Interesting study on 10-year costs to maintain different brands. Pretty much fits everything we’ve been saying (European luxury $$$, Japanese $):
Good data.
Sincere thanks.
Not questioning the validity of the data. But it’s funny tha BMW is the most expensive to maintain yet the Mini is near the bottom - but they are both BMW.
My numbers for the Passat equals those in the article. My repair costs were $12500 for 10.8 years, or $11600 for 10 years, exactly the same as the table.
GIGO - Garbage in garbage out. The survey is a very unscientific study without regard for numbers of vehicles, model-years, models, equipment, miles accumulated, etcetera.
Who is Your Mechanic? Looks like a repair shop.
"But not every car costs the same to keep it running. And different cars have varying risks of leaving their drivers suddenly immobilized. "
So, which cars will leave me suddenly immobilized? I’ve never had that happen in 50 years.
“At YourMechanic, we have a massive dataset of the make and model of the cars we have serviced and the type of maintenance done. We decided to use our data to understand which cars break down the most and have the highest maintenance costs. We also looked into which types of maintenance are most common to certain cars.”
“Massive dataset” ?? I’m trying to picture massive, but… perhaps Donald Trump could explain…
We also looked into which types of maintenance are most common to certain cars."
OK, I’ll bite. Which types? How many cars of each make, model, model-year, engine option, transmission type, age, miles???
“First, we looked at which major brands cost the most to maintain over the first 10 years of a car’s life. We grouped all years of all models by brand to compute their average cost by brand. In order to estimate annual maintenance costs, we found the amount spent on every two oil changes (as oil changes are generally done every six months).”
"In order to estimate annual maintenance costs, we found the amount spent on every two oil changes (as oil changes are generally done every six months)."
Say What??
Take Pontiac. Most folks agree that as cars age (and also accumulate miles) they become more costly to “maintain.” Since Pontiacs haven’t been manufactured for 7 years then that brand, represented broadly by older vehicles is being compared with brands that have a greater mix of newer vehicles… and so on.
Besides, each brand has cars more reliable and maintenance free than others in their line-ups. I research cars extensively before I purchase so that I don’t buy repair/maintenance head-aches.
Perhaps that explains why my cars are so reliable and economical to buy and operate. It also explains why I keep on buying the brands of cars that I buy. And another thing… not everybody buys boring cars that are noisy, uncomfortable, or not very useful, just to save a couple bucks on maintenance. How can I afford to own and drive 7 cars, some of which have 300k miles, unless they are reliable?
This data and charts begs more questions than it answers.
CSA
I guess any data is better than nothing, but then Lexus costs less than Honda to maintain based on this chart.
I did the math on my 2005 Camry and even if I did the oil changes at a shop, with tires and brake, it would probably be less than $2500 over 11 yrs/150+ K miles, Much less when I did the stuff myself. Now if the engine blows up tomorrow, things will change 
Agree that this is subject to the famous “all other things being equal” caveat. But the interesting overall truth is that a Lexus costs less to maintain than a Mini. And the 8 lowest maintenance vehicles, except for the Mini, are all Japanese.
Maintenance is one thing, REPAIR costs are another thing altogether. This is where German cars really get hammered both in terms of cost and component longevity.
I do this analysis frequently for industrial customers, and low maintenance and long component life often justify a higher initial cost.
In this case, Japanese vehicles cost no more and usually less than corresponding German models.
When buying a new car this info is of some use, but without knowing how long transmissions and other major items last on a specific model, it’s only a very small part of the decision making process.
" I’m trying to picture massive, but… perhaps Donald Trump could explain."
In that case, the dataset would be…yoooooge, and–of course–“beautiful”.
In any event, I agree with all of your points, but I want to add that lumping actual maintenance together with repairs (two very different concepts) can make for a lot of very confused people.
I’m sure there are lots of limitations to the study, but I look for the general results. I’m not surprised that they line up with the CR survey data, I think it’s no coincidence.
"I guess any data is better than nothing, …"
Seriously?
CSA
“I’m not surprised that they line up with the CR survey data, I think it’s no coincidence.”
Does CR’s survey data indicate that it costs almost $3k more to “maintain” a Mercury as opposed to a Ford? Given that Mercury’s models were all totally identical mechanically to comparable Ford models makes those numbers…suspect…IMHO.
After reading the report, I find that it was written poorly. First they say it deals with maintenance and use two oil changes per year as an example. It costs $17,800 to change oil in a BMW twice a year and change air filters over a ten year period? Besides, BMWs and MBs have oil changes at lest every 15,000 miles, implying oil changes no more often that once per year. I became skeptical. Then they switch to describing repairs, not maintenance. Was an editor used to vet this document? They may have valid points, but they make it difficult to believe by providing misleading information. If this data represents repairs and maintenance together, they should make it clear explicitly and not imply that the costs are only maintenance. If they can’t do something simple like that, it is hard to believe anything they say.
“If this data represents repairs and maintenance together, they should make it clear explicitly and not imply that the costs are only maintenance. If they can’t do something simple like that, it is hard to believe anything they say.”
Yup!
+100!
"I’m sure there are lots of limitations to the study, but I look for the general results."
Not me. I see all the limitations and ignore any “results”. There are no results or conclusions of any value here.
CSA
So it’s pure coincidence that, outside of a few oddballs, like Mini and Mercury, the results are a good match for the CR reliability surveys? I don’t think so.
Also, if there were huge data problems, I’d expect a much more random ranking, rather than what we see.
I do not and never have bought into stat sheets like this. Back room number crunchers playing the odds.
According to CR from back in 2013 a 6 cylinder Camry is more shoddily made (meaning higher upkeep costs) as compared to a 2013 4 cylinder Camry.
This was apparently published after the content was approved by a string of straight faces.
While not related to cars but in line with back room number crunchers…
Some may remember the BCS college FB BS. One of the BCS analysts lives here in OK. They do their work in a small room that is plastered with University of Oklahoma memorabilia and who admittedly has an OU bias. How does anyone think their number crunching pans out…
The Mercedes Benz E350 rates most reliable according the Consumer Reports. How does that square with the ratings?
So, If I Buy A Subaru Of My Choice, It’s Going To Cost 49% More To Maintain Than Any Toyota Vehicle?
Wow, I hope word doesn’t get out on the street.
CSA
I Re-Read The Article, But Can’t Find Why A Kia Costs 60% More To Maintain Than A Toyota. What Are They Getting For Kia Oil Filters?
CSA