Pro tip: Let someone else be the lab rat in the mad experiment on car ownership risk. Details next.  

Save thousands on any new car (Australia-only): https://autoexpert.com.au/contact

AutoExpert discount roadside assistance package: https://247roadservices.com.au/autoexpert/

Did you like this report? You can help support the channel, securely via PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DSL9A3MWEMNBW&source=url

Jeep Shitsville says it’s redressing its former customer crap-ness, which was inspired by Idi Amin, by increasing warranty, adding capped price servicing and lifetime roadside assist, reducing parts costs, increasing tech support, and moving customer care onshore.  Problem is: None of these things affects reliability. Poor reliability stems from under-done R&D. It’s like, bad design plus crap implementation equals poor reliability. Longer warranty doesn’t change that.  But reliability is only half of the customer satisfaction equation. Being dealt with fairly and expeditiously when you have a problem is the other half. No evidence yet that I’ve seen - on moving the needle there, away from ‘Idi Amin’ and towards ‘Nelson Mandella’ on that.   Cultural change is very hard. Especially when you’ve got one organisation importing the product and separate businesses selling it, and they’re currently not profitable. Selling Jeeps cannot be profitable at the moment.  My standard advice to would-be Jeep Buyers is: If you are truly committed to being a lab rat in this experiment, contact your friendly neighbourhood psychiatrist. Wait for some evidence before dropping the big bucks on an enduring bad idea.  When you’re out there asking people their opinion, the needle moves all over the spectrum. Very confusing.   "Just wanted some advice on this vehicle. A lot of people say not to buy and others say it’s a good car. I have heard Jeep has a bad reputation of reliability and service but I would just like to hear your thoughts on his please. Thank you, - Linda  Let’s say you’re out there, researching a new car, asking people you know about their experiences. Everyone you ask seems to be representing their honestly held view, and yet these are often  deeply polarised and seemingly irreconcilable with other people’s accounts.   Jeep cannot be both stellar and also Satan in a Suit. And yet, owners you ask will vote either way. It’s very confusing for the would-be owner, like Linda.  Most people considering these dud brands … they kinda know (or they strongly suspect) that it’s a bad idea. But they are also emotionally enamoured. The gravitational pull of a brand can be quite strong.   And yet, the stories of under-done engineering and malevolent customer support are too prolific and credible to ignore completely. But these act on a different part of the brain. The attraction goes straight to the id, whereas the part that screams ‘bad idea’ hits you in the intellect.   It’s a conflicted state, and because you know what you want, confirmation bias is so insidious: so perhaps you look for, and find, that dude who thrashed his Grand Cherokee for 300,000 kilometres and it was bulletproof. Despite never being serviced and all attempts to break it.    So - there’s your evidence. Justification. Whatever. If you’re a hammer, everything looks like a nail - that’s confirmation bias.  The real problem here is metadata, and bad conclusions. Almost everyone takes their own personal experience of one vehicle, and they extrapolate it up to the brand. That’s the problem.