No bias required; you can eye-ball a Tesla and immediately see the panel fitting and paint defect tolerances are much higher than say a Jaguar/BMW (for the panels) or a Toyota (the paint).

These are the defects that consumers seem to be complaining about.

The paint especially is horrible. When it's brand new if compares unfavorably with a 30-year Toyota.

Not just the manufacturers - motoring journalists have generally said the same thing from the get go:

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/tesla/model-s/first-dri...

> Inside the car there are plenty of rich feeling materials, but Tesla still hasn’t quite worked out how to put them together yet. There was the odd squeak from the interior trim when on the move, and some very large gaps around a cubbyhole’s lid.

Interesting. So basically, this J.D. Powers study brings nothing new to the table?

It looks to be another data point, and that's generally a good thing IMHO. There's a comment above somewhere that casts doubt on its methodology, but reports of Tesla quality issues certainly aren't anything new [0][1]

To be fair to Tesla in the above article [0] they legitimately question the sample size and some later articles point to improvements [2].

Personally, I'm wary of the quality issues but I still want a Model X. Make of that what you will.

[0] https://www.businessinsider.com/survey-uk-drivers-say-tesla-...

[1] https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/tesla/model-3

[2] https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-fixing-quality-issues-...

Edit: formatting, typos and missing reference

So you complain the previous assessments had "an obvious bias" but this new one, which isn't from a car manufacturer or a journalist, "brings nothing new to the table" ?