"Good bets" for making 200,000 miles were Honda's and Toyotas."

Yeah the motor, maybe. I had a Toyota van which ran great till about 150k, but there's more to a car's longevity than the drivetrain. Something made out of recycled beer cans with paper thin doors just won't cut it. I had a door handle break off in my hand in the winter; something that would never happen with my 20+ year old 300CD. I haven't seen too many 1984 Toyotas or Hondas on the road up here in NH, but still plenty of old 123s around.

And as far as the stats go, this also depends on Honda owners being objective - HAH! Honda makes a great car, but it's not nearly as great as Honda owners think they are. They resemble Apple people in that regard.

__________________
Gil

2004 ML350
1984 300CD; Ivory (sold)

It is pretty clear that a 123 will outlast a 1977-1985 Honda or Toyota. Consumer Reports agreed with this in 1985.

But Toyotas have been improving year after year, and it isn't all that fair to compare a Toyota Corona that listed for maybe $5000 in 1985 with a 123 that cost at least three times that.

The AC and the radio on the Toyota would outlast the 123 radio, I bet, anyway.

The big problem with older Toyotas was RUST. If you notice the new ones, they don't rust as readily.

CU's article simply said that a new (as in 2006-2007) Toyota or Honda was more likely to make it to 200,000 miles than a new BMW or Mercedes.

People who buy a cheap car don't maintain it as well as people who buy a Mercedes, and becaue it started life as a cheap car, it is more likely that people will simply junk it at 160K and buy another.

An eleven year old Mercedes is probably worth fixing. The $100 + per hour and the huge markups for parts many shops charge is the main deterrent to fixing a Benz. Pretty much anyone can fix a Toyota, because it's simpler.

I would much rather DRIVE a Mercedes than a Toyota. But it does tend to cost more.

__________________
Semibodacious Transmogrifications a Specialty

1990 300D 2.5 Turbo sedan 171K (Rudolf)
1985 300D Turbo TD Wagon 219K (Remuda)

"Time flies like and arrow, yet fruit flies like a banana"
---Marx (Groucho)

Thats the point! Of course it costs more to drive a super expensive, and complicated, German luxury car, than a Toyota!

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

"Pretty much anyone can fix a Toyota, because it's simpler."

Simpler? Based on what? Where do you get this? There isn't anything more complicated about fixing a Benz than a Toyota. The thing I like about a Benz is once you fix it, it tends to STAY fixed. Might also be true for a Toyota, but not for as long. Even on a comparably priced car, it's still Japanese and never meant to last as long. Though Benz cut some corners on the lower priced models, the E class and up are still longer lasting cars than any overpriced Toyota (i.e., Lexus)

__________________
Gil

2004 ML350
1984 300CD; Ivory (sold)

Consumer reports said the renault alliance was car of the year in 1984.

Jim

__________________
Jim Messina

1983 300 SD
2006 Silverado Z71

If you guys are gonna bash CR, go ahead, but before you do....

Show me another source, that doesnt accept advertising, and fully discloses its test methods like CR, that has **any** data on cars over 200kilomiles....

Please, I'd like CR to have some competition.

(maybe msshop should start its own =)

-John

__________________
2009 Kia Sedona
2009 Honda Odyssey EX-L
12006 Jetta Pumpe Duse
(insert Mercedes here)

Husband, Father, sometimes friend =)

Actually, CR probably does a decent job of doing what they are trying to do. As best I can tell, their purpose is to provide enough basic information so people can find the "best deal" between similar products. If I was shopping for some commodity that I didn't know/care much about, but wanted the "best deal" available (i.e., dishwasher, TV, lawn mower, light bulbs, etc.), I might actually look at consumer reports. If an average person wants to find the "best deal" in a certain class of auto, I would send them to consumer reports. You have to remember that the "average person" is looking for something they can drive for 2-4 years with the minimum of hassle and expense, then trade in for the most money. I understand that enthusiasts (including me) think that CR is a joke, but we are not their target audience.

I've got to call you out on this. CR *hated* the Alliance. Plus, CR doesn't give out a car of the year award. Are you sure you don't have this mixed up with one of fanzines like Motortrend

__________________
Tjohn

82 300 SD
77 450 SL (gone)

Only after being sued by Suzuki did we learn about their not-so-objective tests. They deliberately set up the Suzuki Samurai to roll over in an effort to nail a company a company that had enough cash to pay, but not enough cash to put up a serious legal defense. There are videos of this "test" out there on the internet. Sure, CR won't accept advertising, but they still have to generate cash to stay afloat. Well, whaddya know, coincidentally, consumer reports just happened to blow several million dollars on their new headquarters building around the time of the supposed "flaw" they discovered in the Suzuki Samurai. But that didn't mean they were desperate to find a way to pay for it all - oh no.

CR also often gets involved in product liability lawsuits for the purpose of trying to benefit from payouts, probably under the legal doctrine of cy pres. This essentially means that under certain circumstances, they can benefit from a judgment against a manufacturer. Because of this, the temptation is there for them to "bounty hunt" in order to benefit themselves. Therefore, I don't buy the "we're not biased" line of reasoning, at least not all of the time.

__________________
Gil

2004 ML350
1984 300CD; Ivory (sold)

The auto industry has improved the manufacturing methods and materials used in leaps and bounds in the last 40 years, to the point where the mechanical reliability of engines and transmissions is nearly indistinguishable in the first 100,000 miles from brand to brand. Regardless of whether or not the car is a name brand luxury car or a mass produced cheapomobile. In the "old days" before this change, luxury cars had equipment that was built to actual drawing tolerances and was more costly to produce, but was highly prized as "reliability" was then perceived to be the ultimate "luxury." The Japanese auto industry brought modern QC processes to the engine and transmission manufacturing floor, and steadily drove out the causes for mechanical unreliability across the spectrum of autos they sold.

So, for many of us the ruggedness and reliability of our Diesel powered MBs is the source of their appeal. The older ones were truly out of the ordinary for their time. I have to admit the MB gas engines I have owned are fully capable of exceeding 200,000 miles without much more than frequent oil changes with good quality oil, along with filters (oil, air, fuel) and other regular maintenance (brakes, brake fluid, anti-freeze, valve adjustments on my 190E 2.3-16 valve engines, etc.). The issue is for the first 100,000 miles the lowliest Korean, Taiwanese or other make of car can be made reliable, mechanically. So for the average consumer mechanical reliability is no longer a distinguishing feature of MB.

Where MB has fallen down is with the integration of all this electronic junk that is made specifically and only to fill up the door panels, space under seats, and behind the dash areas of cars. An entire industry has sprung up to provide un-needed junk for the auto industry that no one would touch with a ten foot pole in any other uses. And the industry is evolving so fast the equipment has no time to be tested thoroughly before it is sold to the public.

I would love to see MB provide an entry level car that was just made with superior interior materials, and none of this electronic junk. All manual controls for all A/C functions, and as few electrically operated things as possible. My 1998 E300TD driver's side external mirror is leaking some kind of likely hazardous fluid that was the means by which it auto-dimmed the headlights shining in your eyes from the car behind you. The new piece of glass alone is over $400 with the MBA Club discount. That is just a crime. I have to fix it so I will likely just have a piece of exterior grade mirror cut to the shape of the existing mirror, and then glue it over the existing piece of leaking, useless crap. It is stuff like this that drives me nuts. New cars come with a freaking rain sensor to turn on the intermittent wipers! I would like to imprison the engineer and marketing types who thought this was so good it had to become a standard piece of equipment on US bound cars. There is no programmable defeat that I know of, and the feature is prone to spastic application of the wipers when I don't want them on (this is on my daughter's 2005 C230 Kompressor Sport).

MB didn't have these issues in the past because the automobile market didn't demand them. It is time to demand this junk be taken out again, or be made entirely optional, not packaged and visibly priced. When I ordered my grey market cars in the early to mid 1980's, the German price list was itemized for everything. The simple A/C was about $1100. The auto A/C was another $1,700. Electric seats on my 16 valve 190E were $1,700 each. Electric windows were about $100 per set of doors (you could order them for the rear or the front alone). All this made it clear, if I bought the seats like they came in the US model, I would have paid $1,700 to "electrify" the seat position that no one ever sat in most of the time, along with another $1,700 to change mine when I never changed it once I set it up the way I wanted it. The decision was easy. The factory price for my car was under $21,000 delivered to me in the US. The showroom price for the US version was $37,000. The difference was a handful of electrical things that were sure to cause extra problems in a 20 year lifetime.

I could go on and on. The point is, MB's reputation for reliability comes from an era when reliability was valued as a luxury. It is now commonplace, and the electronic reliability has replaced it, mainly because the electronic equipment falls so far short of the mechanical reliability of today's cars. Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

Any current manufacturer reduced to using "reliability" as a selling point these days shouldn't be in the car business (which explains the absence of Italian and French cars in the US). Reliability might have been something to brag about in the 1970s, but now it's a given.

That said, I know what you mean by all the electronic junk clouding the picture. These things are serious profit hooks for the manufacturer, and as you said, people expect and love it. Try to find a GM car without air conditioning and power windows these days. Those were considered luxury options back when the 123s were made, but the fluff you describe is taking it to another level. And even though it might not last 20 years, if you're the car maker, do you really care? Hell, if you're a customer you don't care either - most people don't want to drive anything older than five years anyway if they have a choice. WIth that in mind, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that well-built strippo model from MB.

At the risk of sounding like a greenie, we live in a throwaway society; just ask anybody who used to fix VCRs or even stereos. People like that are out of business now since everybody only wants what's new. Hell, with electronics, sometimes you can buy something newer with more features for the same price you paid five years ago for the old model. Which would you do? Fix the old one or buy the new one? The same kind of thinking applies to cars.

__________________
Gil

2004 ML350
1984 300CD; Ivory (sold)

Until CR has some real competition or I have the resources to test these things myself...



I also note (as in the topic title) that CR just designated these cars "best bets", admitting that they (CR) realize that just because a 4 or 10 year old car made it to 200k, that doesnt mean that a 2008 model of the same will do the same thing. I am really curious about this because as pricing gets more competitive, the manufacturers of the "best bets' cars are facing the same "make it cheaper" pressure that MBZ is facing.

I can see a future where cars begin to self-destruct between 100k and 200k miles with regularity. We've proven that the manufacturers have little concern after 100k miles.

-John

__________________
2009 Kia Sedona
2009 Honda Odyssey EX-L
12006 Jetta Pumpe Duse
(insert Mercedes here)

Husband, Father, sometimes friend =)