Talk:CarComplaints.com

Automobiles Low‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Websites: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

I am seriously bothered by carcomplaints.com. There is no scientific or statistical basis to this website. Since it is based solely on customer complaints, and don't use a random population sample their data is not a viable method to determine reliability.

Obviously the vehicles that sell the most will tend to have more complaints. If a vehicle A sells 500 000 per year and vehicle B sells 10 000 per year, you would expect more complaints from vehicle A. This trend is reflected when you observed the "lemons" posted on their website. Most are top selling vehicles.

Another issue with the website is that people may tend to complain more if they bought a vehicle from one company with a reliable history vs a company with a troubled history. If I had 2 cars from a unreliable company, I would expect those vehicles to break down, accepting each one. Now if I got fed up with an unreliable car and decided to spend a little more on a reputable car company with known long term reliability and had a problem, some might be more likely to be more annoyed and post on this website.

(142.176.48.170 (talk) 11:21, 19 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

You are missing the point of the site, I think. The example you gave misrepresents their data in a very odd way -- it makes no sense to compare simple complaint totals across vehicles, as you suggested. Instead look at vehicles individually & you can research complaint trends, & then compare vehicles based on that information. The "lemons" you refer to on their Worst Vehicles page are listed based on several factors involving repair cost & mileage at failure, and NOT simple complaint counts. You apparently missed where this is explained at the top of that page. The NHTSA uses the same exact type of complaint data to determine problem trends to investigate. It's valid when you don't misconstrue how to use it. Jmathis555 (talk) 12:47, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Response: I believe the point of the website it to have a central point for complaints people can use in there research. There will always be false complaints made or invalid complaints. The majority that you see on that site are also rated by others. This, I would believe gives more credibility to the site. Your point around manufactures that sell larger volumes will have more complaints is valid, however it is ideal to know. Look at Holden and Ford in Australia. They are in a world of pain for not complying with local laws and selling "lemons". If more people are aware of common issues, they can ask the dealer if these issues have been resolved. There will always be lemons with mass production, it is how the "lemons" are dealt with. Sites like lemonregister.com reflect how dealers handle lemons. I believe Carcomplaints.com should look at something similar. The more information made available to consumers the better. But information needs to be verified, you can't always believe what you read on the net. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vunoo (talk • contribs) 04:52, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on CarComplaints.com. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]