They base their ratings on "reliability, safety and availability". Click here for more info.

 

um, for the w202 model...

 

And...?

"Eligibility is limited to Used Cars from 1996 to 2000." Therefore the W203 can't be included. I realize this isn't the W202 forum, but I figured the other "happy" W203 owners here would get a kick out of it.

Young, feel free to ignore it since it doesn't include your car. Geez!

 

the point is that complaints have been that the quality of mb cars have been going downhill. that means that the w203 is worse than the w202. the old, "it ain't what it used to be..." your post doesn't disprove that at all.

put it another way, the quality of the w202 does not correlate to an equal level of quality in the w203.

so how is this supposed to make current w203 owners feel better? or as you put it, "get a kick" out of this?

(btw, i don't think the w203 is that bad)

 

Our W202 was so much better then our W203.
(C280) vs (C320)

Erik

 

The W202 has consistently rated higher than the W203 in reliability and build quality. Our W202 has been an excellent car and had far fewer problems in 30,000 than our 203 has had in 7000. Thats not to say that I dont like the W203, its a great car, but its absolutely true "They just dont build em like the used to!".

 

what year is your w202? the cars are always more reliable at the end of the body style run, they work all the bugs out. I am sure the 2006 w203 will be a "better car" then the 2001.

 

Its a 2000. Still, the W202 is a better car in terms of material quality and solidity of construction. I would hope that M-B sorts out their reliability issues by 2006.

 

They did slide in their 5 year dependability survey that JD Power conducts. They were #10 in 2001 and I always thought that was too generous and now for 2002 they have fallen into the sub-par catagory where they are not even ranked. I'm confused because I always thought they were bad and I find the 8 or so times that I brought it in for warranty repairs a huge improvement over my W201 car that was in about 18 times the first year. So to me it's great, an MB that's twice realiable as my 1984 and loaner cars, cookies and drinks while I wait for my free car wash.

 

Here we go again JD Power & Assoc. admitted MB's poor ranking was mostly caused by the POS ML line.
Buellwinkle, please quote JD Power's reliability rating of the C class vs. MB's in general. I think you'll find it's neck-and-neck with other small German sedan's, such as BMW's 3 series. I had asked someone to re-post that JD Power reliability survey that had each car brand's various lines listed individually, but no one ever did I can't find it using the search function.

 

The ML is responsible for a LARGE percentage of MB's reliability problems...after several years of production, they still don't have the bugs out of the design, nor do they have a handle on the quality from the stateside plant. I like the Vision GST SUV/Wagon crossover thing they are going to build, but given that its going to be built in Alabama, I'd take a pass on it.

BTW, Buell, I grew up with a 75 and an 84Benz, both were rock solid cars. 18 times? What did you take it in for...dirt on the dashboard?

 

Interesting. The SLK is the most reliable Benz made these days, according to the German ADAC reliability statistics.

 

The car had 3 major flaws. It went in 12 times for the throttle linkage falling off. This was clearly a design flaw in the W201 diesel 5 spd where they routed the throttle link very close to the exhaust manifold and when it got hot, the metal would expand and warp the plastic socket it was in and when it got cold it fell off. MB actually had an engineer from N.J. fly down to take a look at it after the regional office gave up. The next item which was not a big a deal was the radio volume control would fall off and require a replacement radio (3 of them in 1 year). Then the last problem was the A/C compressor would develop 500 psi of pressure and blow hoses, this was part of a TSB. This car was taken back under the CA lemon law. The replacement car needed a horn, radio and transmission after a week. Suprisingly it was more reliable after it's first year and stayed in the family for 200K miles and about 10 years. The cars remarkable fuel mileage of 45mpg made it a great car for the amount of driving I did back then. Of course people said I had problems because I bought the "cheap benz" and wouldn't happen with a "real benz" so my parents one upped me and got the E class in 1987, 2 years old and caught on fire from an electrical short while driving, needless to say they never bought another MB again.

 

I never had any porblems with my SLK, but I know quite a few people who have had major problems, ie Supercharger and Convertible problems.

Erik