mercedes diesels have the highest incidence of failure rate of any diesel manufacture
 

I read it on another forum, is this true? I asked the guy for a source but haven't gotten a reply. I was thinking if they consider like cruise control being failure, but I also read somewhere that an insanely high % of mercedes diesel cars are still on the road, a testament to reliability.
-Nate

According to MBUSA there's over 200,000 MB diesels from the 1999 and earlier model years still on the road in the USA....and something like 74% of ALL MB's are still on the roads period....since the begining of their production. I don't remember where I read that but I thought that sounds pretty good!

I guess it all starts with the definition of a 'failure.'

Item requiring repair/replace under warranty?
Equipment failing in any way, such as power antenna?
Failure to start, or to run?
New or used cars?

Without knowing this definition, it's hard to speculate.

It's sort of like asking "Which has better Quality, Japanese or American cars?"

Overall, American.

Quality is also relative of the time. 30 years ago bad quality was would it start below 0. Now it's electric antennas, etc..

i also heard this statistic of 74% of all benz's ever still on the road

That's not a reliable statistic. Rolls has a higher percentage of cars still running/registered. I'd like to see statistics of how much of the MSRP is paid for every mile to 100K miles, 200K miles, 300K miles, etc.

If this is a US statistic, what is the basis? Some years the only Diesel passenger car you could get was an MB. Or did VW have Diesels in the late 80s and early 90s.

Sixto
95 S420
87 300SDL

I believe I heard this too, but it was in reference to current models. I do know that in recent reliability tests, Mercedes-Benz on a whole fared very poorly. Not sure if that's what I remember hearing about the diesels, specifically, though.

I would be hard pressed to believe that historically. It seems to be somewhat common knowledge that diesel Mercedes of yore possess tremendous quality. Sometimes reputations are unfounded, but Mercedes diesel cars have such a widespread good reputation that I'd have a hard time believing that they have a high rate of major engine failure.

vw has had a diesel in the us since around 1981 with the rabbit diesel and then the jetta,golf etc and still today they have the 1.9 diesel.

I don't know.

How many 3.5 liter 603 engines were produced again? Failure rates seem to skyrocket, then! :P

Define "failure". Speaking strictly of the engines (both gas and diesel) MB seems to make some of the best ones around. They last a long time and are pretty sweet to drive. The trans also seem to be very tough and long lived.

Now on the the rest of the car, all MB's seem to have the same trouble spots.
Climate control systems are a pita from about the W116's to present day. :D
Sunroofs have always been a hit and miss thing. Some work forever some break.
Vac leaks are a constant thing on the older cars.
Electronics have always been a bit of a pita
Dash boards crack

Nothings perfect, at least they are pretty simple and cheap to fix.

Both of our sunroofs still work.... *knock on console wood......

geeze, I didn't MAKE the statement I was just TOLD it, I don't know what defines "failure"
-Nate

To say nothing of the 313 hp twin turbo V10




(from Volkswagen Press Release, March 2003) Wolfsburg. As of 4 April, Volkswagen will be enhancing the luxury class segment with a new dimension: the Phaeton V10 TDI, the most powerful saloon in the world with a diesel engine. Its 5.0-litre ten-cylinder power unit generates 230 kW / 313 bhp. From 2000 rpm upwards, the bi-turbo diesel direct injection develops a fabulous 750 Newtonmetres of torque.

The performance of the Phaeton V10 TDI is at the level of a thoroughbred sports car. For example, the saloon accelerates in only 6.9 seconds to 100 kph. At 250 kph top speed, the electronics regulate the V10 TDI gently and unnoticeably. Here, the Phaeton V10 TDI stands out with a low average consumption, an average of 11.4 litres for 100 kilometres. :cool:

I've had the opportunity to sit in one of those Phaetons at the auto show last december here in GR, that thing was incredible...... :eek: Tons of room and everything right where it should be...and a speedo that goes to 200mph :eek: :eek: I sat in a taureg too and also liked it, as well as the feel of the M-Class, SL, and C class (felt sporty).....I didn't however, like the feel of the CLS, it felt cramped, and the windows are extremely small.....for being such a large car it doesn't feel like it on the inside....there was no shortage of electronics on any of those cars though! :eek: :eek: I don't even want to imagine what fixing that stuff would be like.... :rolleyes: I was very happy to cruise on home from the show in my 126 :D, which promptly started that night when it was 3 degrees out and it had been sitting in a windy parking lot for about 7-8 hours

Back a score or so years ago, when I was a subscriber to Consumer Reports, I recieved their annual survey. I paid particular attention to the questions in the automotive section. IIRC, the question on reliability was phrased as, " Did the vehicle have any failures which you consider to be major?" This always struck me as odd; as posted above, some people consider the failure to start at zero degrees a major failure, others would consider the failure of the power window as a major failure, while someone else might consider a broken transmission as normal wear and tear. Leaving the definition of "major" to various people seems to invite problems. Perhaps in a given sample such difference are statistically unimportant.
All this is to underscore the concept that statistics are often the tools of liars-this is even more applicable in the realm of things political than in things automotive.