Mercedes Quality dropped from 10th to 16th
11-25-2002, 04:51 PM
#1
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Mercedes Quality dropped from 10th to 16th
For 2002 the JD Powers surveys have Mercedes ranked 16th overall for Quality. That is lower than Mercury and Buick. See Article:
http://www.autonews.com/article.cms?articleId=41540
http://www.autonews.com/article.cms?articleId=41540
11-26-2002, 04:08 PM
#3
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
HERE IT IS.
Mercedes falls in perceived quality
Products score below average on dependability index
By Mark Rechtin and Jim Henry
Automotive News / November 25, 2002
LOS ANGELES -- Mercedes-Benz took a blow to its used-vehicle quality perception by falling below average in the latest J.D. Power Vehicle Dependability Index study.
It is the first time the German prestige marque has fallen below industry average since J.D. Power began the annual study in 1989.
Mercedes-Benz fell from 10th to 16th place in the 2002 study, which monitored 137 areas of 1998 vehicles still on the road. The 1998 model year was the introductory point of the M-class sport-utility, which was knocked at its launch for having questionable assembly line quality.
The fifth year of ownership is considered a critical stage, when many consumers are thinking of replacing their vehicles.
Much of Mercedes-Benz's overall decline in the study was attributed to the M class. J.D. Power spokesman Michael Greywitt said that had it not been for problems with the M class, Mercedes-Benz would have finished above industry average.
Japanese marques swept the top five spots this year. Lexus won the crown for the eighth straight year - every year that it has been eligible to win. Amazingly, Lexus vehicles showed fewer problems after five years of ownership than the average vehicle did when new in 1998.
Mercedes-Benz did not make officials available by press time. In a recent interview, Klaus Ulkann, vice president of customer services for Mercedes-Benz U.S.A., said many problems of early M-class customers have been addressed.
For instance, customers have complained that the brakes on the M-class squeal.
"It's not like we have an engine problem or something. A lot of them relate to convenience and how they perceive the car." Ulkann said. "The surveys have been pretty hard on the M class. When we look at (initial quality), what we are doing is leading in the right direction."
Not just perception
Brian Walters, director of product research at J.D. Power and Associates in Westlake Village, Calif., agreed that Mercedes-Benz's initial quality scores have improved in recent years. But he noted that mechanical troubles, and not just perceptual differences regarding quality, affected Mercedes' durability scores.
The top 10 problems reported on the M class included malfunctioning fuel gauges, power windows and check-engine lights, as well as poor fit and finish of interior panels.
Mercedes was not the only European marque to fare poorly. Audi and Saab both fell from their above-average perches. And Volvo continued to show poorly, Volkswagen was fourth from the cellar, and Land Rover finished only ahead of Kia. In the 1998 model year, Volvo and Land Rover were not owned by Ford Motor Co.
Fast forward
Filling the rest of the top ranks, the usual suspects still ruled the roost. What's more, the leading brands surged forward in quality faster than the rest of the industry, pulling the overall industry average upward from 382 problems per 100 cars to 355 problems - a 7 percent improvement. Mazda was the only marque to improve from below average last year to above the line this year.
The Big 3 automakers trailed the Japanese in long-term vehicle durability. Only four domestic brands scored above average in this year's study, all of which were luxury or near-luxury brands. Last year, seven domestic brands managed to crack the midpoint.
The domestic brands have improved their initial quality in the time since, but Walters said, "Good initial quality doesn't mean good long-term dependability."
Products score below average on dependability index
By Mark Rechtin and Jim Henry
Automotive News / November 25, 2002
LOS ANGELES -- Mercedes-Benz took a blow to its used-vehicle quality perception by falling below average in the latest J.D. Power Vehicle Dependability Index study.
It is the first time the German prestige marque has fallen below industry average since J.D. Power began the annual study in 1989.
Mercedes-Benz fell from 10th to 16th place in the 2002 study, which monitored 137 areas of 1998 vehicles still on the road. The 1998 model year was the introductory point of the M-class sport-utility, which was knocked at its launch for having questionable assembly line quality.
The fifth year of ownership is considered a critical stage, when many consumers are thinking of replacing their vehicles.
Much of Mercedes-Benz's overall decline in the study was attributed to the M class. J.D. Power spokesman Michael Greywitt said that had it not been for problems with the M class, Mercedes-Benz would have finished above industry average.
Japanese marques swept the top five spots this year. Lexus won the crown for the eighth straight year - every year that it has been eligible to win. Amazingly, Lexus vehicles showed fewer problems after five years of ownership than the average vehicle did when new in 1998.
Mercedes-Benz did not make officials available by press time. In a recent interview, Klaus Ulkann, vice president of customer services for Mercedes-Benz U.S.A., said many problems of early M-class customers have been addressed.
For instance, customers have complained that the brakes on the M-class squeal.
"It's not like we have an engine problem or something. A lot of them relate to convenience and how they perceive the car." Ulkann said. "The surveys have been pretty hard on the M class. When we look at (initial quality), what we are doing is leading in the right direction."
Not just perception
Brian Walters, director of product research at J.D. Power and Associates in Westlake Village, Calif., agreed that Mercedes-Benz's initial quality scores have improved in recent years. But he noted that mechanical troubles, and not just perceptual differences regarding quality, affected Mercedes' durability scores.
The top 10 problems reported on the M class included malfunctioning fuel gauges, power windows and check-engine lights, as well as poor fit and finish of interior panels.
Mercedes was not the only European marque to fare poorly. Audi and Saab both fell from their above-average perches. And Volvo continued to show poorly, Volkswagen was fourth from the cellar, and Land Rover finished only ahead of Kia. In the 1998 model year, Volvo and Land Rover were not owned by Ford Motor Co.
Fast forward
Filling the rest of the top ranks, the usual suspects still ruled the roost. What's more, the leading brands surged forward in quality faster than the rest of the industry, pulling the overall industry average upward from 382 problems per 100 cars to 355 problems - a 7 percent improvement. Mazda was the only marque to improve from below average last year to above the line this year.
The Big 3 automakers trailed the Japanese in long-term vehicle durability. Only four domestic brands scored above average in this year's study, all of which were luxury or near-luxury brands. Last year, seven domestic brands managed to crack the midpoint.
The domestic brands have improved their initial quality in the time since, but Walters said, "Good initial quality doesn't mean good long-term dependability."
12-07-2002, 09:01 PM
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GA
Posts: 1,823
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
'06 Lexus GS300 RWD, '07 Camry SE V6 auto, '91 190E 2.6 auto
Well, according to the text in the article, as long as you aren't driving an M class, you are probably experiencing above average quality. Shouldn't the title of this thread be "M class only wrinkle in Mercedes' otherwise above average quality"?
12-08-2002, 11:36 AM
#7
Super Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Happy Boston, MA
Posts: 837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2002 SLK 320
Originally posted by theine
Totally agree with Jim Banville. The M class has a been a shame to MB.
Totally agree with Jim Banville. The M class has a been a shame to MB.
However, like most SLK owners, I went through a string of niggles when I first got the car and have had the dealer fix a whole ton of stuff.... nothing serious, but enough to make me wonder whether QA are paying much attention over in Germany.
I guess it could be worse, they could be building them over here!!!
