When does a car “age out” for long distance road trips?

Replace every failure prone component you can think of-for example, the MGM in my sig got 2 front Timken wheel bearing assemblies when I bought it (right at the end of USA manufacturing of them), new coated rotors & pads, new TYC radiator fan assy., new A/C accumulator(rust), new tires. PO had already done the transmission flush, had maintenance records (but did several short OCIs with synthetic regardless). Other than collapsing chain tensioners & a little PS noise when sitting & really cold, it can (& has) gone anywhere.
 
You can maintain your vehicle all you want, but most people don't swap out a perfectly good radiator, starter, fuel pump or alternator nor should they.
In the last 12 months I’ve preemptively replaced the alternator, water pump, belts, pulleys/tensioners, and done a couple of transmission siphon and fills on my 2005 Chevy Avalanche 5.3 with 245,000 miles. It’s called PM…preventive maintenance! We took it yesterday on a 180 mile round trip for lunch and it ran like a top! I would confidently drive it anywhere in the lower 48.
 
If you can afford a rental, but if downtime and route has reasonable access any age works.

On a tight timeline maybe something less then 10 years old.
 
We went on a 1500 mile trip a few years ago. It was a choice between our newer Camry with ~40k miles or the older RAV4 with ~350k miles. The RAV4 would have been fine but had a higher probability of failure so we took the Camry.

12 hours of driving at an average of 60 mph is 720 miles. So, two tanks of gas. I don't see a need to go crazy with PM.
 
Let's be honest here, the older the vehicle, the higher the risk of random failures. In light of this, there is no specific age or mileage that denotes low risk vs. high risk. We can quantify the risk statistically. A while back, Truedelta.com had some fantastic statistical reliability information. Toyota came out on top with the lowest number of shop visits and lowest number of mechanical failures.

Interestingly, the difference in reliability between brands is an order of magnitude. A Camry is 10X less likely to have a serious mechanical issue than a Passat.

I drive long trips regularly. My older Jag (2003 X-Type, manual trans) just did a 1350 mile road trip. No issues, but a month after arrival, the radiator is now empty and needs to be replaced, as do the hoses. It's old and prone to problems.
 
Not so much mileage but condition. We’ve driven our GM from Phila to Toronto 3x. It is clearly the least reliable of our 3 cars. So many things broke starting with ac and a steering rack at 27k.

I’ve never driven my N54 BMW that far, even though the BMW has been totally reliable. This is how powerful the web is with “fear factor.”

Toyota product is opposite 600k to 1 mil is well documented on my car so there is no concern there.

My .02
 
Let's be honest here, the older the vehicle, the higher the risk of random failures. In light of this, there is no specific age or mileage that denotes low risk vs. high risk. We can quantify the risk statistically. A while back, Truedelta.com had some fantastic statistical reliability information. Toyota came out on top with the lowest number of shop visits and lowest number of mechanical failures.

Interestingly, the difference in reliability between brands is an order of magnitude. A Camry is 10X less likely to have a serious mechanical issue than a Passat.

I drive long trips regularly. My older Jag (2003 X-Type, manual trans) just did a 1350 mile road trip. No issues, but a month after arrival, the radiator is now empty and needs to be replaced, as do the hoses. It's old and prone to problems.
There’s exceptions to every rule-you can’t convince me a Hyundai or Kia product, even recently made, would be more reliable than the Corolla, xB, MGM, or even the Express in my sig. Even the 2 1/2 year old Transit,with only 75K heavily maintained miles, is less reliable than those 4 (10R80 transmission issues).
 
never imo , just drove 10 hours round trip to pick up parts in my 1964 ihc c1300. long as the vehicle is in half decent mechanical shape why stop using it for the intended purpose
 
All the parameters come into play: age, mileage, service history. Also, some specific cars are known as long runners...
How reliable has the car been in the say, last year or two? I just replaced the tires and water pump on our 2006 TSX at 221K; it has been great. Now, if I were going far, I might be concerned about the plastic tanks on the OE radiator and the OE hoses.

Good luck.
 
Some depends what stuff you have in your fleet.

I wouldn’t think twice about taking anything in my fleet, including my 20 year old Cavalier pretty much anywhere

My rusty but trusty 2006 Cobalt just did a 800 mile trip, no questions asked.

That said, I took a rental down to Disney World in late 2019 because I didn’t want my cars beat to death in the Theme park lots…

Just it just depends!
 
At what mileage or vehicle age do you no longer trust a car for a long distance drive? As a general rule, realizing that of course there are always outliers and exceptions? We’re planning on taking a 12 hour driving trip in the spring and are trying to decide between a newer car with higher mileage and a lower mileage one that’s several years older.
i hear new toyota tundras age out withing the first 10k when their wastegates fail and the software runs fail safe mode.

The question is vague and frankly outdated. Its all about current condition.
 
I don't consider 12 hours all that long of a drive but things can go awry. In your case, consider a rental.
Oh you don't!?!?!? 😂. Had to take a 2016 Honda Fit Sport from Wichita to Casper Wyoming in one day. Advice: get out every 100 miles, stretch, take in a bit of fuel ⛽, pee and don't look at the clock or odometer for sanity reasons 😆.
 
Our 2015 Accord runs better since I replaced PCV valve, cleaned throttle body and dumped the last couple ounces of Gumout in the tank. It doesn't get the love it should, but it still starts. We put more love into the 2017... probably because I paid for it completely on day one and I'm just more concerned about the things I have to buy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hrv
I'd use newer with higher miles if it's been maintained. Example is the 02 Wrangler I bought last March. The radiator in these has a rep for lasting X miles and X years. I've never replaced a radiator in anything and thought not necessary and would have taken it on any trip because I did an extensive refresh front to back. Sure enough on an errand run around town I smelled antifreeze, got home and it was dripping, the top tank split open. Would have sucked in the middle of BF Egypt and that's everywhere around here for a long ways on or off road.
 
At what mileage or vehicle age do you no longer trust a car for a long distance drive? As a general rule, realizing that of course there are always outliers and exceptions? We’re planning on taking a 12 hour driving trip in the spring and are trying to decide between a newer car with higher mileage and a lower mileage one that’s several years older.
My 40 year old 1984 Cutlass hasn't yet. We take it on most of our long summer trips. And that vehicle apparently (have been reminded of by a few members of this site) is a piece of junk. Lol.
 
Having said that it also depends on the particular car. our 02 TDI Jetta was a problem child and by the time we hit 80,000 miles it had had 4 neutral park safety switches, which leave you stranded. Injector problems, glow plug issues, wheel bearings. We didn't like taking it 4 miles to the store, so it had to go. If you know the vehicle and history mileage shouldn't be an issue. We knew the Jetta well enough to know we probably shouldn't take it to the end of the driveway.
 
There’s exceptions to every rule-you can’t convince me a Hyundai or Kia product, even recently made, would be more reliable than the Corolla, xB, MGM, or even the Express in my sig. Even the 2 1/2 year old Transit,with only 75K heavily maintained miles, is less reliable than those 4 (10R80 transmission issues).

EXACTLY! The website I noted did a deep dive into reliability. A lot of it makes real sense, newer is better, certain brands are better. Toyota came out as the most reliable brand and the Camry the most reliable vehicle. AND, the history follows for many years.

If it's not clear yet, H/K cars are NOT up to the standards set by Toyota/Lexus or Honda/Acura, especially as they age. Tell me again how many MILLIONS of engines they've replaced.... No other manufacturer, anywhere, ever, has had as many outright failures. Some H/K = high chance of engine failure around 100K miles. Would that one make a good "tour the country" choice? No way.

I know there are folks here on BITOG that love their brand, I tend to drive F150's, but not because they are more reliable than Toyota, as they are not. I am more comfortable in the Ford's seats. Since work requires many "seat" hours.
 
Last edited:
I drove my 1995 Club Sport to Legends of the Autobahn East a few years ago with no issues. Fifth gear is 1:1 so with a 3:64 gear ratio it meant that I drove for several hours at 4,000-4,500 rpm. It's still an entertaining little car.
 
Back
Top Bottom