Why did Mercedes cost cut?

Why did Mercedes cost cut?

Author
Discussion

pentoman

Original Poster:

4,814 posts

265 months

Thursday 22nd February 2007
quotequote all
I was young so I don't know - What was it that prompted Mercedes to cost cut back in the late '80s/early '90s? I believe they actually publically announced they were going to "stop over-engineering our cars". To me over engineering was what sold them. You knew you were getting a good car, even if it wasn't the best equipped/handling/riding/cheapest. Were they making no money? Or did they just get greedy? It might really have killed the company. Mercedes have spent a lot trying to get their quality reputation back, and claim they have done it now with the new C-class. Even if they have done it (which they might well have), then the stigma of the '90s and '00s will still linger for at least 10 years. How could they be so stupid to almost destroy a brand that was built into what it was through an entire century of making high quality cars? To the point that 15 years later most car enthusiasts probably see Mercedes as just expensive, reasonably nice cars of questionable quality. Sort of like Alfa Romeo but not as bad.

They could at least have made changes that didn't ruin the brand's USP, such as deciding to make cheap ugly cars with 3 cylinder engines, but maintaining the engineering thoroughness.

pentoman

Original Poster:

4,814 posts

265 months

Friday 23rd February 2007
quotequote all
But theys still must have made some major changes for some of the things that have happened to have happened.. this is my list:

1 RUST. Cars rusting in as little as 5 years. Fair play they seem to be paying to fix it though.
2 The interior of the first C class was nasty, the E class not much better
3 The harmonic balancer failure issue on the V6 and V8
4 Electrical bugs/glitches (ok every manufacturer has these but you'd hope Mercedes would be a bit better
5 the big old S-class with its door closing pumps that fail every couple of years


Of course they weren't problem-free beforehand, they had their issues but they were never so blatant, they always seemed like genuine issues rather than under engineering/cost cutting.


It's amazing they would risk their quality repuatation, when so many companies (eg Jaguar) would do absolutely anything to have that sort of reputation and therefore relatively reliable customer base.

pentoman

Original Poster:

4,814 posts

265 months

Tuesday 27th February 2007
quotequote all
johna8tdi said:
I am afraid I don't touch Mercs any more the build quality has all but gone.


Are they that bad though? I know they have their niggles and they aren't the same to work on as they used to be, but inside I still believe that the engineering is 90% there, e.g. most of the engines would still go for 300,000 miles with ease (provided electrical unreliability didn't prevent it from getting there!). I've driven a 230,000 mile 2001 S320. The interior was showing a more wear than Mercs of old because it's pretty plasticky, but apart from that you couldn't feel the mileage one bit.

I mean, there has to be something there for all that money, right!?

pentoman

Original Poster:

4,814 posts

265 months

Thursday 1st March 2007
quotequote all
So the first C class (202) started it off with the plasticky interior.. but basically is still fairly well engineered? The current C class (203) is through-and-through cheaper (as it was developed in the mid 90s when cost cutting was highest)? But is the imminent new C-class developed with the new quality mindset that Mercedes claim to have and will it prove to be better? Hopefully the 203 was a low point (though I quite like it and prefer it to the 202) and things will improve from now on.

pentoman

Original Poster:

4,814 posts

265 months

Thursday 8th March 2007
quotequote all
tonylal said:
I remember posting on here that if you sat blindfolded in the front of my 190E cosworth and then a new 203, you would swear my 16 year old was the newer of the 2. Even the engine sounded sweeter compared to those early Kompressors.


And I think my cossie engine sounds like a bag of nails at anything other than full whack..!

I've only spent a day with the 202 (an early but v low mileage C180 with manual windows!) and thought it was better in every obvious way than the 190E - more space, better driving position, better insulated, smoother, sharper handling and so on. But I did think it lacked some of those other things that should make a Mercedes feel good - a good interior, a general feeling of class and quality, many hard to define qualities.

Maybe that's just what everyone says every time a new Mercedes comes out.... I reckon people will say the W203 was the last solid Mercedes and that new fangled thing is rubbish!

pentoman

Original Poster:

4,814 posts

265 months

Saturday 10th March 2007
quotequote all
Well it's nice to know a C320 can be more solid. I imagine they are very nice? I've only ever sat in low spec C classes which aren't too nice.