2 ms·

You’re talking about the difference between commercial and commuter use. We both know that they are not the same at all, and have different manufacturing envir

You’re talking about the difference between commercial and commuter use. We both know that they are not the same at all, and have different manufacturing environments, parts, builds, and specs. Clearly, this discussion is not about commercial vehicles. Go look at the list of most reliable cars. Toyota and Honda are always listed as number one and two. Ford isn’t ever discussed as "reliable". I think this goes way beyond perception. Yes, commercial vehicles by Ford are probably reliable, but we are talking about regular commuter cars, and when it comes to that class, Toyota and Honda lead.

yourapostasy 4y ago
Wow, I was not expecting Ford transit vans to be above-average reliable, but a bit of searching around shows that indeed they are. Not as reliable as a Mercedes Sprinter, but I wonder if the operating costs are lower over the years (they cost roughly the same, which also surprised me) than the Mercedes.
- bombcar 4y ago
  Mercedes is actually quite price competitive. And commercial vehicles live in a different world where companies actually track TCO and friends.
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  I think that's just a reflection of how terrible the Euro-vans are in general. in North America they're not held in high regard by anyone other than the highfalutin taxi/airport shuttle/mobility van fleets that buy new and depreciate over the warranty period. The Transit and the Sprinter (the latter of which has really gone down the tubes since it's '00s peak) might be "good" but that's like being MVP in a junior varsity game. Anyone operating them outside of warranty generally hates them compared to the Ford and Chevy vans they're replacing.
  - sammalloy 4y ago
    > I think that's just a reflection of how terrible the Euro-vans are in general. in North America they're not held in high regard by anyone other than the highfalutin taxi/airport shuttle/mobility van fleets that buy new and depreciate over the warranty period. I’m sorry, but this statement is so utterly and totally opposed to the facts, that I’m beginning to think you’re doing PR for Ford. The demand for Euro-Vans in North America is so high, there’s a 1-2 year waiting list. It’s literally the most wanted vehicle in its class.
  - yourapostasy 4y ago
    Sigh. This is why we can't have good things. Thank you for saving me some research time on the heads up of the overall Mercedes quality. It gels with my experience with Mercedes sedans. Until I got to the very top of the line S-series like the 5xx/6xx, the owner experience on recent models was still a step down from what it was like leading up to 2000, mostly with fiddly bit details and robustness/conscientiousness overlooked in those details, and this quality corruption seems to have infected the other product offerings from your description. The core vehicle itself was fine, but I'm not paying the Mercedes premium just to overlook those details. Maybe I'll stick with my original plan of getting a Toyota Hi-Lux and convert + tow what I want instead of lumping it into an all-in-one large commercial/trade van.
throwaway0a5e 4y ago
Oh FFS. Fine, if the fanboys demand it I'll do a personal use comparison. What do you do in your Accord? You commute in it, or something along those lines, and that's probably about it. How much back seat wear is it getting? You got kids fighting back there? Do you stick your new dryer on the roof or do you pay the $20 for delivery? Your peers probably answer those questions about the same way. Meanwhile, several tax brackets down things are way different. Some single mom's four kids are doing their best impression of UFC in the back of her '09 CVT Altima, no wonder the seat is ripped, the floor contains a dozen types of dried soft drink syrup and the "window lock" switch is worn out by 100k. The differences only get wider as you start considering vehicles that are sold as having a lot of utility (wagons, SUVs, minivans), at the lower price tiers people size these vehicles to be just barely enough for what they want to do. At the high end people are buy way more vehicle than they need. Let's even remove brand from the equation. How many grand Marquis do you see on the road these days? Probably 2 for every non-cop and non-ex-cop Crown Vic you see. Do you think that is in any way representative of the sales numbers when those things were rolling off the line back in the day? Of course not. Vics out-sold Grand Marquis and Town Cars by a wide margin. But a greater fraction of 'Vic buyers rode them hard and put them away wet with the intention of getting something else around 100-200k. The older, wealthier Grand Marquis buyers did the maintenance on schedule and kept them in good order so they lasted longer. A key mechanism of "lasting longer" is price. People have different expectations and give different treatment to a car depending on price. So you trade in your Accord or whatever, it's in great shape. It goes on the used car lot for a lot of $$. So that ensures the the statistical next buyer is more well off, expecting it to last longer and therefore more willing to care for it. Meanwhile the guy that buys the Altima from the above example pays pennies for it and is expecting it to go maybe 50k before needing something big at which point he intends to dump it. So he's not gonna fix that window lock switch. He's gonna have no qualms about letting his dog f-up the already torn back seat. He's also gonna skip the transmission fluid changes and air filter and generally neglect the car because there's no reason not to if you intend on dumping it in short order. You can run the same comparison on '00s Impalas and the Buick equivalent (both generally regarded as supremely reliable cars). The Impalas got beat and thrown away. The Buicks are still around (proportionally). You don't think Ford, or GM, or whoever, makes reliable models for the same reason you'd never consider buying a house anywhere other than a good school district. It's a self-reinforcing expectation foisted upon you by the kind of people you surround yourself with.

yourapostasy 4y ago

Wow, I was not expecting Ford transit vans to be above-average reliable, but a bit of searching around shows that indeed they are. Not as reliable as a Mercedes Sprinter, but I wonder if the operating costs are lower over the years (they cost roughly the same, which also surprised me) than the Mercedes.

bombcar 4y ago
Mercedes is actually quite price competitive. And commercial vehicles live in a different world where companies actually track TCO and friends.
throwaway0a5e 4y ago
I think that's just a reflection of how terrible the Euro-vans are in general. in North America they're not held in high regard by anyone other than the highfalutin taxi/airport shuttle/mobility van fleets that buy new and depreciate over the warranty period. The Transit and the Sprinter (the latter of which has really gone down the tubes since it's '00s peak) might be "good" but that's like being MVP in a junior varsity game. Anyone operating them outside of warranty generally hates them compared to the Ford and Chevy vans they're replacing.
- sammalloy 4y ago
  > I think that's just a reflection of how terrible the Euro-vans are in general. in North America they're not held in high regard by anyone other than the highfalutin taxi/airport shuttle/mobility van fleets that buy new and depreciate over the warranty period. I’m sorry, but this statement is so utterly and totally opposed to the facts, that I’m beginning to think you’re doing PR for Ford. The demand for Euro-Vans in North America is so high, there’s a 1-2 year waiting list. It’s literally the most wanted vehicle in its class.
- yourapostasy 4y ago
  Sigh. This is why we can't have good things. Thank you for saving me some research time on the heads up of the overall Mercedes quality. It gels with my experience with Mercedes sedans. Until I got to the very top of the line S-series like the 5xx/6xx, the owner experience on recent models was still a step down from what it was like leading up to 2000, mostly with fiddly bit details and robustness/conscientiousness overlooked in those details, and this quality corruption seems to have infected the other product offerings from your description. The core vehicle itself was fine, but I'm not paying the Mercedes premium just to overlook those details. Maybe I'll stick with my original plan of getting a Toyota Hi-Lux and convert + tow what I want instead of lumping it into an all-in-one large commercial/trade van.

throwaway0a5e 4y ago

Oh FFS. Fine, if the fanboys demand it I'll do a personal use comparison. What do you do in your Accord? You commute in it, or something along those lines, and that's probably about it. How much back seat wear is it getting? You got kids fighting back there? Do you stick your new dryer on the roof or do you pay the $20 for delivery? Your peers probably answer those questions about the same way. Meanwhile, several tax brackets down things are way different. Some single mom's four kids are doing their best impression of UFC in the back of her '09 CVT Altima, no wonder the seat is ripped, the floor contains a dozen types of dried soft drink syrup and the "window lock" switch is worn out by 100k. The differences only get wider as you start considering vehicles that are sold as having a lot of utility (wagons, SUVs, minivans), at the lower price tiers people size these vehicles to be just barely enough for what they want to do. At the high end people are buy way more vehicle than they need. Let's even remove brand from the equation. How many grand Marquis do you see on the road these days? Probably 2 for every non-cop and non-ex-cop Crown Vic you see. Do you think that is in any way representative of the sales numbers when those things were rolling off the line back in the day? Of course not. Vics out-sold Grand Marquis and Town Cars by a wide margin. But a greater fraction of 'Vic buyers rode them hard and put them away wet with the intention of getting something else around 100-200k. The older, wealthier Grand Marquis buyers did the maintenance on schedule and kept them in good order so they lasted longer. A key mechanism of "lasting longer" is price. People have different expectations and give different treatment to a car depending on price. So you trade in your Accord or whatever, it's in great shape. It goes on the used car lot for a lot of $$. So that ensures the the statistical next buyer is more well off, expecting it to last longer and therefore more willing to care for it. Meanwhile the guy that buys the Altima from the above example pays pennies for it and is expecting it to go maybe 50k before needing something big at which point he intends to dump it. So he's not gonna fix that window lock switch. He's gonna have no qualms about letting his dog f-up the already torn back seat. He's also gonna skip the transmission fluid changes and air filter and generally neglect the car because there's no reason not to if you intend on dumping it in short order. You can run the same comparison on '00s Impalas and the Buick equivalent (both generally regarded as supremely reliable cars). The Impalas got beat and thrown away. The Buicks are still around (proportionally). You don't think Ford, or GM, or whoever, makes reliable models for the same reason you'd never consider buying a house anywhere other than a good school district. It's a self-reinforcing expectation foisted upon you by the kind of people you surround yourself with.