Heartland quality

[JanAndBill]

The simple fact is thar all affordable RVS are designed to a low standard with many inherent problems built-in by the design. Extreme susceptibility to water damage. Extreme susceptibility to freezing damage and leaks. Frame and suspension problems. Too rapid assembly with too few quality checks and enforcement. Current available solutions are expensive. No one company is to blame. This is an industry standa4d. Some may be better, some orse. Yet, the standard guarantees these problems. This is then reflected in lower standards for subassembles and components.

We no longer accept this standard in our cars and trucks. Not that they are perfect.

Having a strong welded moocoque body would add complexity and cost to construction. RVs would be smaller and heavier in order to be safer and more durable. Across the industry. You may not get what you pay for from some manufacturers, but you never get what you won't pay for.

Our first RV SOB of any size we owned for over 7 years. Other than the normal maintenance and service you have with any RV we never had an issue. The doors opened, closed and latched. appliances worked as they should, cabinets still looked as good as the day we got it. The last unit before our BH was a lower end SOB. The only "warranty" issue we had with this unit was the carpet binding came loose a slide. Even the cheaper quality cabinets stayed together without coming apart or the bottoms falling out. Not saying we've had a lot of problems with the BH because we haven't, but I am a little irritated that I "assumed" when I went up in price, I wouldn't increase the number of little annoying things that have plagued us. Has the experience turned me off on Heartland, no not completely. Will I look into the some of the other brands I've had good success in the past with, most definitely. Could I get a worse unit with SOB, unfortunately the answer is maybe.

 

[JohnD]

We had some major issues with our previous Heartland trailer, which made us decide to trade if off.

And we got another Heartland . . .

Yes, we have some issues with it, but the real problem is with our dealership's service department doing half@$$ed repairs (some of which I really can't call repairs yet).

Chances are . . . our next upgrade will be another Heartland product!

 

[Shortest Straw]

How much more money is everyone willing to pay above what you did for your rig to not have any problems? What do you want that money spent on? With your individual expertise and education what would you tell the engineers, design team and manufacturer to do to make paying more for your rig of choice worth the money? I would gladly pay some more for a rig that was built sturdier, more durable, is even a bit heavier, with a manufacturers warranty longer than my attention span. Heck I would buy a rig just based on a longer warranty if the floor plan still made the better half smile.

We only found one other brand in the entire country that has as good of reviews as Heartland does when it comes to warranty and build quality items when we were researching last summer. One. This tells me that two companies in this country are trying to get on top of things. It also tells me that folks are willing to pay for substandard rigs to keep from sleeping on the ground. If we the consumer dont keep buying the manufacturer will have to make some changes. Our NT was flawless in every way. We have not had our Oakmont long enough to have an opinion but I promise you this, if it starts falling apart we will not reward Heartland by buying another from them.

Same goes for dealers. There is an oasis of ways to get reviews on a dealer. If they have a ton of bad reviews and you go buy from them anyway, its your fault what happens after that. Not theirs, not Heartlands, yours and yours alone. While I know folks like to vent, it gets old after awhile. You don't research a crappy dealer, get crappy service, and are still surprised and upset? I do not get that. What is even more astonishing to me is when folks get bad service and then go back again. Why are we doing this? I know some folks are going to do it simply because they have no idea and no one has educated them. The rest of us need to start sending a message...

 

[danemayer]

Let's pretend we're in the boardroom with the executives listening to proposals on how to invest.

One presentation proposes to set up an extra building to do 100% PDI before shipping to dealers. Lets suppose they produce 200 RVs per day or around 50,000 per year. To keep things moving, they'd have to do 200 PDIs per day or there would be a backlog waiting to be inspected. Now suppose 1 person can do a thorough inspection in 4 hours, not counting time to correct problems. So 2 trailers per day per person. That would mean about 100 people to do inspections. Some number of people to do repairs. Some management. Facilities people too. So altogether, let's say it takes 130 people to do 100% PDIs on 200 RVs per day. That's 130/200 or .65 people per rig to do a PDI. On a cost basis, at an average burdened labor rate of $50K, that might be $130 per RV, not counting cost of the facility. It would have to be a large building, suitably outfitted with power and water, and repair capability. So let's call that $12 million amortized over 20 years, or $600K/year. Dividing by 50,000 units, that's another $12/unit.

So labor and facility might cost $142 per unit. If we assume that eliminates 2 warranty claims per trailer, it's about a breakeven on cost.

But customers would see fewer problems on new trailers. So customer satisfaction would go up and the company would see a 5% increase in future sales - an additional 2500 trailers. But the executives are concerned about whether they can really capture that 5% projected increase in sales. Several companies have previously tried spending more on higher quality product and have gone out of business.

Now suppose the second presenter proposes the company spend the $12 million and hire 130 new people to expand the product line and make another 2500 trailers per year. They see a weakness in a competitor's offerings and an opportunity to take sales away from the other guy. Based on past successes with this exact approach, the executives have confidence they can capture this 2500 in additional units sold.

You're the CEO and all heads turn to you. What do you want to do?

 

['Lil Guy']

We need to put a better product out there to capture the market and everyone in this room should feel the same way. We all should be working toward this goal without decreasing production or having to raise the cost. It starts with accountability. Until we build this into our production line there will be no change as for some of the shoddy work that occasionally slips through. A simple sign off by production workers would take no time and puts a name to the job performed. If a name shows up on numerous occasions it should be addressed and maybe be a reason for dismissal. Holding a production meeting with all hands for a 30 minute session to gripe or praise can be beneficial. It all starts with management and each department head should be held accountable for his or her department. Nobody wants to do a bad job but people can get complacent. Again, management needs to start it off trying to be proactive instead of reactive. Maybe a little incentive for a good employee. It's not the laborer on the line. He wants to do a good job. It's management that needs to set the standard. Everybody works differently and is motivated differently. It's the department heads job to know his people and get the best from them. It really isn't that difficult.
In the long run it will pay off. I'm sure there are a lot of people on this site that have held jobs of responsibility and know what I'm trying to say and could present it in a better way.
Sorry for butting in.lol

 

[bdb2047]

Quality in any product has to start at the top of the organization. Most workers work to what they believe is expected. Show them respect set the expectations and the job will be done. Quality at first takes time and money after it is the norm quality makes time and money.

 

[John T Bettencourt]

For the money these units cost the quality is no where near where it has to be.

 

[JanAndBill]

But customers would see fewer problems on new trailers. So customer satisfaction would go up and the company would see a 5% increase in future sales - an additional 2500 trailers. But the executives are concerned about whether they can really capture that 5% projected increase in sales. Several companies have previously tried spending more on higher quality product and have gone out of business.

Now suppose the second presenter proposes the company spend the $12 million and hire 130 new people to expand the product line and make another 2500 trailers per year. They see a weakness in a competitor's offerings and an opportunity to take sales away from the other guy. Based on past successes with this exact approach, the executives have confidence they can capture this 2500 in additional units sold.

You're the CEO and all heads turn to you. What do you want to do?

Dan you've missed the underlying constant in both examples, "the customer". In the first you're assuming the customers won't respond to quality, and in the second your assuming the customer will be thrilled with a mediocre product and unfavorable reviews will not come back to haunt you. Years ago I won a large transportation contract, to deliver truckloads from the manufacturer's warehouse to dealers in the south. The largest of the receivers had a reputation of being "difficult" to deal with. We could have provided the service as expected, and been the same as our competition, our manufacturer would have been happy, but instead we chose to be a little more. Throughout the contract when it was hot, my drivers had instruction to stop and buy a 6 pack of cold drinks for the guys on the dock. When it was cold they took in coffee or donuts, other times snacks of one sort or another.We made it a point to drop these receivers a card occasionally thanking them for allowing us to serve them. Didn't cost us much, but everyone of those (difficult customers) looked forward to my drivers coming in, we got preferential treatment on dock times, we were unloaded and gone while other "quality" carriers were sitting waiting. More importantly when the contract came up for renewal we were outbid by over 6% on our rates, by another "quality" carrier. When these "difficult customers" found out we were being replaced, they wrote the president of the manufacturer threatening to pull their business. End result was that we continued doing the lanes at our rates. That small investment in service paid us back big time over the years. Sometimes in this world, even if you produce a good product, you have to look for ways to differentiate yourself from others. The payback will come maybe not tomorrow, but eventually it will. If I were the CEO I'd be looking for ways to keep my current customers coming back, while expanding my offering to capture new customers. It's not an either or answer.

 

[danemayer]

Dan you've missed the underlying constant in both examples, "the customer". In the first you're assuming the customers won't respond to quality, and in the second your assuming the customer will be thrilled with a mediocre product and unfavorable reviews will not come back to haunt you.

We all insist that we want higher quality products, but the RV companies that have been recognized as producing the highest quality products are out of business today. So there must be other considerations that we as customers respond to and consider more important.

 

[dave10a]

We all insist that we want higher quality products, but the RV companies that have been recognized as producing the highest quality products are out of business today. So there must be other considerations that we as customers respond to and consider more important.

That is conjecture and intellectually dishonest---there are many reasons companies close their doors. I heard that same explanation from US auto makers in the 60's-80's until Japan proved them wrong. Good workmanship does not always cost more.

 

[cookie]

I heard that same explanation from US auto makers in the 60's-80's until Japan proved them wrong. Good workmanship does not always cost more.

Funny you should mention Japanese auto makers, I was just thinking about Toyota. Toyota uses or did use a Kaizen Philosophy.
When I had to go to that place 12 hours a day, (w*rk), I was involved in a couple of Lean Manufacturing, Kaizen Programs. I went into it with not much enthusiasm but in the end I could not believe how much time and money was saved on every project I was involved in.
This would be a great thing for Heartland to investigate. With all of the quality complaints I am certain that the involvement of employees in such a process would trim many of them.
We often hear of the improvements to floor plans and items installed in/on the coaches but have any improvements been made in the assembly process or is it the same process that has been in place for the past ten years. There may be better ways to do things.
Just thinking out loud here.

Peace
Dave

 

[JanAndBill]

We all insist that we want higher quality products, but the RV companies that have been recognized as producing the highest quality products are out of business today. So there must be other considerations that we as customers respond to and consider more important.

I think they more likely went out of business because of the type of product. RV's are luxury items subject to the whims of the economy. Couple that with the fact that it is a limited luxury market. Not everyone who can afford one enjoys the life style. Market became saturated and only the financially sound survived. You can build a better mousetrap but it still requires sound business management.

 

[Kbvols]

We all insist that we want higher quality products, but the RV companies that have been recognized as producing the highest quality products are out of business today. So there must be other considerations that we as customers respond to and consider more important.

I believe the average RV consumer puts more value in the "bells and whistles" items than the quality of construction. When I purchased my first RV nearly 20 years ago the brochure for the unit was dedicated to the construction techniques and materials used. Now it seems most of the RV manufacturers brochures focus primarily on features and extras and less on construction.

I love to listen to people at RV shows rarely do you hear someone ask about the construction of a particular RV. Most of the conversations are geared toward the features or options. There are exceptions but seemingly not many or at least not what I hear.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Shortest Straw]

Which do you think does more damage re-thinking re-tooling re-engineering re-training to make a better product or the couple we met in Missouri last summer who had nothing but issues with their Big Horn, were telling fellow Heartland owners, my wife and I, about it and how terrible their rig was, and how they were buying a Mobile Suites next month? There were about 15 other couples in that room with us. Then they tell others what they heard and so on. If even a third of them never buy Heartland because of what they heard, and so on so forth with everyone they talk to how much potential revenue is lost?

 

[JohnD]

We had some major issues with our previous Heartland trailer, which made us decide to trade if off.

And we got another Heartland . . .

Yes, we have some issues with it, but the real problem is with our dealership's service department doing half@$$ed repairs (some of which I really can't call repairs yet).

Chances are . . . our next upgrade will be another Heartland product!

Earlier in this thread it was mentioned that we should choose our dealers the same as we choose our trailers.

When we chose our Prowler . . . the only dealer west of the Mississippi (which is where we happen to live) that had any of this particular model just happened to be 40 miles from our house, and they had two of them!

The next closest dealership that had one was in Wisconsin.

Sometimes the dealership chooses you.

Sometimes that is how things have to be . . .

 

[JanAndBill]

Earlier in this thread it was mentioned that we should choose our dealers the same as we choose our trailers.

When we chose our Prowler . . . the only dealer west of the Mississippi (which is where we happen to live) that had any of this particular model just happened to be 40 miles from our house, and they had two of them!

The next closest dealership that had one was in Wisconsin.

Sometimes the dealership chooses you.

Sometimes that is how things have to be . . .

Currently truck shopping, and everywhere you go, the dealers want to "find your model" at another dealer. I've never asked but, do RV dealers "swap" inventory like car dealers do? If they don't why not??? We sort of ran into the same thing as John, when we bought our BH

 

[TxCowboy]

For larger dealers that have multiple store fronts and/or locations, they may move units between stores. They may charge you a "deposit" to do that but that deposit is only refundable if you buy a unit from them.

Smaller dealers probably don't swap units with another dealer. They basically buy units from the manufacturers, often by borrowing money from their banks to do so. Whatever is on their lots is all they have to offer a buyer.

 

[JohnD]

Our dealership has two in Colorado (one closer to our house than the one we bought it from), but they didn't have the same model we were looking for.

I believe they have three more in other states.

 

[Shortest Straw]

Earlier in this thread it was mentioned that we should choose our dealers the same as we choose our trailers.

When we chose our Prowler . . . the only dealer west of the Mississippi (which is where we happen to live) that had any of this particular model just happened to be 40 miles from our house, and they had two of them!

The next closest dealership that had one was in Wisconsin.

Sometimes the dealership chooses you.

Sometimes that is how things have to be . . .

That may be but you do not have to use them for service... Just as a reminder, my
Dad had to do a BBB report ****** after dealing with them and he had only purchased a smaller TT. My Dad used it once and the repair jobs on the warranty items were so bad he couldn't take it. The BBB report got their attention the most. End of this story resulted in them taking back the trailer and refunding all monies. If I were you I would see if Heartland will work with you on your issues that did not get fixed, issues that came up while they had the trailer, do some research and find a repair shop closer to you, and never go back to your dealer. Ever.

 

[donr827]

I found very few problems with my BH. I purchased my trailer from Lazydays in Tampa and arrived at their cg two days early with my trade in. Watched off and on as the mechanic did the dealers PDI. A very thorough one. I did my own PDI after they delivered it to the transfer lot. Found around 8 items like loose screws, not mine, and tight locks. The dealer is the key to everything.JMO
Don