|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mercedes-Benz article.|
|This article is written in British English, and some terms used in it are different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This is not a forum for general discussion about Mercedes-Benz. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Mercedes-Benz at the Reference desk, discuss relevant Wikipedia policy at the Village pump, or ask for help at the Help desk.|
- 1 Article fact and layout issues
- 2 Slave labour
- 3 electric problem
- 4 Split the Models section to List of Mercedes-Benz models?
Article fact and layout issues
history revision on 5.25.2006
Found the revision of the history section lacking in clarity and not presenting the best organization of facts -- so I returned the former version to the article.
Taking an engine and placing it onto a stagecoach one has purchased (and therefore, which is the invention of another person) can not qualify as inventing an automobile that can be patented. The number of wheels in the Benz automobile has never been considered an impediment to the recognition that he invented the first automobile that was put into production. (There are automobiles which were built in the mid-twentieth century with three wheels.) Benz was granted a patent for the invention. Benz went into production in 1886. Daimler and Maybach did not build an automobile from scratch until 1889. There was no patent issued to Daimler for an engine put onto a stagecoach! There was no production of automobiles by Daimler and Maybach until 1989. In no way do I intend to diminish their inventions, however.
Perhaps, if the article is restored as it was before the changes, some consensus about any changes may be reached.
As I see it—later in the article—there is further discussion that explores the fine points that concern the editor who made the sweeping changes and that and other discussion clarifies the differences in the development paths of Benz and DMG. More importantly, other articles on the inventors and such, are more appropriate as the place in which to go into much more detail.
After all, this is an article about Mercedes-Benz a brand that was designated for automobiles built 26 years after the death of Daimler and 15 years after Maybach left DMG. Of the three inventors, only Karl Benz had any involvement with the company, Daimler-Benz, which was the manufacturer of the brand that began in 1926. - kb 2.25.2006
addressing KB's points on history
Quote: "In no way do I intend to diminish their inventions, however."
Well you have, you see in 1886 Gottlieb Daimler built (or designed) the worlds first four-wheeled motor vehicle when he took the stagecoach (made by Wilhelm Wimpff & Sohn) and adapted it to hold his engine. This is a widely accepted and recognised fact, just because there is no patent for it does not mean the accolade is unmentionable. below are links to automobile history all show the 1886 Gottlieb Daimler invention. I just can’t see how you can conceivably think that the worlds first four wheeled gas engine automobile is not worth even mentioning! It is without question a landmark event/product in Mercedes history, regardless of whether it was built from the ground up by Daimler or not. Countless car manufactures today use chasses and engines from rival/other companies, this does not suddenly mean they are not automobiles worthy of mention.
I never said that because the Benz vehicle had only three wheels that it fails to be an automobile in my edit I clearly state that: "Benz, who had his shop in Mannheim invented the worlds first true automobile " the fact that it is three wheeled is even in brackets.
These essential details are not addressed later in the article. You said that you found the revision in history: "lacking in clarity and not presenting the best organization of facts" will I don't see the problem, everything is chronologically ordered in an understandable fashion. It is the current edit that is "lacking in clarity and not presenting the best organization of facts" and, is inconsice and incomplete and but if you still don't like it the clean it up don’t just revert to a previous edit.
Thanks for your comments, but im reverting to my edit. --JCW 09:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- I will work on it over the weekend—to see whether we can reach some agreement about that section. There are many previous examples of carts, boats, or stagecoaches being adapted to carry an engine—these are not patentable inventions built as a concept. If you feel they are, then, in order to make the history correct, you also should mention all of them in the history section for the Mercedes-Benz—because they were the first converted contraptions with four wheels. I would not—and will continue to debate whether the number of wheels is a justification for asserting that the primitive converted stagecoach of Maybach and Daimler should be considered a first in the general history of the Mercedes-Benz. It simply was not the first stagecoach or horse wagon with four wheels that had an engine put onto it to make it move, as you assert. In 1885 Maybach and Daimler purposely built a patentable motorcycle and in 1889 they purposely built a true automobile that could carry passengers as well as the driver, both deserve recognition. I will look at the sites you advise before returning to the edit. Thanks. - kb 2.26.2006
Towards the end of the article the author seems to get a bit excited about modern build quality, somewhat giving the impression that things will now be fine and dandy, when it actual fact Mercedes have a long way to go yet.
- Don't worry. Once I had a 1989 200 E and it was the best thing I've ever used. Now, I have a faster and a newer car but it is not the same. Mercedes is one of the best manufacturers in the world. Deliogul 15:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry mate, Mercedes WERE one of the best manufacturers in the world, ever since the merger with Chrysler, quality of their cars have gone south. For example, the electrics on many of their new cars (espciallt the C-Class) are terrible and I've seen a few with severe rust that are only less than 10 years old. Mercedes now are nothing of old, and they are slowly going down the same road Rover did 25 years ago.
- Yeah, how's so ? do you have a source for that ? I don't think Mercedes has ever gone down hill with its quality, i think this brand is probably so only one is the world, has truly has an exceptional quality build —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dim386 (talk • contribs) 05:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
As Arthur Wellington said so well in 1887 in his book about railroad engineering, “engineering is the art of doing well with one dollar which any bungler can do with two.” The author would do well to remember this when thinking of Mercedes Benz quality.
The authors’ statement about declining quality “possibly related to the then board of directors being distracted from maintaining the marque's traditional quality whilst buying up or into many second-rate manufacturers such as Chrysler…” is an unfortunately typical reaction to the DaimlerChrysler merger.
The Mercedes Benz decline in quality had nothing whatsoever to do with Chrysler. The causes vary with opinions, but at one point it had dipped even below Chrysler’s standards. The 2004 Chrysler Crossfire – a thinly disguised previous generation Mercedes SLK launched with a flash but quickly gained a reputation for gremlin plagued electronics and Mercedes priced maintenance. Sales ‘success’ followed, as did production cancellation. It is my opinion that the Mercedes quality slide was an unfortunate byproduct of attempting to justify the already high purchase price of a Mercedes Benz vehicle by pushing the technology envelope without increasing prices even more. The core ‘hardware’ remained sound, while the poor electronics detracted from the owner’s perception of quality. Then fixes had to be implemented, which ended up raising prices even more. The result was even higher vehicle prices with lower customer perception of quality.
The merger with Chrysler was strictly about money. This was admitted in public by DaimlerChrysler management, but somehow the press never caught on...
DaimlerChrysler Chairman, Juergen Schrempp, addresses the Annual Meeting in Berlin. April 08, 2004 "Any claims that Chrysler is being subsidized by other parts of the Group are simply false. They have nothing to do with the facts. Chrysler is not the "poor relation" of the Group. Since the merger of Daimler-Benz and Chrysler, the Chrysler Group has, on balance, made a huge, positive contribution to the success of the Group as a whole. And here I'm talking about both the operating profit and the cash flow. Even when Chrysler posted a negative operating profit in 2003, its cash flow, after investments, remained clearly positive. And here we're talking in the billions range."
The authors’ claim that, “once Chrysler was dumped from the company portfolio, quality and reliability of Mercedes-Benz vehicles began to return to their traditional levels,” is equally misguided. Daimler left Chrysler a "hollow shell of a company that had been starved of product” according to Robert Nardelli, CEO of Chrysler LLC. Chrysler was spun off because it had no more money to give. The quoted improvements to the quality Mercedes Benz vehicles (1st quarter 2007) were implemented while Chrysler and Mercedes were still parts of one company.
Actually at the end of the article I said: "Many now hope that the rest of the Mercedes-Benz range will inherit this fastidious attention to detail and rock solid reliability—that gave Mercedes-Benz its prestigious name in the first place." implying that most of the rest of the MB range still need improving in the build quality department.
However the W221 S-Class has been widely heralded as a magnificent car by its reviewers, with quality 'back on form' (i.e. as it was in the pre-Chrysler (pre late 1990's)days) being a common comment by independant reviewers. And the citations are examples, although most reviews are on paper (can't find on net to link) in magazines such as ‘CAR’, ‘Top Gear’, ‘What Car’, and ‘Mercedes Enthusiast’. I think this is a fair and comprehensive paragraph, with more citations in it than the rest of the article combined. Not merely an off the cuff comment on ‘modern build quality’ of Mercedes Benz cars, as you implied. -JCW 9 May 2006 (UTC)
- I can't find that bit in the article, has it been removed? It's worth mentioning if sources can be provided, although I think it's also worth mentioning that only time can tell for sure how good the build quality really is.--Santahul 03:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Criticism and controversy?
Is there any criticisms or controversy, which would be relevant to Mercedes Benz, which could be included within this wiki? Electric Avenue 19:37, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
No way, Mercedes PWNZ!!
- There could be an article on build quality. As is well known, pre-93 cars are built to an incredibly high standard but then some director guy came in and decided to start cutting corners to improve profits and it's done a huge amount of damage to Benz's reputation. The build quality hasn't been the same since either (look at the M-Class), even with the huge efforts that are being made lately they're struggling.--Santahul 03:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
PFG: Cannstatt (or Bad Cannstatt as it#s called (from 1933) today) is (since 1905) a city district of Stuttgart and not an independent city near Stuttgart, therefore I corrected this passage. Please compare to the page "Stuttgart". Also Untertürkheim (since 1905) and Zuffenhausen (since 1931) are "only" city districts of Stuttgart and not independent towns. These facts are often published false (even in books).
ee think this page should be used like a news service ro reference to all current models and happenings. (e.g the snippet on the Vision CLS availability to the U.S). This is an Encyclopedia and there are many Mercedes-Benz sites that will cater for American Enthusiasts.
I am removing the said section, if anybody has a big problem with this let's discuss it and find a solution. But some of the content on this page is definately "news" instead of "encyclopedia". Dawidl 07:00, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Nice job on reworking the "Mercedes"-daughter factoid into the improved article. --Ed Poor
- Not sure what factoid is being discussed here. As it stands now, this article is a farce! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 14:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC).
Here's another small factoid: while a Mercedes-Benz car is often, or even usually, referred to popularly as a 'Mercedes', in some countries the name is abbreviated to 'Benz'. (For a chap like me, of course, who likes to travel with his head out the window, either will do.) -- TheToxicAvenger 22:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
Redirect from teleaid
for some reason teleaid redirects here, even though there's no mention of it on the page. I'm not sure what that is, (although judging from the link from car phone it must have something to do with car phones), but it doesn't make sense to redirect here and then not even mention it. Inordinate (talk) 00:23, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Slave labour needs to be mentioned, otherwise this article will be a useless piece of advertising or fan fiction.
It's not about blame, it's about factuality, as was discussed before. And yet there's no mention of the people who were exploited yet. (I guess it was there but somebody deleted it)
If there's a section on history of the company, the history needs to be complete, that is all.--188.8.131.52 (talk) 02:43, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
would like to find out something.i own a benz c 200 1995 model.what does it mean when ext temp is showing on the dash board what does it mean.please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 08:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
- This is an encyclopedia, but I placed the question "benz c 200 1995 model.what does it mean when ext temp is showing on the dash board?" in google and various sites came up. I would suggest that you see if any one of them can help you, as they know more about this than we do. Britmax (talk) 09:55, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Split the Models section to List of Mercedes-Benz models?
- What about List of Mercedes-Benz vehicles? I think the section needs to be pared down. Keep only the current models, and a more discriminating list of significant past models. The nomenclature decoder is fine but doesn't belong in the Models section. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:37, 6 December 2013 (UTC)