That is interesting. So to that extent the Bmw supplier pays Bmw for failed parts. which means BMW has less incentive to purchase the most reliable parts. I bet that includes labor as well.RobbiZ4 said:I agree.zxy said:[...]
The list of E89 problems (and others) is a list of components not made by BWW but mostly by Bosch et al.
In business relations this may differ, as AFAIK BMW will charge the supplier for each part, that had to be replaced on warranty.
Said this, it's a calculation model of the suppliers:
Sell a bunch of 100.00 weak built parts and accept a re-charge quote of let's say 5% in the following 5 years. That is much cheaper for the supplier instead of delivering a better quality.
Jmy2ct
Rob
My experience here in the USA has been that components are submitted for Life testing in real time which may be cycle tested for weeks or more to simulate the warranty period. Then shipments are spot checked continuously and entire shipments can be rejected and be replaced by the vendor.
Another incentive for vendor quality here is the use of class action law suits which are not unusual. BWW and VW are both well aware of them. VW was caught cheating on emission claims and BWM lost lawsuits involving wheel cracking even though they warned buyers of certain wheels that they might be prone to failure. They also had to remedy HPFP issues because of the safety hazard involved in a having a vehicle fail in highway traffic and had to reimburse and/or increase warranty to 80,000 miles on the fuel pumps.
I believe the fuel pump problem was caused by an elastomer O ring failure which should have been specified in a higher grade for a few cents more.
I am curious about the situation with the Toyota Supra made with the BMW engines. I am guessing that Toyota engineers made some changes in some specifications.