I don't think BMW has scored high in the IQS survey for a long time. Of course remember, this survey includes things like brake dust on the wheels and 227 other strange questions. As mentioned, unless you are keeping the car for 90 days, what's the point?

 

BMW below KIA?
damn thats low

 

Are you one of the many people who think Kia [and Hyundai] are still cheaply made cars?

They are among the best built now.

 

As for these stupid 90 day surveys, I just want to laugh...

Show me the shape of a car in 5, 10, 15 years from now and you got yourself quality results.

Even the very worst of cars have very, very few issues in the first 90 days.

Working at a dealer I have the opportunity to see all the makes and models come through our doors through trades and see first hand which ones hold up the best with years and mileage.

 

Kias are still pretty bad IMO.... Hyundai has really improved in the last few years, though.

 

If you're talking quality, then how so? They are just about on par with Hyundai (which is the same company).

 

Read the forums for specific models both here on CL and elsewhere, and you'll see that A LOT of people come on with problems/issues within the 1st 90 days of ownership. IMO it's a vaild timing for a survey, as is after a longer period of ownership.

 

Sure, the survery has some validity. But most people really don't have more than 1 or 2 small issues with their new cars. I read numerous forums (mostly Toyota and Honda) and buyers more than often report NO problems at all in the first couple of years and up to 60K.

 

The 90 day survey has some meaning, but I think the more meaningful survey
is the 3 year or longer survey... The only use for the IQS is to figure
out which limones to avoid down at the bottom

 

Just driving any higher mileage Kia the lack of durability is very apparent.

Scion and Lexus are part of the same company as are many other companies with a fairly significant separation in overall quality of design, materials, and assembly.

 

I'm referring to the last couple of model years where vast improvements have been made. I don't think there are that many high mileage '06's-'08's.

Not saying that long term durability will match Toyota and Honda but neither does Mercedes.

I've recently had the unfortunate chance to explore and drive a 2001 MB S430with only 90K on it and I have to say it's one of the worst built cars I've ever seen. I had always liked these cars but when I finally drove one I was extremely dissappointed. Felt like it was held together with Elmers glue! How could this be with the "standard of the world"?

 

In the 1980s, Mercedes was one of the best-built cars in the world. Their quality began to deteriorate in the early-to-mid 1990s, as the effects of Japanese competition in the luxury-car buisness began to take effect. Being stuck at the time with ultra-high-cost German labor, and not wanting to lessen the quality or effectiveness of their world-class safety and crash protection, Mercedes started cutting costs in other areas....primarily in areas that affect the day-to-day reliability of their vehicles, such as cheaper-quality hardware, poorly designed electronics, and sub-standard quality control.

But, despite cost-cutting and the general unreliability of their electronics and hardware, there are still some areas today where Mercedes takes extraordinary precautions to do things well.....such as in the hand-built and certification process of their AMG engines, and chassis engineering that is probably second only to BMW.

 

Yes, but those results are pretty worthless because how a car is built 5, 10, or eek, 15 years ago may have NOTHING to do with how it's built today.