You can get a rough estimate of how much of those reliability figures are down to absolute scattershot luck of the draw, because Roper’s (Whirlpool) only laundry machines on the market are literally rebadges of the only Amana machines (also Whirlpool) with no mechanical changes whatsoever, but they score “better.” Squinting at that image, it appears Amana is possibly #20.
Also, the Kenmore bar is complete bullshit since Kenmore/Sears never manufactured a single appliance at any point in history. Every Kenmore model is actually a rebadge of some other manufacturer’s product (handy lookup chart located here) so the build methodology can vary wildly from model to model. So the fact that these are not separated out into their actual brands given how trivial this is to do indicates to me once again that Consumer Reports does not actually have any idea what the hell they’re doing.
Even if you want to group things just by their nameplate since that’s what the consumer will see, fine. But those examples in particular need to have a big fat asterisk next to them and an explanation of what’s actually going on behind the scenes.
It’s possible that consumer’s perception of reliability is affected by warranty and how well/quick repairs are made, which might be a point of difference. There’s also possibly binning of parts going on, with higher reliability batches going into one brand over the other.
for sure!
You can get a rough estimate of how much of those reliability figures are down to absolute scattershot luck of the draw, because Roper’s (Whirlpool) only laundry machines on the market are literally rebadges of the only Amana machines (also Whirlpool) with no mechanical changes whatsoever, but they score “better.” Squinting at that image, it appears Amana is possibly #20.
Also, the Kenmore bar is complete bullshit since Kenmore/Sears never manufactured a single appliance at any point in history. Every Kenmore model is actually a rebadge of some other manufacturer’s product (handy lookup chart located here) so the build methodology can vary wildly from model to model. So the fact that these are not separated out into their actual brands given how trivial this is to do indicates to me once again that Consumer Reports does not actually have any idea what the hell they’re doing.
Even if you want to group things just by their nameplate since that’s what the consumer will see, fine. But those examples in particular need to have a big fat asterisk next to them and an explanation of what’s actually going on behind the scenes.
It’s possible that consumer’s perception of reliability is affected by warranty and how well/quick repairs are made, which might be a point of difference. There’s also possibly binning of parts going on, with higher reliability batches going into one brand over the other.