"last reliable cars" (before 'designed to break')

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

columnshift

Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
264
Location
Minnesota
I was going over some Scotty Kilmer videos on youtube lamenting modern mercedes and BMW's and finding it rather eye opening... they don't even have engine oil dipsticks in newer BMW's now?? And Mercedes designs their braking system so that the disc pads are slightly smaller than the rotor, cutting grooves in the rotor that necessitate replacing the rotors every single time pads are changed?

To say nothing of all the [censored] plastic on everything whether inside or under the hood. Inside for a few ounces of weight savings I still have doubt about, but plastics that crack from underhood heat after 8-10 years of use to me are clear evidence of "designed to fail".

It's not only high end cars, when I saw where the water pump was on mid 90's honda accords vs how easy it was on my saturn I shook my head.


So here's my topic for the day! Not only WHEN did cars get bad but IN WHAT WAY? This is not just for the purpose of griping, it could be a useful guide for someone wanting to buy vehicles designed to last multiple decades (assuming you can give up some of the features of newer cars, which outside of a handful of safety features i'm not even sure how great they are/many can be added aftermarket anyway) - but i'm just as curious what was either changed in some stupid/illogical/[censored] fashion... to consider the possibility of changing it BACK.

In today's world of open source projects, 3d printers, and public engineering discussions I wonder how feasible it would be to simply make parts that flat out work better. Identify the [censored] parts designed to fail in newer cars (while keeping their newer safety features) and replace them in such a way with custom parts if you're one of those people who actually wants your car to last a longer than average time. But step one is actually identifying them so i'm curious what else is out there...
 
On my VW I would replace rotors with pads, as they both were shot at the same time. Albeit I was getting > 100k on a set of brakes. Cheap money to do both. So I don't see the outrage there.

When cars were easy to be repaired, it was done that way because they needed constant repair. Today we're jaded as we think every component ought to last > 200k. But we forget there was a time when tires wouldn't last 10k. Heck they wouldn't last a month before needing a repair.
 
I think that the newer cars are more reliable and better made than the cars of a decade or so before. "designed to break?" How in the world did you come up with that? Do you think engineers get together and try to figure out how to make cars less reliable?
 
Obligatory:

IMG_20150618_130724_244_zpsjrhiqibj.jpg
 
Don't get me started. The BMWs made in the 80's are very reliable and easy to maintain. I bought my first one in'96. It had an unknown history and 149.5K on the odometer. I bought a Bentley manual and I had metric tools from my Bug era. I maintained it in my driveway. Maintained it to the extent that in the 200k and 12 yrs I drove it, it always got home on its own power.
The Rat,OTOH,is a masterpiece of planned obsolescence. It was engineered to be cheap and easy to assemble. Little regard was made for ease of maintenance. Push on connectors on plastic lines that are next to impossible to open. Having to remove the bed to replace a fuel pump. Little plastic or sheet metal widgets. That are essntial to keep the E brake working.. NLA. You will see more Model Ts and As driving around in 25 yrs than 2016 Fords.
 
BMWs have digital oil level sensors. It is still a dipstick, just not what you are used to.

Ever car I have ever owned has had the brake pad slightly smaller than the rotor.

Plastics under the hood have been there since 90's BMWs. Evidence of cost cutting, to be sure, but also cheaper to replace when they fail.

Vehicles change efficiency, weight, and cost all dictate component locations. Modern BMW water pumps are as easy to replace as my classics, but they are electric which some people don't approve of. Most people forgot how much of a pain a fan clutch is. My modern BMW's radiator fan and shroud come out in minutes.

There are companies that manufacture OEM+ parts. Superior materials, new v reman, and generally improved.
 
Originally Posted By: BobsArmory
I think that the newer cars are more reliable and better made than the cars of a decade or so before. "designed to break?" How in the world did you come up with that? Do you think engineers get together and try to figure out how to make cars less reliable?


I agree. People look back with teary eyes and nostalgia, but cars of weren't capable of even he what cars today can do. Power density, luxury, safety, the list goes on. I like classics, I have owned classics, I still do, but I don't think they were superior at all considering everything.
 
I sorta feel like 90's/early 2000's was the last of the truly well made simple reliable cars. Although some cars like the Civic and Fit were pretty simple right up until 2012+ ish. I love the simplicity of my 2010 SI, its a great car.

I feel like Toyota/Nissan/Honda were all at their peak in the 90's, and they all made amazingly good cars at that time.
 
Added to the usual wear items on otherwise reliable cars of today are emission control sensors and parts which fail on a regular basis.
 
Originally Posted By: columnshift
Not only WHEN did cars get bad but IN WHAT WAY?


I've heard the same whining about cars for the past 60+ years. Every time a new "generation" of vehicles arrives, there is a segment of the population that laments about them being overly complicated and prone to failure. If you really want something simple to work on, get yourself a Model T. And on a side note, even Model Ts have parts that fail.
 
My cars in my bottom signature are very basic and run like a Timex watch.

No navigation, no complicated transmissions, no glitter and glam package...
 
Cars are more reliable, safer, fuel efficient and cost per mile less expensive to buy and maintain than ever before. The difference between the best car in the market today and the worst car realiability wise is really infinately small. Even the "least" reliable car today is way way more reliable than ones from the past.
 
Um, my old cars from the 1950's-1960's that everyone considers so "reliable" are always needing tinkering around and repairing.

So many doomsday preppers and naysayers on this site. In my experince, cars have gotten more reliable as years progress....
 
Originally Posted By: columnshift
I was going over some Scotty Kilmer videos on youtube lamenting modern mercedes and BMW's and finding it rather eye opening... they don't even have engine oil dipsticks in newer BMW's now?? And Mercedes designs their braking system so that the disc pads are slightly smaller than the rotor, cutting grooves in the rotor that necessitate replacing the rotors every single time pads are changed?

You can stand his videos? I can't.


Originally Posted By: columnshift
So here's my topic for the day! Not only WHEN did cars get bad but IN WHAT WAY? This is not just for the purpose of griping, it could be a useful guide for someone wanting to buy vehicles designed to last multiple decades (assuming you can give up some of the features of newer cars, which outside of a handful of safety features i'm not even sure how great they are/many can be added aftermarket anyway) - but i'm just as curious what was either changed in some stupid/illogical/[censored] fashion... to consider the possibility of changing it BACK.

In today's world of open source projects, 3d printers, and public engineering discussions I wonder how feasible it would be to simply make parts that flat out work better. Identify the [censored] parts designed to fail in newer cars (while keeping their newer safety features) and replace them in such a way with custom parts if you're one of those people who actually wants your car to last a longer than average time. But step one is actually identifying them so i'm curious what else is out there...

There have ALWAYS been stupid design decisions, and things have ALWAYS had a design life.

Things can't be designed to last forever. Companies have finite resources with which to design their cars, so they have to decide how long they want them to last. Maybe that mark is 100k miles, maybe it's 200k. Whatever it is, when you get close to it, things are going to start breaking. Is it "designed to fail" at that mileage, or "designed to last" until then?

Cars have gotten more complicated in recent years. The core parts generally last longer. Like, a LOT longer. At the same time, engine bays are more crowded, which means more small things to break and less room to work on them. Overall -- and with a few exceptions -- the trend has been for the better.

I have my gripes with modern cars, but difficulty of maintenance ain't one of them.
 
Originally Posted By: ToadU
Cars are more reliable, safer, fuel efficient and cost per mile less expensive to buy and maintain than ever before. The difference between the best car in the market today and the worst car realiability wise is really infinately small. Even the "least" reliable car today is way way more reliable than ones from the past.


He's right guys, that's why you should all buy a new Dodge.
 
Interestingly, ETCG posted a video recently about planned obsolescence. I'd say the powertrains of most (of course there are exceptions) modern cars are more reliable than they used to be. Unless you get a lemon, there's no reason an engine today shouldn't go 200K miles with proper maintenance. Will all the 'driver assistance' tech like lane departure warning, adaptive cruise control, cross traffic alert, blah blah last that long? Probably not.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: skyactiv
Originally Posted By: ToadU
Cars are more reliable, safer, fuel efficient and cost per mile less expensive to buy and maintain than ever before. The difference between the best car in the market today and the worst car realiability wise is really infinately small. Even the "least" reliable car today is way way more reliable than ones from the past.


He's right guys, that's why you should all buy a new Dodge.



What a joke. The delta in reliability between a new fiat and a corolla is infinitely small? Another opinion with no data to back it up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The Critic
Trico Force Wiper Blades - Design Change?
Replies
5
Views
931
Triple_Se7en
W
Modern Turbo Engine Reliability and Durability
3 4 5
Replies
88
Views
5K
wtd
C
Cars 5 years old or less Roll Call
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
3K
Silverado12
TumblrDucks
Silly Question - why can't oil pan/water pump be designed to spin-on?
Replies
17
Views
907
DGXR
S
Its official - 60% of households and 82% of singles can't afford a new car.
7 8 9
Replies
163
Views
6K
Kurtatron
Back
Top