Hondas, Toyotas and the brainwashed

[bradtech]

Somehow I made it to around 140k on the original thermostat & housing. I replaced just the thermostat because it was stuck open. Housing went shortly there after and was leaking. I had so many little things going. Towards the end of last year I was working on it every 2 or 3 weeks. Heater bypass pipe sprang a leak and was spraying engine shield, alternators, starters, ignition switch, water pump list is never ending.. I still needed motor mounts. Decided it was best to sell it and pay off part debt and get something with less miles. I've had three Fords & had to replace transmissions before 100k.

Originally Posted By: slacktide_bitog
Ford made a big mistake using the DCT in their Focus and Fiesta. They still can;t get it right after a dozen attempts to fix it. Why not just use a regular automatic?

The Focus SFE sedan with the 1.0T is availabe with a 6-speed auto. They should just use that on all automatic Foci. Maybe they can swap it in the next time they recall the DCT.

Overseas, the Fiesta is available with a 4-speed auto. Swap it in the next time Ford recalls their DCT Fiestas.

Originally Posted By: bradtech
Those Zetec engines would run forever in the Focus. Only problem for me was the rest of the car kept having constant problems after 80k. I had an 04 Focus and 06 Focus. Got rid of 06 after transmission failure at 89k. Even had it serviced at dealer every 30k. 04 kept going without transmission failure up to 155k when I got rid of it. But I was on my 3rd alternator and had replaced a lot of things. My 93 S10 has held up better than any of the Focuses. In my experience it seems those front wheel drive smaller cars just aren't put together that well. Including the Hyundai Accent I got now that has been at the dealer 4 times before they would replace what needed to be replaced. Only after getting corporate involved & an engineer/upper level tech going out to do it from corporate. I'm sure it will be scrap before this 93 S10 is.




The best part about the Zetec is the constant thermostat housing failure. It will explode every 30k or so

 

[HangFire]

Originally Posted By: nthach
I'm basing this on family/friend observations, but Toyotas tend to age better than Hondas do. My cousin has a 2004 Pilot that clearly has seen better days - it has 174K on it, mechanically it's in OK shape but it needs some TLC(valve adjustment, plugs, fresh fluids) and the interior is in bad shape.


My 2005 Pilot interior is in great shape, and I have kids. I would look at your cousin's deferred maintenance for the reason as to the condition of the vehicle.

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
I think the best thing to do is to buy what you like and put your money where your mouth is. People buy vehicles for a lot of reasons and I think actual reliability is pretty low on the list, even if people cite it as why they bought a certain car. They probably didn't look into it that much, and couldn't tell you what specific engine/trans their car has, etc. And the difference is small anyway. There's nothing magical about a car being built in Japan.


Reliability can be a big decision factor for most. It is not a "minor" one. Still, it really depends on the buyer and it is often an inverse relationship with car expertise. The less you know about vehicles, the more important "reliability" happens to be. People want the reliability not only for the get to point a to b, but also avoiding the uncertainty or poor repair industry (because it is unknown and scary). Some folks (my wife included) treats the tire pressure warning light like the end of the world. I has someone return a fleet vehicle because the AC blew "dusty". This vehicle has just sat for a while near a construction area so it was dusty... but that made it undrivable. This type of "fear" drives people to try and reduce their risk.

For some, reliability (as well as the ease of maintenance/use)is the biggest thing, others it could be styling, safety, interior volume, or power. Normally, reliability tends to be in the top three of factors. No one wants an unreliable car except for Alfa owners.

It also can depend on prior purchase experience (often earned). I find that prior "experience" early into the driving experience is a big deal and can absolutely go into someone's decision/brand preference. This is a bigger deal for those between 20 and 40 years of age... as all those 80s-00s domestic crudbuckets completely ruined a generation of buyers while the 80s-00s were Japan's best. If a mid-90s Malibu, Taurus... or worse, Contour, Concord, or Cavalier was your first car, god help you. You will never even consider a domestic again. I was almost one of those kids... but I escaped and bought at 79 Datsun. Was I ever late to highschool because it would not run, nope. Drove it through my Masters degree.

My younger brother is one of those domestic junkers. Not a car guy. Just needs a car for his 30 min to 1.5 hour commute and for college recruiting trips: His first car was a1998 Chrysler Sebring. That thing was junk and barely had an original part by the end. My favorite thing was that the torque converted failed on me (while visiting him).... twice (50K and just before he sold it at 150K). Sold it for a 2003 Accord. He still has the Accord nearing 300K. All he wants is something that has 4 doors, gets decent gas mileage, and does not break. He wants to spend his money on other things, not the car. He is decent with fluid maintenance as long as he does not have to do it himself. As far as I know, the only thing he had to replace was the Takata airbag, suspension and brakes. So only wearing items.

This is what I find with a lot of brand folks, especially those weary of domestics. Their disdain was well earned in formative years. You could not talk my brother into a Chrysler or Ford product to save you life. For him, it is Honda. Can't blame him. The problem for the domestics is that they lost two generations (GenX and GenY) because of their shoddy decades. For those who do not even want to think about cars, then they will default to very specific brands with good reputations.

If you know cars, and I mean truly know cars, you can wade through a lot of information and manage expectations for each item. Chances are that your personal vehicle is older, higher miles, bought used, and you actually had a very specific sub-market/trim car. So you are not likely driving a washing machine type of vehicle. Chances are, you are either "Ford for life" or remarkable brand disloayal and prone to jumping brands (ie you will not likely have multiple vehicles 25 years or less of the same brand). Non-car people are the opposite. They drive newer, buy newer, and go for mass market cars with very common trends. If there are multiple vehicles in the household, they will be variants of the same brand and market segment (Own a Civic and CRV).

 

[funflyer]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Well, this thread devolved into the usual ignorance is bliss brandfest in which cars that haven't been all that great since the nineties are somehow conflated into being extremely reliable while cars which have been really good since the nineties are downgraded as lacking reliability and durability.
Ponder this:
You can buy a '14 Avenger with well under 100K at auction for around four grand and they aren't bad at all to drive and will deliver reasonable fuel economy along with decent interior and trunk space.
However unreliable and lacking in durability such a car might be, you can do a whole lot of fixing for the price premium you'd pay for a Toy, Honda or Subaru of similar year with similar miles.
On a cost basis, there are plenty of better buys than a Honda, a Toyota or a Subaru.
One can also expect 150K of service with no major work out of anything built over the last twenty years or so regardless of make.
There are outliers of every make, but most cars will offer good reliability out to at least 150K.
This is reality, not the fantasies that many have posted in this thread.


This has to be a joke, right?
The Avenger is the new Neon. They have gotten higher ratings for their accessories though, so, at least you can listen to the radio while waiting for that AAA tow

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: funflyer
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
You can buy a '14 Avenger with well under 100K at auction for around four grand and they aren't bad at all to drive and will deliver reasonable fuel economy along with decent interior and trunk space.


This has to be a joke, right?


Trollin'

Even the fleet guys hate, HATE these vehicles. The only thing you could say "positive" about these cars was that they WERE cheaper than a Dart.

Claiming that the "Avengers" are not that bad is a lot like the "tis but a scratch" skit from Monty Python.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc



Trollin'

Even the fleet guys hate, HATE these vehicles. The only thing you could say "positive" about these cars was that they WERE cheaper than a Dart.

Claiming that the "Avengers" are not that bad is a lot like the "tis but a scratch" skit from Monty Python.


After the mid cycle enhancements (2011?) they really weren't bad. Actually enjoyed them as rentals. The earlier ones just had the worst Rubbermaid interiors ever.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Avenger excellent budget rental agreed. Drive that ANYDAY over a Camry. In fact I wont drive a Camry. Absolutely horrid cars. I'll take mediocre reliability over horrendous driving dynamics.

 

[SatinSilver]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Even the fleet guys hate, HATE these vehicles. The only thing you could say "positive" about these cars was that they WERE cheaper than a Dart.


I guarantee they would fall in love with the Avenger after spending time in a Nissan Rogue. It's a big piece of garbage I'm sorry to say. The Subaru Crosstick isn't much better. I test drove one and it lost all power on the highway and went into limp mode. The salesman called up the dealership to have someone pick us up. Fuel level was a little over half so it wasn't that.

One of the guys on here has a WRX and has had serious issues with it. It has spent more time in the shop than his drive way.

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc



Trollin'

Even the fleet guys hate, HATE these vehicles. The only thing you could say "positive" about these cars was that they WERE cheaper than a Dart.

Claiming that the "Avengers" are not that bad is a lot like the "tis but a scratch" skit from Monty Python.


After the mid cycle enhancements (2011?) they really weren't bad. Actually enjoyed them as rentals. The earlier ones just had the worst Rubbermaid interiors ever.


No, even after the "refresh", they were bad. I only consider the 2008 Chevy Uplander a worse horrifically bad car. The 6-speed made them better but I only saw the 4-speed in the fleet use.

The Camry is(was?) boring, but if you are doing the long trip fleet use, give me a camry. A 2011-era and on Camry is decent, better gas mileage, better space, ride.

I consider the Dodge Journeys (that replaced our Avenger) to be a step up and those are so shoddy that the PRND letters on the shifter look like a kindergarden craft project. It has an infotainment cluster without bluetooth intergration. Our users complain the pairing is broken until we tell them it can't pair.

 

[KrisZ]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Non-car people are the opposite. They drive newer, buy newer, and go for mass market cars with very common trends. If there are multiple vehicles in the household, they will be variants of the same brand and market segment (Own a Civic and CRV).


You nailed. Their household will see only one brand.

However, some of them will see nothing but one brand for more than a decade, but but have no problems preaching to others how the other brands are junk etc. when compared to their beloved brand. Not only that, they will ignore some big repairs, thinking that the others would've been much, much worse.
You know, an Odyssey loses a tranny, or two, no big deal, because a Chrysler would've been in a junk yard by then.
I see this type of thinking all the time when a discussion of reliability comes up and the ignorant ones try to sound educated about the topic.

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted By: HangFire

My 2005 Pilot interior is in great shape, and I have kids. I would look at your cousin's deferred maintenance for the reason as to the condition of the vehicle.

YES - her son just took into a lube shop and did the minimum needed. I feel car ownership isn't for everyone, if you live in the city you can get away with Uber and transit. However in the suburbs and rural areas, not as much.

I was in an newish Acura TL yesterday and I did notice the center armrest covering was getting wrinkled, same thing with a friend's 1998 Accord EX-L.

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Non-car people are the opposite. They drive newer, buy newer, and go for mass market cars with very common trends. If there are multiple vehicles in the household, they will be variants of the same brand and market segment (Own a Civic and CRV).


You nailed. Their household will see only one brand.

However, some of them will see nothing but one brand for more than a decade, but but have no problems preaching to others how the other brands are junk etc. when compared to their beloved brand. Not only that, they will ignore some big repairs, thinking that the others would've been much, much worse.
You know, an Odyssey loses a tranny, or two, no big deal, because a Chrysler would've been in a junk yard by then.
I see this type of thinking all the time when a discussion of reliability comes up and the ignorant ones try to sound educated about the topic.




Maybe, sometimes. I am in the weird world of being in the academic/market/policy side for a few years before my wife wanted to move "home" and then I just took a fleet role job.

There is some wiggle in the data but that was the trend. If you are unsure (scared) about cars, new, a single brand and often but not exclusively japanese was the common thread. It was the message I found in the dataset when I was doing some subcontract work for a domestic company. They were really looking for a social media "strategy" to break into foreign car households. Their problem was how to get non-car people to pay attention to them since all the car people who followed them on social media didn't buy new cars frequently enough.

Any car can make it to 1,000,000 miles as long as there is willingness to repair. The problem is that a LOT of folks have a very low threshold. (OMG, sell it before the timing belt needs to be replaced!). I will say, some brands like Toyota do the minimal maintenance, minimal repair quite well. Honda used to be kinda like this too. Mazda is creeping into class too. Actually, some GM products can fall into this (Buicks because they know their market). Japanese cars tend to do this better (although Nissan is not always the best example) I warn people that Subies are not like Toyota. Subaru will punish you if you ignore some things, but are generally reliable. On the other end, the domestics have not figured this out. Chrysler will bleed you until the ultimate death (lots of small things followed up with a big item, so low willingness to repair). I have a lot of Mopar/FCA products in my fleet. They are not rolling clusters, but they do take a bit more work and have a lot of nagging problems followed up by a doozie. We repair them and move on. Fords can run a long time but there will be a major item every 15-30K. I do not know why Ford tend to do this, but every single one of my Ford have had a major issue at 10K, 40K and 70K (and things around 100K, 120K, 150K and then around retirement). Major issues too. GM will be generally good followed by absolute and complete engine/tyranny failure.... and then in some cases proceed to eat every accessory item (inverse of the Chrysler problem). So after you spend $6K on a new crate motor/tranny, the other accessories [censored] out. You willingness to repair a radiator after an engine failure is often low and folks unload. Heck, I wish I still have my "invincipala". It was at 120K without any major repairs before a texting driver took it out. For that one, I had two others with tranny failures by 50K. Go figure.

BMW, Merc, Audi are great for the first 50K and then remind you with major repairs/service that you do not want to be poor so buy another.

 

[oilpsi2high]

It's all in the maintenance. Every brand has its known flaws, and every piece of mechanical machinery is going to wear out and fail at some point.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: oilpsi2high
It's all in the maintenance. Every brand has its known flaws, and every piece of mechanical machinery is going to wear out and fail at some point.

Yes, maintenance is important and I know that pretty well with the cars in my sig. However, some vehicles will take a heck of a lot more maintenance than others in order to get to a certain odometer reading. My BMW has taken more maintenance and repairs to get to where it is today than my other three cars combined. It's not even close.

 

[oilpsi2high]

That's because the BMW is 10 times more complicated than a mid-90s Accord, late-90's Toyota minivan and a 2000 Toyota Echo combined.

 

[fdcg27]

k
Originally Posted By: funflyer
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Well, this thread devolved into the usual ignorance is bliss brandfest in which cars that haven't been all that great since the nineties are somehow conflated into being extremely reliable while cars which have been really good since the nineties are downgraded as lacking reliability and durability.
Ponder this:
You can buy a '14 Avenger with well under 100K at auction for around four grand and they aren't bad at all to drive and will deliver reasonable fuel economy along with decent interior and trunk space.
However unreliable and lacking in durability such a car might be, you can do a whole lot of fixing for the price premium you'd pay for a Toy, Honda or Subaru of similar year with similar miles.
On a cost basis, there are plenty of better buys than a Honda, a Toyota or a Subaru.
One can also expect 150K of service with no major work out of anything built over the last twenty years or so regardless of make.
There are outliers of every make, but most cars will offer good reliability out to at least 150K.
This is reality, not the fantasies that many have posted in this thread.


This has to be a joke, right?
The Avenger is the new Neon. They have gotten higher ratings for their accessories though, so, at least you can listen to the radio while waiting for that AAA tow

Well, we have a couple of four cylinder Avengers in our fleet at work and both are now over 80K with no problems at all. Both are still on the OEM Michelins that FCA put on these cheap cars and the tires are now around 4/32nds so are about due to be replaced.
I've put a number of miles on these cars myself and while you'd never confuse one with an Accord, they're more than okay to drive and have proven to be dead reliable.
I've always considered some of the "ratings" companies to be a little suspect in terms of the veracity of what they publish.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: oilpsi2high
That's because the BMW is 10 times more complicated than a mid-90s Accord, late-90's Toyota minivan and a 2000 Toyota Echo combined.

Even if that were true it is because the "superior German engineers" made it that way. There are many things on even this old BMW that are needlessly complex and as a result fail much sooner than do the Japanese counterparts.

The BMW components always feel heavier, look more substantial and seem like they are better than the Japanese ones. But guess which one fails first?

 

[mightymousetech]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: oilpsi2high
That's because the BMW is 10 times more complicated than a mid-90s Accord, late-90's Toyota minivan and a 2000 Toyota Echo combined.

Even if that were true it is because the "superior German engineers" made it that way. There are many things on even this old BMW that are needlessly complex and as a result fail much sooner than do the Japanese counterparts.

The BMW components always feel heavier, look more substantial and seem like they are better than the Japanese ones. But guess which one fails first?


Stupid electric water pumps comes to mind. Luckily the newer cars don't use them as the primary water pump anymore.

 

[L_Sludger]

Originally Posted By: oilpsi2high
That's because the BMW is 10 times more complicated than a mid-90s Accord, late-90's Toyota minivan and a 2000 Toyota Echo combined.
You're talking about kschachn's 1994 530i?
I wouldn't imagine that car to be particularly complicated.

My 1987 BMW 325i convertible is equally or less complicated than the 1986.5 Toyota Supra I had.

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: oilpsi2high
That's because the BMW is 10 times more complicated than a mid-90s Accord, late-90's Toyota minivan and a 2000 Toyota Echo combined.

Even if that were true it is because the "superior German engineers" made it that way. There are many things on even this old BMW that are needlessly complex and as a result fail much sooner than do the Japanese counterparts.

The BMW components always feel heavier, look more substantial and seem like they are better than the Japanese ones. But guess which one fails first?


This is normally where I rant about my dislike for VW (which somehow always marries "complex" with cheaping out).

The whole point of good engineering is to simplify, avoid/address known trouble areas, do more with less, and avoid waste. "German Engineering" has come to mean the opposite. That becomes needlessly complex, have the same reoccurring problem area, does less with more, and is just wasteful (why does the same model & market (and year) sprinter have 3 different brakes configurations for the exact same "vehicle". This is not a different trim/option, etc. You literally have to go by the VIN because they changed it 3 times during the model run. My Sprinter vans have thought me that "German Engineering" means expensive operations.

For example, a little broken window action on one vehicle: You have to remove two panels, unscrew 10 bolts, and remove X plate to access the crummy broken (again) little nylon piece that holds the motor arm in place. That "part" is $150... (because replace the whole unit) or you can jimmy it with a couple of $0.03 metal washers and call it a day. Same goes for the sliding door mechanisms. The are cool and complex but rely on poor material choice and/or needlessly complex... and prone to failure. They will give you this nice piece of metal working only to have the plastic handle/connector, item to fail. DO my Ford transits have their issues? Absolutely! But they are a lot easier to fix when they break in most cases and they cost a lot less to run overall.

I like the "feel" of German luxury vehicles but I know that feel is only sheet-metal deep.