|
I laughed at the Audi quality statement too. I had 2 new Audi's which had many varied issues and both my neighbours with new Audi's have had trouble. I like the design of Audi interiors and you have to hand it to them for engineering innovation, shame the execution is somewhat off the mark.
|
|
Seems they are looking at the perceived quality of their products, which is something Audi do rather well at. Actual build quality and mechanical reliability are completely different.
|
.....VW has already replaced the proposed door seals on the next-generation (Mk VI) Golf, which is due out next year. ......
Is it? Or is it just a facelift?
Sorry to hear about the latest round of ´Ran-related woes, TVM.
By the way, a new Laguna Initiale estate was parked in front yesterday, what a gorgeous design inside and out, full leather inside, nice woody inserts too (not things that usually catch my eye) - apart from the facelift Megane-style nose, which doesn´t do it any favours IMHO. Couldn´t see myself spending my own cash on one though, as the reputation for electrical fragility is a wee bit scary
|
.....VW has already replaced the proposed door seals on the next-generation (Mk VI) Golf, which is due out next year. ...... Is it? Or is it just a facelift?
The Mk V is being replaced early as it is too expensive to make (due to long assembly time). The Mk VI is expected to be much simpler and cheaper to manufacture.
However, since Martin Winterkorn took over several VW models have been delayed and sent back to the drawing board. Models affected include the Scirocco and the Passat Coupe (a 4 door Coupe like the Mercedes-Benz CLS) which was pulled just weeks from being unveiled as a concept. Therefore, as the Golf is a critical car for VW it may be delayed to ensure that it is 'right' this time.
|
...The Mk V is being replaced early as it is too expensive to make ........
Expensive mistake. Is that a record for a short production run? (volume cars, of course - otherwise the TVR Sagaris might qualify)
|
|
The Phaeton seems OK, but my Passat is poor quality. It doesnt go wrong that much, but it doesn't need to to be able to see cheap and nasty assemblies and poor quality parts and staggering design debacles.
|
|
The MkV golf is indeed down on quality comparing it to the MKIV. Which is why I decided to spend that little more on the Audi A3. VW need to get their act together!!
|
|
|
>>... but my Passat is poor quality. It doesnt go wrong that much, but it doesn't need to to be able to see cheap and nasty assemblies and poor quality parts and staggering design debacles.
The silver 'aluminium' effect trim on the 'Sport' is embarrassing: the car I saw at the VW dealer had same trim under across the dashboard was not even fitted straight...and had rough edges. Really awaful. But on a £20,000 car you have got to be joking! A 1990 Hyundai was better.
|
|
|
|
|
SWMBO's family are all VW devotees. There are 4 mk4 Golfs, a B5 Passat and a couple of Polos, and I don't think their reliability record is anything to shout about. The Golfs seem to vary wildly, and the Passat's tab over 2 years and 25,000 miles since the warranty expired (water ingress, clutch and DMF failure, alarm fault, central locking fault, front suspension bush failure, MAF failure) stands at a whisker over £2,500. Yet the guy still loves the car and defends it to the hilt.
I don't know so much about the mk5 Golf, but from the examples of mk4 TDI's we looked at a few months ago, the quality isn't a patch on the old mk1 / mk2 generation. I've driven several mk2 Golfs with 120-150k on the clock which still drive pretty much like new, but the 4 TDI's we looked at had between 70k and 90k on the clock and all felt well used. All were 3-4 yr old ex-fleet cars with full VW histories, yet trim creaked and squeaked, on all bar one the drivers door sagged noticeably, and they generally felt "baggy" and loose. Service histories revealed plenty of electrical glitches between services as well. I was also surprised at the noticeable difference in both performance and particularly engine noise between what were supposed to be examples of the same model. They were all priced far beyond an equivalently aged Focus, yet from my experience I actually think the Focus copes better with high miles if interior squeaks, suspension noise, panel alignment and general "tatutness" are any measure of build quality and durability.
Current VW's have stacks of showroom appeal with their soft plastics and very nicely judged styling, and historically a VW was justifiably known as being durable and tough beyond any reasonable expectation. On this admittedly limited experience, I would say they are nothing to write home about quality-wise at all. The quality review is long overdue.
If this seems like an anti-VW rant, I don't mean it to be. The mk2 Golf GTI 16v and Corrado VR6 are two of my favourite mass produced cars of all time, and I do "get" the appeal of the Germanic styling and lovely soft touch interiors. As a fan of older (early 80's to early 90's) VW cars though, I am appalled at how the quality has gone South, together with the reliability. Knowing what VW were capable of, makes the current stuff look even more inadequate.
Cheers
DP
|
Yet the guy still loves the car and defends it to the hilt.
I don't know what it is about VW, but they really do have a loyal following. That's why the dealer salespeople can get away with being so arrogant - I walk out in disgust, yet someone else will come in and buy a car at near list price.
|
I wonder if this is all part of the trend of how German manufacturers in all fields are attempting to maintain their market reputation for quality (and a bit of a premium price) while outsourcing alot of components or even whole assembly to cheaper countries. I've noticed this with alot of German domestic appliances eg White goods, Ovens, Coffee Machines etc that many are at best given final assembly in Germany and many are only "designed in Germany" and built elsewhere. Without so much in house production there is less "natural overengineering" and more sign that the bean counters are gaining leverage in tackling costs where they perceive the customer won't notice the change.
I think one of the relative changes is the improvement in cabin materials in other cars eg Renaults, Fords and even Vauxhalls of late that are making VW interiors look ordinary. It seemed always a backward step that the Mark V golf was an obvious downgrade in terms of materials than the previous model. Once that occurs the bad back chat starts and a reputation starts to falter.
|
|
|
I don't know what it is about VW, but they really do have a loyal following.
Think about it...;o)
|
|
I had a Mk I Golf LS - rubbish compared to the 1973 Beetle it replaced. Had a Mk II Golf GTI - v good. Had a Mk II GTI 16V - felt hewn from solid - maybe overall the best car I've ever owned. Had a 1992 Mk III GTI - rubbish. Had a Mk IV GT TDI - didn't miss a beat in 50K miles. 03 Audi A4 Avant v good too.
|
|
Ooh maybe this result in the infamous pollen filter designer being given his P45, and not a second too soon.
|
My new Volkswagen Lupo Tdi started with the bonnet release handle falling onto my right foot on the way home from the dealer. It was downhill after, faulty steering rack, damaged airbag clock spring and damaged sills in fitting the rack, steering wheel fitted at an angle, refitted, then airbag light on. every time it went in with a problem it came out with another related to fixing the first.
`parts` told me to use "ordinary multigrade` and the service manager later apologised after I emailed Germany, saying it was a `staffing issue`
In the end, it seemed the dealer was having a detrimental effect when working on the car and I had had enough.
With a struggle I got rid of it at 18 Months.
Our current two Fiats have had much less trouble over a total of 6 years than the VW had in the first 5 days
|
I have had experience in one way or another of all Golf marks staring in 1985 with the Golf 1 of my future mother-in-law followed by own Golf 2 (two of them plus my brother-in-law), Golf 3 of my second wife, Golf 4 of a friend and Golf 5 of a business colleague.
The most boring was the Golf 3, best built Golf 2.2, Best to drive Golf 1, best interior Golf 4. I was seriously interested in getting a Golf 5 with 2.0Tdi and DSG, but compared with the Golf 4 and other cars I was used to including a Focus rental car, I though the interior was very low rent.
You spend more time in your car than looking at it from the outside, so it has to be fit for purpose. You see so many well trimmed Golf's in Paris (nice beige leather etc) and yet in the UK it looks like you're driving a coal mine. I really wanted something smart, but I just wasn't excited at all.
Compared even to our hyundai Trajet, the interior is not that much better, and its way behind my old Forester which has nice aluminum trim in parts and non-scratch plastic.
|
If you want a VW just buy a Seat or Skoda instead :)
My uncles Suburb has a very basic interior but its bullet proof, it dosn't scratch and the seats are very hard wearing. I've always felt that VWs are over rated. The Golf just dosn't do anything to justify its higher than Focus price tag. Its no wonder VW are in a mess at the moment. I've always compared VW with Sony HIFI products, got a percieved good reputation but I would rather have a Marantz any day :).
|
If you want a VW just buy a Seat or Skoda instead :)
Bingo. And get it with the boring but bullet-proof 10-year-old SDi diesel engine. They are good for 300K miles if serviced properly and not driven like an idiot.
By the way we also own a 1999 MkIV Golf 1.6SE. Then my wife and I test drove a VW Golf Plus 1.9Tdi DSG. Dealer was waxing lyrical. But the interior felt so cheap, and the engine noise awful. But the wind roar round the A-pillar did it for her: had to raise our voices to speak over to roar/drone. Same with the Mk V Golf.
We drove home in the smooth classy MkIV and decided to keep it. Next year we will look at the Kia Cee'd thing again: we thought the car was very well finished and more refined than the newer VW. And better value. Or have I got it wrong?
|
>> If you want a VW just buy a Seat or Skoda instead :) Bingo. And get it with the boring but bullet-proof 10-year-old SDi diesel engine.
:o( Someone seems to have left a nice 110hp TDI in my car by mistake.
|
|
Think about it...;o)
>>
Brand loyalty takes just as long to erode as it does to build. ;-) In the case of my brother-in-law's Passat, while it is a perfectly pleasant car to drive or be a passenger in, I honestly can't find any "killer" quality about the car that would make me shrug off £2,500 worth of repairs in 2 years. Apart from the excellent PD engine and a classy interior, it's a pretty unremarkable, typically competent modern three box saloon. It certainly doesn't have any capabilities that are beyond a much cheaper Mondeo, Primera, 406 etc.
But he has had a host of utterly reliable and beautifully screwed together VW's, and personally think his loyalty goes back to the mid 1980's and he's not letting his experiences with one car change it.
Cheers
DP
|
|
Our 85 Polo C rusted less than the model of 10 years later
|
The Kia will loose its value quickly but the 6 year warranty makes it tempting.
My uncles have all been SDi cars :). He's done 20,000 in his suburb now and as far as I know apart from a routine service he has not spent a penny on it.
What would be nice from VW would be a nice simple well screwed together car that will last 300k, I guess the Fabia is just that.
|
Perhaps it says a lot about me but I now own my first VW, a MKV 1.6FSI Golf and have been perfectly satisfied with it in terms of build quality etc. Of course this might mean that I have owned a lot of junk in the past, such as loads of Austin Healeys, Ford escorts and two Rovers up until their demise.
My current car, as saloon/hatchbacks go, is excellent compared to anything else that I tried before making my purchase, ie, Astras, New Focus and Toyota Coralla to name but three. These appeared like gaslight in comparison to what I now drive - VW dealership, well that's another thing!! However having said all this, I don't know whether I would buy other VAG products when the time comes to change my current car.
|
>>Audi's reputation for quality is unrivalled in mainstream motor manufacturing<<
How can they say that when Audi's are just VW's with a bit of bling - they suffered the same coil problems etc. TDI engines are the same. platgforms are the same........................ etc etc. If you look at the CBCB and compare models with BMW or Lexus then IMO Audi do not have an unrivalled reputation for quality. Daft comment in my view and one written by a motoring journalist who spends no more than a day test driving a vehicle and is impressed with the audi shut lines and interior. Spend any more time as contributors to JD Power do and the truth surfaces then.
However I also agree with oldgit and would suggest that Toyota's reputation is on thin ice based on the number of recent recalls and my experience of their so called quality.
At the end of the day - the fact that the boss of a company has to go public with a review of its own quality proves to me that all is not well and that the comments on this forum about VW quality are somewhat justified now.
|
I think the original story was probably copied off a VAG press release - hence the bit about Audi quality.
It amazes me how superficial a lot of general public are about 'build quality'. They interpret some soft-touch plastics and ashtrays running on ball-bearings as 'quality'. I have seen car testers describe Subaru interiors as 'low rent' and 'cheap' . They are hard wearing and functional though - and when you take a look under the car you see where the money has been spent....
|
and when you take a look under the car you see where the money has been spent..
Thing about most subaru's,from underneath is about the best place to look at them?
|
BTW, my last post was referring to the cardriver's bling nonsense.
Re. the superficiality of the general public AKA the customers. These people spend almost all their time inside the car, looking at the dash and the cabin and touching the controls and all being well they never see the underside and surely that?s the way it should be. It?s not a case of superficiality, it?s nailing the basics in picking a car which appeals to your senses, reliably gets you from A to B and back, in a comfortable cabin. If it?s fun to drive, powerful, economical, good to look at etc. then so much the better.
If Audis were hopelessly unreliable, regularly leaving their occupants stranded at the roadside at the expense of a well-finished cabin then you?d have a point but from my own experience, that of friends and colleagues and from what our fleet manager tells me, this is not the case. My current A6, the one before that and the one before that have not missed a beat. There are tons of high mileage, hard-driven Audis in our fleet and I have heard of no reliability issues with most people happy to replace their current car with another Audi. My wife noticed that the quality of Audi?s electrics and their CS got ropey in the mid 90s and she had an A4 with recurring electrical niggles, but since then reliability has been fine, CS fine and she hasn?t had a problem.
It?s been a few years since I was last in a Subaru, a high speed blast from Elterwater over to Keswick and up to Carlisle in BIL?s Impreza. It was exhilarating, fast and sure footed, an absolute belter and for squirting around the lakes I can?t think of a better car, but there was a ton of noise from the road, wind, engine and gearbox and all this in what seemed like a cramped and dreary cabin. I was driving an Alfa 156 at the time, hardly the pinnacle of serenity and comfort and certainly not reliability, but comfort wise it was a blessed relief after the Subaru and I have to confess that I simply could not do the mileage I do in that Impreza. Cutting edge engineering is laudable and I can see why someone of an engineering bent would look to that over all else but how does it benefit the driver who arrives at his destination tired and battered from a functional but basic cabin For my last 2 car changes I whittled my shortlist down to a BMW and Audi which I tested to death. Mostly they were on a par but the BMW was better balanced and handled better through roundabouts and fast, twisty roads, but I could not get a comfortable driving position, found the controls irritating and every long journey left me tense and tired whereas the same journeys in the Audi left me fresh and relaxed. So the undoubted engineering superiority of the BMW was a classic example ofa feature which failed to benefit this customer.
What is needed is balance and I fail to see the point in denigrating a product which succeeds in an area where so many other companies fail dismally. The interior of the old Legacy was unforgivably bland but last year I had a quick poke around the new model and with its vastly improved cabin, Subaru have clearly acknowledged the importance of addressing this aspect.. When Subaru manage to produce a cabin as comfortable as an Audi, and Audi consistently produce cars with the engineering excellence of a Subaru then we?ll all be winners, but until then it?s horses for courses and neither car is the best choice for everyone.
|
This old factually incorrect twaddle again? Which VW would you bling up to provide the chassis and engine of the A6 3.0tdi, the A4 2.7tdi, or my bosses A8 4.2tdi? If one was daft enough to apply your logic, Porsche, Lambos and Bugatti, they?d be just Audi and by extensions VWs?.with a bit of bling. Then Lexus are just Toyotas with a bit of bling and Astons, Jags, Volvos, Mazdas are just Fords, all with a bit of bling.
|
Is quality synonymous with reliability?
Yes? No? Not always?
A hand-made emboidered and sequined silk coat can be of high quality, but not at all reliable or durable compared to a goretex and polyester anorak.
|
This thread might have gone a bit off-topic but I like what you say, Martin, especially the bit about Impreza ve Alfa v Audi. Personally, I love a car that's got bags of character and is a hoot to drive. But for my main car my choice criteria are based on what it does for me when I get to a car park at night, it's raining and maybe cold, I'm tired and I've got to drive 100 miles, say. I want to feel better at the end of the drive than when I started. My Mk IV Golf and Audi A4 did the job very well. So will my new BMW 3, I reckon.
Incidentally, I find the range of driving positions on the 3 better than on the A4, so for me the BM wins on that score.
|
Over the weekend I had a play in a 2007 A3 S line with 18 inch wheels and rubber band tyres. Audi have obviously listened to reports about the harsh ride on big wheels and sports suspension. The difference in ride over the Sport version I drove with 17 inch wheels just over 2 years ago was astonishing. No spine juddering jolts when going over the smallest road imperfection and no tramlining whatsoever.
If VW listen to the same extent and make similar improvements it can only be a good thing.
|
Cheers MM
A comfortable driving position is a very personal thing and I haven't spent enough time behind the wheel of the new 3 series to comment but the position seemed and the ride quality better than the E60. For me, the standard and sports seats in the E60 are poor for a car like this and the comfort seats are very expensive must. This is a recurring topic on E60 boards where some people are willing to put up with the discomfort for the superior handling and others are pretty hacked off at having to endure the discomfort. It reflects what I posted above that people value different qualities in a car and will accordingly accept different compromises; no right or wrong just different priorities and needs.
Davey, I agree. I've just got the SE spec but have 18 inch wheels and the ride is much better than the previous 2 cars which had 16 and 17 inchers respectively; really smooth and forgiving of bad surfaces yet still pretty sharp handling. My wife recently had a courtesy A4 s-line with what looked like 18inch wheels and she remarked on how smooth and comfortable it was compared to previous experiences with Audi sports suspension. I don't recall hearing about any changes but something has certainly been going on.
|
The sales staff told me the A3 and A4 front suspension has been seriously tweaked, unfortunately such changes never appear in sales material.
From HJs A4 update form earlier this year:
"2007 MY A4 2.0 TDI 170 S-Line Avant
This is an update. The look of the car hasn?t changed since the 2005 model year facelift. But under the skin Audi engineers have been working on it to overcome criticism of poor ride quality, particularly with the S-Line handling pack.
The second was the ride. This car was the S-Line, on 40 profile tyres. A spec you?d expect to scramble the fried eggs you ate for breakfast and shake all your internal organs like a James Bond Martini. But it didn?t. Apart from very slight, barely perceptible tramlining on uneven surfaces, it was fine. Even over speed cushions. "
|
>>or my bosses A8 4.2tdi<<
Simple really Martin - I would bling up a Phaeton and stick a couple of cylinders on the V6 tdi which is what they did.
I appreciate your comments but it is a known fact that all VAG products are basically the same engineering with a bit of dressing. They have openly based their complete business model on this approach. OK so you have picked a couple of engines that are only sold as Audi engines in the UK - this does not change the fact that they all share components with Skoda, SEAT etc. What about the 1.9TDi and 2.0TDi or the 2.0 FSI T - all VAG engines found in ALL VW group products including Audi's.
Unfortunately alot of people do not appreciate this fact and it just concerns me that when the chief of a company comes out and states that their quality is sub standard then if those parts are shared on other brands then surley the same must be true across the brands. That was the point of my comment and not one to digress from th eoriginal OP.
And yes the same goes for Toyota and Lexus - although the last JD Power survey that put Lexus 1st and Audi 11th would suggest that Lexus do not have the same problems Audi do.
To just dismiss a fellow back roomers point of view with >>This old factually incorrect twaddle again?<< is a really poor response and does nothing to add to the debate (other than raise your BP my old friend).
I for one really hope that VW (and those parts shared with Audi) get it together and improve the relaibility as this is all good for the customer. I also admire the Audi styling and design but unfortunately my number one priority when buying a car is reliability so I could not bring myself to buy a VAG ar - but good luck to those that do.
|
>>If Audis were hopelessly unreliable, regularly leaving their occupants stranded at the roadside at the expense of a well-finished cabin then you?d have a point<<
I think everything is relative Martin and clearly cars are becoming more reliable - it's just that some are more reliable than others and no doubt always will be - as you say Subaru are much better engineered cars than Audi are. For example if you look at the most recent reliability index - the highest placed Audi is 30th - but I suppose your right Martin - people don't buy Audi's for reliability or engineering.
I do find it amusing when car companies come out and say they are going to improve their quality and relaibility to the point where they will beat the Japs in customer surveys. The boss of MB made that mistake a few years ago when he said that with 2 years MB will be back topping the charts - well he recently came out saying it will be another 3 years before that happen - and now you have VW saying something similar - the question that springs to my mind is what makes them thing the Japs are just going to stand still and let them catch up. The Japs are masters at continuous improvement and will continue to use it.
Now at the end of the day I think Martin Winterkorn is being very honest and brave and I admire him for that - it's just as I say it somewhat justifies the comments (or as Martin Sweeney puts it - nonsense) that people make on thsi site about VW's.
|
|
The japs aren't what they used to be either. Toyota's reliabilty in no better or worse than VW's. And build quality of the new Auris is appaling.
|
The japs aren't what they used to be either. Toyota's reliabilty in no better or worse than VW's. And build quality of the new Auris is appaling.
Any evidence for that statement?
|
In my earlier post I was not denigrating Audi, merely taking issue with the statement, "Audi's reputation for quality is unrivalled in mainstream motor manufacturing. " - which reads like it comes from a VAG press release.
Audi need to raise their game. Speak to some of the independents that repair them - they provide plenty of business. I question athe quality credentials of a company that uses those dreadful Marelli-supplied instrument packs, for example. And the front suspension desigh ( a la A4 etc) is messy and not properly thought through. There is a lot more to quality than soft-touch trim and nice cloth.
To compare one of the larger Audis with an Impreza is not really fair. A better comparison would be with a Legacy. Given that you can get a Legacy 2.0R for around £15k new (from a Supermarket) then IMHO on engineering and qaulity value for money terms its a no-brainer.
If you want to bring the Impreza into the discussion then currently you can get a 2.0RX (160PS) saloon for around £12.5k on the road. Comes with CD, air-con etc etc and has outstanding roadholding and grip (you have to pay about 3 times the price for anything else comparable). Pretty much bomb-proof mechanicals and a rev-hungry engine that redlines at 7300. What can I get for £12.5k from VAG - a well-spec'd Polo?
|
Aprilia, it?s obvious that there is more to quality than soft-touch trim and nice cloth, but to state this as the only reason why someone would buy an Audi over a Subaru is missing the point and hardly a fair representation of why people choose Audis. Sure more people probably sleepwalk into choosing an Audi, BMW or any of the large marques than a Subaru but many don?t and having tested the competition still end up in an Audi or BMW. I don?t doubt for a second that the Subarus are brilliantly engineered but upto the new Legacy, this has been at the expense of the cabin which was a poor place to spend long motorway miles. We all have different needs and tastes and for my BIL who used his Impreza for squirting around the Lakes, that was fine but he drove down here once in it and thereafter took the train. My mentioning the the Impreza wasn?t a matter of fairness, it?s just that it?s the only Subaru I?ve driven and been driven in which is why I mentioned it, and I wasn?t comparing it with my current car but saying that even the Alfa I had at the time was better suited to my needs as would be a Mondeo or Passat. Neither better for everyone but horses for courses was my point. The new Legacy I would consider, as Subaru have finally realized that the cabin matters and that respect has been vastly improved, but I have to be honest, it might have trick suspension and a blinding chassis but as a place to spend 4 or 5 hours a day in, it still doesn?t do a lot for me, and I very much doubt that I?m a voice in the wilderness with this opinion.
I don?t doubt that your independents do work on Audi but all I can do is repeat that the experience with my cars and those of my wife and colleagues is clearly at odds with what this representation of unreliability. The thread has other VAG car owners echoing my thoughts and I find it hard to believe that this experience is some sort of statistical anomaly. I?m not married to Audi and having had a couple of seriously unreliable cars in my recent past, I kick up a right fuss when they go wrong but hundreds of thousands of miles later, this simply isn?t happening hasn?t happened with the Audis in my family or at work and I see no problematic trend with other Audis. When Subaru produce a car which better meets my needs than what I?m driving, then I would have no problem jumping ship, but as they currently don?t, I?ll stick with what I?ve got until it?s time to change, when I'll reassess the state of play.
|
Any evidence for that statement?
See thread "which cars cause fewest complaint" thread.
The national surveys usually put Honda, Toyota and Nissan near thetop, but Backroomers seem to have been casting doubts on these reputations recently.
So does mynext car need to be a Mazda or a Skoda, or have I missed anything out?
|
>>Any evidence for that statement?<<
My personal experience of Toyota is that fundamentally they are reliable and having researched the company for some time they certainly believe that customer satisfaction drives profitability.
Hence you will always hear stories of how they believe in stopping the line to fix any problems and reward such behaviour. The opposite is true of most european and US car makers that reward managers for output and stopping the line is bad - although this attitude is changing as they now try and inspect quality into their product. Where Toyota differ in my view is that they also design it in from the outset. I have seen Toyota documents that go to great lengths to determine all the durability and reliability attributes of a car and how they have designed those into the product. Having said that I have experienced alot of rattles and minor trim problems in my wife's Corolla (Japanese built - not UK) which suggests they can improve build quality.
Dealers - have not been over impressed with them. As an example I told them for 3 years that I thought the head lights were out of alignment as we were regularly flashed by oncoming traffic. Each time they told me all was ok. At it's first mot they were delighted to inform me that the only thing wrong was a mis-aligned headlight and they corrected that as part of the service.
I believe that the Toyota Production System does strive for quality but not at the expense of output and whilst alot of companes try and copy it - they do not really understand it properly.
Of all the car companies though my view is that Honda and Subaru engineer their cars better than anyone else and hence the feedabck we hear on this site about Honda. As you say though alot of people mis-interpret damped glove boxes as quality and the more I read the report that started this OP the more I think VW have missed the point. For example they are talking about alterations to the Polo's interior trim next - well this certainly will not satisfy the customer satisfaction results - my brothers Golf has a fantastic interior - he just can't drive it becuase of coil and fuel system problems. Still - nice place to sit when he is parked by the side of the road.
|
I actually think that my neighbour's Golf is now OK after nearly 12 month of trouble, during which, he has only been driving his car for about 50% of that time, the remainder using various courtesy cars. I don't know what percentage of his car's mechanics/electricals has been replaced to get it going and to keep it going without breaking down or limping home in 'safe' mode - I'd have given up long before then - I hope that they've compensated him for all that inconvenience - probably another bunch of flowere or a bottle of bubbly!
|
CD
When I referred to the following statement, your statement, as nonsense, I meant no offence but was merely indicating that it was factually incorrect and as such it actually made no sense.
?How can they say that when Audi's are just VW's with a bit of bling - they suffered the same coil problems etc. TDI engines are the same. platgforms are the same?
A viewpoint and a comment is fine but when it?s wrong in fact then surely you would agree that it needs correcting. The line you advanced above and general anti VAG polemic is regularly exhumed here by a few bitter souls who can neither accept facts, move on nor acknowledge that people look for different things in their cars, so this misrepresentation has to be corrected. We had poor sod here whose spiel was that for some reason he owned about seven VWs in a row, his nan and all his family also had a VW and to a car, they all let their owners down and to his final breath he would relentlessly hound VAG and their products. Good imagination but a hopeless and bitter case with an inability to grasp or argue the facts.
Anyhow, your assertion was not that there were some shared components as you?re now stating but that Audi and VW platforms and TDI engines are interchangeable. I could have picked any engines for the cars in my example and you would have failed to provide a VW counterpart. To address the example you gave which failed to prove your point, the Phaeton and A8 are completely different platforms and unless by blinging, you mean some form of alchemy, no amount of it or repetition of how they?re all just the same underneath is going to change that. Fundamentally, nothing you have said in your subsequent posts alters the factual errors underlying your original statement above. BP fine, 110/72.
Common parts run not just throughout brands but across automotive groups, so the use of such parts is not by necessity going to dictate the quality or reliability of the finished vehicle, so no, your assertion doesn?t hold up. If you contend that every car within the VAG group is damned by using the same parts surely there would be no apparent disparity in reliability between the brands.
I would say that Lexus and Audi have different problems and that like every other car company, both would like to hold first place in the TG survey, and in this respect VAG could learn from Lexus most notably in its dealer training. If you provide a reference for your warranty figure I can comment on it. As you well know, I never stated that Audis aren?t bought for their engineering or reliability, and for you to infer so by putting words in my mouth is a poor reflection on the strength of your argument. In fact what I stated was that were they not reliable or well engineered at the expense of a smart interior then this would be a serious problem. I went on to point out that from personal experience and from the experience of many others, including a fleet manager who has the bare facts from a large sample, I have seen no major issues with Audi reliability or quality, and Skoda?s first place in the TG survey rather undermines this notion that VAG products are a byword for unreliability. Seat, Audi and Skoda are all in the top half of the TG league and VW are hardly bringing up the rear, so of course the group should be seeking to improve matters but it?s hardly a need to convene a council of despair. Worldwide VAG sold more vehicles in 2006 than ever before and saw operating profit rise by 51.7%. In the UK market, VAG sales growth, and Audi in particular continues to surge, with YTD sales growth of 23.72% against Lexus? 1.76%, and in real terms the picture is even starker with 11,539 Audis being sold against 1,449 Lexus YTD. In the UK, Honda is faring little better, Mazda and Subaru considerably worse, from which the natural conclusion is that the reliability and quality of cars such as Audi is high enough to be of little or no concern to the customer and that the enhanced reliability of Lexus, Mazda and Honda isn?t enough to outweigh the downsides of these marques, the negative aspects that are clearly failing to draw in customers. We had a Lexus roadshow event at our offices last year after the new IS was released and anyone who wanted had a test drive. It was averagely attended and the IS in particular got fairly positive reactions, it?s a nice car and I like it, but almost one year on, I know of only one person who chose a Lexus and she didn?t even attend the event. Powerful sales growth and repeat business doesn?t mean that the product?s perfect, and Winterkorn has the sense to look down the line and address any issues now, but it does indicate that their producting is getting things more right than wrong. If I were the UK MD of a major car manufacturer looking at this set of sales figures, I know which set of problems I would rather have.
BTW, you seemed to talk constantly about VW vs. the Japanese the article that I read didn?t mention the Japanese but seemed to refer to Winterkorn?s specific concern about VW?s quality procedures as flagged up by survey scores. Can you refer me to where he discusses the Japanese competition?
You don?t want a car from VAG and it?s your prerogative not to one without having to justify your decision. Likewise those, like myself who have the likes of Honda, shuddered and walked away, preferring a car from VAG, have exercised their prerogative and shouldn?t need to defend their decision against uninformed criticism. There are some very good reasons why so many people pass on Hondas, yet thankfully they move on, chose a car that?s better for them and resist the temptation to pop up every couple of months on forums venting hopelessly about what they wrongly think is the problem with Hondas. There?s a lesson there.
|
BP fine, 110/72.
LOL! (Nice BP, BTW.)
|
The web is a great leveller isn`t it?
Giving the individual who has had an unreliable Volkswagen ( or other make) the opportunity to present the situation.
Why not? In the pre internet past, the motor trade was full of Dealers who were arrogant to say the least, to customers with problems knowing they had little, or no empowerment or comeback.
|
In the UK market, VAG sales growth, and Audi in particular continues to surge,
It's pretty well understood though, at least in the company car market, that Audi's are bought by people who's budget doesn't stretch to the equivalent BMW or Mercedes.
|
|
Most A3's are quite a few £££'s more than the equivalent BMW 1 series.
|
Martin, many thanks for a - er long response with many points to discuss.
Firstly my facts on VAG platform and component sharing are gathered from a couple of friends who are designers at Bentley and work very closely with Audi so I am pretty confident they are reasonably accurate - either that or my friends & their colleagues would benefit from a day's training from you on what their company really does with it's component and platform strategy. I'm sure you could teach them alot judging by your last post.
On the subject of the 'poor sod' who chose to share his/her views on VAG ownership on the web - well I am not going to lower myself to talk about someone who is not here to defend him/herself other than to say that clearly they have had some impact on your life that you feel strong enough to remember & bring them up when I assume they are not participating in this discussion - but also as oilrag states the web is a great leveller and gives the 'poor sod' an opportunity to share his/her bad experiences with your good ones.
You stated in a response to Aprilla that you 'kick up a right fuss' when it suits you - is this 'poor sod' denied this option ?
The reason I raised the Japanese Vs German issue was as a follow on discussion from Aprilla's point about Subaru quality. You are quiet correct Martin Winterkorn did not raise the subject specifically and I did not realise that precluded the rest of us from using it as a comparison. Given that the Japenese usually set the benchmark in the automotive world for quality and reliability then to use them on a quality subject posting seems fair to me.
Although you seem against me raising the Japanese Vs German point you then go on to spend alot of time detailing the sales figures of these companies in the UK - which only tells part of the story. If you look globally at the sales figures for these companies then clearly the Toyota/ Lexus brands sell many more cars than VAG could ever wish to. I would just add to this that the UK market is heavily biased by Company car owners who don't really care if the car goes wrong in the same way a private buyer would - hence the strong German car presence on our roads.
As you say we all choose cars that suit us and given the opportunity on a forum such s this to then share our experiences in my view is great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
