German cars: do you prefer BMW or Mercedes?

[Lala81]

The interior of a Merc is more comfortable and eye pleasing to me.

[nigel8210]

The interior of a Merc is more comfortable and eye pleasing to me.

especially the new C Class W205

[Yuan]

If you know how the vehicles are built, you will go for mercedes benz. I will go for Mercedes Benz.

 

It is expensive here.

 

You got any alternative options?

[ShellVpower]

 

It is expensive here.

 

You got any alternative options?

 

In this global supply chain, it is absolutely inevitable for source parts from a great variety of sources. And their first tier suppliers will source for breakdown parts from even great diversity. The second tier, the third tier and sometimes the third tier goes to the first tier causing the whole thing to become a network.

 

And this management of supplies becomes an art to master. For suppliers to qualify for provision of parts to vehicle builders, it is necessary to get parts from TS16949 certified first tier suppliers. Under the clause 7.4 Purchasing of ISO/TS16949, the organization shall ensure that purchased product conforms to specified purchase requirements… It is then the responsibility of the first tier suppliers to ensure that their APQP is in place and their suppliers provide parts that meet the requirements as stipulated by the contract eg. Drawing and technical specifications. Under VDA6.3 process audit, 8.5 supplier management (P5), suppliers to german makers like Audi, Daimler, VW are required to also comply to the requirements.

 

Mercedes Benz also falls within the agreement of the VDA6.3 process audit requirement which also requires their suppliers to pass the VDA6.3 audit attaining a minimum of B grading prior to the commencement of purchase.

 

Mercedes Benz, in my opinion, is a unique organisation that exercises more control over their sources and governance of product development. For example, we compare their steering rack assemblies to BMW.

 

BMW sources from ZFLS (formerly partially owned by ZF and bosch, now 100% owned by Bosch) which provides steering assemblies to the end of the bolt and nut, including the electronic attachments. Therefore, ZFLS has the control of the entire steering rack assembly which allows them to conduct aftermarket sales and technical support without interference as long as they are not bonded by contract forbidding them to. However, Mercedes Benz does it the other way. MB buys the pinion form ZFLS, sources the electronic attachments elsewhere, sources the rack and housing elsewhere as well like Thyssen Krupp. They assemble it together and MB becomes the only one with the blueprint. So it is no possible to conduct a repair/aftermarket sales support without going through MB. In the quality-wise, BMW gives ZFLS bigger authority to determining the product quality while MB owns the bigger share of power over the quality of the parts which in my opinion, is a better way to managing quality. It is always better to rely on yourself than others. ‘Customers prerogative’ sometimes don’t work as well as taking initiative to pursue quality.

 

Engines suppliers like MDC Power GmbH supplying some engines for Mercedes Benz is a wholly owned subsidiary of then-DaimlerChrysler AG who also owns Mercedes Benz. So comparing them to the BMW outsourcing strategy, MB still exercises more control. This is because you are dealing with colleagues and not suppliers. Suppliers are driven by profit while colleagues by KPI.

 

Apart from these, I offer my vote to Mercedes Benz also because of the engineering philosophy behind the parts. While BMW aligns themselves to very strong first tier suppliers like ZF & BOSCH and their also very strong competitors, They rely more on the effectiveness of their supplier management. However, MB relies more balanced on their project management, product and process development and execution with their supplier management and production throughout. So the chances of them screwing up has lesser effect than BMW if their supplier management screws up.

 

We can see from how bad things went when VW didn’t secure their supplier management process and system. The DSG7 is an outsourced part. VW and Audi strategize their quality similarly to BMW. And thus, they need to have an extremely vigilant eye over their supplier management process. No doubt they contracted some of the best suppliers in the world. But when profits and KPI come into the picture, the possibility of getting compromised becomes greatly heighten.

 

As for Japanese brands, they too have their own problems. Toyota had several accidents and some deaths cause by the throttle system. I was told by industry players that corporate compliance was compromised and some staffs were complicit with their dealings. I am not sure if anyone got sacked for their actions but I am saying no one is spared from these sort of breakdowns. And the more complicated your system, the greater the tendency to run into a bigger cock up.

 

Continental makes always pursue ‘perfection’ while Japanese makes always go for ‘optimization’. This in turn shows that the continental vehicles often show their products as being more ‘refined’. Of course, you simply pay more. Japanese makes are capable of doing that as well. Heck, nowadays, even staffs are globally sourced, there are Japanese working in German brands and Germans in Japanese establishments. We should not look at the nationality of product, but look into the QMS and their track record. Therefore, if $$$ is not a concern, I will definitely go for Mercedes Benz. And with more control, they inevitably have to increase their pricing... lol... No such thing as Cheap and good, bro.

[inlinesix]

 

In this global supply chain, it is absolutely inevitable for source parts from a great variety of sources. And their first tier suppliers will source for breakdown parts from even great diversity. The second tier, the third tier and sometimes the third tier goes to the first tier causing the whole thing to become a network.

 

And this management of supplies becomes an art to master. For suppliers to qualify for provision of parts to vehicle builders, it is necessary to get parts from TS16949 certified first tier suppliers. Under the clause 7.4 Purchasing of ISO/TS16949, the organization shall ensure that purchased product conforms to specified purchase requirements… It is then the responsibility of the first tier suppliers to ensure that their APQP is in place and their suppliers provide parts that meet the requirements as stipulated by the contract eg. Drawing and technical specifications. Under VDA6.3 process audit, 8.5 supplier management (P5), suppliers to german makers like Audi, Daimler, VW are required to also comply to the requirements.

 

Mercedes Benz also falls within the agreement of the VDA6.3 process audit requirement which also requires their suppliers to pass the VDA6.3 audit attaining a minimum of B grading prior to the commencement of purchase.

 

Mercedes Benz, in my opinion, is a unique organisation that exercises more control over their sources and governance of product development. For example, we compare their steering rack assemblies to BMW.

 

BMW sources from ZFLS (formerly partially owned by ZF and bosch, now 100% owned by Bosch) which provides steering assemblies to the end of the bolt and nut, including the electronic attachments. Therefore, ZFLS has the control of the entire steering rack assembly which allows them to conduct aftermarket sales and technical support without interference as long as they are not bonded by contract forbidding them to. However, Mercedes Benz does it the other way. MB buys the pinion form ZFLS, sources the electronic attachments elsewhere, sources the rack and housing elsewhere as well like Thyssen Krupp. They assemble it together and MB becomes the only one with the blueprint. So it is no possible to conduct a repair/aftermarket sales support without going through MB. In the quality-wise, BMW gives ZFLS bigger authority to determining the product quality while MB owns the bigger share of power over the quality of the parts which in my opinion, is a better way to managing quality. It is always better to rely on yourself than others. ‘Customers prerogative’ sometimes don’t work as well as taking initiative to pursue quality.

 

Engines suppliers like MDC Power GmbH supplying some engines for Mercedes Benz is a wholly owned subsidiary of then-DaimlerChrysler AG who also owns Mercedes Benz. So comparing them to the BMW outsourcing strategy, MB still exercises more control. This is because you are dealing with colleagues and not suppliers. Suppliers are driven by profit while colleagues by KPI.

 

Apart from these, I offer my vote to Mercedes Benz also because of the engineering philosophy behind the parts. While BMW aligns themselves to very strong first tier suppliers like ZF & BOSCH and their also very strong competitors, They rely more on the effectiveness of their supplier management. However, MB relies more balanced on their project management, product and process development and execution with their supplier management and production throughout. So the chances of them screwing up has lesser effect than BMW if their supplier management screws up.

 

We can see from how bad things went when VW didn’t secure their supplier management process and system. The DSG7 is an outsourced part. VW and Audi strategize their quality similarly to BMW. And thus, they need to have an extremely vigilant eye over their supplier management process. No doubt they contracted some of the best suppliers in the world. But when profits and KPI come into the picture, the possibility of getting compromised becomes greatly heighten.

 

As for Japanese brands, they too have their own problems. Toyota had several accidents and some deaths cause by the throttle system. I was told by industry players that corporate compliance was compromised and some staffs were complicit with their dealings. I am not sure if anyone got sacked for their actions but I am saying no one is spared from these sort of breakdowns. And the more complicated your system, the greater the tendency to run into a bigger cock up.

 

Continental makes always pursue ‘perfection’ while Japanese makes always go for ‘optimization’. This in turn shows that the continental vehicles often show their products as being more ‘refined’. Of course, you simply pay more. Japanese makes are capable of doing that as well. Heck, nowadays, even staffs are globally sourced, there are Japanese working in German brands and Germans in Japanese establishments. We should not look at the nationality of product, but look into the QMS and their track record. Therefore, if $$$ is not a concern, I will definitely go for Mercedes Benz. And with more control, they inevitably have to increase their pricing... lol... No such thing as Cheap and good, bro.

 

Not forgetting that there could be difference in quality within the same model range depending on which plants it was assembled.

 

[ShellVpower]

 

Not forgetting that there could be difference in quality within the same model range depending on which plants it was assembled.

 

 

Yes, logically, different plant should produce a different quality standard.

 

However, for some, in case the question of nationality comes in, it does not mean that the nationality determines the quality. The QMS decide the build quality. It determines how far does the production veer off from the engineering stipulations. An un-certified, un-controlled German plant could be less effective and efficient quality wise compared to a German-built Chinese plant managed with proper QMS or Japanese established Thai plant with proper TS16949 in place.

[inlinesix]

 

Yes, logically, different plant should produce a different quality standard.

 

However, for some, in case the question of nationality comes in, it does not mean that the nationality determines the quality. The QMS decide the build quality. It determines how far does the production veer off from the engineering stipulations. An un-certified, un-controlled German plant could be less effective and efficient quality wise compared to a German-built Chinese plant managed with proper QMS or Japanese established Thai plant with proper TS16949 in place.

 

You did not get my point lah.

 

For BMW 3 series, it is assembled in Munich, Regenberg, South Africa, Shandong, Malaysia & etc. There will be variation in quality between these plant hor.

 

[Baal]

getting very chim....

For yes also depend on model to model for me. Purely on looks of course.

- 3 Vs C, I take C.

- 5 Vs E, I take 5.

- 7 Vs S, I take 7

- Z Vs SLK, I take SLK.

- SUV, I take BMW.

[Galantspeedz]

Though i only understand 20% of what ShellVpower says... but sibei got ink....

 

up 5!!

[ShellVpower]

 

You did not get my point lah.

 

For BMW 3 series, it is assembled in Munich, Regenberg, South Africa, Shandong, Malaysia & etc. There will be variation in quality between these plant hor.

 

 

Well, I think you didn't get my point too. Of course, batches, locations etc cause variation. There are many reasons that come by. Sometimes due to machine calibration nonconformity, intermediate inspection lapse, tooling wear undetected, supplied parts unvalidated. Also, it could be due to failure to communicate information when there's an engineering change. As mass production takes place, sometimes the batch of plant A surpasses the batch in Plant B and next time the results reversed possibly.

 

BMW3 series is a general model broken down to many submodels. A different market with political reasons, taxation reasons etc calls for production plants to build the car in different locations. Whether it's built in München or any other place, the variation in quality between these plants if managed under the same QMS should not deviate too much in quality unless they are designed with the intention to fit different market from the beginning.

 

What you are saying is that the engineering of different locations have been conducted to fit different markets for example, the VW Golf designed and produced in Wolfsburg which is in accordance to the requirement of sales within the country has to meet statutory and market preference. The VW Golf produced by FAW-VW is built according to the requirements of its intended market.

 

For example: tightening of door panels. In the process step of door panel tightening, one of its individual step is to tighten the mounting screws into the bracket to secure the panel. In Wolfsburg, it might be a requirement for the screws to be tightened with torque while FAW-VW does not come with that process. This helps to further reduce the cost of production which leads to more competitive prices for its market. The individual tools of the PPAP will be different. And that means that the production follows a different process route. This is not a deviation of quality. This is a difference in engineering. And if the requirement practiced in Wolfsburg for any reason has to be implemented in FAW-VW as there are customer complains of noises with the door panels, the engineering in FAW-VW will have to modify the process step of door panel installation to incorporate torque tightening. The production floor will then be informed of the engineering change, tools change, risk change (P-FMEA to be amended), control plan amended etc... However, if the production fail to carry out as according to the new intended process, then we will call that a quality NC.

 

I hope I have conveyed my message clearer. Pardon me for the jargons used.

[Yuan]

 

In this global supply chain, it is absolutely inevitable for source parts from a great variety of sources. And their first tier suppliers will source for breakdown parts from even great diversity. The second tier, the third tier and sometimes the third tier goes to the first tier causing the whole thing to become a network.

 

And this management of supplies becomes an art to master. For suppliers to qualify for provision of parts to vehicle builders, it is necessary to get parts from TS16949 certified first tier suppliers. Under the clause 7.4 Purchasing of ISO/TS16949, the organization shall ensure that purchased product conforms to specified purchase requirements… It is then the responsibility of the first tier suppliers to ensure that their APQP is in place and their suppliers provide parts that meet the requirements as stipulated by the contract eg. Drawing and technical specifications. Under VDA6.3 process audit, 8.5 supplier management (P5), suppliers to german makers like Audi, Daimler, VW are required to also comply to the requirements.

 

Mercedes Benz also falls within the agreement of the VDA6.3 process audit requirement which also requires their suppliers to pass the VDA6.3 audit attaining a minimum of B grading prior to the commencement of purchase.

 

Mercedes Benz, in my opinion, is a unique organisation that exercises more control over their sources and governance of product development. For example, we compare their steering rack assemblies to BMW.

 

BMW sources from ZFLS (formerly partially owned by ZF and bosch, now 100% owned by Bosch) which provides steering assemblies to the end of the bolt and nut, including the electronic attachments. Therefore, ZFLS has the control of the entire steering rack assembly which allows them to conduct aftermarket sales and technical support without interference as long as they are not bonded by contract forbidding them to. However, Mercedes Benz does it the other way. MB buys the pinion form ZFLS, sources the electronic attachments elsewhere, sources the rack and housing elsewhere as well like Thyssen Krupp. They assemble it together and MB becomes the only one with the blueprint. So it is no possible to conduct a repair/aftermarket sales support without going through MB. In the quality-wise, BMW gives ZFLS bigger authority to determining the product quality while MB owns the bigger share of power over the quality of the parts which in my opinion, is a better way to managing quality. It is always better to rely on yourself than others. ‘Customers prerogative’ sometimes don’t work as well as taking initiative to pursue quality.

 

Engines suppliers like MDC Power GmbH supplying some engines for Mercedes Benz is a wholly owned subsidiary of then-DaimlerChrysler AG who also owns Mercedes Benz. So comparing them to the BMW outsourcing strategy, MB still exercises more control. This is because you are dealing with colleagues and not suppliers. Suppliers are driven by profit while colleagues by KPI.

 

Apart from these, I offer my vote to Mercedes Benz also because of the engineering philosophy behind the parts. While BMW aligns themselves to very strong first tier suppliers like ZF & BOSCH and their also very strong competitors, They rely more on the effectiveness of their supplier management. However, MB relies more balanced on their project management, product and process development and execution with their supplier management and production throughout. So the chances of them screwing up has lesser effect than BMW if their supplier management screws up.

 

We can see from how bad things went when VW didn’t secure their supplier management process and system. The DSG7 is an outsourced part. VW and Audi strategize their quality similarly to BMW. And thus, they need to have an extremely vigilant eye over their supplier management process. No doubt they contracted some of the best suppliers in the world. But when profits and KPI come into the picture, the possibility of getting compromised becomes greatly heighten.

 

As for Japanese brands, they too have their own problems. Toyota had several accidents and some deaths cause by the throttle system. I was told by industry players that corporate compliance was compromised and some staffs were complicit with their dealings. I am not sure if anyone got sacked for their actions but I am saying no one is spared from these sort of breakdowns. And the more complicated your system, the greater the tendency to run into a bigger cock up.

 

Continental makes always pursue ‘perfection’ while Japanese makes always go for ‘optimization’. This in turn shows that the continental vehicles often show their products as being more ‘refined’. Of course, you simply pay more. Japanese makes are capable of doing that as well. Heck, nowadays, even staffs are globally sourced, there are Japanese working in German brands and Germans in Japanese establishments. We should not look at the nationality of product, but look into the QMS and their track record. Therefore, if $$$ is not a concern, I will definitely go for Mercedes Benz. And with more control, they inevitably have to increase their pricing... lol... No such thing as Cheap and good, bro.

 

How about Korean cars?

 

They are up and coming.

 

The suppliers in the automobile industry should be similar for them same as they are for the German automakers and the Japanese manufacturers.

[SuPerBoRed]

simple question like/prefer which one nia la...

no need to write GP paper to justify one lor...

 

still like BMW for the drivability

[GSIdude]

BMW. They are generally better driver's cars as compared to Mercs.

 

But I was not impressed with the F10 523i. I'd rather go for a Toyota Crown to be honest.

[ShellVpower]

simple question like/prefer which one nia la...

no need to write GP paper to justify one lor...

 

still like BMW for the drivability

 

well... as you can see, some are consuming the information and finding it appealing. My post is for them. So if the information does not appeal to you, you are always free to skip it.

[Little_prince]

simple question like/prefer which one nia la...

no need to write GP paper to justify one lor...

 

still like BMW for the drivability

when i young. i like BMW.

 

now old liao. i prefer merc. lol

[inlinesix]

when i young. i like BMW.

 

now old liao. i prefer merc. lol

 

When i young, i like BMW.

 

Now old liao. I prefer Mini LOL!!

[ShellVpower]

 

How about Korean cars?

 

They are up and coming.

 

The suppliers in the automobile industry should be similar for them same as they are for the German automakers and the Japanese manufacturers.

 

Not at the moment. I think they are OK quality wise but their engineering philisophy is not in line with my desire. I am quite anal about certain specs.

 

1. minimum 6 speed semi-auto transmission (CVT and full automatics are strict no-no)

2. independent front axle (well, i don't see any rigid front axles for passenger cars nowadays but I will prefer macpherson strut with wishbone rather than double wishbones for ease of maintainence but not a must)

3. independent rear axle (very very important)

4. Acceleration slip regulation

5. electronic understeering, oversteering correction

6. disc brakes all round

7. Stable spare part support both OE and after market, ease of maintenance.

8. electric power steering preferred but I can make do with hydraulic power steering

9. I am not very particular with the engine power and torque. But with a 6 speed at least, I won't mind 89kW and 160Nm if cost is a concern to own one since COE prices are out of control.

10. sedan/hatchback only

 

So, Korean is out for me at the moment. French too...

With my requirements, all BMW and MB and some VW and Audi will qualify. The next will be a mazda 3 or 6. At the moment, these are the possibilities. A commuter is not a race car. Anyway, remember, it's not what you drive but how you drive that matters.

[Angcheek]

getting very chim....

 

For yes also depend on model to model for me. Purely on looks of course.

 

- 3 Vs C, I take C.

 

- 5 Vs E, I take 5.

 

- 7 Vs S, I take 7

 

- Z Vs SLK, I take SLK.

 

- SUV, I take BMW.

 

This is the best way to break down the comparison.

 

Anyone can comment on 520 Vs E200 , both 2014 model ? Which is a better choice ? The new E200 is now more ex than the 520. I think C&C is trying to cash in. I dont quite like the interior of the new E range. Its still with the old look. Performance wise both are about the same.....

 

Thanks