[zoom_vroom]

For me the term "Build Quality" comprises of
1. Feeling of being cocooned when you sit inside the car.
2. Lack of squeaks and rattles.
3. Low levels of outside noise coming inside the cabin.
4. No harsh noise while closing the boot,doors and bonnet.
5. The car glides over potholes without making you feel as if your facing a storm.
6. Mechanical parts last on and on and on, and don't need replacement often.
7. Regular service requires just oil and filter changes with tuning.
8. When you sit inside the car, you feel secluded from the worldly vices and feel safe and secure.
9. You feel that your family will be safe in case of any mishap travelling in that car.
10. You can take up a long journey without thinking that your car needs a checkup every time.
11. The car doesn't show its age within 3 years of ownership and doesn't make you vouch for a new car.
12. Car that can changes owners and still give each owner a re-assuring feeling that it still has some miles left in it.
13. A car that makes you think before you sell it and you just can't find reasons to sell it.
14. A car whose newer generation becomes a contender in your next car list when you go on a car shopping.
15. A car that never lets you down no matter what the weather conditions are.
For me its the reliability that counts.One can live with squeaks and rattles but not with a car that goes to the garage every 2 months for something or the other.

[jkdas]

Reliability vs Thud = No breakdown vs reach home safe+ what mag said.

[joslicx]

This thread reminds me of the superb discussions on "What is Quality?" in the great book Zen and the art of Motorcycle maintenance.

Anyway for me reliability would be one of the most important parameters of quality. Otherwise the good old Amby should be the best car in the world qualitatively!!!

[shyamhegde]

Is the 'Thud' you all are talking is the way the door sounds when closed?

Can that not be improved by applying good damping materials (or like that) and make the door metal thicker, make the door heavier? Just a thought.

[greenhorn]

I voted for the thud. I'd rather have a solidly put together car I can drive with the confidence that I'm adequately cocooned in steel, which may have the occasional glitch, rather than something that feels like a tin can ,drives like a hearse and gives 20kmpl.
Of course not all of us think rationally , at least when it comes to cars, that's what make us listen to our hearts, than our heads during buying and ownership

EDIT:@ lurker, the gaps have been a non issue for me !

[aaggoswami]

An excellent thread.

For me the build quality is not the interior build quality of plastic and they way they are screwed. For me the chassis part is more important.
I would like to define more here.

Build quality for me is divided into two sections.

1) Chassis, brakes, suspension, powertrain ( come the reliability factor ).
2) Interior fit and finish.

I have opted for the first option i.e. supreme reliability.

We have two Japanese cars, Maruti 800 and Suzuki Baleno. Both of them are very reliable and we are happy.

[DCEite]

Hmmm..I asked had the same question here, to all those who were condemning Maruti's build quality, in the "Why Maruti" thread.

Originally Posted by DCEite

All those here who talk about "Build Quality"

What exactly is " build quality" ?

Does it mean absence of rattles?
Does it refer to the heaviness (Tank™ like) ?
Does it refer to the doors that close with a "Reassuring Thud ™" ?
Is it just something Automags are obsessed with, like they are with "Inconsistent Panel Gaps" and "hard cornering" ?


FYI,
my 5 year old Maruti WagonR does not rattle. But my friend's Skoda Octavia has constant rattle from the rear left door.
Does that mean my Maruti has better build quality than Skoda?

This thread should help answer my questions.

[suman]

To me, its important that my car doesn't break down for inexplicable or unknown reasons, doesn't rattle everytime it goes over a pothole, doesn't crumple like paper after a not-so-heavy impact & doesn't cost the earth for regular services.

Not sure if one can stereotype "Jap" vs "Euro" to meet all the above criteria always.

Originally Posted by ImmortalZ

Compare a Japanese SUV to your Safari and you'll see a different picture. (How much does a GV cost - I'm not certain. But I'm fairly certain that you'll be better off inside one of those during an accident.

Are you sure about this?

[i10]

As someone who uses the car very little, I would prefer the 'thud'. The thud makes me feel good that the car has been built with care. I don't think these manufacturers just ensure that the door closes with a nice sound, and forget the rest. To me, the thud indicates the attention to detail, which in the long run, translates to reliability.

[raj_5004]

build quality for me. i respect cars with a tough and well built body structure which makes me feel i am safe inside it. a tough body is not so easily pront to dents as the "tinny" jap cars too which is a boon in th city. no jap cars ever cut into my way or try to scare me because of the toughness of the body, they know their car will suffer more damage. this translates into stress free city driving. no rattling and squeaking is also a must. for me, a car with too much of rattling is "weak"...
reliabilty is my second priority.

[ImmortalZ]

Originally Posted by suman

Are you sure about this?

Fairly certain, yes.

[cypher]

For me, build quality is all about reliability - for all the major parts as well as the minor things like panel alignments. It especially means no annoying issues like squeaking seats or doors.

[esteem_lover]

Originally Posted by headers

Indicas panel gaps and poor quality arise out of poor vendor quality and the raw materials used!

Which in turn is because of the ridiculously poor conversion rates offered. How else can you make a car for 1 lakh ?

Build quality is all round, not related only to body, dash etc. It is to be determined as an overall package. Having a tank like metal structure is not good build quality. The way it is engineered & executed matters most.

[shipnil]

I would like to get views on cars which are japanese but with european engines like swift diesel. Where do we put these? Under reliability category or thud? I understand the thud is more about the chassis and in case of swift diesel it is only the engine that is from Fiat. But I think people here would agree that the Swift diesel is doing a fine job. And what about cars like Indica Vista? The solid body is from Tatas, with the same Fiat engine, and additionally gearbox and suspensions from Fiat.

[sridhga]

A thud with simpler technology has an elment of reliability too. That's what I prefer any day.

Ofcourse a thud contributes to safety. I do not think ABS and Airbags in a card board box make you safer.