How can we tell "quality"?

Honest John Back Room » Motoring discussion
View Threaded
Wed 23 May 2012 16:11
How can we tell "quality"? - Ed V

We know that a small group of manufacturers dominate what we perceive to be high quality cars. But how do we know it's not all marketing and pricing?

Do Mercs use better robots, or better materials for example, or are most of the key parts simply standard issue produced to a formula, or made by a small coterie of specialist manufacturers whose clients are all the car makers who buy their windows, clutches, spark plugs, rubber hoses etc. etc.

In summary, what's the real difference between a Focus and a Golf; or a 5 series and a C5, or an i20 and a Yaris?

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 23 May 2012 16:25
How can we tell "quality"? - gordonbennet

I consider a car has quality when it gives a long life, 15 years + with little relative trouble, during that life it performs almost as well as new, and provides its occupants with comfort, quiet, pace grace and safety.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 23 May 2012 16:49
How can we tell "quality"? - veryoldbear

Not many of them about I fear ...

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 23 May 2012 17:20
How can we tell "quality"? - GavoTheSane

In summary, what's the real difference between a Focus and a Golf; or a 5 series and a C5, or an i20 and a Yaris?

Quality of materials, the attention to detail of the people screwing it together. Between a Focus and a Golf you'll not find huge difference in quality, but if you compared a Golf with something like a new shape Fiat Bravo you might find a bit of a difference with materials used, especially on interiors.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 23 May 2012 17:34
How can we tell "quality"? - NARU

Everybody has a different interpretation of quality. People will argue that rangerovers are better quality than my landcruiser because they have nicer cabins, better leather etc. But the definition of quality to me is largely around whether the car is likely to make it to ten years + without a major breakdown.

I laughed when whatcar had two big features in the same edition of the magazine. Car of the year, won by a landrover, and car reliabilioty survey, where landrover came bottom or nearly bottom. The magazine clearly has a completely different definition of quality to me.

Edited by Marlot on 23/05/2012 at 17:37

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 23 May 2012 17:36
How can we tell "quality"? - NARU

Quality can be the basics like slightly over-specifying components so that they are unlikely to fail in service, using thicker metal, making sure that ECUs are designed to be reliable, and siting them away from places where they might get damp.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 23 May 2012 19:08
How can we tell "quality"? - craig-pd130

Quality is what Benz used to do in the 80s with the W124 and W126 E / S-class cars, building them to a standard without too much interference from beancounters.

Although I remember a nice quote from an M-B chief engineer after inspecting an original Lexus LS400 when they were launched.

Apparently he had a nosey at the casting & fabrication on the front suspension components and walked away, shaking his head sadly, and saying there was no way he'd EVER have got sign-off for those if he'd specified them for an M-B, the quality was way beyond what he could ever get approval for.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 23 May 2012 19:09
How can we tell "quality"? - unthrottled

Quality can be the basics like slightly over-specifying components so that they are unlikely to fail in service,

It is over engineering the boring bits that you don't see that determines how the car will fare in service. Unfortunately, car buyers base their decisions on a checklist of what they can see.

'alloy' wheels (the bigger the better)

privacy glass

electric colour coded mirrors

parking sensors.

panoramic roof

All of these accoutrements eat into the budget of the essential components. Nothing wrong with putting luxuries on a car with a luxury price tag, but when i see extras on a cheap car, it does make me wince.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 23 May 2012 20:21
How can we tell "quality"? - akr

I've said this several times on here that without doubt, quality is down to the engineering and how long components last and how reliable a car is long term. Unfortunately, as has been said here in this thread, most cutomers base their definition of quality on what they can see and feel.

This is why you get so many complaints about the likes of VW and Audi on here cos they are expert at the showroom touchy feely stuff but their products are only averagely reliable. However, because the British public seem to want to buy into the quality interior thing and the badge snobbery that's why resale values on such cars are so high and which is why I, as a private buyer, have two VWs and a BMW. I know at any age somebody will want to give me a shed load of cash for them no matter how unreliable they may have been

(As it happens, both my VWs are petrols and they have been faultlessly reliable - it's only the VW diesels I've had that have given me bother. I've only had the BMW two weeks so I'll reserve judgement for now).

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 24 May 2012 23:15
How can we tell "quality"? - Happy Blue!

If you take the badge snobbery out of matters and consider cars as appliances like a washing machine then the definition of quality is clearly longevity of service without needing repairs. However, you could buy a Miele for £900 and it could last 20 years or buy a Hotpoint and it will last seven years but only cost £250. Which offers better value? Does the Miele clean better and use less energy or water in the process? Its a complex issue

Should value be considered when talking about quality? I think yes. Even aircraft manufacturers consider value as well as quality so why not car makers?

So, maybe quality should be related to whole of life costs and level of performance. Looked at in this way, a Lexus may well be massively and unnecessarily over specified, whereas a competing Ford may offer better value even if it is less reliable and is less efficient.

Personally whilst i really like and drive a current Ford, I would love to own a Lexus simply for the obvious attraction of driving a car really well screwed together and one that was very quiet and comfortable. But does it make sense financially - probably not.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 24 May 2012 23:27
How can we tell "quality"? - Leif
Should value be considered when talking about quality? I think yes. Even aircraft manufacturers consider value as well as quality so why not car makers?

So, maybe quality should be related to whole of life costs and level of performance. Looked at in this way, a Lexus may well be massively and unnecessarily over specified, whereas a competing Ford may offer better value even if it is less reliable and is less efficient.

Personally whilst i really like and drive a current Ford, I would love to own a Lexus simply for the obvious attraction of driving a car really well screwed together and one that was very quiet and comfortable. But does it make sense financially - probably not.

Sensible comments. I suppose you are talking about quality for a given price. An expensive car would, you hope, have a smoother quieter ride, and a more powerful engine, and you pay for that. So in that sense you can feel the quality e.g. sound proofing, leather seats, air con. You would hope the underlying structure is better too, no idea if that is true. You would hope a better car had a better shell, with better galvanising and paint. Is this true in practice? No idea.

Better parts and a powerful engine mean high repair bills.

A typical VW has more spent on interior plastics than some similar cars, so they feel better. The Polo feels quite luxurious compared to many cars.

My VW Up feels much better than my Ford Ka and old style Nissan Micra, but the Micra actually had very solid components, unlike some Ford cars, where you feel they are pared down to the minimum.

I suspect surveys such as JD POwer will tell you about actual build quality.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 24 May 2012 23:32
How can we tell "quality"? - balleballe

I suppose it all comes down to expectation and whether you want the money spent on the mechanicals, or the interior

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 25 May 2012 00:36
How can we tell "quality"? - Avant

Brilliantly summed up in a single sentence, Balleballe. Broadly the Japanese major in the mechanicals, the Germans on perceived body solidity and interior quality. The French and Italians aren't terribly good at either; Volvo, Skoda (and pre-GM Saab) quite good at both.

The problem, as AKR mentions above, is that perceived, visible quality sells cars and their popularity leads to them holding their value. But for people buying used, the older the car the wiser it is to buy the car with the durable mechanicals.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sat 26 May 2012 03:26
How can we tell "quality"? - Mil1194

Well - we have owned Audi A8's, Merc S500's, BMW 740's - all from new all from 1995-2003. Since falling from that market it would seem all too easy to 'diss' a new Fiesta/Corsa etc. However I had the good fortune to be a guest in a brand new Aston Martin last Saturday, 95/100£ new? having never sat in one before. Having seen these tested/dissed/etc on Top Gear and like I was absolutlely overwhelmed over the finsh, the quality of the switches, the stiching of the leather etc and of course the noise and absolute performance. People who cannot tell the difference between a Fiesta/Corsa can be explained away, but the Aston - owned by Ford/Volvo/Chinese???? - was simply the best quality vehicle I have ever has the satisfaction of being a passenger in - despite being the owner of proper prestigious cars in the past. Sorry if this annoys anyone! ;-)

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sat 26 May 2012 03:28
How can we tell "quality"? - Mil1194

Oops - but within the three weeks he's owned it there have been issues with the tracker - either linked to his iphone, 'tag' or other, have meant it being taken back to Cardiff for insurance purposes until it was sorted.....very upsetting.....

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sun 27 May 2012 15:28
How can we tell "quality"? - Roly93

Quality is a whole raft of things which I would attempt to summarise below ~:

Resilient paintwork which doesn't chip or scratch easily (unlike our old 2003 Focus where the cat scratched the paint with his claws climbing down off the roof).

Solid feel to switchgear and interior materials.

Good sound deadening and insulation of road/tyre noise.

Small and even shut-lines.

Absence of clunks rattles squeeks and creaks when driven over rough lanes.

Firm but supportive seats which are not DFS sofa-like - sorry Renault

Not too much mock-chrome on instrument binnacles and the like - sorry Nissan !

Underbonnet pipes and cables anchored protected or armoured where appropriate.

Quality moisture-resistant electrical connectors used.

Finally demonstrable attention to detail used as opposed to a 'that'l do' approach, eg siting of delicate components from moisture environment etc, eg cold weather insulation of batteries like some German marques.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sun 27 May 2012 18:10
How can we tell "quality"? - Avant

An excellent list Roly - but is there a manufacturer this side of RR and Bentley who can deliver all of them?

My experience of two VWs, an Audi and two Skodas suggests that VAG come nearest, but they have to produce this kind of quality consistently and there are too many others (on here and in the consumer surveys) who would disagree. It's odd that Skoda consistently beat Audi, VW and SEAT in these surveys - partly down to better, mostly family-owned dealerships.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Mon 28 May 2012 07:57
How can we tell "quality"? - NARU

>> Resilient paintwork which doesn't chip or scratch easily (unlike our old 2003 Focus where the cat scratched the paint with his claws climbing down off the roof).

Agreed.

>> Solid feel to switchgear and interior materials.

Not bothered how it feels. More interested in how it endures.

>> Good sound deadening and insulation of road/tyre noise.

Agreed.

>> Small and even shut-lines.

Not bothered

>> Absence of clunks rattles squeeks and creaks when driven over rough lanes.

Agreed

>> Firm but supportive seats which are not DFS sofa-like - sorry Renault

Agreed

>> Not too much mock-chrome on instrument binnacles and the like - sorry Nissan !

Not bothered

>> Underbonnet pipes and cables anchored protected or armoured where appropriate.

Not bothered*

Quality moisture-resistant electrical connectors used.

Not bothered*

>> Finally demonstrable attention to detail used as opposed to a 'that'l do' approach,

Not bothered*

This list is focused on inputs. I'm much more interested in outcomes - Zero breakdowns in the first 10 years/100,000 miles, early warning of any issues. Car still comfortable to drive when it gets to 10 years old. Easy to repair. Low cost of ownership over the ten years.

The items I've marked with an asterisk are probably important, but are just a small selection of the input options available to the manufacturer to create a vehicle which gives the outcomes I want.

Edited by Marlot on 28/05/2012 at 08:00

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Mon 28 May 2012 09:41
How can we tell "quality"? - Collos25

You must be talking about a DB W211.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Mon 28 May 2012 11:28
How can we tell "quality"? - NARU

You must be talking about a DB W211.

Didn't have any partcular car in mind, but my job includes articulating outcomes for company proposals, backed by evidence.

I tend to drive Japanese cars these days - Household contains one each of Honda, Toyota and Mazda . I'd rate their quality in that order [taking into account the price paid for each new]. No breakdowns on any of them.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 29 May 2012 12:03
How can we tell "quality"? - Ed V

Lots of really interestings thoughts here, thanks guys!

Seems to me that none of us has sufficient access to important information. Journalists seem on the whole to view cars like we do - roadholding, appearance, accelaration etc.

There's no serious attempt to visit the factory, to question who makes the bought-in mechanicals, to see how the hoses / electricals / exteriors are fitted, etc. Is one 2 litre diesel the same, in practice, as any other?

Honest John does more than most, but it seems to me that marketing works when it comes to cars - at our expense.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 30 May 2012 22:05
How can we tell "quality"? - Leif
Journalists seem on the whole to view cars like we do - roadholding, appearance, accelaration etc.

There's no serious attempt to visit the factory, to question who makes the bought-in mechanicals, to see how the hoses / electricals / exteriors are fitted, etc. Is one 2 litre diesel the same, in practice, as any other?

Honest John does more than most, but it seems to me that marketing works when it comes to cars - at our expense.

Indeed. Buy you can read surveys such as JD Power to get some idea of how they last. No good for a new model of course. and by the time you know it lasts 10 years, or not, it is outdated.

I work on the basis that a small car is designed to last 7 years of good use, and then it is time to replace it. I've kept cars that are 10 years old, and that is too long.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 31 May 2012 02:43
How can we tell "quality"? - 1litregolfeater

"In summary, what's the real difference between a Focus and a Golf; or a 5 series and a C5, or an i20 and a Yaris?"

All world manufacturers are working for a similar break even, and they all have their costs cut as far as possible.

So quality has been driven as low as possible within 95% expectations, all cars are the same now.

All equally boring and crap, you can expect them all to suffer similar faults within 2 or 5 years.

Now the marketing is a different question, I don't understand how German can still stand for quality when they are subject to the same economic forces as others. BMWs have obviously declined in quality over the last ten years to the level of say, Ford, but still the high quality perception remains.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 31 May 2012 08:59
How can we tell "quality"? - NARU
So quality has been driven as low as possible within 95% expectations, all cars are the same now.

All equally boring and crap, you can expect them all to suffer similar faults within 2 or 5 years.


If that were true, why are the same manufacturers regularly at the top and bottom of the reliability charts?

I CAN understand the marketing affecting the owner satisfaction reports.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 31 May 2012 12:54
How can we tell "quality"? - unthrottled

If that were true, why are the same manufacturers regularly at the top and bottom of the reliability charts?

Demographics pays a large part in this. Your average Honda driver is much more likely to follow service schedules than a Ford driver who only bought a Ford because he couldn't afford an Audi and treats the car with utter contempt.

Heck, there are still a few Morris marinas plodding around the roads-proving that even the worst car can be kept alive with proper care.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link