How can they possibly determine “long term dependability” in three years? They call three years “long term” when the average person will take out a five year loan to buy the car, that’s pretty silly. They don’t have a clue which of these cars will fall apart in 10 years.
I disagree. It can be useful for someone buying a two or three year old car.
No it isn’t. All it tells you is how reliable the car HAS been…NOT how it’s GOING to be. MY GM S-15 was EXTREMELY reliable it’s first 4 years of ownership. Year 5,6 and 7 were nightmares.
I also think there is a legitimate difference in expectations based on price. If I bought a $20K honda, I would probably be satisfied if it moved under it’s own power most of the time, I would feel like a real jerk going back to the dealer to complain about some tiny imperfection. My attitude would be; “I just bought a new car for the price of a happy meal, so what am I complaining about?”
If I paid $120K for a car my expectations would be somewhat higher, to say the least. I would probably be back at the dealer complaining if I didn’t like the radio presets.
I very much doubt that many 2007 cars will be on the road in 42 years (2049). I fully expect my 82 to outlast most of them, because I know it will be on the road in another 200K miles. Your 42 year old car will also still be running if you want it to be.
Can you imagine the issues that these rolling video games are going to develop when they are 15 or 20 years old? Very scary.
However, the $20,000 car has less things that could go wrong than the $120,000 car. The 1957 and 1958 Studebaker Scotsman had a very high reliability rating for cars of its time, and was billed as the cheapest full-size car available at the time in the U.S. However, these cars weren’t available with even a radio–one went to an aftermarket supplier if you wanted the radio. The heater was a recirculating box that hung down under the dashboard. An automatic transmission wasn’t an option. The car had a manual choke–eliminated the problem with the automatic choke. My point is that the more features an automobile has, the more things that can go wrong.
Very true; the more complexity you add, the more failures you are likely to get. I personally think that all current cars are much too complex, not just the high end ones. I’m a strong believer in the KISS principle of design.
I drive a 25 year old car with no computer, no ABS, no air-bags, no traction control, etc.; it’s very reliable, and if it does break I can probably fix it with hand tools.
I don’t even want to begin to imagine the electrical issues some of these cars are gonna have in 15 years, even if they are maintained properly. Replacing the wiring harness and electrical components will be the equivalent to a frame off restoration.
As an ex-service manager for GM, BMW, Subaru, I did not see a significant difference in the amount of warranty and non-warranty repair work being performed on any of these cars. The questions of complexity and owner expectations are quite valid.
But there are other issues not addressed elsewhere that affect the perception of reliability and longevity. The expensive cars like BMW (and I assume Mercedes, Lexus, etc.) have required maintenance schedules. REQUIRED to maintain warranty validation. You take the car into the dealer (and only the dealer) to have the mandatory services performed. The dealer stamps your warranty booklet in order to maintain a valid warranty. No stamp, no warranty. The services are not cheap. You WILL replace wiper blades annually. You WILL flush and refill brake fluid annually. The list goes on. Annual services can run over $1,000 depending on mileage. Obviously a vehicle that has such expensive requirements (at owner expense) should statistically last longer than one that does not.
Additionally, these expensive cars are not typically purchased either new or used (excuse me, pre-owned) by buyers who are trying to save pennies by avoiding “unnecessary” maintenance expenses. If you spend big dollars on a vehicle, you usually take good care of it. Buy a junker and drive it 'til it quits. So there aren’t many Lexus junkers. Not because they last longer, but because of buyer expectations and willingness and ability to maintain their status symbols.
Strangely, I’ve never been polled about any vehicle I’ve owned. I wonder who J.D. Powers and CR questions about their stats? I take all these reports very lightly when they compare two or more essentially “identical” vehicles and get vastly different numbers. Many Fords and Mercury cars come off the same assembly line. Same with GM, yet their stats are quite different. Is it buyer perception? Difference in dealer attitude in the service department? Or does changing a name tag really affect the longevity of the car? Go figure.
Well, of course not. Most 42 year old cars aren’t on the road now, either. 20 years is about the normal life of a car and has been for a long time. Yes, a few are kept going by owners who like them or collectors who are preserving them for aesthetic reasons, but the average car from 1965 is long off the road. Today, the 1980s cars are starting to thin out pretty severely, in 10 more years the '90s models will be getting scarce. It has nothing to do with the electronics or lack of, cars just don’t stay in service much longer than 20 years.
Eventually, even if nothing else fails, these things will be eliminated by the lack of available parts/service for their computer systems. It will be like trying to have your 10 year old computer serviced, it will be cheaper to replace it. As Ranck implied, these things have become fully disposable commodities. It’s getting to be like deciding between a gateway and dell computer, they are practically identical so you just buy whichever is cheapest and has the least screwed-up customer service.
I’m afraid that the only current cars that will be preserved are the very high end examples that appeal to collectors and will be supported by their manufacturers (limited editions and some mid-six figure cars). The rest of this junk will be long gone in 20 or 30 years. It’s really too bad; hold onto your Chevelle, it may be the last 40 year old car you have a chance to own. I would rather put $20K into a solid old car than buy one of these things that will be worth nothing in a few years.
However, sometimes people who buy expensive automobiles think that their automobiles can do no wrong. When I was in graduate school the second time around, I drove a 6 year old Rambler. My wife and I lived in married student housing. New faculty were also permitted to live in married student housing for a year while they located a house to buy or rent. One new faculty member who lived in our building had a BMW. For some reason, this BMW didn’t like wet weather. One rainy morning he was trying to dry out the ignition wires while his wife attempted to start the car. She was screaming at him that she had to get to work. My wife and I were ready to leave in our car–I needed to take her to work and then get down to my classes. I offered the BMW folks a ride which they accepted–delivered both women to their jobs and was taking the faculty member to his office. He proceeded to tell me what a great car the BMW was and how poorly engineered my car was. I finally told him that no matter how bad the weather, my car always seemed to run–it started it sub-zero weather–it never overheated on the highway even when pulling a U-Haul trailer. As we got to the BMW owner’s building, he told me that I wouldn’t appreciate a fine car. “No, I probably wouldn’t”, I replied. “But I certainly hate to walk in the rain”. He got out, slammed the door and neve said a word. The next time it rained and he was trying to start the BMW with his wife screaming, I just honked and waved as I went by.
Cadillac is cutting edge, and they are in the top 5.
I think a lot of the difference in twin cars is who drives and maintains them. The Buick usually (always?) has a better rating for dependability and safety than the twin Pontiac. Demographics say that older drivers use Buicks, and they are more likely to do the regular maintenance, drive gently, and avoid accidents.
If I could find a 49~50 Mercury that wasn’t hacked up(built Ford tough, using Chevy stuff 
) too much, or a 67 Mustang project car and turn it into a gt-500, which I would never let go. I know the cost for making a clone would definitely be less than the cost of an original(~$120k), and it’s one of my dream cars.
The mustang project could probably be done more easily than the mercury. There are still a ton of 60s mustangs around and there are a bunch of after-market parts suppliers. Building a high performance ford engine should be fairly cheap. I bet you could do the whole project for the cast of a new toyota, maybe $20-30K for a nice driver (not a show car). Which would you rather drive, that or a new toyota/honda/gm/ford/maytag?
As was said, current cars with emission controls are electronically complicated and a restoration project may be difficult if the needed identical electronic controls are not available from a scrapyard.
I can see, however, three alternate paths to take if you want to restore a current car in the future.
-
PC control with the required hardware for inputs and outputs, possibly not including emission controls.
-
Adapt a then current motor vehicle electronic system.
-
Revert to distributor-ignition points type mechanical ignition with emission controls omitted.
Do not underestimate the ability of the market to provide what is needed for this.
The largest decision will be to choose a vehicle that is worthy of and interesting enough to deserve restoration.
Which would you rather drive, that or a new toyota/honda/gm/ford/maytag?
Toyota: Maybe the Camry, but not really my thing
Honda: Only new vehicle of their’s I’d drive is the s2000, the rest are ugly.
GM: Corvette, maybe one of the Caddys with the AC seats.
Ford: I’d buy the new Shelby GT-500, but for 70k, I could buy the z06 Vette, or 10~15k more and get a Viper
Maytag: God I hate Maytag. I build those things all day at work and am sick of seeing them. Nothing but white dryers on my line all day, everyday. Hint for those that are considering buying a new Maytag dryer, do NOT buy a porcelain top, they chip very easily, and it isn’t something that can be touched up with a bit of paint, you’d need to replace the whole top if you wanted it to look good. Estate, Roper, Whirlpool, Kenmore(sears), Maytag; the only difference is load capacity(drum size) and wiring/options, and some have the lint screen in the top, others have them in the door, other than that, they are the same thing inside and out.
I’m sure you will be able to hack together something to keep current cars running in the future, but they wouldn’t be correct so they would be worthless on the collector market.
I agree, the real question is if there are any really worth preserving. Personally, I can’t thing of one mass-produced car from the last 20 years that I would want to own now, never-mind spend a small fortune on restoring/preserving in the future.
I’m sure some folks will want to preserve the current vettes, mustangs, vipers, porsches, etc. and there may be an after-market for very specific makes/models; but I think that will be the exception.
I will add one more theory here.
Buick owners are mostly older, they go to the dealer. The extra repairs get done along with the maintenance items and in two days they forget about it (poor memory?). I know this is not a good perspective but probably happens to some.
absolutely! I agree. Ten year reliability is more important. I saw a ford explorer up on a lift. It was a town-owned car in the town I live in. 5yrs old and COMPLETELY