Fit and finish on wagoneers
121 - 140 of 249 Posts
Joined
·
3,919 Posts
I agree 100% We don't have a Grand Wagoneer on the lot to confirm.......But there is nothing upscale or classy or as Stellantis likes to use "Premium" about the word "Merica" It wouldn't have bothered me on the now discontinued Dodge Avenger but on a 100k Grand Wagoneer.........not a good look.
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Well they had only one shot to launch this thing right—you can flush the toilet now, this thing is done
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
39,030 Posts
Hadn't we already decided it was a fake?
1986 LeBaron convertible, 2.2L T2 with A413. 1989 J convertible dash and console modified to fit.
Joined
·
1,230 Posts
Back to the idea of stopping the line for problems. One of my Boy Scout troop dads worked at Ford's (now closed) Norfolk Assembly plant. That plant had the best quality control world wide for Ford (this fact was revealed to me by a Daimler-Benz Truck division manager) It was cited as one of the reasons for building the plant in Hampton VA. He told me that there were many "line stop" buttons along the assembly line, and they were for safety or quality issues. They were instructed to use them for either, and no penalties would be applied.
Saw pics of a GW at a dealer. The back end was perfect, no issues.
Joined
·
33,356 Posts
Good philosophy in an ideal world.
But there are ways around everything. I worked for a large process control and instrumentation equipment company, and we were getting returns on I/O modules that were related to an amplifier circuit. It turns out, the designer used typical performance specifications instead of minimum/maximum numbers, and didn't compound them to determine the overall instrument tolerance. Marketing insisted on a 0.025% tolerance, but if you used the min/max specifications on the components, this wasn't guaranteed.
I met with the test engineer who told me that:
1) The first-pass yield being reported on the instrument was 92%, and that met conditions for a bonus for executives. So, quality goal met....or was it? Why were we getting so many returns?
2) He also told me that the first-pass yield was really 3rd, 4th or 5th pass. If the module failed tolerance, they kept testing it until the first time it passed, then shipped it and counted it as first-pass yield.
3) I wondered how they could do that, and he told me that there was no automated recording of the data at all, so no way of proving how many times it was tested before being declared a Pass. If it absolutely would not pass, it was declared a Fail. But the data recording was a manual report.
Charged with solving the problem, I examined the component tolerances and the accumulated errors in the circuits indicated that a 0.050% tolerance could be guaranteed. But Marketing said that that was unacceptable, that we needed the 0.025% spec in order to be competitive. Or at least publish that it was that spec. Problem was, usage in the field proved that we didn't meet it, and customers were getting pissed.
So in order to find the real first-pass yield, I worked with the ethical test engineer who ratted out the issue to me (but not to management, who would have reassigned him or targeted him in the next layoff), and we tested enough production units for a Weibull plot, a statistical analysis.
We found that we could only meet the 0.025% specification about 30% of the time. So in other words, the true first-pass yield was 30%, not 92% - and 70% failed.
This would not be allowed to be reported higher up, so we had to work behind the scenes to resolve it. It took over a year, but eventually the circuit was redesigned (essentially we did a 2-stage amplifier scheme, with a gain of 10 and a gain of 100, instead a gain of 1000 at one stage), and were able to get a true 95% or so first-pass yield, and returns went to a trickle.
But even though this company prided itself on a sophisticated and dedicated quality system and had industry-leading professionals in that area, politics would not allow problems to be identified publicly within the various organizations, and especially not if bonuses would fail to be paid. Problems could only be fixed if they were kept quiet, behind the scenes, and did not embarrass anyone at all. They were not fixed if this criteria could not be met. And that's how it works in the real world, for most companies; this one being a Fortune 500 company with an impeccable reputation at the time.
Now I work for an employer who honestly identifies and fixes problems in the open within the company, with no blame, only emphasizing problem-solving. And it is a relief and a joy.
Joined
·
20 Posts
I hope they iron out the Uconnect 5 issues before there is too many of these running around. Every vehicle I've driven (22 DT, 21 WD, 21 WL) with the new improved Uconnect absolutely sucks. From simply shutting off while driving, apple car play dropping off all the time, radios staying on after key cycle and door opened (regardless of the setting ), screen freezing up and even horrible drone noise at 950rpm from speakers (flash coming late 4th quarter 2022 for that)... it's embarrassing.
The Bronco isn't $100k either. Nice try though, keep up the deflecting.
Joined
·
15,295 Posts
Ford is known to have difficulty in executing its manufacturing properly. Aside form interior materials that do not inspire quality, the actual production is filled with problems as evidenced by many launches.
Rather than compare to Ford, compare the Wagoneer to a Hyundai or Kia that costs 1/4 of a Wagoneer and comes with fit/finish far superior.
It is all about manufacturing process and testing/reliability.
Additionally, FCA software has been a big source of reliability problems. That is why Tavares brought in Ned Curic as Chief Technology Officer from Amazon Alexa so he could put in place better software creation systems and testing.
Rather than compare to Ford, compare the Wagoneer to a Hyundai or Kia that costs 1/4 of a Wagoneer and comes with fit/finish far superior.
It is all about manufacturing process and testing/reliability.
Additionally, FCA software has been a big source of reliability problems. That is why Tavares brought in Ned Curic as Chief Technology Officer from Amazon Alexa so he could put in place better software creation systems and testing.
2002 Ram 2500 Quad Cab 4x4 with Cummins. 2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee L Altitude
Joined
·
4,935 Posts
I would think the 30k Ram would benefit from all the plant upgrades, especially the paint jobs.
So, when Stellantis actually does something right, are you also going to find the smallest thing possible to complain about, like a bolt that's hidden from tech's (let alone out of sight and mind of the consumer) not being undercoated? Dude, this is a discussion about 'fit and finish'. He talked about 'fit and finish'. Literally in the scope of this discussion. MSRP a little different? Oh boo-hoo.
Our Wrangler Unlimited has 0 fit and finish issues. I've read several reviews and the Wrangler's materials, stereo and fit and finish are superior. I'm sure Ford will eventually improve the assembly quality but the cheap looking materials are just that no matter how well it might be assembled. Oh, BTW our much maligned (on this board) Compass was also assembled beautifully with good looking materials and fitment.
Correction it is a thread about fit and finish on Wagoneers. You know, a vehicle that costs as much as a house. For that price it should be near perfect.
Whatever the price point a vehicle should be well assembled.
Joined
·
15,295 Posts
Yes, if you build a $100k Wagoneer in the same plant as a Ram pickup, the changes should raise the quality level of all the products in that plant.
In fact, every time a plant receives upgrades, the products should see an improvement as a result.
The problem with FCA is that while they invested in plant upgrades (one of their most positive actions) they kept squeezing suppliers and reduced testing, resulting in many quality and reliability issues.
Until this Wagoneer issue, we did not see many assembly problems under FCA (other than wrong axles due to botched line sequencing). Brampton still has body panel alignment issues, even after the 2015 refresh. How much is due to part design vs plant infrastructure is hard to tell.
But some anecdotal reports say the Wagoneers may have the alignment under control now. We will see as many reviews will be taking place.
121 - 140 of 249 Posts
Join the discussion
