What happened to Mercedes quality? - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

tyl604 · #1 06-13-2016, 09:59 PM

Yesterday I happened to notice a fairly new (to me) Mercedes in the shopping center lot with the top most piece of its grill missing. How can that happen I wonder? When I get closer I see that that piece of grill is no longer part of a single, wholly metal surround grill - but it is a silly, thin piece of chrome that is attached to backing to make it look like a real grill. Arrgh!!!! It might not even be real chrome; who knows?

I never knew that Mercedes stopped fabricating real grills for their cars. When did this happen? Why? What happened to the quality that we all see in our 80's cars?

dude99 · #2 06-13-2016, 10:18 PM

After the w124 and the w140 the quality took a nose dive.... My w210 is very nice to drive, but is not built anywhere close to the standard of the cars that came before it.... Supposedly the newer generations are striving to get back there in terms of quality but I have no first hand experience with that so I don't know...

tjts1 · #3 06-13-2016, 10:29 PM

My friend has an 08 or 09 R350 4matic sitting in his driveway with less than 100k miles which he offered to me for FREE. There are so many things broken on it that the mechanic quoted them something like 120% of the resale value of the car in pristine condition which its not. It doesn't pass smog because of CEL, air suspension is toast, the driver's seat only moves in one direction, ac is dead... the list goes on.

Demothen · #4 06-13-2016, 10:30 PM

Safety standards, build and material costs, and fuel efficiency requirements happened.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing. And it's certainly not limited to Mercedes. Do you like your modern cars to get good mileage, but still have modern conveniences? They need to weigh less. Want to be safer in a crash? They need crumple zones. Want to be able to afford a car? Then it needs to be made from less expensive materials, and fewer of them.

To meet expectations, cars need to be more refined and engineered. Instead of building things heavy and strong, they need to be engineered to use the fewest resources, but those resources need to be just strong enough to do the job.

There was a crash test done a while back between a 50's or 60's piece of detroit iron and it's modern equivalent. Very thought provoking.

tyl604 · #5 06-13-2016, 10:42 PM

Dem - that argument makes a good deal of sense. I would propose that the pendulum swung too far.

On the other hand I suggest that Mercedes does not want its cars to last as long any more because they want new car sales. Granted there will always be a market for new ones - but that market is greater if the older cars just basically fall apart.

Actually I suspect that technology failures - replacement of failed computer driven items - are more likely to make us junk the newer cars as we are just not willing to spend the dollars for repair/replacements. But I still think the base mechanicals will also not last as long.

Call me an old fogey.

tjts1 · #6 06-13-2016, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demothen

Safety standards, build and material costs, and fuel efficiency requirements happened.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing. And it's certainly not limited to Mercedes. Do you like your modern cars to get good mileage, but still have modern conveniences? They need to weigh less. Want to be safer in a crash? They need crumple zones. Want to be able to afford a car? Then it needs to be made from less expensive materials, and fewer of them.

To meet expectations, cars need to be more refined and engineered. Instead of building things heavy and strong, they need to be engineered to use the fewest resources, but those resources need to be just strong enough to do the job.

There was a crash test done a while back between a 50's or 60's piece of detroit iron and it's modern equivalent. Very thought provoking.

This makes no sense at all. There are plenty of reliable cars today, Mercedes is not one of them. MBs had crumple zones going back to the late 60s, ABS and airbags in the late 70s, seat belt pretensioners in the mid 80s etc. Safety is nothing new. Also most modern cars are far heavier than any of our ancient diesel heaps. A modern E350 weighs 3800LBS.

Demothen · #7 06-13-2016, 10:49 PM

Oh, I agree that new cars are unlikely to last as long as old cars. No question.

Overbuilt != overengineered in most cases.

Demothen · #8 06-13-2016, 11:03 PM

Note that I didn't say that modern cars are unreliable. In fact, modern cars are much more reliable than classic cars were, even when new.

Cars today weigh a lot. No questions asked. But that weight is not just extra sheetmetal. Wiring harnesses are huge. My GLA has something like 9 airbags. It also has power seats, a power liftgate, a ton of sound dampening (though so does my w123, to be fair), 10 or so speakers. It weighs about 200 pounds less than my w123, even though it has all these extra features. Both cars are roughly the same size, the GLA is quite a bit shorter front to rear, but also a lot taller.

My point is that modern cars are heavily engineered. Classic cars are heavily built.

If modern cars were built like classics, but still had to meet today's safety standards and carry the equipment they do today, they would probably weigh 50% more than they do now.

Mark DiSilvestro · #9 06-14-2016, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demothen

Note that I didn't say that modern cars are unreliable. In fact, modern cars are much more reliable than classic cars were, even when new.

Cars today weigh a lot. No questions asked. But that weight is not just extra sheetmetal. Wiring harnesses are huge. My GLA has something like 9 airbags. It also has power seats, a power liftgate, a ton of sound dampening (though so does my w123, to be fair), 10 or so speakers. It weighs about 200 pounds less than my w123, even though it has all these extra features. Both cars are roughly the same size, the GLA is quite a bit shorter front to rear, but also a lot taller.

My point is that modern cars are heavily engineered. Classic cars are heavily built.

If modern cars were built like classics, but still had to meet today's safety standards and carry the equipment they do today, they would probably weigh 50% more than they do now.

And probably cost 50% more too. I've learned to accept the plastic interior/exterior trim. Even the plastic radiators.
But I really detest the many other plastic underhood parts. Especially in the cooling systems and valve-covers on BMWs. Despite what they claim, I believe the weight reduction over aluminum is negligeable, and it's mainly done to save money, make the cars 'biodegrade', more expensive to fix once the warranty's up, and encourage new car sales.

Happy Motoring, Mark

MBeige · #10 06-14-2016, 03:52 AM

Quality is relative.

As vehicles evolve, so do design requirements, which in turn may affect quality.

superapan · #11 06-14-2016, 04:36 AM

It's no secret build quality of 210 and 211 (and models of their generation) is garbage. It improved somewhat for facelifted 211. I've had them both, and now a 2011 W212, which has been good to me so far, touch wood.

jaybutter · #12 06-14-2016, 09:03 AM

I had a 95 S500 and it died because the engine wiring harness insulation turned to dust, and I mean dust. "The Best or Nothing" means nothing in quite a few cases! Shame on MB! I really enjoyed my W140 until this failure. All because of a BS parts supplier and MB's unwillingness to make them perform.

My 84 300CD W123 is much better, but some parts are now getting very expensive. Have you priced a brake master cylinder reservoir recently. $350 from MB, $200 after market. And I won't even discuss the CD's window seal pricing as it is just abusive!

In the end I really don't understand my own love, hate relationship with MB. I just can not walk away!?!

barry12345 · #13 06-14-2016, 09:58 AM

General repairs are getting so expensive that brands that require far more than average work. Will probably see their market share decline. Actually to a certain extent this has already occurred with many brands.

I have noticed in the last few years more than a few people saying we will never buy another product of an X brand. Actually I almost feel sorry for the owners of certain brands as I follow along the road behind their new vehicles.

For what they paid for their vehicles they could have gotten a far more reliable car. Where at least the manufacturer is making some effort to also support his product overall. The average car buyer perhaps still is influenced too much by their emotions and advertising.

Zacharias · #14 06-14-2016, 09:59 AM

Why does anyone think Mercedes bought Chrysler? It was for two reasons: First, they needed to learn how to make cars cheaper, and needed to learn it quickly.

Second, they wanted to piggyback on Chrysler's parts distribution system and methods as they were apparently at the forefront of the industry at the time (I have to agree, when I owned a Dodge Magnum I could call in the AM and have a special-order part in my hand at 5 p.m.).

This was what was told to me by a veteran MBz parts manager. He and other experienced parts guys were seconded to Chrysler for six months to learn their system and help to implement it at Mercedes.

All cars are more cheaply built and built with less robust materials than 20 years ago. They also tend to be built using larger "systems" rather than more individual parts, which increases the price of repairs many-fold.

And yes, globalization means that your Mercedes wiring harness may be made offshore and if Mercedes is spec-ing work on a low-bid basis... well....

Carpenterman · #15 06-14-2016, 10:11 AM

I always liked the saying:

"Mercedes quality began sliding downhill when they started making cars for rich people instead of smart people."