How bad is Mercedes reliability, really?

Routine maintenance and wear items don't get reported.

From the survey form:

Problems with these never count as problems:
Light bulbs -- if not a headlight and takes less than 5 minutes to change
Tires
Suspension alignment
Clutch lining
Fluids (oil, coolant, etc.)
Filters
Battery
Spark plugs and wires
Wiper blades
Belts, including timing belt
Radiator hoses

I also exclude brake pads and rotors from the main analysis. I didn't used to collect data on them at all, but many people wanted me to. So I've started asking people to report brake jobs, but will be reporting any results for them separately.

A few reasons:

1. It would require far more work from participants, and it's hard enough to get people to put in the time currently required

2. Few people are going to admit to not doing the required maintenance. They'd either claim to have done it or, more likely, just not participate

3. People who take part in the research are interested in reliability and are responsible enough to consistently respond to the surveys. Responsible people interested in reliability likely do at least the required maintenance.

4. Most things that break are not things that can be maintained: power window motors, audio systems, alternators, and so forth. And of the items subject to maintenance, only some will be caused by lack of maintenance. Ultimately, a very small percentage of repairs will be due to insufficient maintenance.

5. If need be, I can follow up in cases of major failures to find out if they might have been caused by insufficient maintenance. I don't have plans to do this, but it's a possibility, and would be a much more efficient use of people's time than having everyone report all their maintenance. #2 will still apply, but it will apply regardless.

mkaresh said:

A few reasons:

1. It would require far more work from participants, and it's hard enough to get people to put in the time currently required

2. Few people are going to admit to not doing the required maintenance. They'd either claim to have done it or, more likely, just not participate

3. People who take part in the research are interested in reliability and are responsible enough to consistently respond to the surveys. Responsible people interested in reliability likely do at least the required maintenance.

4. Most things that break are not things that can be maintained: power window motors, audio systems, alternators, and so forth. And of the items subject to maintenance, only some will be caused by lack of maintenance. Ultimately, a very small percentage of repairs will be due to insufficient maintenance.

5. If need be, I can follow up in cases of major failures to find out if they might have been caused by insufficient maintenance. I don't have plans to do this, but it's a possibility, and would be a much more efficient use of people's time than having everyone report all their maintenance. #2 will still apply, but it will apply regardless.

Click to expand...

True Delta may wish to have one of their more knowledgeable marketing reps assist with this very public response. Based on your reply, I can't see why anyone would pay for the services True Delta plans to offer.

Regarding item 1; too much work? You can't possibly be saying True Delta is attempting to produce a product without doing the work. Does True Delta really believe people are willing to pay for a product from a company whose reps publicly state doing things the right way is "too much work"? The work is what separates "fact" from "baseless opinion". If the goal is accuracy, that requires work. If the goal is to produce a product that simply sells, regardless as to how accurate the reporting is, True Delta may find that customer base to be quite small.

Item 2; I feel that those who don't do or report their maintenance shouldn't participate. If your goal is a factual product, the accumulation of facts is required.

Item 3; I believe people to be self centered, and will consequentially do the absolute minimum. When a lessee has 8 months remaining on his 27 month term, and he needs the car serviced, does he (1) bring it in to the dealer for $600 worth of service, or (2) take it to WalMart for an oil change? Basically, it comes down to whether you believe someone will spend an extra $500+ so that the next owner (who they will never meet) will have a better vehicle. If people maintained their cars, PPIs wouldn’t be necessary and every heap on the road would automatically qualify as a Starmark vehicle.

Item 4; most things that break cannot be maintained? You stated that as if it were a fact. If you believe it to be a fact, please state your source. Regarding the three items you mentioned, they can all be directly linked to maintenance. As an example, there’s a service recall for the W208 voltage regulator. Low voltage will fry a PW motor. A bad voltage regulator can cause the alternator to overheat and fail. Voltage spikes can kill any audio system. Without bringing a car in for "service", how does one get a "service recall"?

Many people don’t like CR for one reason or another. How you plan to produce a better product without doing the work required is a mystery.

In the UK the JD Power results have just been published and show Mercedes as the most improved manufacturer. The E class and C class both finished in the top quarter. No results for S class. Not enough to give fair response. Far more sell in US where incomes are higher.

J.D. Power Model by Model

Here’s the league table
http://www.whatcar.com/NonCar/1057740480.jpg

Here’s the main report. Lots of detail on models and well worth reading.
http://www.whatcar.co.uk/news-special-report.aspx?NA=225557

Here are some selections: -
Mercedes C-Class
Rating 81.3%
Overall ranking 23rd=
The C-Class suffered few reliability problems and scored well for cabin layout, but comfort was rated as merely average.
In the past, owners criticised the Merc's maintenance costs, but are now happier that they're getting value for money.

Mercedes E-Class
Rating 81.3%
Overall ranking 23rd=
The E-Class's controls came in for the most criticism, while the gearbox and transmission proved very reliable, and among the best in class. Owners were concerned about the cost of repairs, but fuel economy was strongly praised.

For comparison, some surprising comments on the BMW 5 series: -
11 BMW 5 Series
Rating 79.4
Overall ranking 54th
The 5 Series finishes behind all of its main rivals, and owners were unhappy with its reliability. Performance was rated as above average, while the car's interior and exterior were merely average.

High ownership costs and poor dealer service took the bloom off 5 Series ownership.


Mercedes-Benz CLK
Rating 80.9%
Overall ranking 31st
You expect a Merc to impress, and owners rated the CLK's handling and exterior design highly, along with its performance. However, the car's comfort and convenience didn't rate highly.

The CLK's mechanical reliability was considered to be above average, but problems with interior features and control issues were reported. Owners rated dealer service as merely average, although they were impressed with the helpfulness of staff and the facilities available.

The cost of ownership was classed as average, and the cost of repairs and maintenance was felt to be high.


Mercedes-Benz SLK
Rating 80.4%
Overall ranking 38th=
The SLK scored highest in the class for looks — owners were emphatic
in their praise of the styling, both inside and out. They were also delighted with the car's performance and were fairly pleased with the level of service they received at dealerships.

They rated the SLK as being pretty solid mechanically; very few owners had issues with the engine and transmission. However, nearly a quarter of owners had problems with the seats and a fifth had niggles with the interior controls.

SLK owners were not overly enamoured with the cost of repairs, but were more satisfied than CLK drivers.

Mercedes-Benz A-Class
Rating 81.1%
Overall ranking 28th=
The A-Class ran a very close second to the Corolla Verso. It seems Mercedes has got its act together on the reliability front and, like the Toyota, it performed extremely well in this area.

Interior build quality proved to be the A-Class's major strength - owners reported no nasty niggles, rattles or glitches. Heating and ventilation systems, the stereo and the seats also got the thumbs-up, and the engine and transmission proved to be strong.

The A-Class scored highest for exterior styling. On the downside, owners felt costs of service and repair were too steep.

It is bad. Just ask the MB mechanics themselves. They have stories for each car model.
Among my 999 E and C class cars here are some recent issues:
1. Constantly failing MAF
2. Failed Crank position sensor.
3. Top dashboard cracking in many places.
4. Rear door wont open from inside on one car side.
5. Child seat sensor failing/bad contact. That automatically disables passenger side air bags
6. Recall on one big pulley, which has cracked and done extensive damages in other cars in the past.
and it goes on and on.
The most recent visit to a mb dealer for a free engine check yeilded the following additonal issues info from the mechanic:
Front lights burning due to overheat. New socket was installed on later cars.

In any case , of course cars are mechanical things that do wear and tear, but for the price a MB should not show so much wear and tear mechanically and sthetically (is that how yu spell?? I went to huukedonfonics dude).
Wasting time at a stealership is not a good and efficient way to make use of your time.
A friend of mine got tired of going thru top E class cars in the last 3 years and switched to Lexus. They now go to his home/work and drop a replacement car when it is time for routine works. No malfunction so far.
May be I will do the same soon.

Cheer up.


I don't recall having that many problems with my other US built cars.
Where are they getting those parts made at? Don't they charge enough to do an accelrated life test on those things? I am not willing to pay a lot and have my car having so many problems that seem to be parts quality control related.

MarcusF:

Another marketing rep? There is no marketing rep. There's only me. Welcome to the power of the Internet.

Collecting maintenance information wouldn't be too much work for me. It'd be too much work for participants. In other words, far fewer people would participate. And it's hard enough to get people to participate as is.

There are many more things I'd ask if it would not have an impact on participation to ask more questions.

But it would. So it's necessary to figure which questions are most necessary to ask, both in terms of the likely quality of responses and the usefulness of responses.

You're dealing in hypotheticals, and unlikely ones at that. I've been up close and personal with actual data for six quarters now. I read every response. Every three months I tweak the survey based on what I've learned. The actual data have not indicated a need for maintenance information.

It's possible that CR and JD Power do not collect maintenance information for the same reason.

Are the results of this research perfect? Of course not, very little is. But they will be much better than any reliability information currently available.

Wait for something that's perfect, and you'll never have anything.

Hawk20:

Thanks for the info and links.

J.D. Power does a different sort of survey in the UK. It's measuring overall satisfaction, and the reliability component asks for owners' opinions about the reliability of their cars. Good info to have, but not the same as measuring repair rates.

My own research strives to highlight the size of differences. Often these aren't large. I encourage the same approach with this J.D. Power survey. Most of the brands' scores are within a few points of the average of 79.

If one brand has a satisfaction score of 76, and another has a satisfaction score of 82, is that six-point difference really worth paying attention to? This range includes all brands from #6 Jaguar to #29 Peugeot.

Similarly, every brand from #10 Volvo to #25 Mitsubishi falls within two points of the average.

Looked at another way, how different are VWs, Skodas, and Seats? Since I'm in the U.S., I must admit I don't know the answer to this question, other than that they are based off the same platforms and tend to closely resemble one another. Yet Skoda's CSI score is 84.5, VW's is 80.2, and SEAT's is 77.8. Quite a range in the context of this study.

http://www.whatcar.com/NonCar/105774033.jpg

There are many types of recalls. This is what a service recall is - manufacturers send service bulletins to licensed franchisees (AKA dealerships, however the dealership MUST be a franchisee of that particular manufacturer). When the service advisor or mechanic runs the VIN of a vehicle and determines that vehicle is covered under a service bulletin which did not generate an owner notification letter, and makes the repair – that is a “service recall”. All technical service bulletins do not result in a service recall, but all service recalls are the result of service bulletins. IE - one is a subset of the other. It’s been my experience that it works the same way for GM, Ford, Mazda, Toyota, Porsche, and Mercedes-Benz. Letters are never sent for a “service recall”, and they are always performed while the car is in for other service, or at the owner’s request.

With regard to this particular voltage regulator recall, I didn't receive an owner notification letter, and MB USA knows who I am. If there is a mileage cutoff, I am unaware of it. I’m a little unclear how your surveys could note this recall. You didn’t know the recall existed before my post. Even now, with the information you have before you, I have serious doubts that you can list the recall number.