Over half a million people have read this “advice” article from Gawker’s Two Cents - and it’s totally bogus.
I keep coming back to this article as a prime of example of non-car people thinking they’ve made sense of car data based on what they think are reasonable assumptions.
Which turn out to be such poor assumptions they should have just picked numbers out of a hat.
I’ll quote it so you don’t have to click the link to read it and contribute to the reader total (yes, I didn’t use the block quote thing because there was already a block quote in the quote):
“Mobile car repair provider YourMechanic.com analyzed their own data to find out which car brands and models require the most maintenance over time. They explain:
At YourMechanic, we have a massive dataset of the make and model of the cars we have serviced and the type of maintenance done. We decided to use our data to understand which cars break down the most and have the highest maintenance costs...First, we looked at which major brands cost the most to maintain over the first 10 years of a car’s life. We grouped all years of all models by brand to compute their average cost by brand. In order to estimate annual maintenance costs, we found the amount spent on every two oil changes (as oil changes are generally done every six months).
“According to their data, BMWs were the most expensive to maintain by far, with a 10-year cost of $17,800. They found the luxury brands were the most expensive in general, but many budget vehicles ranked high, too. Saturns were 6th on their list with a 10-year maintenance cost of $12,400.”
And then here’s the image:
I mean, what’s so wrong with just letting the Jalopnik crew write the automotive articles? You know, so it can be right?
Am I the only one who can see the major HEADLINE glaring issue here?