mtnhntr

When I was researching the 2017 GLC, Consumer Reports had it as the #1 in it's class with an overall rating of 81 out of 100. Now I see that they rate it very low at 54 out of 100 with reliability being a 1 out of a scale of 5. Anyone know why the big change?

fabbrisd1

Yes - two things - (1) early cold/reverse brake squeal issue - which took Mercedes 3-4 months to re-design new brake pads - and (2) starter fuse able link recall also affected some GLC's

mtnhntr

Wow. That seems rather minor to drop us to the bottom. But Consumer Reports is sometimes strange.

ajmtbm

So i have a squeal when backing out first thing in the morning then it goes away. its a pretty loud noise for sure

So it sounds like this is a known issue; is the remedy to replace the pads only? and would that be front or rear replacement?

I was planning on reporting it next time at the dealer; my only fear is that when i get to the dealer they wouldn't be able to duplicate it. hopefully as it is a known issue it will be fixed even if they cant make it happen.

And i was also going to report at teh same time that the replacement wipers they gave me had no effect on the shuddering issue- will be interesting to see what their next step on this is.

AJM

ajmtbm

agree seems like a big drop. how do they do the reliability ranking anyway? Via survey? i wonder if many minor issues typical of the first model year of a a new design had anything to do with it as well.

Philamg

I wonder where the Land Rover Discovery Sport was in the survey, go on their forums NOTHING but faults, I know from experience.

Ddmccormack

Are you sure this was it? What is your source?

mikbar2

I gave up on CR years ago. Their ratings never seemed to agree with my real life experience on the items that I actually purchased.

mtnhntr

The Land Rover Discovery Sport is rated at 39 out of a 100. You can see all of the ratings for the various SUVs at their website, but you have to be a member or able to log in thru your local library (what I did).

Philamg

Not worth reading if that's where it places the Discovery, it's build quality is rubbish, GLC is brilliant.

mtnhntr

I may not have been clear. The rating is the Land Rover scores 39 out of a possible 100 points. The GLC scores 54 out of a possible 100 points. It still has the GLC way ahead of the Land Rover, but like you, I think it is a great SUV and I have not had any issues except a corrupt Navigation SD card which was probably my fault.

mtberman

No surprise. CR is a broad indicator but it is not strongly reliable because they don't use objective survey methodology to determine their ratings. A significant amount of their data is derived from surveys of their own paid membership, not average owners.

For example, for a number of years beginning around 2002, JD Power, Strategic Vision, Maritz and others (companies that track/report vehicle reliability based on objective surveys) saw decreases in the overall quality and increases in defect counts related to Toyota products, as rated by those taking their surveys. During this same period, automotive writers were increasingly noting a drop-off in Toyota product quality. Despite this, CR continued to rate almost every Toyota product as a Best Buy, and those products often placed 1 or 2 in their tests. Only after multiple recalls and a couple of defect scandals did CR finally get on board and lower their Toyota ratings.

Keep in mind, too, that all of these ratings will change based on one single item in a car that's bad. For example, Ford's "overall quality" ratings plummeted due almost solely to problems people were having with their Sync in-car technology. The exact same car with a bad user interface saw a big drop in "overall quality". In truth, it was one system in the car that was driving the change. The same thing is going on with Cadillac due to their (awful) CUE entertainment system.

YMMV

Philamg

Apologies, I should read posts correctly, no issues on mine except the ongoing saga with the all weather tyres.

Ddmccormack

Some good points posted here.

Another example is the Tesla Model X...by most accounts, a great vehicle except for the back doors (the gull wings). So it gets slammed in publications. I suppose some kind of a weighting system that's not subjective would be needed, but not sure how that would be accomplished...ie, weighing the Model X's drivetrain / fit - finish multiple times higher than the cars doors.

mikbar2

In my opinion reliability should be rated on getting you from point A to point B with zero problems. Mainly drive train components. Then sub categories for things that are nuisance but does not endanger the car or occupants such as sound system etc. Safety items would be another sub category that would be heavily weighed into the reliability factor.

stath

Which GLC aspects are poor in the CR ratings?
The CR ratings are somewhat of a riddle sometimes. Like others said here, one aspect may disproportionately affect the overall score. There are some oddities. For example: in the April 2017 CR: the C class has green in almost all areas, but overall is rated below average reliability??

mikbar2

Based on that, the GLC is a good car but the others are better. Clear as mud.

fabbrisd1

C-Class was also affected by the voluntary recall on the starter/fuseable-link (in the event your car is submerged in water) - and voluntary recalls hit hard on CR scoring..

Takehold

About CR - 11 days ago I bought a new 2018 GLC based on the CR online ratings from only 2 weeks ago!! - Where they had it with a score of 81 with top ratings for reliability in it's class! Now 11 days after I bring it home they have it at a 54 with a heavy weight on poor reliability! Not sure what to think of this. Not really sure how this happens or if it is from the 2017 or 16 models. The 18 just came out. Thoughts? BTW - I like the car overall but I do wish the brakes were a bit smoother and I have felt some of the vibration in the steering that others have noticed. Is this normal or are there fixes for these?

Chrisk03

Funny, I was in Barnes & Noble yesterday buying the C&D issue with the 43/SQ5/Macan shoot-out and on the top shelf was CR-Oct 2017 issue praising the GLC to high heaven's and right next to it was the CR-Nov 2017 issue basically saying it was a dud. Ha! As a CR subscriber, I sometimes don't understand their rationale (or lack thereof) on certain things. I also think they often confuse or use "quality" and "reliability" interchangeably and they shouldn't when evaluating products/services, especially vehicles. I can have a Toyota that may have a ton of lower quality plastic that may break in 40k miles, let's say, but the sucker starts up every time and would (almost) never leave me stranded..."reliable". I could also have a BMW with a high quality interior (and low miles), but be left on the side of the road with a jacked up fuel pump...not reliable. They also bash a number of the new electronic systems (CUE, SYNC, etc) in vehicles from survey feedback, but many times people have no idea how to use them and don't read the manual, but they function as designed. Yes, the design (I hate Acura's dual screen setup) may stink, but it's not really a quality or reliability issue per se, IMO, but more of a change that a first time user may not like at all. Most of these systems get easier to use over time, but if you are surveying customer's in the first 30 days of ownership, let's say, they still may have nightmares.

Well, that's my 2 cents...or maybe I'm just hoping I have little to no issues with my GLC43 when it comes next month and am poo-pooing CR.

As for the brakes, I think MB changed the brake design/compound as there was a squeak issue in the 17 GLC's. Perhaps, you got an old set or just a bum set overall. I'd probably go to the dealer asap to have them check them out. Good luck!

Takehold

^ I agree with you on CR. This report is "Predicted Reliability" based on last 2 years models. Let's hope the bugs are worked out for the 18's. Common to have problems during first year or two. Either way I like it better overall than the 2016 X3 I traded it for. And the brakes may just still need to bed in anyway. They are not bad but just not totally smooth from a long stop from like 60 to 0.

ChinaBob

Yeah, same here. The thing is, they don't explain their rationale or methodology by which they reached their conclusions. Without that information, their conclusions are often real head-scratchers, as in this case.

I am not asking for full-blown peer-reviewed academic papers with footnotes, just a basic layman's level explanation of their methodologies so that we as readers can better better evaluate CR's ratings for ourselves.

Tylbran

The CR reliability results are based on surveys from subscribers ("But our Annual Reliability Survey, in which consumers provide us with data on hundreds of thousands of cars, has consistently shown that this pioneering spirit is not without consequences. Our latest survey of about 400,000 subscribers who own 640,000 vehicles reveals that all-new or updated models are now more likely than older ones to have a wonky engine, a jerky transmission, or high-tech features that fail outright"). I have responded to their survey for many years and I have never highlighted problems with any of my vehicles (recently all MB's). Their data does not show how may people with GLC's responded to the survey so it is hard to tell - perhaps very few all with negative comments? Anyway as with others, I find it hard to believe that CR gave the GLC a high rating (based on their road testing) and then they turn around and give it a low reliability rating. If it is based on the recall type issues then that to me does not speak at all to reliability (i.e., mechanical, body, engine type problems).

eggsplorist

Thanks, everyone.

I have a 2015 GLK350 on lease that expires May and have been looking for a replacement. The CR reliability rating for the GLC300 threw me for a loop: I thought my shopping would be over quickly: just go get a new GLC300! Now, I don't know. One other issue I have, living in Georgetown, TX (30 mi. N of Austin) I cannot find a GLC 300 in-stock anywhere close to the one I'd like to have. No 4Matics in south Texas, no ventilated seats, no Premium Driver Assistance Package: You'll have to order one from Germany, which will take 3-4 MONTHS! And, Oh, if you want anything other than black, white or silver, or with a black or tan interior, you'll have to commit to purchasing the car when you order it (and make a substantial payment upon placing the order.)

I may just go next door and get a Subaru Forester XT Touring. The only thing missing is the ventilated seats, and I can get one RIGHT NOW! And spend $15,000-17,000 less.

Flubadub

Having some experience with quality related surveys, you really have to be careful about the conclusions drawn from the data. The biggest issue is that those who have any problem are the most likely to respond, and of course that response will be negative. Without access to the raw data that CR used to draw their conclusions, there is no way to know how they try to remove this bias. I used to be a CR subscriber too, but seeing more and more real world experience and other reviewers run totally counter to them, I let them go. For autos, I personally prefer JDP.