The Definition of "Quality"
Question:
Can you confirm that _ALL_ BMW’s ever made have lasted 16 years and they _ALL_ have 400,000 miles on them? The problem is that you can’t take a single example, your BMW or Mercedes, and make a generality out of it. Just as you can’t take a single example of a Ford which has a problem, and claim that _all_ Ford are the same way. Your reasoning just doesn’t make sense. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Our BMW is 16 years old and 400,000 miles, and our Mercedes is 18 years old and > 500,000 miles, our VW’s 8 years old and 150,000 and they all run like new.
Response:
Well, you were on the right track originally. "Quality" and "durability" are two very different things. "Quality" only means if the vehicle meets all of its designed requirements. "Durability" is a factor of the designed requirements themselves. If you design a vehicle to last just 36K miles, and it does, then that is a "quality" product. It met requirements fully. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I think you are selling me short. I would imagine that a Camry or Accord > will go 150,000 over 10-15 years without too much hassle. Why can’t Ford > build the same quality?
Response:
I don’t think you are missing anything, but I think that enough users in this newsgroup report 100K miles and more without major repair expense to make a good case for the Explorer. Especially when we consider that it is the nature of newsgroups that bad news gets posted a lot more than good news. I have had only one problem with my 98 Explorer Sport (rear window wiper) and it has been a delight to drive from new. I thought the build quality was quite good. It is my hope that it will give 10 years of relatively low-cost service, and the experiences of many here give me some cause for optimism. I am also hoping for another 5 years after that, but at that age luck starts to be a very big factor. In terms of quality I rate the Explorer as medium. Lots better than Kia, not nearly as good as Mercedes. But then I spent 21K, not 45 or 50K. I sure hope your Explorer lasts for 150-200K and 10-15 years with no major repairs, but I don’t think the Explorer is quite in the price range where this can be expected as a matter of course. The manufacturer must balance quality with cost, and statistical data of average length of ownership will be a factor. I know a lot of folks who own Camry’s, etc., and they are excellent cars. But all of them have had to face major repairs when the vehicles reached high mileages. Say at the 8 to 10 year mark. My outlook on vehicle cost is that after a well built vehicle gets about 8 (or 7, or 9, your gut feeling may well vary) years on it, it is best to budget about $1,000 a year for maintenance and repairs. Some years it may be $200 and some years it may be $2000. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->In other words, what Ford defines as "quality" seems to be as making the >vehicle "just good enough" so as not to run up warranty repairs for the >first 3/36. What I define as quality is a well built vehicle that will run >150,000-200,000 miles over 10-15 years with no major repairs and few minor >repairs (assuming proper maintenance). Am I missing something here?
Response:
C.E., Unfortunately none of the Ford vehicles you mentioned are of recent (‘98 and newer) vintage. THAT was my point. Something changed for the worse. Bernie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I think you are selling me short. I would imagine that a Camry or Accord > will go 150,000 over 10-15 years without too much hassle. Why can’t Ford > build the same quality? > My current 4 year old Expedition has over 120,000 miles. Total out of > warranty repairs have totaled less than $500. > My 10 year old F150 has 90,000 miles. Total out of warranty repairs was > less than $100. > My 1986 Mercury Sable had 130,000 miles and was 11 years old when I sold > it to a friend. Total out of warranty repairs were less than $300 (one > alternator and CV joint boots). > My ex-wifes 1982 Toyota Cressida was 7 years old with less than 70,000 > miles when we got rid of it. Total out of warranty repairs (while we > were married) – well over $1000 (and I did much of the work). Oh what a > feeling. This was without a doubt the most over-priced piece of junk I > was ever associated with. > One Sister’s 1991 VW Passat struggled to make it to 100,000 miles at 9 > years of age with well over $2000 in repairs (and that doesn’t include > the power windows that didn’t work, or the door handles that were broken > when She sold the car). > My others Sister’s 1986 VW Jetta managed to make 135,000 miles after 6 > years but required a replacement manual transmission, two in tank fuel > pumps, CV joint boots twice, and a clutch to make it. Since I did most > of the work the total cost was less than $1000, but you can imagine what > the work would have cost at a dealer. > Since 1984 my parents have owned 4 different Ranger Pickup and 2 Mercury > Grand Marquis. Of these 6 vehicles, the only out of warranty repairs > were one water pump, one ignition module, and 1 power seat motor > (combined mileage for these 6 vehicles was well in excess of 500,000 > miles). > I have a friend with a BMW – the cost of a single "tune-up" (i.e., rip > off of the rich and stupid) at the dealer is more than I have paid for > maintenance of all three of the Fords I currently own for the last 3 > years. > One Sister now owns a Civic. It is a very good car. At 50,000+ miles it > has only required 1 out of warranty repair that cost her less than $100 > (I installed the parts). > My other Sister owns a Ford Escape. It is too new to have needed any > repairs (in or out of warranty). > Maybe Toyota’s are better now than they were 18 years ago – I figure > they couldn’t be any worse. I do like Tundra’s, maybe I’ll take a chance > on one next year when I plan to replace my F150 (I never have liked the > current style F150). > Regards, > Ed White
Response:
The PSD motor is pretty good, [although 2 were lost to airbox designs that dusted the engines.. this was a Ford 'silent recall' item] The transmissions and clutches are not up to the torque of the PSD….perhaps in part due to the torque curve. So lots of clutch and tranny problems. What I was talking about was systems in general…say front brakes and suspension. Most Ford dealership mechanics agreed that the Fords often needed everything replaced..right down to the wheel bearings. Everything seemed to wear out, where other vehicles needed only to have the normal ‘wear items’ replaced. The 1994 Explorer Limited required replacement of the entire Air Conditioning system at 5 years and 83,000 miles. Other vehicles we own have never needed more than belts, refrigerant, and high and low pressure switches. Obviously, I like vehicles that last and last and last …. and provide very low cost per mile operation with good maintenance and operation. Vehicles that wear out after 100K and need so many parts replaced that buying a new vehicle makes economic sense doesn’t appeal to me. A vehicle like this locks the owner into a high cost per mile – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> That’s funny – it’s usually the other way around. The PSD is actually >supposed to be a good engine. Look at what U-Haul uses for trucks – Ford. >They did the Chevy/GMC thing a while ago, but switched back to Ford. (And >those trucks are probably some of the most abused trucks out there.) >-Matt
Response:
>> Durability is what American vehicles have lacked for several decades now, >> but that Toyota and Honda have always had. > I have an 86 Mustang with 170k that begs to differ with you… > I’ve got an 88 Mustang with 155,000 and my Sister just sold a 92 > Bronco with 155,000, both running original drivetrains. It’s actually > pretty common.
Yup. I’m fully planning on 200k out of the Explorer. Same for the wife’s Escort. -Matt
Response:
Whether you think it makes sense or not…my reasoning in not that all BMW’s and Mercedes last a long time since ours did. Instead, it is that I know first hand that it is possible that they last, just like I know first hand that the ‘94 Explorer can have problems; the Explorer needed major work at 80K miles: AC rebuild, Tranny. If other Mercedes owners also report trouble-free high mileage ownership experiences with certain models and certain years, or a rash of problems with other Mercedes models or years….. I pay attention. My reasoning is that maybe certain models or years are better or worse than others. Unfortunately, by the time we all learn which vehicles are better or worse, the automaker had usually changed the product. The Fords I know firsthand all had tranny problems, the PSD F-250’s and F-350’s were the worst. The engines were all great, except for 2 ‘97 PSD’s which failed due to a airbox defect which dusted low mileage expensive engines. [Ford had a 'silent recall which they honored for most high volume truck purchasers] The paint failed on the hood, roof, and trunk of our Crown Victoria…another Ford ’silent recall’ for bad primer coat, not honored. The Fords we purchased in Europe were much better, fit and finish was noticeably better, no mechanical defects at delivery, no unscheduled maintenance…. excellent qualty and reliabilty. The European Fords also were a pleasure to drive. The difference between US and European Fords was ‘Quality’. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Can you confirm that _ALL_ BMW’s ever made have lasted 16 years >and they _ALL_ have 400,000 miles on them? >The problem is that you can’t take a single example, your BMW >or Mercedes, and make a generality out of it. Just as you can’t >take a single example of a Ford which has a problem, and claim >that _all_ Ford are the same way. >Your reasoning just doesn’t make sense.
Response:
> Durability is what American vehicles have lacked for several decades now, > but that Toyota and Honda have always had.
I have an 86 Mustang with 170k that begs to differ with you…
Response:
> holding up as well as the stuff made from, say, 1985-1995ish. Something > clearly went downhill. My mother’s ‘98 Mercury Mistake, my ‘99 Explorer and > my friend’s ‘00 Explorer are constantly being bombared with recalls and
Yeah, 2 words…Jaques Nasser. Seems like since he took over and the bean counters started runnig the company, things went downhill fast! -Matt
Response:
> My biggest gripe with the many Ford trucks we maintain versus Chevy…… was > that the Powerstroke diesels needed major system rebuilds as opposed to the > Chevy trucks that needed normal wear items serviced.
That’s funny – it’s usually the other way around. The PSD is actually supposed to be a good engine. Look at what U-Haul uses for trucks – Ford. They did the Chevy/GMC thing a while ago, but switched back to Ford. (And those trucks are probably some of the most abused trucks out there.) -Matt
Response:
AZ, There is, I guess, some truth to your comments. I guess, as a longtime "FORD MAN", what I am seeing is that the crap produced the past few years is not holding up as well as the stuff made from, say, 1985-1995ish. Something clearly went downhill. My mother’s ‘98 Mercury Mistake, my ‘99 Explorer and my friend’s ‘00 Explorer are constantly being bombared with recalls and warranty repairs. My mom, who has an american flag tatooed on her back and is old enough to remember Pearl Harbor, is talking about buying a Camry!!!! This is SERIOUS!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I think you are selling me short. I would imagine that a Camry or Accord >will go 150,000 over 10-15 years without too much hassle. Why can’t Ford >build the same quality? > I think most of them do go that long. The biggest difference I see is > that Ford sells a heck of a lot of vehicles so you hear lots of > complaints. I’ve never had a problem getting well over 100K out of my > vehicles without doing much if any major maintenance. We’ve had many > Fords in our Fleet vehicles that have no problem going that distance. > My sister has had 4 Broncos and ran the first three to almost 100K > before trading on the next one and the last one she ran to over 150K. > All were sold with the original engine and transmission still in them > and going strong. For every person with a problem there are who knows > how many (probably 100’s) who don’t have a problem. Ford isn’t one of > teh largest and most profitable car makers because they sell a product > that people don’t want to buy and buy again. A car maker with the > lack of concern for it’s customers that the loud complainers like to > paint would soon be out of business. There will always be situations > that don’t work out, it’s not a perfect world. >> Yes, you are missing the cost of a vehicle which will last >> 200,000 miles and 15 years. >> Ford only makes vehicles durable enough within the confines >> of what you are willing to pay. Let Ford know that you are >> willing to pay $150,000+ for a vehicle that will last, and >> if you can enough people to do similarly (about 5 million >> people), I am sure Ford will listen. >> You aren’t looking for something for nothing, are you? >> > What I define as quality is a well built vehicle that will run >> > 150,000-200,000 miles over 10-15 years with no major repairs and few >minor >> > repairs (assuming proper maintenance). Am I missing something here?
Response:
> I think you are selling me short. I would imagine that a Camry or Accord > will go 150,000 over 10-15 years without too much hassle. Why can’t Ford > build the same quality?
My current 4 year old Expedition has over 120,000 miles. Total out of warranty repairs have totaled less than $500. My 10 year old F150 has 90,000 miles. Total out of warranty repairs was less than $100. My 1986 Mercury Sable had 130,000 miles and was 11 years old when I sold it to a friend. Total out of warranty repairs were less than $300 (one alternator and CV joint boots). My ex-wifes 1982 Toyota Cressida was 7 years old with less than 70,000 miles when we got rid of it. Total out of warranty repairs (while we were married) – well over $1000 (and I did much of the work). Oh what a feeling. This was without a doubt the most over-priced piece of junk I was ever associated with. One Sister’s 1991 VW Passat struggled to make it to 100,000 miles at 9 years of age with well over $2000 in repairs (and that doesn’t include the power windows that didn’t work, or the door handles that were broken when She sold the car). My others Sister’s 1986 VW Jetta managed to make 135,000 miles after 6 years but required a replacement manual transmission, two in tank fuel pumps, CV joint boots twice, and a clutch to make it. Since I did most of the work the total cost was less than $1000, but you can imagine what the work would have cost at a dealer. Since 1984 my parents have owned 4 different Ranger Pickup and 2 Mercury Grand Marquis. Of these 6 vehicles, the only out of warranty repairs were one water pump, one ignition module, and 1 power seat motor (combined mileage for these 6 vehicles was well in excess of 500,000 miles). I have a friend with a BMW – the cost of a single "tune-up" (i.e., rip off of the rich and stupid) at the dealer is more than I have paid for maintenance of all three of the Fords I currently own for the last 3 years. One Sister now owns a Civic. It is a very good car. At 50,000+ miles it has only required 1 out of warranty repair that cost her less than $100 (I installed the parts). My other Sister owns a Ford Escape. It is too new to have needed any repairs (in or out of warranty). Maybe Toyota’s are better now than they were 18 years ago – I figure they couldn’t be any worse. I do like Tundra’s, maybe I’ll take a chance on one next year when I plan to replace my F150 (I never have liked the current style F150). Regards, Ed White
Response:
Phillip Crosby ("Quality Is Free") defined it as "Conformance to Requirements". His idea was that you should determine the root cause of a problem and take action to prevent it from happening again. He also said do it right the first time. The trouble is that problems are reduced and then companies back off the effort until they get bitten again. My own experience with Ford recently is not build quality. My troubles have been with things that failed early even though they worked when the truck was new. I suspect the cause was too much cost-cutting pressure on parts suppliers. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I keep reading many posts here regarding "quality". What does that mean? To >me, I can live with a loose this or that which gets fixed under warranty. I >am more concerned about DURABILITY. Will the leather wear out after just a >few years (mine has)? Will the radio display go dim after just a few years >(mine has)? >In other words, what Ford defines as "quality" seems to be as making the >vehicle "just good enough" so as not to run up warranty repairs for the >first 3/36. What I define as quality is a well built vehicle that will run >150,000-200,000 miles over 10-15 years with no major repairs and few minor >repairs (assuming proper maintenance). Am I missing something here?
Response:
Interesting question, and a hot topic in manufacturing a few years ago. A fellow called W. Edwards Deming had quite a lot to say about this and led a bit of a revolution in US auto making in the mid 70’s after years of work in Japan. "Quality" is not to be confused with "Luxury", but it often is. A close kin to "Luxury" is "Durability", where more expensive parts or manufacturing methods are used much like adding extra cost features. Neither should "Quality" be confused with "Warranty". In fact, a long warranty is often the first hint that a car has a poor quality history and the maker is trying to buy their way out with some pre-paid service agreement ("sure it’ll break down a lot, and it might even be delivered to you in a broken condition, but it won’t cost you any more than we’ve already built in to the price"). To me, quality is that each vehicle produced works as it was designed to work without correction or fit adjustments when it is delivered. Basically, quality is "Consistency" in the manufacturing process. In over 30 years of new car purchases, only a few that I’ve bought worked right when I picked them up without needing to return to the dealer for something. In fact, having the punch list of corrections, gripes, and flaws used to be the norm on a new car, until we bought a Japanese car in 1980. I recall being very surprised at the dealer’s response as I asked where to bring it back in for the expected fixes. "It won’t need any", he said, "you won’t have to be the final inspector on this one". A number of years passed before I had that experience again, but it was, frankly, on a Ford product 8 years later. Again, the ‘97 Explorer I have now was the same pleasant experience. Sure, some parts have worn out in 100K miles, but really for the price it has been remarkable. I suppose if I wanted to spend $10-20K more that those parts could have been designed to last almost forever (or contain built-in, automatically changed out spares?), but for what I spent the quality of this vehicle is frankly the best I’ve ever had. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I keep reading many posts here regarding "quality". What does that mean? To > me, I can live with a loose this or that which gets fixed under warranty. I > am more concerned about DURABILITY. Will the leather wear out after just a > few years (mine has)? Will the radio display go dim after just a few years > (mine has)? > In other words, what Ford defines as "quality" seems to be as making the > vehicle "just good enough" so as not to run up warranty repairs for the > first 3/36. What I define as quality is a well built vehicle that will run > 150,000-200,000 miles over 10-15 years with no major repairs and few minor > repairs (assuming proper maintenance). Am I missing something here?
Response:
Durability is what American vehicles have lacked for several decades now, but that Toyota and Honda have always had. — mike w
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I keep reading many posts here regarding "quality". What does that mean? To > me, I can live with a loose this or that which gets fixed under warranty. I > am more concerned about DURABILITY. Will the leather wear out after just a > few years (mine has)? Will the radio display go dim after just a few years > (mine has)? > In other words, what Ford defines as "quality" seems to be as making the > vehicle "just good enough" so as not to run up warranty repairs for the > first 3/36. What I define as quality is a well built vehicle that will run > 150,000-200,000 miles over 10-15 years with no major repairs and few minor > repairs (assuming proper maintenance). Am I missing something here?
Response:
It depends on how you choose to use the Word. To Demming (sp?), quality was the way to do something correctly the first time. This eliminates rework and "quality inspectors" thereby reducing costs. His theories on how to do this was shunned by American businesses, but embraced by the Japanese. It worked so well, that the Japanese put up a statue to Demming in Japan. The US vehicle manufacturers are still playing catch-up on quality. Ford requires something like 165 reworks/corrections per 100 new vehicles. About twice as many as Toyota and Honda. Ford has been loosing ground and is last among the major manufacturers for 2000 I think. How this impacts long-term durability or vehicle life I don’t know. Al
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I keep reading many posts here regarding "quality". What does that mean? To > me, I can live with a loose this or that which gets fixed under warranty. I > am more concerned about DURABILITY. Will the leather wear out after just a > few years (mine has)? Will the radio display go dim after just a few years > (mine has)? > In other words, what Ford defines as "quality" seems to be as making the > vehicle "just good enough" so as not to run up warranty repairs for the > first 3/36. What I define as quality is a well built vehicle that will run > 150,000-200,000 miles over 10-15 years with no major repairs and few minor > repairs (assuming proper maintenance). Am I missing something here?
Response:
You proved my point.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’d say you’re missing something. $150,000 for a vehicle that lasts 15 years > and 200,000 miles? > Our BMW is 16 years old and 400,000 miles, and our Mercedes is 18 years old and > 500,000 miles, our VW’s 8 years old and 150,000 and they all run like new. > Over that many miles they will need a repaint, and lots of TLC… but they > don’t fall apart. > My biggest gripe with the many Ford trucks we maintain versus Chevy…… was > that the Powerstroke diesels needed major system rebuilds as opposed to the > Chevy trucks that needed normal wear items serviced. > The ‘94 Explorer needed a complete $1800 Air Conditioner system rebuild, while > the German cars needed only $150 of fresh refrigerant and pressure switches. >Yes, you are missing the cost of a vehicle which will last >200,000 miles and 15 years. >Ford only makes vehicles durable enough within the confines >of what you are willing to pay. Let Ford know that you are >willing to pay $150,000+ for a vehicle that will last, and >if you can enough people to do similarly (about 5 million >people), I am sure Ford will listen. >You aren’t looking for something for nothing, are you? >> What I define as quality is a well built vehicle that will run >> 150,000-200,000 miles over 10-15 years with no major repairs and few minor >> repairs (assuming proper maintenance). Am I missing something here?
Response:
I’d say you’re missing something. $150,000 for a vehicle that lasts 15 years and 200,000 miles? Our BMW is 16 years old and 400,000 miles, and our Mercedes is 18 years old and 500,000 miles, our VW’s 8 years old and 150,000 and they all run like new. Over that many miles they will need a repaint, and lots of TLC… but they don’t fall apart. My biggest gripe with the many Ford trucks we maintain versus Chevy…… was that the Powerstroke diesels needed major system rebuilds as opposed to the Chevy trucks that needed normal wear items serviced. The ‘94 Explorer needed a complete $1800 Air Conditioner system rebuild, while the German cars needed only $150 of fresh refrigerant and pressure switches. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Yes, you are missing the cost of a vehicle which will last >200,000 miles and 15 years. >Ford only makes vehicles durable enough within the confines >of what you are willing to pay. Let Ford know that you are >willing to pay $150,000+ for a vehicle that will last, and >if you can enough people to do similarly (about 5 million >people), I am sure Ford will listen. >You aren’t looking for something for nothing, are you? > What I define as quality is a well built vehicle that will run > 150,000-200,000 miles over 10-15 years with no major repairs and few minor > repairs (assuming proper maintenance). Am I missing something here?
Response:
I think you are selling me short. I would imagine that a Camry or Accord will go 150,000 over 10-15 years without too much hassle. Why can’t Ford build the same quality?
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Yes, you are missing the cost of a vehicle which will last > 200,000 miles and 15 years. > Ford only makes vehicles durable enough within the confines > of what you are willing to pay. Let Ford know that you are > willing to pay $150,000+ for a vehicle that will last, and > if you can enough people to do similarly (about 5 million > people), I am sure Ford will listen. > You aren’t looking for something for nothing, are you? > What I define as quality is a well built vehicle that will run > 150,000-200,000 miles over 10-15 years with no major repairs and few minor > repairs (assuming proper maintenance). Am I missing something here?
Response:
Yes, you are missing the cost of a vehicle which will last 200,000 miles and 15 years. Ford only makes vehicles durable enough within the confines of what you are willing to pay. Let Ford know that you are willing to pay $150,000+ for a vehicle that will last, and if you can enough people to do similarly (about 5 million people), I am sure Ford will listen. You aren’t looking for something for nothing, are you? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > What I define as quality is a well built vehicle that will run > 150,000-200,000 miles over 10-15 years with no major repairs and few minor > repairs (assuming proper maintenance). Am I missing something here?
Response:
I keep reading many posts here regarding "quality". What does that mean? To me, I can live with a loose this or that which gets fixed under warranty. I am more concerned about DURABILITY. Will the leather wear out after just a few years (mine has)? Will the radio display go dim after just a few years (mine has)? In other words, what Ford defines as "quality" seems to be as making the vehicle "just good enough" so as not to run up warranty repairs for the first 3/36. What I define as quality is a well built vehicle that will run 150,000-200,000 miles over 10-15 years with no major repairs and few minor repairs (assuming proper maintenance). Am I missing something here?
