Jaguar Tops J D Power CSI Study For Second Year In a Row

Congratulations Jaguar! Glad to see that they are coming back to their roots. The new XF is gorgeous!

They must not have counted the Ford products.

Yes congratulations Jaguar, you were always my first love.

That is a good job for Jaguar.

Good job, Tata!

Is there really a need to show that you are an ignorant dolt. You should really think before unmasking yourself.

I think you know Tata has been the owner for 3 months. I'll leave it at that

Ford sold the sterling Jaguar marque, yet is keeping the completely redundant Mercury. Go figure!

Wow good work, looks like Toyota people ran some training session at the Jag headquarter.

Great work Jaguar, i would by a Jag over any of the competition.

Jaguars are grossly underrated! The coachwork on most Jaguars are above the competition!

Dud Jaguar sells 60-70,000 cars a year and just so you know a minimum number of responses has to be reached to be in the ratings. So bases upon that there were fewer Jaguar owners to make it into the survey. Which means ea larger percentage of Jaguar owners had to reply to JD Power to make it in . That means they are well motivated owners.

Hope you understand now

DROP THE FORD SHIT. jAG SLAMS AND AS ALWAYS THEY ARE BETTER LOOKING THAN ANY GERAMN CAR (bOXES) ESCEPT THE SWASHED 65. tHE VIPER, AND LAMBI, FERRARI,FORD GT-COBRA.AND WE WILL LET THE VETTE ENTER IN THE BETTER LOOKING CAR THAN THE ALL LOOK ALIKE LESUX, NURDSUN (DATSUN). i BOUGHT MY DAUGHTER AN M3 FOR GRAD FROM COLLEGE (UM)AND WY WIFE PICKED AN A8. dON'T HAVE MUCH RESPECT FOR SOCCER MOM MENTAILITY. YHEY ARE WIGHT AND BOTH LOOK LIKE POLICE CARS. aBOUT THE SAME AS A Malibu
bUY usa AND NOT ONERPRICEDSHIT

Old time car fanatics never thought they'd live to see the day a British or Italian car came in anywhere but last on a study measuring service or repairs. But there it is: Jaguar in first, and for the second consecutive year, on the J.D. Power & Associates Customer Service Index study. There is a catch: This study doesn't measure reliability but rather satisfaction with the dealer's repairs, maintenance, and warranty service. Still, Jaguar isn't bad on pure reliabity, either, finishing eighth on this spring's J.D. Power Initial Quality Study. While CSI is now in its 28th year as a study, it's no longer about overall customer satisfaction with the car, which is what the S in CSI initially represented. Now it's satisfaction with the service department only.

Brands known for models loaded with technology features generally fared better than average. Jaguar, Cadillac, Lexus, Acura, Infiniti and BMW were in the top ten while Audi and Mercedes-Benz were above average. Only Porsche and Land Rover (which is British, true) were below average. If there's a trend on service satisfaction, it doesn't have to do with how many microprocessors are in the dashboard. Suzuki, VW, and Land Rover all saw their scores jump by at least 20 points, but that wasn't enough to keep any of them from escaping the bottom ten. Porsche, Mini, and Saturn saw their scores fall by 10 or more points, with Saturn dropping from No. 6 to No. 10 and Porsche from No. 15 to No. 26. Note that Porsche is No. 1 on the IQS study of mechanical and design defects in the first 90 days.

What makes for a great service experience?
Power's analysis of the results shows dealers can improve service satisfaction by meeting owner needs in several areas.

-- When the customer gets an explanation of the work performed and/or the charges, the score is 100 points higher (on a 1,000-point scale) than otherwise. Pretty obvious, huh? Apparently not, or Power wouldn't be selling the survey results for big bucks to the automakers and individual dealerships.
-- When work and charges are explained fully, customers are more likely to return for service after the warranty expires: 78% who rated service as outstanding say they'll be back, while 49% who rated it as satisfactory say they'll return. This is important because dealerships tend to have higher prices than independent shops and with car sales off, the service area is an increasingly important profit center.
-- Satisfaction is higher (224 points higher) when customers are greeted immediately upon entering the dealership service area than if they cool their heels for five minutes or more.
-- Cars returned cleaner than when dropped off elicit slightly higher scores (48 points higher) than when returned in the same condition, and if they're returned dirtier, scores fall dramatically (224 points lower).

In addition to CSI and IQS, the important Power studies about cars are:

-- The APEAL (Automotive Performance Execution and Layout ) study, du

e shortly, is the most touchie feelie of the surveys and measures "customer delight." Porsche, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Jaguar, and Lexus made up the 2007 APEAL top five. The cheapest car in the top ten is Acura.

-- The VDS (Vehicle Dependablity Study) is the simplest to explain and most like what Consumer Reports measures. VDS tracks vehicle dependability over the first three years. Due in late summer, the 2007 top vehicles were Buick, Lexus, Cadillac, Mercury, and Honda. It's the study that has done the most to disprove the myth that American automakers don't have world-class reliability.

Below is a table of the 2008, 2007, 2006, and 2005 CSI results, with the order of finish and the score each year. The 2008 CSI was based on responses from 87,302 owners of 2005-2007 vehicles. It was fielded late winter and early spring of 2008.

2008 J.D. Power Customer Service Index (CSI)
1. Jaguar, 923 points (of 1,000). 2007: 1st, 925 points. 2006: 4, 908. 2005: 6, 900
2. Cadillac, 922. 2007: 3T, 913. 2006: 3, 909. 2005: 2, 911
3. Buick, 919. 2007: 2, 918. 2006: 2, 911. 2005: 7, 899
4. Lexus, 915. 2007: 3T, 913. 2006: 1, 912. 2005: 4, 904
5. Lincoln, 913. 2007: 8, 901. 2006: 5, 906. 2005: 1, 915
6. Mercury, 908. 2007: 5, 912. 2006: 6, 905. 2005: 10, 894
7. Acura, 904. 2007: 12T, 894. 2006: 12, 889. 2005: 8, 896
8. Infiniti, 903. 2007: 10, 899. 2006: 13T, 887. 2005: 5, 901
9. BMW, 901. 2007: 14, 893. 2006: 16, 884. 2005: 17T, 875
10. Honda, 897. 2007: 19, 887. 2006: 17, 883. 2005: 13, 883
10. Saturn, 897. 2007: 6, 908. 2006: 7, 904. 2005: 3, 905
12. Chevrolet, 896. 2007: 18, 888. 2006: 13T, 887. 2005: 14, 882
12. GMC, 896. 2007: 11, 897. 2006: 20, 879. 2005: 23T, 860
12. Saab, 896. 2007: 20, 883. 2006: 19, 880. 2005: 17T, 875
15. Pontiac, 895. 2007: 9, 900. 2006: 8, 903. 2005: 11, 890
16. Hummer, 892. 2007: 16, 890. 2006: 18, 882. 2005: --, NR
17. Mini, 890. 2007: 7, 902. 2006: 9T, 890. 2005: 31, 844
18. Volvo, 888. 2007: 17, 889. 2006: 9T, 890. 2005: 9, 895
19. Audi, 887. 2007: 12T, 894. 2006: 9T, 890. 2005: 16, 876
20. Mercedes-Benz, 884. 2007: 22T, 872. 2006: 21, 872. 2005: 15, 878
21. Chrysler, 882. 2007: 25T, 868. 2006: 23, 867. 2005: 21, 868
-- Industry Average, 882. 2007: 876. 2006: 873. 2005: 871
22. Hyundai, 880. 2007: 21, 873. 2006: 22, 869. 2005: 26, 855
22. Mitsubishi, 880. 2007: 22T, 872. 2006: 30, 848. 2005: 32, 841
24. Subaru, 878. 2007: 24, 869. 2006: 27, 858. 2005: 23T, 860
25. Ford, 875. 2007: 25T, 868. 2006: 24, 866. 2005: 20, 869
26. Porsche, 873. 2007: 15, 892. 2006: 13T, 887. 2005: 19, 873
27. Toyota, 871. 2007: 25T, 868. 2006: 26, 861. 2005: 25, 858
28. Land Rover, 863. 2007: 33T, 843. 2006: 32T, 840. 2005: 30, 845
29. Dodge, 858. 2007: 28, 853. 2006: 25, 862. 2005: 22, 862
29. Jeep, 858. 2007: 33T, 843. 2006: 28, 851. 2005: 28T, 847
31. Nissan, 857. 2007: 29T, 851. 2006: 29, 849. 2005: 28T, 847
32. Mazda, 851. 2007: 31, 849. 2006: 32T, 843. 2005: 27, 848
33. Suzuki, 846. 2007: 36, 820. 2006: 34, 82