[milhous]

http://financialtimes.printthis.clic...partnerID=1744

sad but true. and i really like mb too.

the ever-increasing rate of electronics integration in cars concerns me. when we buy these sorts of cars (mostly high-end ones), it feels as if you're actually buying the electronics and features of them moreso than the drivetrain and mechanical components which are to me, so much more important. i suppose another way of saying it would be that r&d people are directed by management to offer more fluff than being concerned with what makes a car a car and what is needed for that car to move. i feel that this is one of mb's problems--more research on fluff and bloat and less on the fundamentals.

yes, i may be analyzing it too much, but do you really need a computer to address emissions and fuel efficiency and aren't there just mechanical means of accomplishing this?

i guess what i'm saying is, do you really need a computer to run a car?

sound off!

[entrox]

No, we do not.

There has been this trend lately with German car-makers to include more and more fluff nobody really needs just because a competitor added something similar in its line-up. Some of the stuff is so ridiculously unnecessary that it boggles my mind. Who needs an automatic control for their headlights? Who needs an automatic control for their windscreen wiper (with a wetness sensor)? I don't know about you, but I never had any problems turning on the lights/wiper when it gets dark/rainy. The newest VW Golf re-routes emissions to another exhaust pipe on the side when you're going in reverse, so you don't have to breath them in. WTF?

I'm a Mercedes-Benz enthusiast (I grew up in Stuttgart after all), but I would never buy a car that's newer than 7-8 years from them. Quality has really plunged down in that time. I'm currently driving a '95 C-Class and my next car will be a '94-'97 SL. I can get it for cheap, spend around 8K� for a complete overhaul/refurbishment and get a much better car for much less money compared to their current situation.

The new MB manager, Eckhard Cordes, has announced a shift in strategy to improve quality and their image again. We'll see what happens, although I won't be happy until they finally fire J�rgen Schrempp and get rid of Chrysler.

[angelmb]

This is really a BOSCH issue to recalibrate the injection pumps, isn�t?, nothing serious thought.

Anyway entrox is right, much of those are just commercial gizmos, give me the Mercedes-Benz Pre-Safe system features instead of all them.

[willed]

Originally posted by angelmb:
This is really a BOSCH issue to recalibrate the injection pumps, isn�t?, nothing serious thought.

Anyway entrox is right, much of those are just commercial gizmos, give me the Mercedes-Benz Pre-Safe system features instead of all them.

Maybe this specific instance is the fault of BOSCH or someone, but generally since Daimler-Benz merged with Chrysler, quality of Mercedes has plummeted. I'm sure a quick google would prove plenty of evidence to back this up.


But it's late and I'm tired.

[maxintosh]

It's not just the German manufacturers that do auto-lights. Most Toyotas do this too. Also auto-wipers only function when you manually turn the windshield wipers on to "interval" mode. It's actually pretty useful because when it suddenly starts raining more heavily or you get splashed it can clear up your vision immediately.

Actually I wish auto-headlight feature was mandated. So many people don't turn on their lights when it is dark or stormy out. Now *that* is mind-boggling. (And dangerous.)

[olePigeon]

BMW recalled a bunch of cars after WindowCE decided people didn't need breaks and doors locked.

[Agasthya]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
BMW recalled a bunch of cars after WindowCE decided people didn't need breaks and doors locked.

nice.

[OwlBoy]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
BMW recalled a bunch of cars after WindowCE decided people didn't need breaks and doors locked.

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Originally posted by milhous:

yes, i may be analyzing it too much, but do you really need a computer to address emissions and fuel efficiency and aren't there just mechanical means of accomplishing this?

i guess what i'm saying is, do you really need a computer to run a car?

i suppose some would say when gas prices triple in a few years, you'll need computers to run the hydrogen fuel cells or atleast the battery portion on the hybrids.

consider it practice for the future i guess

[Arty50]

Things have gotten ridiculous on the electronics front. But as for having a computer run the engine, I wouldn't have it any other way. Electronic fuel injection is one of the greatest things to happen in automotive history. If you live at altitude or frequently drive in hilly areas where you're constantly changing elevation, you'll quickly realize how nice it is. I have two cars, one carbureted (83 CJ-7) and the other with EFI (81 500 SEL). My Jeep loses a ton of power when climbing the hills around Tahoe. Newer Jeeps with EFI pass me with ease. The Benz of course just keeps on rocking too. That big engine is especially nice.

[analogika]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
BMW recalled a bunch of cars after WindowCE decided people didn't need breaks and doors locked.

Actually, the 7 series BMW whose doors locked on Thai/Phillippine/Malay/Singaporean (? I'm sorry, I don't remember exactly) government officials who were finally freed from their car by a policeman wielding a sledgehammer to break through the double glass was a pre-iDrive model, IIRC.

The stuff about brakes not working, the automatic suddenly randomly downshifting while in cruise control (at 60 mph!), the computer suddenly rebooting while on the highway and then showing all units in metric, and the trunk hatch refusing to stay shut, that is all iDrive/WindowsCE 7-series stuff, yes.

It's not abbreviated "WinCE" for nothing, folks.

-s*

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by willed:
Maybe this specific instance is the fault of BOSCH or someone, but generally since Daimler-Benz merged with Chrysler, quality of Mercedes has plummeted. I'm sure a quick google would prove plenty of evidence to back this up.


But it's late and I'm tired.

It was well before that.

And since Dailmer was the one that BOUGHT Chrysler, it couldn't be Chrysler's fault.

Meaning Chrysler has no say in how Mercedes are made, or designed.

[analogika]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
It was well before that.

This is true.

DaimlerChrysler fused in 1998, and Mercedes-Benz's electronics problems started in around 1995.

Originally posted by Zimphire:
And since Dailmer was the one that BOUGHT Chrysler, it couldn't be Chrysler's fault.

Meaning Chrysler has no say in how Mercedes are made, or designed.

This is only partly true.

When you buy something that turns out to be a total disaster and absolute money-pit, then you spend an inordinate amount of work, time, and money on trying to deal with that situation.

Higher investment into better sources and better QA are hard to push through when your newer half is hemhorraging money.

Of course, both of these problems are direct results of bad managerial decisions (buying Chrysler arguably the worse of the two), so it's not really Chrysler's fault - beyond, of course, catastrophic decisions on Chrysler management's part that made Chrysler such an awful investment for Daimler-Benz, and the clever decisions on their part that faked them into looking like an attractive investment.

-s*

[Zimphire]

I wouldn't call Chrysler a money pit, or a disaster.

Both sides benefitted from the merger.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I wouldn't call Chrysler a money pit, or a disaster.

Both sides benefitted from the merger.

Not really. Chrysler's main value was its name on the American market (and maybe some other countries). New Chryslers are usually built around some Mercedes Benz platform, so in the end, in a couple of years, it's probably going to be similar to Audi, VW, Skoda, etc. which use basically the same parts.

But looking at the numbers, the `merger' (DB bought Chrysler) is a disaster.

[milhous]

Originally posted by entrox:
No, we do not.

There has been this trend lately with German car-makers to include more and more fluff nobody really needs just because a competitor added something similar in its line-up. Some of the stuff is so ridiculously unnecessary that it boggles my mind. Who needs an automatic control for their headlights? Who needs an automatic control for their windscreen wiper (with a wetness sensor)? I don't know about you, but I never had any problems turning on the lights/wiper when it gets dark/rainy. The newest VW Golf re-routes emissions to another exhaust pipe on the side when you're going in reverse, so you don't have to breath them in. WTF?

I'm a Mercedes-Benz enthusiast (I grew up in Stuttgart after all), but I would never buy a car that's newer than 7-8 years from them. Quality has really plunged down in that time. I'm currently driving a '95 C-Class and my next car will be a '94-'97 SL. I can get it for cheap, spend around 8K� for a complete overhaul/refurbishment and get a much better car for much less money compared to their current situation.

The new MB manager, Eckhard Cordes, has announced a shift in strategy to improve quality and their image again. We'll see what happens, although I won't be happy until they finally fire J�rgen Schrempp and get rid of Chrysler.

Well at least Mr. Cordes is being honest about quality in this article, which came out late last month:

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=105036
-----
Q&A: Mercedes-Benz's Eckhard Cordes

By: editors at Edmunds.com

Date Posted 03-21-2005

Eckhard Cordes has been a member of the board of management of DaimlerChrysler since December 1998 and has been responsible for the Mercedes Car Group, which includes Mercedes-Benz, Maybach, Smart, AMG and McLaren, since October 2004. He joined Daimler-Benz as a management trainee in 1976 after earning an MBA from Hamburg University and has held various positions throughout the company ever since. He was interviewed by Inside Line's European bureau.

One of Mercedes-Benz's key brand values � quality � is suffering. How are you addressing this issue?

It is true, we have been having problems in this area. It has almost become negative PR for the brand. But we are going to fix these flaws, because we really do care about our core competence. Quality must come first, no question about it. It is an essential investment in future profits. How are we going to handle this matter? We will bring already delivered problem cars up to date, and we are going to implement even stricter quality controls, from the drawing board to the assembly line.

So most of the flaws are homemade?

No, quite the contrary. Look, for instance, at COMAND [Cockpit Management and Data system] or SBC [Sensotronic Brake Control]. Our biggest headaches are electronic glitches. That's why we are going to have a word with our suppliers, but at the same time we are also introducing new test and validation procedures.

Would a no-questions-asked three-year warranty not be the most convincing answer?

Such a warranty is already in place in some markets, and we are thinking about introducing it in other countries like Germany, but there is no decision yet. In a way, we'll even go beyond the warranty claims because we feel morally obliged to right the wrongs. After all, customer satisfaction is our top priority.

This is going to cost you�.

�a three-figure sum in a million euros, I know.

You could save some money by backing out of Formula One, where McLaren Mercedes did not do particularly well in 2004.

We are committed to F1 for 2005. Anything else is pure speculation.

Eckhard Cordes is often described as a numbers man who does not care much about the product. True or false?

Both. I am a numbers man because we are in this business to make money, not to write red ink. And, yes, many of my decisions are influenced by this train of thought: If a program does not pay off, it is not going to happen. But I am nonetheless also a car guy. That's why I have no intention to change the model policy mapped out by the Mercedes Car Group.

You say you are a car guy, so why did you stop the sports car project codeveloped with McLaren?

Because first of all we need to get our house in order � think quality! � and make sure the core business is on track, develop an even more focused strategy. For the reasons named above, McLaren will not be part of this strategy.

Mercedes is aggressively launching new niche models, but this means smaller individual volumes and higher piece costs. A financial cul-de-sac?

In general, this approach has been very successful. There are in fact still a few gaps left which may warrant a closer inspection. After all, we want to stay ahead of the competition. But I agree: Whenever we want to expand our product range, such a move must be backed up by a solid business case.

Smart never made a convincing business case. If fact, it has been losing money since Day One. Any thoughts?

Obviously, Smart is in a position we cannot tolerate. These huge losses are simply unacceptable. Are we going to shut Smart down? No, we are not. Because as a brand, it still has plenty of untapped potential.

Like what?

It's a youthful brand with a very strong image and fantastic customer loyalty. It also has promising products, like the iconic Fortwo or the cute Roadster. But we've got to stop throwing good money after bad. I am not expecting a 10-percent return on investment. I am, however, expecting to see some kind of profit, and I am not prepared to wait forever.

So?

Fact is, we are considering all options. We need to take money out of the Forfour to make it work; we may not do the Formore at all; we may have to find a new cooperation partner; we may have to create a revised business model. And we certainly must streamline distribution, first of all by establishing a shop-in-shop concept that involves main Mercedes-Benz dealers.

This still does not sound like a license to print money.

Maybe not. But we must also consider certain strategic implications. Smart could, for instance, become an important stepping stone for future Mercedes customers. And when you look at the broad picture and at the pending CO2 legislation, MB/DCX may have no choice but to offer small, economical clean-air cars.

Is the role of Maybach also under revision?

Maybach does not worry me at all. That's a small-numbers issue. But like Smart, we cannot allow Maybach to circle at random out there in orbit. Both brands need to be brought back into the Mercedes-Benz fold. The sooner, the better.
-----

so entrox, if i wanted to get a benz that's either an E or S class, what years should i be looking at? just as a sidenote, is it even possible to bring a european benz over as an import? as you know us benz models have been predominantly automatic, so i was thinking a manual would be even nicer.

i still miss my 86 560sel. it was such a solid car. too bad i lost it in the accident from an incompetent truck driver 2 winters ago. had less than 92k miles on it.

[entrox]

Originally posted by milhous:
so entrox, if i wanted to get a benz that's either an E or S class, what years should i be looking at?

I'd go with a '94-97 S-Class. The W140 has the reputation of being amongst the best cars Mercedes has ever built. They're built like tanks (really!) and are pure luxury. I've checked prices here and a good S320 goes for around �15k while a (better equpped) S500 is only �3k-�4k more. Big gas guzzlers aren't very popular here

I have absolutely no clue about importing cars into the US and how much it would cost.

i still miss my 86 560sel. it was such a solid car. too bad i lost it in the accident from an incompetent truck driver 2 winters ago. had less than 92k miles on it.

The W140 is all that and more. Alternatively, you could go with a '93 500E which is a W124 with the same engine as the one in your 560SEL. You'd lose out on luxury though, provided that you find one (they're a rarity).

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by milhous:
Well at least Mr. Cordes is being honest about quality in this article, which came out late last month:

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=105036

Yup, electrical issues.

My dad had an Audi that had electrical issues as well. It must be a German thing.

[milhous]

thanks entrox for the advice. if i do get another s-class, it'll most likely be an s320 for it's smaller and slightly better fuel economy over the larger v8 models.

since you're from stuttgart, i have to ask. have you taken the mb factory tour, and if so, what's it like?

zimph, that kind of surprises me about audis. i had thought that after their dismal electrical problems in the 80's (i.e. 5000cs) they'd really nip electrical problems in the butt for good. i guess not.

[milhous]

and for $hits and giggles, a 97 s320 has a 26.4 gallon fuel tank. at the present rate of gas per gallon in philly of $2.15, that would $56.76 to fill it up.

it'd be a heluva a great drive though.

[Arty50]

I know you all diss Chysler, but they've been kicking butt lately. There was a big front page article in the WSJ recently talking about the turn around...and fittingly comparing it to Mercedes recent woes.

It's really sad what's happened to Mercedes. I hope they turn it around.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by milhous:
zimph, that kind of surprises me about audis. i had thought that after their dismal electrical problems in the 80's (i.e. 5000cs) they'd really nip electrical problems in the butt for good. i guess not.

This was the 80s

[maxintosh]

Originally posted by Arty50:
I know you all diss Chysler, but they've been kicking butt lately. There was a big front page article in the WSJ recently talking about the turn around...and fittingly comparing it to Mercedes recent woes.

I agree, Chrysler's been doing extremely well. It's Ford and GM that need to wake the hell up.

[milhous]

man, if mb doesn't shape up, they'll be another repeat of automotive history.

lee iacocca returns to save daimler-chrysler.

[entrox]

Originally posted by milhous:
since you're from stuttgart, i have to ask. have you taken the mb factory tour, and if so, what's it like?

Nope. I guess it isn't that interesting if you see it every day

and for $hits and giggles, a 97 s320 has a 26.4 gallon fuel tank. at the present rate of gas per gallon in philly of $2.15, that would $56.76 to fill it up.

Erm, it costs me roughly $93 to fill up my 16.4 gallon fuel tank, so no complaining please. Your gas is dirt cheap!

[Zimphire]

Just because your gas is ridiculous, doesn't mean we can't complain.

[analogika]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Just because your gas is ridiculous, doesn't mean we can't complain.

His gas is bothering you over teh int4rw3b?

That's ridiculous.

But hey, just open a window, and it'll pass.

[milhous]

Yep, Jurgen's in some real trouble.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=105304

DaimlerChrysler Boss Heckled by Angry Shareholders

Date Posted 04-06-2005

BERLIN — DaimlerChrysler chief executive Jürgen Schrempp faced a hostile reception from fund managers and shareholders at the company's annual meeting yesterday.

One fund manager's quip — "Do you need to shoot yourself in the foot to prove you're a capable doctor?" — won cheers and a round of applause from the packed Berlin convention center.

While they fell short of giving Schrempp a vote of no-confidence, a number of senior fund managers opted to abstain from the traditional symbolic vote approving the performance of the management.

The company's earnings have tumbled in the past year, hit by quality problems at Mercedes-Benz, the collapse of alliances with Mitsubishi and Hyundai, a sales scandal that has seen the sacking of senior German managers, and a $1.56 billion restructuring of the Smart city car business.

Schrempp nevertheless told the audience: "We have made clear progress," claiming the company reached its operating earnings target for the full year despite a drop in fourth-quarter earnings. "We reached our profit target. But we're not satisfied with that," he said.

Shareholders, however, are unconvinced; the company's stock is worth far less than at the time of the 1998 merger between Daimler-Benz and Chrysler. "This is becoming a nightmare," said one shareholder.

What this means to you: Schrempp continues to ride out the storm, despite a series of woeful decisions. Unless the turnaround starts soon, DaimlerChrysler's shareholders will surely run out of patience with him. There must be some smiles in Auburn Hills knowing that now it's Chrysler bailing out the Mercedes division, much to the Germans' dismay.

[Zimphire]

It looks like to me it's not Chrysler that is causing the problems.

[Tyre MacAdmin]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
It looks like to me it's not Chrysler that is causing the problems.

That's odd.