Mercedes GLK reliability -- better info ASAP
 

TrueDelta reports absolute repair rates that make the differences between cars much clearer. Results are updated four times a year, so it's possible to provide reliability information on new models like the GLK quickly--if enough owners sign up to participate.

Thanks to the help of this forum's members, we were able to provide a result very quickly for the new C-Class, and have been tracking those cars closely as they age. We'd like to do the same with the GLK.

Participants simply report repairs the month after they occur on a one-page survey. When there are no repairs, they simply report an approximate odometer reading four times a year, at the end of each quarter.

To encourage participation, participants receive full access to all results, not just those for the GLK, free of charge.

For the details, and to sign up to help out:

Car reliability research

Right off the bat; i'll tell you it'll be better than the Q5! Can't tell you if Benz's are the most reliable, but they're high quality vehicles. With high quality comes ergonomics. With ergonomics comes comfort, and I hope comfort comes with reliability.

Really?

only way you can tell reliability is by track records. in GLK's case, there are none. Think ML, it had tons of problem prior to 06 models and lets not forget w203.... In any case, you can see that MB realizes reliability is an issue in its brand, starting with the w204, the marketing has been focusing on how well its built.

I took delivery two days ago. Everything is perfect. The fit and finish of my German built GLK is first rate ! :y
As for the rear hatch, it works very well and it's opening height can be easily limited or stopped part way with the Smart Key. There are so many thoughtful details inside this car, from the 12V + 115V plugs in the cargo area to the A/C outlet in the glove box. MB seems to have really thought out the design of this vehicle. :y
The folding mirrors are a nice touch and the rear turn signals are LEDs (flash RED) with the Bi-zenon package.

Congrats Derek, no pics of the car yet eh... Its all good, enjoy the ride, when you have a moment post some pics.

don't let my issue with the tailgate scare you!! i absolutely love the my glk. the looks, handling, power, and all the features! i'm confident MB will get my issue fixed.

what he said

do led tails come without the bi-xeon package?

Fish, I believe they do, Leslie has confirmed it in her post of her new vehicle.

I think Leslie's car already came with bi-xenon, so won't confirm the non-Xenon LED. I spotted a GLK last week in a parking lot, and I remember it didn't have LED tail.

Thanks for correcting me Alfred, I read it wrong, guess it's time to go to bed eh....

I looked closely at my tail lamps and they appear to be regular light bulbs. The rear turn signals only appear to be led's. Tail lamps and rear turn signals, by definition, aren't the same thing. That doesn't mean that they can't be the same light though. If the tail lamps are really light bulbs and the turn signals are led's, then that really is false advertising. But overall, I'm still happy with the package.

Yes the setup is the same as the audi q5, rear LED turn signal lights only. The rear running lights are normal. The high mounted stop light is also LED from what I can tell. I was told that early production models had regular turn signal bulbs

I think this is the wrong thread for it but what da hell, I'll join the parade.

imho, I can't see why LED are an option on cars these days, the prices have come down dramatically and they will last the entire lifetime of the vehicle (atleast til warranty)

And, certainly for $900 (US lighting package) they could have made everything LED.

Regarding reliability:

I searched the net for Euro quality reports and trouble reports for GLK, with no success. All refs were more opinion on materials and fit, than defect reports, BUT

I did find a collection of USA customer reports that mentioned the tail gate adjust, operation problems and sunfroof motor short out all fixed, with adjust or parts in stock at dealer. Only read one customer review that said they waited two weeks for a part from Poland.

Reviews were very positive overall. Given how many units have sold in Europe and how long car has been on the road in Europe, I am surprised I did not find info on common defects. Could be my search key words.

Regarding rear LEDs combined with std bulbs on AudiQ5 and GLK:

There could be a design reason vs cost reason. LEDs stand out and contrast with std bulbs, sending added alert and recognition to other drivers. Flashing LED :zoom:with different intensity of surrounding lights could get attention from a zoned out driver.

Then break lights should be LED not turn signals.

Does MB have adaptive break lights? If so this could be reason why brekalights are not LED's.

I think you mean BRAKE :naughty:, its all good just a typo...

This is a very common typo. See it all the time in the repairs people report on our survey.

A few GLK owners have signed up to participate so far. If a few more do, we'll assume 25+ will before too long and go ahead and include the model in the main survey.

Car reliability research

lol yea...brake is what I meant to say.

So far 296 miles on the clock and after sitting in my garage for a week, I got in to drive it and got this message. "Front Left SRS Malfunction Service Required". I hope this is not a sign of worse things to come.

o bummer, hope its nothing major. keep us posted!

Interesting message, I wonder if that means your driver side airbags are gonna work if you need them?

I wonder how much battery drainage there is on a sitting GLK overnight and over a week?

Keep us informed as to what service was required.

I've got an appoinment to have it looked at tomorrow. I'll keep you guys posted.

At least they didn't say pound feet of torque.
 

I'm amazed (too) at how many intelligent people mis-quote or spell incorrectly. It's no big deal. This is just a friendly chat. However, a classic example of misquotes these days is that most of us know that lbs/ft are foot pounds not pound feet like they say on some national TV shows. Csaba you should know better! Do you know anything about engines and torque. These are a measurement of pounds, not a measure of feet Mr. Csere. It tells you how many ''pounds'' are required on a rotating mass (twist on a crankshaft) to move an object one foot not how many ''feet'' it takes to move a pound. You wouldn't call a lbs/in a pound inch would you? Maybe you would. :nix: Just a snapshot of SOME of todays' society in the USA. Get it out quick and get it close enuff (oops). Back to GLK's.