GPA < 0.50.

The list of the worst SUVs in 2012 includes those vehicles with an Overall Auto Reliability GPA from 0 to 1.84 - in letter grade, from the lowest F to a low C. The list is in ascending order of Overall GPA, i.e., from worst to less worse.

The list of the worst SUVs in 2012 is of value to those buyers who want to avoid the worst, but are rather indifferent to whether a vehicle model is among the best.

The Reliability GPAs and Grades of the Worst SUVs in 2012

ID Auto Manufacturer Line Model Model GPA for 0-to-4 Year Old Vehicles Model GPA for 2-to-6 Year Old Vehicles Model GPA for 4-to-8 Year Old Vehicles Model GPA for 6-to-10 Year Old Vehicles Overall Reliability GPA Grade Based on Overall GPA Minimum Reliability GPA Grade Based on Minimum GPA Number of Model Years of Data
249 General Motors Saturn Outlook, all-wheel drive 0.00 0.00 0.00   0.00 F 0.00 F 3
196 General Motors Chevrolet Blazer     0.00 0.00 0.00 F 0.00 F 3
127 Daimler Mercedes-Benz R-Class   0.00 0.00   0.00 F 0.00 F 1
213 General Motors Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid 0.00 0.00     0.00 F 0.00 F 1
386 Volkswagen Volkswagen Touareg     0.00 0.00 0.00 F 0.00 F 1
114 Chrysler Dodge Nitro   0.00 0.00   0.00 F 0.00 F 1
111 Chrysler Dodge Journey 0.33 0.00     0.17 F 0.00 F 3
371 Volkswagen Audi Q5, V6 0.33 0.00     0.17 F 0.00 F 3
124 Daimler Mercedes-Benz GL-Class 0.75 0.00 0.00   0.25 F 0.00 F 5
100 Chrysler Chrysler PT Cruiser, non-turbo 0.50 0.33 0.00 0.50 0.33 F 0.00 F 8
219 General Motors GMC Acadia, all-wheel drive 1.00 0.00 0.00   0.33 F 0.00 F 5
94 Chrysler Jeep Wrangler, 4-door 1.00 0.00 0.00   0.33 F 0.00 F 5
178 General Motors Buick Enclave, all-wheel drive 0.75 0.00     0.38 F 0.00 F 4
282 Kia Kia Sorento, V6 0.50 0.67 0.75 0.33 0.56 D 0.33 F 7
220 General Motors GMC Acadia, front-wheel drive 1.50 0.33 0.00   0.61 D 0.00 F 5
147 Ford Ford Flex 1.33 0.00     0.67 D 0.00 F 3
298 Mazda Mazda Tribute, 4 cylinder, awd 1.33 0.00     0.67 D 0.00 F 3
372 Volkswagen Audi Q7 0.00 1.00 1.00   0.67 D 0.00 F 2
78 BMW BMW X5, 6-cylinder 0.33 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.71 D 0.33 F 9
190 General Motors Cadillac SRX, V6 1.33 0.67 0.50 0.50 0.75 D 0.50 D 7
222 General Motors GMC Envoy, V8 0.00 0.33 1.00 1.67 0.75 D 0.00 F 6
189 General Motors Cadillac Escalade 0.00 0.33 1.33 1.50 0.79 D 0.00 F 5
92 Chrysler Jeep Patriot 1.67 1.00 0.00   0.89 D 0.00 F 4
202 General Motors Chevrolet Equinox, V6 1.75 1.25 0.67 0.00 0.92 D 0.00 F 7
99 Chrysler Chrysler Pacifica 0.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 D 0.00 F 5
87 Chrysler Jeep Commander 1.00 1.00 1.00   1.00 D 1.00 D 3
162 Ford Lincoln MKT 1.00       1.00 D 1.00 D 1
289 Land Rover - Tata Land Rover LR3   1.00 1.00   1.00 D 1.00 D 1
88 Chrysler Jeep Compass   1.00 1.00   1.00 D 1.00 D 1
363 Volvo - Geely Volvo XC90, 6-cylinder 1.50 2.00 0.67 0.00 1.04 D 0.00 F 5
126 Daimler Mercedes-Benz M-Class, V6 1.75 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.06 D 0.50 D 7
231 General Motors GMC Yukon XL 1.25 0.75 1.00 1.50 1.13 D 0.75 D 10
211 General Motors Chevrolet Suburban 1.25 0.75 1.00 1.50 1.13 D 0.75 D 10
173 Ford Mercury Mountaineer, V8 1.50 1.00 1.25 1.25 1.25 D 1.00 D 8
214 General Motors Chevrolet Trailblazer, 6-cylinder 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.75 1.25 D 1.00 D 8
239 General Motors Pontiac Torrent 1.50 1.25 1.00   1.25 D 1.00 D 4
321 Nissan Nissan Armada 2.00   1.00 1.00 1.33 D 1.00 D 2
339 Porsche Porsche Cayenne 0.00 2.00 2.00   1.33 D 0.00 F 2
215 General Motors Chevrolet Traverse, all-wheel drive 1.67 1.00     1.33 D 1.00 D 3
165 Ford Lincoln Navigator 2.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.42 D 1.00 D 6
140 Ford Ford Explorer, V6, 4-wheel drive 2.25 1.75 1.00 0.75 1.44 D 0.75 D 10
293 Mazda Mazda CX-7 2.67 1.67 0.00   1.44 D 0.00 F 4
91 Chrysler Jeep Liberty 1.67 1.25 1.25 1.75 1.48 D 1.25 D 9
327 Nissan Nissan Pathfinder 1.50 1.67 1.25 1.50 1.48 D 1.25 D 8
89 Chrysler Jeep Grand Cherokee, 6-cylinder, V6 2.25 2.00 1.25 0.50 1.50 C 0.50 D 10
184 General Motors Buick Rendezvous   1.50 1.75 1.25 1.50 C 1.25 D 6
77 BMW BMW X5, 35d 1.50       1.50 C 1.50 C 2
90 Chrysler Jeep Grand Cherokee, V8 1.25 1.75 2.00   1.67 C 1.25 D 6
93 Chrysler Jeep Wrangler, 2-door 1.75 1.50 1.75 2.00 1.75 C 1.50 C 10
230 General Motors GMC Yukon 1.75 1.50 1.75 2.25 1.81 C 1.50 C 10
212 General Motors Chevrolet Tahoe 1.75 1.50 1.75 2.25 1.81 C 1.50 C 10
252 General Motors Saturn Vue, V6 2.00 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.81 C 1.75 C 8
136 Ford Ford Edge, all-wheel drive 1.50 2.00 2.00   1.83 C 1.50 C 5
262 Hyundai Hyundai Santa Fe, 4 cylinder 1.50   2.00 2.00 1.83 C 1.50 C 4
 

Note that among the worst sport-utility vehicles in 2012, there is not one by Toyota Motor Corporation, Honda Motor Company, Suzuki Motor Corporation, or the Subaru Division of Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd.

The manufacturers which have offered one or more of the most trouble prone SUVs in 2012, as reported by Consumer Reports subscribers and measured by the Overall Reliability GPA, are General Motors Corporation (with 4 of the 12 worst, 8 of the 21 worst, 10 of the 30 worst, 15 of the 40 worst, 19 of the 54 worst), the Chrysler Group (with 4 of the 12 worst, 8 of the 30 worst, and 12 of the 54 worst), Daimler AG, Volkswagen AG, Kia Motors Corporation, Mazda Motor Corporation, Ford Motor Company, BMW AG, Land Rover, Volvo, Nissan Motor Company, Porsche AG, and Hyundai Motor Company.

In summary, the worst SUVs are very heavily concentrated in two automobile manufacturers - General Motors Corporation and the Chrysler Group; however, the best sport-utility vehicles of 2012 are even more heavily concentrated in two auto manufacturers.

Charts of Manufacturer Shares of the Worst SUVs in 2012

First is a bar graph of the auto manufacturer shares of the 12 worst sport-utility vehicles in 2012.

Automobile Manufacturer shares of the 12 worst sport-utility vehicles in 2012.

All of the 12 worst have a letter grade of F.

Next is a bar graph of the auto manufacturer shares of the 21 worst SUVs in 2012.

Auto Manufacturer shares of the 21 Worst SUVs in 2012.

All of the 21 worst have a letter grade of D or F.

Next is a bar graph of the auto manufacturer shares of the 30 worst SUVs in 2012.

Auto Manufacturer shares of the 30 Worst SUVs in 2012.

All of the 30 worst have a letter grade of D or F.

Next is a bar graph of the auto manufacturer shares of the 40 worst SUVs in 2012.

Auto Manufacturer shares of the 40 Worst SUVs in 2012.

All of the 40 worst have a letter grade of D or F.

Next is a bar graph of the auto manufacturer shares of the 54 worst SUVs in 2012.

Auto Manufacturer shares of the 54 Worst SUVs in 2012.

Chart of the Reliability GPAs of the Top 15 and Bottom 15 SUVs

The following bar graph depicts the Overall Reliability GPAs of the 15 best sport-utility vehicles and 15 worst sport-utility vehicles in 2012.

Bar graph depicting the Overall Reliability GPAs of the 15 best SUVs and 15 worst SUVs in 2012.

 

Caution      When the number of model years of data (appearing in the far right column) for a vehicle is limited to more recent years, the reliability GPAs, Average GPA, and Minimum GPA of that vehicle may be less reflective of the vehicle's reliability over a longer period of time.

The Auto Reliability GPAs are automobile reliability statistics that are obtained from Consumer Reports' auto reliability survey data summarized in the reliability tables of (1) Consumer Reports: New Car Buying Guide: 2012, (2) Consumer Reports: Used Car Buying Guide: 2012, and (3) the April 2012 issue of the Consumer Reports magazine.

The method of computation of the GPAs is probably familiar to nearly every college, technical school, and high school student. A Grade Point of 4.00 (that is, an A) is given to a Consumer Reports Used Car Verdict of "Much Better Than Average," a GP of 3.00 (that is, a B) is given to a CR "Better Than Average" rating, a GP of 2.00 (that is, a C) to an "Average" rating, a GP of 1.00 (that is, a D) to a "Worse Than Average" rating, and a GP of 0.00 (that is, an F) to a "Much Worse Than Average" rating. A 4-year Grade Point Average (GPA) is an average of the Grade Points and is computed using Microsoft's Average(a:b,[c:d],...) function. The Overall GPA given in the table and chart above is the average of the four 4-year GPAs.

AutoOnInfo.net: Helping to inform consumers which autos, brands, and manufacturers are better than good and worse than bad since 2001.

Additional Resources

More detail on brand Quality Grades is given in the Kindle ebook entitled AutoOnInfo.net's Car Quality Series, Volume 2: Brand Quality for Model Years 1985 to 2006 and Brand Market Shares from 1985 to 2009. Links to the Amazon page offering the book are given below.

Icon for AutoOnInfo.net’s Car Quality Series Volume 2: Brand Quality for Model Years 1985 to 2006 and Effect on Brand Market Shares from 1985 to 2009

AutoOnInfo.net's Car Quality Series, Volume 2: Brand Quality for Model Years 1985 to 2006 and Effect on Brand Market Shares from 1985 to 2009

This volume of AutoOnInfo.net’s car guide series offers consumers and researchers an historical summary of the reliability and durability of car and truck brands and examines how these brands have fared in their U.S. market shares. It uses 6-year-old model entries in Consumer Reports’ Used Car to Avoid – also termed Vehicles to Avoid and Worst Cars, Year by Year – and CR’s reliability charts to ascribe quality grades to automobile brands for model-year groups 1985 to 1989, 1990 to 1994, 1995 to 1999, 2000 to 2004, 2005 to 2006, and 1985 to 2006. In addition to ascribing quality grades to each brand, it provides a chart that plots the number of the brand’s 6-year-old model entries in CR’s vehicles to avoid. To examine the effect that a brand’s reliability and durability has had on sales, two or more charts depicting the brand’s U.S. market shares for calendar years 1985 to 2009 are given. These grades and charts and the author’s comments impart an historical perspective that sheds light on the present condition of surviving vehicle lines and their future prospects, individual and institutional shortcomings, and what effect these may have on the U.S.

Also visit www.CarsOnInfo.net and www.CarQualityInfo.net for more car and truck quality tables, charts, graphs, and information.