We have our first result for the GLK. With a reported repair frequency of 74 repair trips per 100 cars per year, the 2010 GLK is about average.

Small sample size, so this is a partial result.

Everyone who has been helping, thanks, I appreciate it. We'll have further updates in May and August. With more participants, we could provide more precise results.

Mercedes-Benz GLK-Class reliability comparisons

 

From monitoring the two main M-B web sites, I'd guess a lot of those trips to the dealer had to do with power tailgate problems and moisture in the headlamps. Both should be relatively easy fixes for the next model year and the picture should get a lot rosier. Thankfully, reported engine and drivetrain as well as electronics problems are virtually nonexistent so the SUV seems to be pretty solid in the big-ticket areas. Granted though, relatively low mileage on most vehicles so that could change.

 

The only electrionic issue I heard is LCD blackout and require panel replacement. But again this is a relatively easy fix.

 

Just enhanced the related repair history survey so that it can (optionally) be used as a personal car maintenance record.

As always, more participants would be helpful. Updated Car Reliability Survey results in May, with a preview for participants in mid-April.

Car reliability research

 

Updated stats in about a week.

This time around we were only four responses short of the minimum for a full result for the GLK. So even a few more participants would be very helpful.

 

I'm still having issues with the tire pressure monitoring system. For whatever reason the system goes inop (Tire symbol flahsing and the Tire Pressure INOP on the screen). It's been to the dealer at least 2 times for the same problem. And it doesn't always stay INOP. Next time it is, I'll be heading back to the dealer again.

Also having the problem with the tailgate and it stuttering to open and then closing. Been to the dealer at least twice for that.

I'm really hoping I don't have to lay in to the dealer but these issues are getting old and tiring.

 

Wow! are you giving free lessons in what?

 

We've updated results for the GLK to include owner experiences through March 31, 2010. With a reported repair frequency of 69 repair trips per 100 cars per year, the 2010 GLK remains about average.

Small sample size, so this is a partial result. But this time we were only three cars short of the minimum for a full result.

Everyone who has been helping, thanks, I appreciate it. We'll have further updates in August and November. With more participants, we could provide more precise results.

To see how competitors compare, and to sign up to help:

Mercedes-Benz GLK-Class reliability comparisons

 

The industry average is 109 trips to the dealer per 100 cars.
See this link:

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com...itial-Quality/


Based upon this statistic, I would say that GLK350 is far better than average.

 

You can't mix and match methodology and surveys.
JD Power shows the industry average. Thats the average of Econocars, midrange cars, and luxury cars of all price ranges and configurations........ True Delta is comparing actual models that are competitors to the GLK. It would appear that all the competitors in True Delta subset beat the industry average for all cars. But in this little subset of competitive cars....Luxury compact SUV.....it appears the GLK is average...as is the Q5.........nowhere near as good as the Lexus RX at 37 trips to dealer for instance.

 

RedRover,

Correct on not mixing methodology and surveys. The big difference in this (and most cases) is the question asked. Ask a different question and you'll often get a different answer.

We measure repair trips in which a repair was successfully completed, and annualize the statistic. (So if there are really only four months of data per car, we multiply the reported repairs by three.)

J.D. Power covers only the first 90 days, which would actually yield one-quarter the problem rate if all else were equal and problems were evenly spread over time. So the disparity between the stats is even larger than Lend27 thought.

Why such a large difference? The questions. J.D. Power asks a lot of questions to squeeze out just about any complaint someone might have about the car. Many of the problems reported about the car are designed in, such as difficult to understand controls or poorly designed cupholders. These problems aren't repairable, but they do bump up the reported problem rate, in some cases by a lot. BMW takes a big hit for iDrive. A few years ago Hummer took a big hit for lower than expected fuel economy.

I have been very critical of J.D. Powers' approach, because in the end it's not clear how many repairable problems are indicated by their scores. In some past years they've provided subscores for "design quality" and "manufacturing quality," but don't appear to have done this this year. And they provide numerical scores for brands only, not for individual models.

They do eventually provide "circle dot" ratings that separate out design problems and mechanical problems. The latter understandably correlate much more closely with TrueDelta's stats than the combined scores. The dots have their own weaknesses--the lowest score of two dots (no one gets a single dot) is for the entire bottom 30%, etc.

 

My own opinion. Without drilling down the reasons, type of problems and causes. The trips per year per 100 car is meaningless.

 

We post the description for every reported repair. Drill down to your heart's content.

 

Yep.

IMO, the only meaningful critique is the relatively small number of samples but I've seen time and time again where the more mainstream reporting agencies [eventually] came to the same conclusion as Michael's preliminary data revealed months earlier.

TrueDelta provides a valuable service for potential owners interested in obtaining early information on new model auto reliability. Karesh is a recognized expert in consumer behavior and has put that Ph.D. from the University of Chicago to good use helping savvy consumers make wise choices.

 

Thank you for putting a good word in.

I certainly agree on the sample sizes--we only have a fully adequate sample size for a few dozen models--and am doing what I can to get more people involved.

The irony is that if everyone who didn't participate because of the sample sizes did participate, we'd have adequate sample sizes for far more models!

 

Yes, you do have very detailed information in each repair trip. The sample size is not very big, but should be good enough to show some facts/trends. My only suggestion is to quantize the detail info and make the tables or chart from that. (for example, breakdown the trip number by severeness into major, medium and minor, by area into drive train, electrical system and etc, by causes into design defect, manufacturing defect and assembly defect ... ...) You still have some subjective factor, but the data will be much more informative.

 

I do plan to further improve and expand how the results are presented. Some of these improvements require larger sample sizes to make them viable, so I'm concentrated much of my effort on getting more people involved.

An additional complication with rating severity is that there are hundreds of different possible repairs, and people do not always report enough detail to know the specific repair. But we do ask some questions on the survey which can be used to identify especially serious repairs, such as whether the car had to be towed, could have been driven with the problem for another week, etc.

 

I don't like too much "interpretation" used.
Some people might look at a handful of nuisance type repairs as no big deal.
While with me, it is how often a car needs to be worked on that is most important.
I almost don't care about the severity.
I would rather have a GLK that needed a new Transmission rather than one that had 6 "minor" shop repairs in a year.
The Tranny is going to fail in some very low percentage of the cases. I undertand that.
But the constant going to the shop, strikes at the heart of reliability as far as I am concerned.
And Towing is a big deal to me, even if the fix is minor or routine. A tow in can just ruin a trip or cause me to miss an appointment....which is a no no.
There are reasons I buy new cars, and reliability is numero uno.
So I just like the facts , ma'am. Just the facts. I'll do the interpretation thank you.

In other words, while I would like to see larger sample sizes, of course, I like the system as it is now.

 

Good to know that at least one person likes the current format!

Ideally, I'd like to provide information in different formats to suit different people. This would increase the challenge of making it easy for people to find the specific information they're looking for, though. Already I receive quite a few complaints about site navigation.

 

When you have larger data, it is even more important to put them into buckets. Otherwise you won't even know if the number 6 represents 6 minor repairs, or 6 tranny replacement (exaggerated). Or otherwise read through 1000 trip reports, at least I won't have that kinda time.

This would be a typical database query. And again, you can always choose to have total number or read through all reports, as it is now.

With what I said above, I do appreciate what truedelta already has. It's a good starting point. Question, when I register my account with a GLK and no repair trip, does it already add one in the denominator?

 

I agree on the need for more detailed queries when there are more responses. The current presentation of repair descriptions works less and less well as the number of responses increases.

The current results are through March 31. Simply signing up has no effect. But after signing up you'll receive an email to respond to the survey--new cars are activated near the beginning of each month. If you then responded to the survey, if only to report no repairs for the previous month, your car would be included the next time the stats are updated.

 

I will update my data. Thanks.

 

Thank you, I appreciate it.

I have split the repair descriptions by model year, and plan to also present repairs by system. This should happen by the end of the summer.

Updated stat for the GLK next month. Additional participants would certainly be helpful.

Car reliability research

 

We've updated results for the GLK to include owner experiences through June 30, 2010.

Other sources of car reliability information won't cover the more recent months until the summer or even fall of next year.

With a reported repair frequency of 55 repair trips per 100 cars per year, the 2010 GLK remains about average.

Thank you, once again, to everyone who has been helping. We'll have further updates in November and February. With more participants, we could provide more precise results.

To see how competitors compare, and to sign up to help:

Mercedes-Benz GLK-Class reliability comparisons

 

I just signed up both of my cars.