Do Motorhome Manufacturers Listen To Their Customers?

[Vernon B]

It seems to me that unlike most other consumer products the Motorhome trade is not creating a situation in which customers are "spoilt for choice". Indeed it is increasing common to hear the comment "I've not seen anything here that would make me put my hand in my pocket" at the big shows. Moreover when talking to sales people you're often told, very nicely of course, that what you're looking for isn't in tune with market demand. So I wonder if that is indeed the reality or whether the trade is giving us what they think we want. To get some objective data, from what must be a very good sample of motorhome users, I'd like to invite you to participate in this simple poll.

 

Whether you're currently looking to buy a motorhome or not, simply select the one option that best describes your feelings about the choices on offer relative to the price bracket you could afford.

 

Vernon

[Brian Kirby]

Vernon

Cynical perhaps, but do I detect the remotest hint of an interest here?  Journalistic?  PR?  Marketing?  Just curiosity?

[Vernon B]

No absolutely genuine Brian - I've just got a bee in my bonnet about an industry that brings out new models each year with apparently no regard to what the public are looking for. I thought this poll may be a way of determining "Is it (just) me!"

 

Hope you've logged your view . . .

 

Regards

 

Vernon

[net-traveller]

I have been very disappointed in this years (2007) models.

 

While I appreciate that manufacturers have to design based on the chassis available I, and I suspect many others, have to base my choice on certain criteria that I cannot change. So for me, the lack of choice in the 6m and under category means that no dealer is getting any chance of a part-ex this time around.

 

And yes I've voted.

 

;-)

[Mel B]

Is it me or are they all getting bigger again? The overcab pods are massive now compared to a few years ago but at least some of the manufacturers were then trying to keep the length down, now the vast majority of 'vans are over 6 metres in length. I'm seriously considering changing at present but am very disappointed with what's on offer.

 

We're going to GMEX next Saturday (got some tickets of ebay for £1.05 including postage!) to see what 2007 models are on offer but I'm not hopeful unfortunately. Anyone else going? *-)

[Brian Kirby]

Vernon B - 2007-01-12 4:54 PM No absolutely genuine Brian - I've just got a bee in my bonnet about an industry that brings out new models each year with apparently no regard to what the public are looking for. I thought this poll may be a way of determining "Is it (just) me!" Hope you've logged your view . . . Regards Vernon

Vernon

Oh dear, nasty suspicious me!  Yes, I have recorded my view.  However, merely saying there is little that I find interesting, won't do much to improve the overall offer.  Part of the problem is us, we all want different things!  Also, for each buyer there really only needs to be one 'van, so if one can find that one one will be satisfied.

Can we explore common threads in dissatisfaction?

Layouts are so personal, and evoke such passions.  Wouldn't be seen dead with/without permanent bed, separate shower, lounging space, grill, full cooker, automatic transmission etc etc.

Can we perhaps dispense with these issues as a bit cosmetic and obvious, and look at the more difficult issues that cause great dissatisfaction after the 'van has been bought?

May I suggest payload as No 1.  Inadequate payloads, especially for larger vans, really are grossly unfair to first time buyers.  Manufacturers and dealers are far too inclined to produce/sell large and seductive vans on inadequate chassis, rather than own up to the fact that they need more than 3,500Kg MTPLM to be viable.  Even on smaller vans many have inadequate payloads simply because the coachbuilt body, and the furniture, are ridiculously heavy.  It is quite amazing by how much the MIRO of two 6 metre vans, on the same chassis, can vary.  Since both are likely to have about the same fridge, heater, water capacity, cooker and toilet, most of this difference must, surely, be due to differences in construction techniques, with the heavy van giving a poor payload as a consequence.  So, the underlying cause of poor payload is, really, poor specification of materials and construction techniques.  Now there's a challenge!

[Clive]

My wife always says that the designers should go and live in their creations for a couple of weeks then they would see their shortcommings.

 

What I still cannot understand is why some furniture continues to be made from laminated chipboard. Heavy or what!

[Guest bil h]

Laminated chipboard probably enhances the "crash stability" ??

 

bil h

[Vernon B]

Brian

 

I take your point that we all have different needs and preferences but that applies to most things. The reason that M&S nearly went out of business was primarily down to the fact that they lost touch with the customer over a whole range of things from not accepting credit cards to the layout of the stores.

 

One way of the industry responding to our multi various preferences would be to offer a base van with options on those preference areas - particularly layout. Now I know the costs of manufacture could be potentially higher but that could be avoided by sticking to a model range for three years rather than having to tool up every year for new models.

 

It would be interested to know how many people here have actually been surveyed on their preferences by a dealer/manufacturer.

 

Interestingly there is already a theme emerging here namely that the industry is not addressing the preference for a well put together, 6 metre van with a decent payload and a practical layout. Is that too much to ask?

 

Vernon

[Supertractorman]

I do think that the manufacturers should survey their customers as I feel we all could make worthwhile suggestions as to how to improve the build of the van. My Dealer sent me a survey of my purchasing experience so at least they want to learn how they could improve.

With regards to the ideal van, then it has not been built yet, otherwise why would we all go and purchase extras from Day 1. How many people do you know that only use a van with no alterations or add ons. Even the Hirers of vans seem to add extras, and they must have more experience than anybody on this front.

As for choice there is plenty, but it always has to be a compromise.

 

David

[Vernon B]

V poor response to this survey - interesting ...

[Brian Kirby]

Vernon B - 2007-01-13 9:51 AM Brian I take your point that we all have different needs and preferences but that applies to most things. The reason that M&S nearly went out of business was primarily down to the fact that they lost touch with the customer over a whole range of things from not accepting credit cards to the layout of the stores. One way of the industry responding to our multi various preferences would be to offer a base van with options on those preference areas - particularly layout. Now I know the costs of manufacture could be potentially higher but that could be avoided by sticking to a model range for three years rather than having to tool up every year for new models. It would be interested to know how many people here have actually been surveyed on their preferences by a dealer/manufacturer. Interestingly there is already a theme emerging here namely that the industry is not addressing the preference for a well put together, 6 metre van with a decent payload and a practical layout. Is that too much to ask? Vernon

Vernon

No, definitely not unreasonable.  However, we all learn from experience, so those who are new to motorhomes will tend to be swayed by the "wrong" things.  Thus swayed, they will buy, and only then will the find out! 

If the manufacturers canvass opinion, therefore, when should they do it?  I think the ideal answer would be a questionnaire sent about 12 months after purchase, but are they really likely to do that? 

Without trying to be cynical (not difficult I'm afraid!) the manufacturer wants sales.  He doesn't want to become a motorhome consultant, its us purchasers who want that.  The magazines need the advertising revenue, and can't really rubbish this or that van': they'd never get another one to test if they did. 

These things are expensive and the present situation is unsatisfactory, but the only remedy is for consumers to become more informed and keep drumming away, in the way only we can, at the industry to raise it's game.  Clive's point that the designers/manufacturers should use their own products is very valid.  However, I suspect very few motorhome manufacturers' directors would be seen dead in a motorhome!

The internet gives us contact with each other, and a medium for exchanging views, so seems the ideal tool.  If we could agree what the shortcomings are, we can surely get our message across, but ultimately we'll need publicity to give it teeth and it's at that point I run out of ideas.  Who would publicise our findings - always assuming we could organise them well enough to present a clear critique of present vans' shortcomings?

However, I think we'd have to run the poll item by item, inviting comment on particular aspects of motorhome design.  For example, separate showers - a waste of space or a highly desirable feature?  Ditto full cookers.  Ditto fixed beds.  Ditto big "Heki" rooflights.  Ditto "garages" that can't carry at least 300Kg.  Ditto 5/6 berth motorhomes with 4 belted seats.  The list is endless, but it would be worth a try - provided MMM would periodically risk publishing the findings.

[Vernon B]

Hi Brian, as ever you make some telling points.

 

On a slightly different tack the data here suggests that you and I represent a very tiny minority who are interested in these issues and using the site to further those objectives. Only 32 people have seen a value in completing the poll and of the 11 comments, you and I have contributed 7 of them!

 

On the face of it I think that is a disappointing and surprising outcome given the amount of threads relating to poor design, poor quality, unfulfilled expectations and poor customer service etc. Perhaps we leave the manufacturer no alternative but to hazard a guess at what the customer wants, because we are simply unwilling to proved such feedback.

 

On the other hand, when Xerox canvassed opinions about photocopiers, and Sony did same with the Walkman, the public reaction was that they could see no possible use for these products (true!) - so alternatively perhaps manufacturers don't trust our judgment.

 

My thinking behind the design of the poll was to keep things simple and while I see some sense in your suggestion about pinpointing certain features, I thought a "top level" measure of overall satisfaction with what's on offer would be a good starting point - clearly that has not been the view of members.

 

Finally, re your point about the reluctance of the press to criticise a 'van because it might result in a loss of advertising revenue and access to test vehicles. I'm sure you're absolutely right about this but you may remember back in the 1960's that that was the situation in the car trade until a magazine starting life as "Small Car" adopted a totally different approach to Autocar and Motor and rubbished any car that didn't come up to scratch. I think that mag helped start consumerism in the car trade and was a major factor, together with the Japanese of course, in improving quality standards. And just look at the motoring press now - none of them hold their punches - and Jeremy Clarkson certainly doesn't go short of demo vehicles. Of course this more aggresive appraisal of motor cars has benefitted us as far as base vehicles and chassis are concerned, as evidenced by the very low frequency of complaints about those compared with the "caravan" bit.

 

Me thinks we are too willing to accept the status quo and hence in the final analysis we get what we deserve

 

Vernon

 

[breakaleg]

we bought a new 2006 marquis lancashire, same as the nuavo, because the 2007 model is 10 inches longer.

this i belive is due to the new chassis being longer.

pete

[Mel B]

Trouble is, one persons 'criticism' is another's 'praise'! Take for instance the argument about such a sundry item as the toilet window - should it be clear or opaque? I like it clear so that when I'm in there doing whatever I can peer out to the lovely countryside in which we are usually parked, others, however prefer not to be able to do this.

 

Similarly with fixed beds, separate showers, etc some love 'em, other's hate 'em. Unless manufacturers did a survey of every motorhome owner and every potential motorhome owner they'd never get a true picture ... and that wouldn't last long as we are all fickle and change our minds - how many people set out with one layout in mind and then changed it for another???

 

As for mags having a go at motorhomes, it's difficult again because what the reviewer may love, we may hate or see as a problem. The standards of the finish etc for the price are very subjective, however, I totally agree that faults should be clearly identified and commented upon, especially when the basics are flawed - like rediculously low payloads.

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

Could the low response to the survery simply mean that most people are actually happy with their motorhome?

I'm a newbie and I think that mine is absolutely brilliant. I can't really think how the maker could squeeze in much more in its slightly under 20 feet body. I chose it at the NEC where I could compare several models under one roof and I'm pleased to say that what looked good on paper seems to be good in actual usage.

True, there's the odd accessory that I wish they'd fitted themselves but these are minor criticisms. Best of all everything appears to work perfectly.

In an earlier post someone mentioned that the production manager of the firm had one made for himself with extra-special attention to detail (and who wouldn't in his position!) so there's at least one executive out there who's using his own product!

Oh and Ps, it drives superbly and has a payload of over 750kg!

[Clive]

"Could the low response to the survery simply mean that most people are actually happy with their motorhome? "

 

My guess is that some still think there is a commercial interest behind the poll. ???

[michele]

can This thicko get a honest answer to an honest question please .

Clive what is wrong with it being commercial ? if it is .What does that mean to me. (?)

[Mike Chapman]

Could mean that out of the 1700 registered users only 37 are actually active which has been pointed out before.

 

Regards,

 

Mike.

[Brian Kirby]

michele - 2007-01-16 11:15 PM can This thicko get a honest answer to an honest question please . Clive what is wrong with it being commercial ? if it is .What does that mean to me. (?)

No more than we might be giving someone a free ride on a free website.  We could be doing some journalist's job for him, we could be doing some manufacturer's market research for him.  No problem with that, so far as I'm concerned, but I'd prefer him to come clean and declare his interest if that were the case.

However, it isn't the case, so we don't have to worry about all that, do we?  You're far too hard on yourself Michele!  See if you can get hold of a copy of last Sunday's Observer colour supplement.  There's a long article in that on a subject that I think might interest you.  It's only spelling, see!