I read the same article in the USA Today newspaper in the hotel yesterday.

If you had read the whole article, you would have noticed that the article also mentioned that the first 90 days of ownership says nothing about the long term quality and durability of the cars.

It further went on to say that the ranking of cars after 5 years was completely different of that in the first 90 days. And up to the five year point, they mentioned that the "quality" problems were dead batteries, brake pad changes, etc. People like us on this board who keep up our cars and maintain them over the long haul, wouldn't call these issues "quality" problems, but rather regular maintenance items. Weird, huh?

I wish I would've kept the article, but the hotel cleaning staff had already thrown it away when they cleaned my room.

I forgot where Mercedes ranked after 5 years, but it was in the top ten.

I remember thinking after reading the article why J.D. Power and Associates only rates cars up to five years. Why don't they go back and report after 10 or even 15 years...

__________________
Paul S.

2001 E430, Bourdeaux Red, Oyster interior.
79,200 miles.

1973 280SE 4.5, 170,000 miles. 568 Signal Red, Black MB Tex. "The Red Baron".