How do you define quality in a vehicle?

So, I'm catching a lot of flak from people for stating that the Miata is a higher quality car than the BMW E36 M3. Electrical gremlins, crappy window regulators, crappy radiators and water pumps, crappy HVAC, etc. Pretty much all of the common E36 problems point to a poor quality car to me. My car didn't have all of these issues, but it just wasn't fun enough to justify the amount of preventive maintenance required to avoid it.

I like not having to treat interior trim pieces like they're made of china. I like my radio working. I like my windows rolling up and down properly.

So far, I've been told that all of that stuff is normal, and that the heavier doors and roundel on the hood make it a better car.

What say you?

I can deal with a lack of quality, but the car better put a damn big smile on my face when I drive it.

Interesting note: My car insurance on the MSM is the same as it was on the Z06; both are $36/month cheaper to insure than the BMW was.

Pretty much the same thing. Reliability and the fit of components, and the finish of parts (it shouldn't look like it's made of "melted down action men" as Jeremy Clarkson says).

Nothing says "low quality" like snap-in pieces that really just jam into place. My old Daewoo was rife with those, including the emblem on the front that shot off and hit me in the nuts when I closed the hood one time.

GameboyRMH wrote: Pretty much the same thing. Reliability and the fit of components, and the finish of parts (it shouldn't look like it's made of "melted down action men" as Jeremy Clarkson says). Nothing says "low quality" like snap-in pieces that really just jam into place. My old Daewoo was rife with those, including the emblem on the front that shot off and hit me in the nuts when I closed the hood one time.

To me, quality is measured by longevity combined with minimal repair. As in: it needs to be thought through during the design phase and then screwed together properly at initial assembly. That's what turns me off about German cars but appeals to me about Japanese.

Plastic trim can look cheap but be very durable. For instance, my stepdad's Hyundai Sonata's interior plastic looked (he's traded it for a Genesis, damn nice car that) sorta cheap, but it did not buzz or rattle in the least. The panels in high end cars may look better but they are not necessarily better made or longer lasting.

For what they cost, they should last a lot longer. Crap, the interior panels in my Trooper looked better than the ones in the comparably aged Mercedes my customers drove when I worked there.

GameboyRMH wrote: My old Daewoo was rife with those, including the emblem on the front that shot off and hit me in the nuts when I closed the hood one time.

This needs to be in "say what?"

IMHO, The Mercedes-Benz W126 is the highest quality car ever built. The last fully mechanical benz, built when MB was run by engineers, not accountants. Everything perfect, nothing out of place, everything as easy to work on as possible. There isn't a single case of "Why the berkeley did the engineers do this/put that here?". Many of these cars are just starting to have rust issues, after 30+ years and 200k+ miles of use, many of them still look nearly new on the inside too.

I created a 'proof' to prove the answer to 'what constitutes quality in a vehicle':

1) Operational Quality = 1/2 Durability + 1/2 Functionality.

2) Build Quality = 1/2 Fit + 1/2 Finish

3) Without the first, the second is meaningless, thus:

Quality = Build Quality | Operational Quality

4) (See Mercedes W123)

QED

Kenny_McCormic wrote: IMHO, The Mercedes-Benz W126 is the highest quality car ever built. The last fully mechanical benz, built when MB was run by engineers, not accountants. Everything perfect, nothing out of place, everything as easy to work on as possible. There isn't a single case of "Why the berkeley did the engineers do this/put that here?". Many of these cars are just starting to have rust issues, after 30+ years and 200k+ miles of use, many of them still look nearly new on the inside too.

I was coming in here to say W123.

The easiest way I would define quality is the amount of up keep a car needs...

Most cars come off the show room floor with good fitting pannels, a good feel to it, low road noise, a motor that feels good, a half decent ride to it... All of this is subjective to price tag and personal preference though...

Maintenance plays a big part in the quality of a vehicle.. Every thing needs maintenance, its more the question of how much does it need beyond the simple oil changes, washing and general keeping it clean factor..

Kenny_McCormic wrote: IMHO, The Mercedes-Benz W126 is the highest quality car ever built. The last fully mechanical benz, built when MB was run by engineers, not accountants. Everything perfect, nothing out of place, everything as easy to work on as possible. There isn't a single case of "Why the berkeley did the engineers do this/put that here?". Many of these cars are just starting to have rust issues, after 30+ years and 200k+ miles of use, many of them still look nearly new on the inside too.

Stop making me want stuff!

(How many people besides me immediately searched CL?)

I have two cars built in 1996.. my BMW 318ti and the Volvo 850. The interior on the BMW is typical for BMWs of the period.. I had to redo the headliner and reglue on the door panels. Fixing the window regulators was just a matter of scraping out the old sticky grease on the bottom track and putting in new slippery grease.. the old grease is what breaks BMW windows.

The Volvo, while in better looking shape.. did need a new driver's seat (it was missing chunks of foam out of it, two door panels, and a dashtop.

My other car.. the 1987 Saab 900 Turbo.. just has a cracked dash.

You do the math

There is also initial quality.....and long-term quality.

I was impressed with the Hyundai Azzera a few years ago when they came out and convinced my folks to buy one. While it is a decent car, it hasn't held up well---- squeaks, wheel bearings, poorly fitting interior parts. After a few years and only 30K miles or so the car feels....well cheap.

Contrast this with the 1979 450sl I bought last year, and that thing was a tank! All the materials were top-notch, it didn't rattle or squeak, or leak. This was a bottom-feeder Benz too. (purchased for $2,500) It was so well built it felt comforting to drive. It sounds weird, but the car's solidity actually made the driving experience more calming.

My E36 M3 falls between the two. It has minimal squeaks and rattles, and goes down the road as well as it did when new. (152K miles ago) It handles great, inspires confidence, and soaks up road irregularities with a satisfying thump. If feels VERY well made mechanically, but the interior lets it down. The headliner needed to be put back up, the door-panels became unglued, and I have a airbag light perpetually on.......oh yeah, and it's time to re-do the cooling system! Despite the car's flaws I love it, and never plan on letting it go.

YMMV

My goal in life is to care less and less about more and more until I don't give a E36 M3 about anything. A quality car is one that fits my life mandate by not needing constant attention while doing its job.

I answer your question with another question!

How long is a piece of rope...

NOHOME wrote: My goal in life is to care less and less about more and more until I don't give a E36 M3 about anything. A quality car is one that fits my life mandate by not needing constant attention while doing its job.

That is well said. The most reliable car I ever owned was not known as a great car, but it was perfect because it did everything we wanted, and required minimal attention. I'd say the quality was good.

I haven't taken a miata apart, but an e36 is decently engineered where there aren't too many goofy things. Build quality/fit/finish is good. Choice of materials - feel a bit cheap, but I don't see many e36 with cracked dashes. As far as maintenance, BMW made some choices with plastic parts and enviro-friendly glues that turned what used to be lifetime items to 60k maintenance items. OTOH, the BMW won't need a timing belt. either with regular maintenance will go 200k+

For me... it's "how much crap did I have to fix that I shouldn't have in how short of time and how many miles did I throw at it" factor. The Elantra was great for 10 years. It needed nothing more than normal maintenance items (fluid changes, timing belt, brakes and tires) with the exception of stuff I changed/broke while changing like suspension and tires for auto-x etc. That was a damn fine car for what it was. Never failed to start, always reliable and very cheap for me to maintain it.

NOHOME wrote: A quality car is one that fits my life mandate by not needing constant attention while doing its job.

I think this is a pretty good answer. Quality doesn't necessarily have anything to do with luxury and features, or lack thereof - if a car (or any other product) meets the needs of its intended use without requiring repairs, it has good quality.

oldtin wrote: I haven't taken a miata apart, but an e36 is decently engineered where there aren't too many goofy things. Build quality/fit/finish is good. Choice of materials - feel a bit cheap, but I don't see many e36 with cracked dashes. As far as maintenance, BMW made some choices with plastic parts and enviro-friendly glues that turned what used to be lifetime items to 60k maintenance items. OTOH, the BMW won't need a timing belt. either with regular maintenance will go 200k+

that is a problem with the year too.. in the 70s and 80s.. they were not so environmentally conscious. So plastics were hard wearing (and not recyclable ) and the glues and paints were poisonous. By the time the 90s rolled around, things had changed and many car makers were still trying to figure it all out.

if you look at most BMWs built in the 2000s.. you do not see things like delaminating interiors and broken window mechanisms

Definitely no cheap plastics LOL! And dont forget to check the pixels.

^Agreed^

I've got an '01 Tacoma, 120k, an '89 build date Miata @ 130k '98 e36 M3, 90k, and most recently an '01 525iT, 89k. They're all quite good.

I'm amazed at the Miata actually - when I bought it I was thinking "Civic convertible" but it's proven to made of high quality - if minimal - materials. The M3 has been extensively unrated to deal with it's 90% track time mission, but as a street car it would have been very good.

The Tacoma is amazing. I fully expect it to go 250k easily - it runs perfectly and uses no oil between changes. I've installed OEM shocks and brakes, and it's going to get timing belt and cooling system before next towing season.

The 525iT (manual!) I predict will have a few electrical demons, but mechanically will be great.

The thing to remember is the German stuff was built to last forever ~provided the owner follow the maintenance schedule provided with the vehicle~.

If you own a German car, behave like a nice, orderly German and you'll be fine.

When I was in motorcycle sales, occasionally someone would be comparing the Ducati ST2/ST4 sport tourers we sold with the Honda VFR800, and would be stuck on the maintenance issue of timing belts and shimming the desmodromically actuated valves - every 2.5 or 5k miles.

I'd make the point that both the Duc and the Honda will get to 40k miles at the same time - but the Honda would do it with zero maintenance, and w/o maintenance the Ducati would blow up at 10k.

Way, way back when I had my '91 Escort GT, the thing rattled and buzzed terribly. (As does my current Sentra, but for a different reason.) One rider commented, "Where's that rattle coming from?" To which I replied, "It's a Ford - pretty much everywhere." However, it was dead reliable and still looked great when I sold it with 132K on it. So quality in some ways but not others.

jstein77 wrote: Way, way back when I had my '91 Escort GT, the thing rattled and buzzed terribly. (As does my current Sentra, but for a different reason.) One rider commented, "Where's that rattle coming from?" To which I replied, "It's a Ford - pretty much everywhere." However, it was dead reliable and still looked great when I sold it with 132K on it. So quality in some ways but not others.

That's the thing about those cars... Everything MECHANICAL was of great quality. Everything ford touched was berkeleying AWFUL. I am NOT looking forward to the terrible rattles and buzzing my car will make when it fires for the first time with its new powerplant.

The equivalent Proteges? Not nearly as bad.

motomoron wrote: The thing to remember is the German stuff was built to last forever ~provided the owner follow the maintenance schedule provided with the vehicle~. If you own a German car, behave like a nice, orderly German and you'll be fine.

Quote of the year.

For a daily driver, quality means minimal maintenance with major abuse. Don't buy a DD from me. It will have been ridden hard and put up wet all it's life.

I don't usually fondle my dashes so I really don't care what they are made out of, as long as they stay where they belong and don't rattle on a smooth road. I'm partial to vinyl and plastic everything. Doors, head liner, floor mats, seats, everything. I don't want to have to baby or take care of it. I don't really want to clean it more than twice a year. If I can do that with a scrub brush and a hose, that's even better. I don't want to have to buy a special treatment to make the seats last or shampoo the carpet. I don't want to have to change the cooling system at 100k. I don't want to have to buy quality parts. Cheap oil, cheap gas, cheap everything. I want to turn the key, go where I need to and other than that ignore it. E150 cargo vans for the win. They are like a Timex.

Most other cars I don't really care. If I like it, I'll put up with the quirks like the window you have to help down so it doesn't pop off the track. Or the crack in the dash. Quality for me is in the engine and mechanics. The rest of the car is just there to keep my butt from dragging on the ground.