|
I generally agree that most modern cars can be taken care of and last 25+ years and well over 200,000 miles. It's just that some will age with much more grace than others, and some will cost more in time, money, and headache to keep in tip-top shape than others. The biggest reason for a modern car not lasting 25 years is that the vast majority of car owners are woefully neglectful of any sort of scheduled/preventative maintenance. And then when a couple of more or less expected issues crop up, the car "is on its last legs" and they trade it in on a newer vehicle and take a bath financially. What's really funny is that over in the BFC car thread, most of the "last legs" posts are about cars that are only about 10 years old and generally with not much more than 100k miles on them. These cars are barely at their halfway point in life if given a bit of maintenance. It does makes a certain amount of sense, since that's roughly the time interval when most cars will need a little bit of basic maintenance and attention (fluids, filters, brakes, tires, plugs, sensors, maybe some suspension work) to freshen things up, but these are all wear items and are to be expected on every car, be it a Honda or a Bentley. For a relatively small maintenance cost (certainly no more expensive than a couple of payments on a new car!) you can take care of most of the major maintenance items and the car will be mostly good for another 10 years/100k miles. The exception is model-specific design flaws or manufacturing defects that cause an expensive and potentially recurring problem. For example, Subaru head gaskets from the 90s-mid 2000s, or Honda/Acura V6 automatic transmissions from late 90s-early 2000s. Having to do a head gasket job or an automatic transmission replacement is definitely a lovely/expensive thing that will cause most people to write-off a 10 year old car. But even with those, once replaced they shouldn't be a problem again for another 10+ years (or at all if replaced with improved/redesigned parts). But I can see why someone with a 10 year old car staring at a $2000+ repair bill might write it off, even though repairing it would likely be the more strictly financially sound decision in the long run. Guinness fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Sep 17, 2012 |
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 05:45 |
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:The LLV doesn't meet consumer needs in a meaningful way, though. Honestly, it's bloody hard work to try and buy an actively bad car nowadays. Just buy something you like that fits your needs and is in your price range. The days of new sills and an engine rebuild after seven years are long behind us.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 18:58
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:The consumer in that example was utility/delivery companies, and it most certainly did. It doesn't meet the needs of an average family buyer because it wasn't designed to. Right, that was my point. I think that many of the compromises made would be unacceptable to an end consumer so that saying Well They Did It With the Grumman doesn't make sense as a reason that one could build a consumer vehicle to a similar standard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 19:02
|
|
|
Guinness posted:I generally agree that most modern cars can be taken care of and last 25+ years and well over 200,000 miles. It's just that some will age with much more grace than others, and some will cost more in time, money, and headache to keep in tip-top shape than others. I think part of the reason this is so may be because prices for maintenance and service are primarily labor-dependent and highly local, which means that they scale differently compared to the prices of goods. I would need to support this hunch with data, but it's possible that everyday maintenance has gotten more expensive for people who can't do a lot of the work themselves. In particular, overall, peoples' incomes have not kept pace with the costs of living, but the artificially low cost of many consumer goods, materials, and food, achieved through heavy offshoring, illegal labor, and advances in technology/capital investments, has covered up this fact. However, services that are primarily dependent on relatively skilled labor cannot be as easily offshored. Add also the general decrease in independent mechanics, as servicing new cards becomes more difficult, and as the number of serviceable parts (versus parts that must be replaced outright) decreases, which means less competition, which again drives prices up. It doesn't help that peoples' perceptions of cars are arguably still stuck in the malaise era, where the failure of a single part often was only the first of a long string of failures.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 21:20
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:I think part of the reason this is so may be because prices for maintenance and service are primarily labor-dependent and highly local, which means that they scale differently compared to the prices of goods. I would need to support this hunch with data, but it's possible that everyday maintenance has gotten more expensive for people who can't do a lot of the work themselves. Considering that boiling water to make instant (soup, coffee, tea, ramen) is now the bar set by most for taking care of nutrition, I can only assume the same for most peoples' view of car maintenance. "The genie lamp came on so I fed it another quart!" 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 21:30
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Right, that was my point. I think that many of the compromises made would be unacceptable to an end consumer so that saying Well They Did It With the Grumman doesn't make sense as a reason that one could build a consumer vehicle to a similar standard. Yes, but it's not necessarily contrapositive either. The argument was that there's nothing unique to that approach that couldn't be carried over to a passenger car. Linedance posted:I will freely admit to completely missing the point, because I believe that cars, especially modern ones, are built to last. And with proper care, servicing, and preventative maintenance measures they can last indefinitely. I could go to a Hyundai dealership tomorrow, buy a new car, and there's no reason I couldn't run that car for 25 years or more. No, what you're describing is a disagreement. Missing the point is when you don't understand the topic at hand and refuse to address it, instead latching onto an ancillary issue. Also, where is your evidence for this belief? I agree that, given unlimited money and resources, you could get any modern car to last forever. But that doesn't change the fact that the overall reliability, price of maintenance and repairs, and costs relative to the actual worth of the car are all going to combine to make it impractical, and the time it takes for this to happen is going to differ based on the design of the car in question. Unless you really think that all modern cars are absolutely equal in durability, longevity, and long-term costs of maintenance. Which is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 21:42
|
|
|
Viggen posted:Considering that boiling water to make instant (soup, coffee, tea, ramen) is now the bar set by most for taking care of nutrition, I can only assume the same for most peoples' view of car maintenance. Define "most." The availability and sales of high-end produce, groceries, and cooking equipment has significantly increased in the past decades. So it seems that plenty of people are actually getting more interested in their food and in learning more about cooking, and they're spending a lot of money on it. Most people don't want another thing that needs constant maintenance and care. A car for most people is a necessary utility, not a hobby. Not to mention the fact that not everyone has the time and space to work on a car. Especially since, culturally speaking, even knowing what brand of tires are on your car has gathered a bit of a stigma as low-class behavior. Just like computers. Most people just want to know what button to press to go to their youtubes and cat pictures. They will either buy the shittiest piece of plastic with swoopy designs or big numbers that matches their budget, or else they will pay thousands for the latest hermetically sealed Apple product. People who can actually figure out what's going on with their computer without taking it into the store are rarer than you think, though, like the food thing above, your perception may be altered by the kind of people you see most of the time. OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Sep 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 21:54
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:I think part of the reason this is so may be because prices for maintenance and service are primarily labor-dependent and highly local, which means that they scale differently compared to the prices of goods. I would need to support this hunch with data, but it's possible that everyday maintenance has gotten more expensive for people who can't do a lot of the work themselves. That's true, the biggest killer on mechanic visits is the labor, but even expensive shops or dealers for non-exotic cars aren't more than $150-175/hr or so, and that's on the extreme high end. Even in a very high cost of living area, most labor rates are in the 100-120/hr range or less, which of course still adds up quick. But even so, take your typical "on its last legs" scenario of some 10 year old generic Toyonda Camcord with ~100k miles that is starting to hit its first real round of expected, but overall minor, maintenance: fluids/filters/plugs, brakes, perhaps a timing belt/WP, and maybe some miscellaneous stuff like worn/squeaky accessory belts, an O2 sensor going bad. or a leaky valve cover gasket. When most people tell me that their car is one foot in the grave it's all minor stuff like this. Yeah, getting it freshened up by a mechanic will probably run you about $1000-1500 but then it will basically be good for another nearly 10 years/100k miles. The same cost would be realized within just a few months of payments on a new (or new-used) car, not even accounting for taxes or downpayment. And of course most people don't perform any maintenance ever until it's something serious, making all that delayed periodic maintenance pile up and make it one very expensive trip to the mechanic, instead of several cheap ones. EVERY car eventually needs maintenance. Fluids break down, filters get dirty, pads get used up, plugs get worn, tires goes bald, and belts start to crack. It's just amazing to me how so many people equate having to do even the most basic of periodic maintenance as "car is dying, must go take out a 20k loan and buy a new one!" when for a tiny fraction of the price they could fix their car and get another 100k miles out of it. Guinness fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Sep 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 22:09
|
|
|
That scenario would make sense for a Toyota, spending $1500 on a 10 year old W body GM on the other hand.. (The grand prix I had taught me that ignition cylinders and intake manifold gaskets are wear items)
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 22:23
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Define "most." The availability and sales of high-end produce, groceries, and cooking equipment has significantly increased in the past decades. So it seems that plenty of people are actually getting more interested in their food and in learning more about cooking, and they're spending a lot of money on it. I really don't understand the point you're trying to make. Do you believe that cars should be/are built like Apple computers (in your example)? Hermetically sealed and built for people for whom a car is a necessity but knowledge of its operation is not? Or that they should be/are built for mechanics, who can disassemble and rebuild one to suit whatever purpose they have? What sort of fantasy car are you dreaming up here, one somehow so overbuilt that it never breaks, or one that when it breaks (in conflict with the first point), a layman can repair it with no more than a set of Ikea instructions and an allen key?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 22:55
|
|
|
Linedance posted:What sort of fantasy car are you dreaming up here, one somehow so overbuilt that it never breaks, or one that when it breaks (in conflict with the first point), a layman can repair it with no more than a set of Ikea instructions and an allen key? I kind of wondered the same thing, but was trying to find a way to be less sarcastic, since SA has turned to SAAN in the last few years.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 23:02
|
|
|
Viggen posted:I kind of wondered the same thing, but was trying to find a way to be less sarcastic, since SA has turned to SAAN in the last few years. I'm guessing the "AN" doesn't stand for "Awfully Nice". Sarcasm is easy and cheap. If only someone built sarcastic cars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 23:16
|
|
|
Linedance posted:What sort of fantasy car are you dreaming up here, one somehow so overbuilt that it never breaks, or one that when it breaks (in conflict with the first point), a layman can repair it with no more than a set of Ikea instructions and an allen key?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 23:17
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:Oh, you mean a Hilux? But not a modern one. Or even and old one with the 2.4 turbo diesel. Actually an 80s G-Wagen is probably better http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18910560
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 23:20
|
|
|
Linedance posted:I'm guessing the "AN" doesn't stand for "Awfully Nice".
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 23:45
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:SAAN = Smile And Act Nice. It was a "website by girls, for girls" but it was basically a female version of SA. In 2001. Now, it seems status quo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 00:07
|
|
|
Linedance posted:I really don't understand the point you're trying to make. Do you believe that cars should be/are built like Apple computers (in your example)? Hermetically sealed and built for people for whom a car is a necessity but knowledge of its operation is not? You still haven't read the things you're discussing, huh? It's also difficult to mock a fantasy for being a fantasy when it's explicitly described as fantasy every time it comes up. The standard approach to making a car that's durable, has low maintenance costs, and has a long service life is to deliberately simplify, which removes points of failure while decreasing replacement costs, overbuild key components that are difficult to replace, and make other components and wear items easy to replace by prioritizing such things in the engineering process compared to other goals like price and performance metrics. Usually, such cars are designed for large corporate customers who care about such things, such as military vehicles like the original G-Wagen or older Jeeps, or else general utility vehicles like the 80s Toyota pickup or original Land Rover, which are intended for use off-road or in rural areas. But you also saw this happen with stuff like the old "built to a standard, not a price" Mercedes sedans, many of which are still kicking even today in daily use. That comes mostly from over-engineering everything. Stuff like the Hilux or the old AMC Jeeps were overengineered to a point, probably were designed for looser tolerances due to the era, were largish cars with ample room to work in, and were built in huge volume for many years, which means cheap parts availability. Ditto for stuff like the old Crown Victorias. You will not see a car like the classic Hilux for sale in the US anymore because people aren't willing to pay more for less on the promise that it will last longer. And also possibly because modern efficiency and performance is dependent on higher tolerances that are generally less robust and less tolerant of abuse. The sealed, disposable car design model is one that, while it has yet to be fully embraced, has the potential to become more prevalent in the future. See also things like modern BMWs not having dipsticks, proprietary diagnostic tools and electronic interfaces, and the growing use of stuff like one-time-use fasteners.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 00:27
|
|
|
Viggen posted:In 2001. Now, it seems status quo. So would you say it was political correctness... gone mad?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 00:32
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:So would you say it was political correctness... gone mad? From the site that gave us Yackity Sax to 9/11? It seems a bit, overly monitored. I've seen people banned and probated for political statements (not racist) more than goatse stupidity in the last few years. Do I think it this is a good thing? Not offhand.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 00:34
|
|
|
Keyser S0ze posted:BMW followed MBZ and Audi and loving plastered the poor beast with M badges as part of the m-sport package. Dead Pedal, Steering Wheel, Shifter, huge ones on all 4 door sills and of course, on the rimz. It's silly and a bit embarrassing, tbh - as the only race I'd beat an M5 at is some sort of ultra-long distance fuel efficiency challenge. I have an M-sport 335, and it's the same deal. Although the dead pedal's M badge is rubber so it doesn't stand out as much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 01:52
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:You will not see a car like the classic Hilux for sale in the US anymore because people aren't willing to pay more for less on the promise that it will last longer. And also possibly because modern efficiency and performance is dependent on higher tolerances that are generally less robust and less tolerant of abuse. This is the crux of the discussion here. The only difference between these old MBs, Hiluxs and 911s you're getting all misty eyed about is they'll tolerate more abuse. Given a modicum of care, any modern car will last just as long. It's just that if owners can't even be hosed to take it to the dealer once a year for a $100 service they'll die an early death. To me that isn't indicative of lesser engineering, it's indicative of different engineering focus. And let's be honest here, if these magical indestructable cars had anywhere near the levels of performance of even a modern commuter car they'd have all fallen to bits too. That's what these tight tolerances and modern metallurgy allow. e: Also, how many of these amazing million-mile W123s et al are there really? Because come on, for every one of those there's probably 10 that were scrapped at 200k mi.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 03:19
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:You will not see a car like the classic Hilux for sale in the US anymore because people aren't willing to pay more for less on the promise that it will last longer. And also possibly because modern efficiency and performance is dependent on higher tolerances that are generally less robust and less tolerant of abuse. Nor anywhere else in the world. A modern Hilux is a much, much more sophisticated vehicle with problematic but much better performing modern common rail diesels as are all the competing products. Even the good old Landcruiser 70 now has a V8 turbodiesel where it is still available which is not regarded as anywhere near as tough as the old sixes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 04:04
|
|
|
sanchez posted:That scenario would make sense for a Toyota, spending $1500 on a 10 year old W body GM on the other hand.. (The grand prix I had taught me that ignition cylinders and intake manifold gaskets are wear items)
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 07:00
|
|
|
Left Ventricle posted:I know I'm a huge GM apologist, but why is it okay to spend $1500 on repairs to an '02 Camry but not okay to fix up an '02 Century (also a W-body)? Wouldn't the Camry's resale value be significantly higher?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 07:10
|
|
|
dissss posted:Wouldn't the Camry's resale value be significantly higher? Well, yeah. It'd be running.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 07:25
|
|
|
Sorry to interrupt your 10 year old car chat, but GM is introducing variable intake valve lift on the 2014 Impala! http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2012/Sep/0917_intakevalve.html quote:2014 Impala Engine Gets a High-Tech Lift
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 07:44
|
|
|
That last paragraph annoys the piss out of me. I hate it when huge companies feel the need to inform us of who the gently caress they are in their press releases.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 08:14
|
|
|
"Up to 1 mpg increase" Also, what's with the 2014 model out in 2013? Is this naming behavior common like magazine covers dating ahead to make people think they're reporting from the future?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 09:55
|
|
|
Believe it or not, there's actually a law about how far in advance a car can be dated. Thanks to the Chevy Beretta, which came as a 1988 model in like late 86. Aside from the usual 2013s come out in fall 2012 that everybody does, it's just to make people say "Wow, the 2014s are out already?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 10:39
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Sorry to interrupt your 10 year old car chat, but GM is introducing variable intake valve lift on the 2014 Impala! So Chevy has invented VTEC.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 13:43
|
|
|
Guinness posted:
What I think a lot of people are forgetting is that the 'my car is on it's last legs' scenario is typically just an excuse to get a new car. People see a car they want, with newer features and that new car smell, and suddenly they want their current car to be a piece of poo poo. So it isn't so much that they genuinely think buying a new car will be more cost-effective, they're just using that as an excuse to justify getting a new car. Fucknag posted:So Chevy has invented VTEC. Seems more like BMW's VANOS system, which has been around since 1993, since it's hydraulically actuated.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 15:25
|
|
|
Left Ventricle posted:I know I'm a huge GM apologist, but why is it okay to spend $1500 on repairs to an '02 Camry but not okay to fix up an '02 Century (also a W-body)? Because I'd be fairly sure the Camry would do another 100k without anything major happening as the overall build quality is solid. The GM, not so much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 15:53
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Just like computers. Most people just want to know what button to press to go to their youtubes and cat pictures. They will either buy the shittiest piece of plastic with swoopy designs or big numbers that matches their budget, or else they will pay thousands for the latest hermetically sealed Apple product. People who can actually figure out what's going on with their computer without taking it into the store are rarer than you think, though, like the food thing above, your perception may be altered by the kind of people you see most of the time. OK, enough now with the horrid car/computer analogies. And FWIW, your ideas about how expensive Apple laptops are are dangerously out of date, they're very competitive with similar Lenovos etc.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 16:09
|
|
|
CornHolio posted:What I think a lot of people are forgetting is that the 'my car is on it's last legs' scenario is typically just an excuse to get a new car. People see a car they want, with newer features and that new car smell, and suddenly they want their current car to be a piece of poo poo. This is very accurate. My 10.5 year old Monte Carlo could have had another 100k in it, but it would have taken even more money to keep it going than the first 120k miles, and with the cost of broken A/C, I just convinced myself it was time to go. It's hard to resist cars 10 years newer when they can get the same or better mileage but with almost 100 more horsepower. My girlfriend sold her '99 Camry for twice what I sold my '02 Monte Carlo for with similar mileage, although I admit my sale was a bit of a favor to my neighbor. Camrys are boring but they sure retain their value like crazy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 16:09
|
|
|
CornHolio posted:
It's not even remotely like VANOS? It doesn't even do the same thing, VANOS is just a hydraulic phase actuator at the cam pulley that varies valve timing, everyone has that already, GM has it on pushrod engines even. This is a system that varied valve lift, like VTEC, this mechanism is unique as far asI can tell, the closest comparable system, and they're not really the same either, would the Toyota's VVTL-i that they only used on one engine and no longer make.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 16:23
|
|
|
And here's the McLaren F1 successor:  Autoblog link
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 17:18
|
|
|
In other news, Ron Dennis has lost Gordon Murray's contact details.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 17:26
|
|
|
I do like that it has a windshield you can actually see out of. Playing forza with the cockpit view makes you realize how ridiculous it is to drive 140 mph looking out of a mail slot. Not that it actually matters to me since I will never own or drive anything at that level but I appreciate the practical touch. I did watch a guy try and fail to back a murcielago into a spot at starbucks for 5 minutes. It was like catching a super model on the shitter. EDIT: its hard to blame people for wanting to upgrade their cars every few years these days. My car is 5 years old and has no bluetooth, no device integration, archaic navigation (updated data but terrible UI and barebone features). This is a loaded luxury car, You can get these as an option on econoboxes now. Comparable new models can self park, radar adjust cruise control and give you a handy while you wait for pandora to buffer. Xguard86 fucked around with this message at 18:25 on Sep 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 18:19
|
|
|
awesome-express posted:And here's the McLaren F1 successor:
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 18:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 05:45 |
|
|
The Chevy system sounds like the Nissan/Infiniti VVEL system which continuously varies lift and timing on the intake and exhaust valves.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2012 19:04
|
|