Quote: Originally Posted by Dudley_Dooper (original)
Maybe that was just a Friday car they got and a shame that they stopped purchasing the brand on one bad experience.
The problem with Mercedes was that there was a conscious management decision to cheapen the design and lower the build quality as they felt they were over-engineering their cars and profit margins were not high enough. This happened to coincide with us buying our third Mercedes. I can't remember all the problems we had, but from the top of my head:
Idle was rough Automatic tip-tronic transmission would stall if you floored the accelerator from a stand-still Traction control stopped working Satellite navigation kept rejecting the map CDs. Built-in microphones for the mobile phone kept disconnecting themselves so people couldn't hear you. Convertible roof got stuck half-way up just as it started raining. The car can't be pulled out of park while the roof is mid-operation so had to phone for assistance - while blocking the traffic lights. The rubber seals around the bottom of the drivers door fell out about 2 weeks after delivery The roof leaked above the windscreen The dashboard rattled The keys were dropped out of a pocket and this misaligned the hologram mirrors in the key so the car wouldn't recognise it. It took 3 weeks to get another key from Germany.
But it wasn't just the problems with the car that were part of the bad experience. The dealership wasn't helpful either. Mercedes actually blamed the fact that the car had an AMG tune on it and AMG blamed Mercedes... yet the AMG tune was specified with the order to construct the car.
An alternate dealership was no further help and referred us back to the original one where we bought the car. There was a complete and total failure on the part of Mercedes to deliver a car that was anywhere near their old standards and their service network was pitiful in trying to resolve our problems. The rough idle and stalling when attempting maximum acceleration from stand-still were never solved in the 2½ years we owned the car.
They may very well have sorted out these problems, but when you give a company £67k for a car, you expect the car to be much better than that and certainly you expect the service side of things to look after you if/when something goes wrong. What we found was that the warranty wasn't properly repairing components when they broke and most of the problems were chronic rather than an acute problem that was fixed. They were massively disappointed with the car (it may very well have been a lemon), but it was the terrible service across the network that convinced them Mercedes was no longer the company they enjoyed being customers of.
They eventually got rid of the car for £24k with just under 40,000 miles on it. The reason they ended up getting the CLK over the M3 was simply because the M3 had a 6 month waiting list if you wanted it built to spec, while the Mercedes had only a 3 month waiting list. Throughout all of this, they were impressed by the service they received on their 5-series and while they had the CLK they often lamented that they should have bought another BMW instead.
Since then, they're now on their 3rd new BMW purchase and are very happy with the cars and service.
Quote: Originally Posted by M.O.S (original)
The cayman, well lets just say change one letter of the name. I'd rather have a bus pass. Yes you can tune it to be faster than an imitation 911, but its just not right. It doesn't fulfill the requirements of a proper porsche and screams I couldn't afford a 911.
Well, I think that's just nonsense. I suppose you look at the 924, 944, and 928 and say "they couldn't afford a proper Porsche"?
Quote: Originally Posted by M.O.S (original)
All the mgs had different chassis. OK the doors and basic shape was the same, however, thats it. Even the engines were differently tuned e.g. rover 25 1.4=85bhp, mg zr 1.4=105bhp...
The problem is, with the car having the same shape and too similar styling, people weren't going to look for any subtle under-the-skin tweaks. And even though there were improvements, it was essentially just a facelift: many facelifted cars have changes like suspension geometry, engine retunes, new gearboxes, etc... but they're still the same basic car. As was the case here.
Quote: Originally Posted by M.O.S (original)
I dare say so. Most BMWs are just sitting on motorways now, which doesn't create much strain on wearable components. I know of a fair few MG Rovers that are used as tow cars and/or driven hard and they're fine. Infact a friend had and still has a 2003 75 2.5v6 tourer, and the only parts that have gone wrong are those shared with BMW/MINI - door locking things etc... Yes our bmw is driven very hard, but as its got all the ///M parts on it, this shouldn't be a problem - motorsport derived parts should tolerate fast road.
Well, that's surprising. I've never known anyone who's had a bad experience with a modern BMW before.
Quote: Originally Posted by M.O.S (original)
The last line was sarcastic. You took it far to seriously. I would have added 3 exclamation marks, but felt that there wasn't the need when talking to someone who is of above average intelligence
Sometimes it's very difficult to communicate/interpret sarcasm on a forum without vocal inflections or facial expressions.
Quote: Originally Posted by M.O.S (original)
I've had only one dealing with the mods on here, it was about pictures and instructions of how to attach as thumbnails, rather than using the picture button thing on the top of advanced reply which I was using. The moderator in question did this in a very friendly manner, providing me with easy to follow instructions.
I can't say I've ever experienced this or seen any evidence of it.
Regards,
Andrew.
