MikeHK

The M5Killer vs. EVO stuff shouldn't be taken care of over a internet forum at the first place. That is just non-sense and from my point of view, if M5killer choose to go this route, it won't be too much more serious than any other thread here. Or else, he would had brought it to the court already, obviously he can't and to blow his frustration, he choose to play dirty and bad mouth EVO over a public forum.

Similarly, perhaps in a less serious manner, the mighty MBworld Improviz attempt to redirect everybody attention to the number of unreliablity of BMW but the fact remains in HIS report or Krispykrme's reports where all claim BMWs are more reliable than Mercs.

I understand this is a MB board but can't fact be just fact and be accepted? To me Krispykrme was only stating facts, and well, obviously not everyone here can take it.

Improviz

Yes, but the difference is one of degree, and one of source: JD Power is a consulting firm. It receives money from the automobile industry.

Consumer Reports is funded solely by its subscribers.

Now, which would you say is more likely to be unbiased; an organization funded by the automobile industry, or one which doesn't receive a dime from them?

And while the Consumer Reports data does list Mercedes' reliability as being lower than BMW's (a point which I have never argued; you might also do well to actually read what I'm writing--and debating), the point is that the difference is not the night and day level that krispy was claiming.

Obviously not everyone here can take the facts I posted either.

MikeHK

So the FACT afterall...as of relaiblity is concerned from all these reports regardless from which party.... Mercs was ranked LOWER than BMW in everyone of those... YES?

That to me is FACT.

Degree of night and day level is personal as I found in your earlier post claiming your CLK is night and day more reliable than your family BMW.

So let me get this straight, your argument here is to argue that Mercs are NOT that much LESS reliable but still not as reliable than the Extremely UNreliable BMWs? Man...you sounded like a educated dude to me, but look at what you are doing here? Absolutely stupid and out of your mind.

I mean, come on, take that Mercedes color glasses away and you might find things a little more simple or yet way easier to accept that you see it now.

Improviz

Yes. Just as it is FACT that Mercedes is not appreciably LESS reliable than BMW. BOTH are much less reliable than Japanese cars.

Well, if you'd pull your head out of your ignorant *** for one moment and actually read what fasto was arguing, you'd see that I was posting this data to counter HIS PERSONAL assertion that BMW was MUCH more reliable than Mercedes:

Click here and read his post, idiot:
See that, idiot? That is what is called a FALSE CLAIM. And so, having data which SHOWED it to be false, I posted it.

But you can't be bothered with little FACTS like that, now can you mikie? No, you just want to come here and troll for BMW. Which is why you're up in MY face about MY factual data, not up in krispy's face, right honey?

Hey, **** you, jerkoff. My point was to argue that BMWs are not appreciably more reliable than Mercedes, and the data proves it. So kiss my *** if you don't like my posts, you stupid, trolling moron.

See? I can simply use ad hominem too...I can also engage in a substantive debate, unlike you.

Says the troll who comes here constantly talking down Mercedes and talking up BMW...give me a fvking break, loser. Your motives here are crystal clear, as are fatso's, which is why you're rushing to the defense of his relentless Mercedes-bashing.

Belmondo

krispy is a 300lb's dude with 5000lb's of problems/issues------you put those two numbers together and one begins to see the scope of problem Impro is dealing with here.



A while ago I have decided for myself that krispy needs lotsa TLC and understanding , pissing him off just makes him eat more donuts , get bigger and angrier....... What I find interesting is that he eats donuts but turns into a cookie crumbles in the arguments. Simply Fascinating.........

zoink

Dang.... I just didn't see this thread is overcooked

You guys are just amusing..... it's all subjective..... are you guys going to argue whose wife is prettier? Beauty lies on the eyes' of the beholder.... likewise, significance lies on the eyes' of the observer.

Facts are:
Consumer Reports:
Best to worst problems range: 1.39-3.97 per car over 3 years course = 0.46-1.32 per car per year

MB vs. BMW: 2.83 vs. 2.25 per car over 3 years course = 0.94 vs. 0.75 per car per year.

JD Powers:
Need to make some assumptions.... let's say the industry average is the same as Consumer Reports, which is 2.37 per car over 3 years = 0.79 per car per year.

So, excluding Scion & Land Rover (not sure what asterisks mean... I guess not enough sample? ), the range would be 58 above to 98 below that translates to 0.33-1.56 per car per year.

For MB vs. BMW: 80 below vs. 28 below = 1.4 vs. 1.01 per car per year

So if you have the least reliable car vs. most reliable car, you'll likely to have ~1 additional problem. And if you have MB vs. BMW, you'll likely to have 0.5 additional problem.

Is it significant?
For KrispyKreme, yes, because he looks at the distribution of the survey results PLUS his bad experience w/ MB.

For Improviz, no, because he looks at real-life scenario PLUS his bad experience w/ BMW. 1 additional problem a year (and who knows what that problem is... could be just as minor as a blown bulb to as serious as an engine problem) is not a big deal.

For you.... your call.

Yet, w/o knowing the exact problems and how both surveys weigh each type of problems, it's hard to know because BMW could have a lot more incidence than MB but less critical..... or BMW could have a lot fewer incidence than MB but more critical.

MikeHK

May I just ask....how old are you?

Improviz

The above is actually the JD Power data, not the Consumer Reports data. I don't know if CU gives their data in the form of defects/car; if they do, and I can find it, I'll post it in a follow-up.

Improviz

Ask your mommie.

And come back when you have something substantive to contribute.

Improviz

Zoink -

I went to Consumer Reports' site and spent some time examining their reliability page and its sub-pages. Findings:

- Their average defect rate for three year old cars is 51 problems per 100 cars. For American cars, it is 55, Asian 32, and European bringing up the rear at 71.

- By five years, the average grows to 79 per 100, with Asian at 44, US 88, and European 105.

- Sample size in last survey was given as "over 810,000 vehicles". This is substantially larger than the JD Power sample size of 50,635 owners, although they do not provide number of owners per model year.

They also provide a useful metric: their circle rating system. It boils down thusly:
Percentage of owners reporting problems:
solid black circle = more than 14.8%
half black circle = 9.3% to 14.8%
clear circle = 5.0% to 9.3%
half red circle = 2.0% to 5.0%
solid red circle = less than 2%

Their circle ratings and corresponding percentages for the BMWs I listed previously:
3 Series: clear circle = 5.0% to 9.3%
5 Series: solid black circle = more than 14.8%
7 Series: solid black circle = more than 14.8%
Z4: half black circle = 9.3% to 14.8%
BMW X5: half black circle = 9.3% to 14.8%

Hardly a stellar reliability record in anyone's book, for BMW or European makes in general.

zoink

Thanks, Improviz.

If I may restate:
- Asian: 0.11 (3-year) & 0.09 (5-year) problem per car per year
- American: 0.18 (3-year & 5-year) problem per car per year
- European: 0.24 (3-year) & 0.21 (5-year)

Couple things to note:
- #'s from CR vs. JD is completely different. I think JD is proactively getting the sample (like a survey or something), while consumer reports are not (they just get reports from consumers and use this as numerator and they get DMV filings / Dealer reports as denominator). This can be seen from sample size as well as incidence reported (1,265 incidence for JD vs. 413,100 incidence for CR).
- I think CR may highlight bigger problems more as people get more frustrated and report to gov. agency, BBB or some agency like that when they have big and/or many problems
- Unfortunately, CR doesn't distinguish between BMW & MB

So my conclusion is that:
Both Improviz and KrispyKreme are correct. The number seems small and insignificant in real life. Yet, the numbers are statistically significant due to tight distributions found in the sample. Putting aside the significant or not significant argument, both KrispyKreme and Improviz, including me, agree that BMW & MB & other Euro cars have quality issues.

Anyway, I'm sure both of you are more concerned about the type of problems instead of # of problems or # of trips you need to make to a dealer, right? 1 engine problem is more significant than 10 blown bulbs / fuses, right? Unfortunately, neither of the surveys tells type of problems.

The fact that I'm surprised is that American cars are more reliable than Euro cars... WTH? Is it because American cars have huge improvement b/c of merging / alliance w/ Japanese / Euro manufacturers (i.e. Ford & Mazda, GM & Subaru, etc.)? Or is it no one reporting as Buicks and such are owned by older and care-less people? Or is it b/c American cars are diluted by rentals, which I don't think the companies bother to report problems?

Improviz

Hi, Zionk -

I can fill in a few blanks here...

- Consumer Reports (Consumers Union) sends all of its subscribers (members) a survey once a year. I've submitted this, as I am a subscriber. It asks what cars you own, what year, mileage, etc., and then a series of questions for each as to what areas in which the cars have had problems (or not) over the last year.

They then report these by car, per model year, with a breakdown of average problem rates/car for the following areas:
Engine
Cooling
Fuel
Ignition
Transmission
Electrical
A/C
Suspension
Brakes
Exhaust
Paint/trim/rust
Body integrity
Power equipment
Body hardware

This is done using a colored dot for each model year for each category; see attached image. Key to interpreting dots:
Percentage of owners reporting problems:
solid black circle = more than 14.8%
half black circle = 9.3% to 14.8%
clear circle = 5.0% to 9.3%
half red circle = 2.0% to 5.0%
solid red circle = less than 2%

So, take brakes: less than two percent of 2004 owners of the hypothetical car in this example have had problems with their brake system, but 9.3% to 14.8% of the '97 (and '98) owners have had them, etc...

So, in this regard, it is quite detailed.

Good news is with both the BMW and Benz stuff, that the only areas to get the solid black are areas we could probably all guess: electrical, power equipment, body hardware, etc...but this doesn't show up until the cars are four years old or more (conveniently, just out of warranty!! )

The "major" stuff (engine, brakes, driveline) are more in the average (5.0-9.3%) range after four years or so...

Bottom line: *both* of these brands have a ways to go before they get anywhere remotely close to Lexus territory; for example, the Lexus stuff is below 2% in all (at worst, all but one or two) categories for the first three years, but then degrades to the 2-5% range in two, maybe three categories after five or six years...even out to '97, they are still mostly coming in at defect rates in virtually all categories below 2%!!

Dammit, Germans, get with the program!!

zoink

Haha..... this is exactly what I expected..... I think during the warranty people tend to report fewer problems b/c they haven't got hit by ridiculous bills. Once they're out of warranty, they would certainly take time to report their problems as "revenge".

In summary, if you only keep the car within the warranty and assuming there is no bias in the report (like what I mentioned above), I doubt the BMW and MB has significant difference in terms of quality even as compared to Lexus (all of them would have solid / half red circles for the 1st 3-4 years). However, this is in GENERAL (sample / industry average) and the basis of your arguments to KrispyKreme, if I understand correctly.

Yet, if you look at the distribution, even though the average is the same, the swing / std. deviation / variance could be big. Look at JD's report.... Lexus's swing is ~70, MB's swing is ~125 and BMW's swing is ~95.

So according to JD, BMW's median and swing are lower than MB indicating better (regardless whether significant or not) and more consistent quality, respectively, which I think the basis of KrispyKreme's argument.

wolverine

The whole basis for this thread is the guy has concerns about the reliability of the M5. I think we've all shown that there are no overall reliability issues with BMW's compared to Mercedes.

The real issue is how does the reliability of the M5 compare to his existing E55. If his car has been pretty reliable, I can understand some reluctance to switch to the M5. There have been a number of magazine tests where the M5 destructed when it was subjected to extreme testing. So the real issue is not BMW reliability, it's M5 reliability.

Since I'll be getting one in the next few weeks, I am concerned as well. I can say that the initial reliebility reports from a few dozen owners are very good. Only a few problems, and all software related. However, this is probably the most complex, sophisticated mass production car ever assembled. There are bound to be some problems. The initial reports are very good though.

zoink

Given what my friends and I have experienced w/ 1st year release of euro cars, I personally wouldn't dare to touch 1st year (I now somehow see it as "beta" version):
- My '03 E55 (1st year) was lemon
- My friend's '01 M3 (1st year) got some internal engine problems plus engine's fan recall or something
- My friend's '03 Cayenne (1st year) got some steering problems that dealer could not fix until he sold it 1 year later

Japanese cars, I still would.... but not euro.

If I were you, I would wait until 2nd / 3rd year so not only most bugs are gone but dealers would also be less likely to mark up the price.

Improviz

Yes, true...and also, as cars age, they're more likely to break at any rate, so one would expect to see the number of defects for all 2001 cars now to be higher than it was in 2001, etc...

Pretty much...if you look at their relative problem areas, both brands have their higher defect rates in electrical, power accessories, brakes, and body integrity as they age...older BMWs also suffer from more cooling issues, which should not be a mystery to anyone who knows how their radiators are constructed (read more about it in this Road & Track overview of used Z3s)...

Hmm, are you looking at the JD Power graph, or the Consumer Reports graph? I believe by your description it's the latter....the Consumer Reports is the one in this post on the right; the JD Power data is the one on the left.

In any case, if it is in fact the Consumer Reports data, I'm not sure how useful a standard deviation would be with the BMW plot, because the mean indicates that the distribution would be heavily skewed by the 3 Series data, and the more skewed the frequency plot, the less useful the standard deviation becomes. The Mercedes and Lexus plots, otoh, appear to tend towards true normal distributions. What skews the BMW data is the 3 Series is only about 10% below average, while the rest of the line is 40% or more below average. So with such a heavily skewed distribution, I don't think the SD would prove to be useful.

Still, BMW does score a higher ranking than Mercedes in the Consumer Reports stuff, but is still 30th out of 36--not a stellar rating...and Lexus just absolutely whips the crap out of both of them. Too bad they're about as exciting as a bar of soap, although it looks like they're beginning to change this...and it's about bloody time!!

vraa

Almost (regarding Lexus). Everyone knows I'm one of the Lexus boys here, but after talking a lot to my friends who have driven the GS430 before and after I drove the GS430 (the new one), we've come to a conclusion that it sucks. It tries too hard to be a 5er, but fails.

IS350 is different. I just drove one a few minutes ago. That car from the get go is FAST!

BoBcanada

yeah so guys what the hell are you talking about? can someone summarize it to me in one sentance please? IM too tired of reading this bs lol

ultraseven

Where's M&M when we need him ?

As usual thread titles with BMW on this board have often received attention by the classic trolls. Insecurity at its finest.

Improviz - you are at your best once again. Sometimes I can't stop laughing when the victims can't resist but resort to using childish retorts.

absent

I'm surprised people still follow this thread......

E552006

Yeah
Here it is...
Who gives a Fu#$ about which one is better...(MB or BMW) as far as JD Power quality ratings.
We don't buy these cars for these reasons. We buy them because we want too.
End of story, stop pissing and moaning about quality. Both are below par but we still love the vehicles.
Get over it

Sorry, more than 1 sentence

amgdriven

Hey Improviz...............You have to be the most entertaining person on the internet ( well.....excluding ****! ) You F@#*ing Rock!

Mercedes and bmw are not bought by people for reliability-----we all know that. Performance and looks are what they do best. Lately........IMHO......BMW has taking a turn for the worse on the look department....but thats my opinion. They have always been the ultimate driving machine.......untill AMG turned the page. Mercedes is now doing battle with BMW. E63 AMG 500+hp N/A with a seven speed agressive auto? This is not the same Benz 20 yrs ago. BMW owners (not bashing) can no longer say they are the ultimate driving machine.....................they sure and hell can't say they are better quality-----come on......we all know better...really. Why start **** on a forum to provoke? And if you happen to own cars that you hate...........sell the F@#*ing *******s!