@MikeInNH I do not have a BMW and even if I had one I am not “dumb enough” to go to the dealer for an oil change. But they still need European specs synthetic with OEM filter and with the newer cars it is more and more difficult to do your own oil change, reset the maintenance/etc. If you are still under warranty, for your average costumer, I think they are going to end up at the dealership, dumb or no, I am not sure but changing a BMW engine out of warranty would be expensive I would think.
@MikeInNH
"What’s your problem @common sense answer…I’ve answered you multiple times.
I use CR as ONE source…Not as THEE source…Can you comprehend that. Is that too difficult for you to understand? I hate to tell you this but other people read this and can follow the conversation…and understand that I have answered you. "
No problem here, Mike.
I need to establish this point in order to get to my next point in the car reliability/maintenance question discussion.
So, "You have used and cited CR as a good source for learning the “reliability” of cars. Is that a good place for me to look? " “Please give me a straight “Yes” or “No” answer.”
Since I have not received a “Yes” or “No”, but rather answers like
"I use CR as ONE source…Not as THEE source…Can you comprehend that [?]. Is that too difficult for you to understand?"
Do I follow CR? No… I do read it as just ONE opinion. What do you use? Weegie board? Because I can’t find any survey or review that says GM produces reliable vehicles. "
My comprehension is pretty good. I see that you do use CR ( it’s a “yes”) and you don’t follow CR (it’s a “no”). Which do you recommend for me? That’s all I’m asking… yes or no?
“Because I can’t find any survey or review that says GM produces reliable vehicles.”
Mike, I know. That’s the point. Work with me here and I’ll show you! 
CSA
How many times do you want me to answer it. I use it as ONE source. What’s your point.
Would you buy a used car from the yourmechanic group? Without knowing more about them I’m not sure the figures are reliable. Maybe so, maybe not, but … I just don’t know.
The data raise too many questions for me to accept them carte blanche or to assume they are a meaningful picture of car ownership expenses by brand.
You want to pigeon hole me to a very narrow innacurate answer. Not going to play that game. I’ve answered you. Live with it.
Yeah I think I agree with CSA. Pretty much unusable information. Too many variables. If you buy a new BMW, its pretty much free for 5 years and an Acura just pretty much oil changes. So that kinda skews the 10 year figures.
Both Consumer Reports and the AAA used to publish actual maintenance and repair cost figures by make and model.
All those AAA surveys showed that the average US driver spent about $1100 per year on maintenance, tires and repairs. The RANGE of these figures, however, was large, with small econoboxes with reasonable reliability coming (Toyota Tercel, Mazda 323) out on top and unreliable luxury cars such as the Mercedes S Class and Land Rovers representing the extreme opposite. The worst was about 3 times the best in terms of cost.
A guy down the street owns a 12 year old Lexus 400 which he says is virtually bullet-proof and has needed almost no repairs. He also owns one from the opposite end of the spectrum, a Volkswagen Westfalia camper van, which constantly needs repairs, even though he does not drive it that much. He owns a bicycle shop and has many tools, so he fixes the VW himself, and refers to it as his hobby car. When he goes to the mountains for the weekend he takes his toolbox along.
If CSA flips cars and makes money out of it he is really in the used car business, and not a typical owner. A Pontiac Fiero has to be a most troublesome car according to all survey results. Of course if you hardly ever drive it, it could be “reliable”.
A colleague works for a major car rental company and he is in charge of the fitness of the cars. They recently got some Fiat 500s because the public seems to like them because they are “cute”. He tells me they are a pain to maintain and they send them to the dealers for all work; even the dealer’s mechanics don’t like working on them!
For those who can’t distinguish between the rule and the exception, like our Nigerian office manager’s opinion on AIDS, I have no answer. A little COMMON SENSE goes a long way, however.
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.
Not sure to what degree they differed but the V6 should show up costing more to maintain just for the fact it has a timing belt versus the 4 which has a chain…
I view Dodge Caravan as a mobile pile of junk, based on what happened to the one I owned before I bought the Sienna in 2002. Every time I stopped in a town in my trips across the country I had to make an appointment with a local mechanic.
Yet, if I could afford to get another one every 75,000 miles. I would expect few repairs. After 100,000 miles I would expect an inordinate amount of repairs. I don’t want one, and anyone who tells me his high mileage Caravan is highly reliable is doing a great imitation of Pinocchio.
As far as CSA. I am going to say with all sincerity, that I believe he believes what he is saying about his cars and their reliability.
Suppose a similar list of maintenance costs had been assembled in 1980. I wonder where the Checker would be on the list. I’m not thinking of the Checkers used for taxicab service, but the Checkers sold for non-commercial use.
Well, since Checker used GM engines & transmissions exclusively after they stopped installing Continental engines in the '70s, I think that the maintenance and repair costs would likely have been very similar to the Chevrolets that utilized the same 6-cylinder and V-8 engines that were put under the hoods of Checkers. That would be a pretty good maintenance & repair record, I think.
And, for the few Checkers that had that awful Oldsmobile diesel V-8 installed, they would likely have had the same problems–and the same repair issues–as the Olds vehicles that used the diesel engine.
@Triedaq The Checker was a very tough automobile. For taxi service it had to be. The GM power train was OK, but the rest of the car was very solidly built. A colleague actually bought one because he liked the interior space and he intended to keep it a very long time. Everything on that car was easy to service as well.
Some time back I saw one, the Marathon, model, at a transmission shop for routine service. It looked very good in spite of its age.
Checkers only used the gasoline V8 engine to the best of my knowledge.
“Checkers only used the gasoline V8 engine to the best of my knowledge.”
The vast majority of them used the Chevy I-6 or V-8, but toward the end of their run, some were powered by one of the smaller GM V-6s. A very small number of them had the Olds diesel V-8 under the hood.
@VDCDriver Thanks for the update. There was a Checker dealer in my area and the only model they sold was the V8 gas model with automatic. A very good power train. Cabs in NYC probably used the 6 cylinder to advantage since they mostly crept along at low speed.
Until the mid 1960s, Checker used the 6 cylinder Continental Red Seal engine. Sometime about 1960, the Continental engine became available as an overhead valve engine in the Checker as a no cost option to the flat head 6. The switch to Chevrolet engines occured because Continental elected not to renew its contract with Checker. The last series of Checkers began in 1956 and continued through the end of Checkers in 1982. When the new design came out in 1956, some cab owners were suspicious of the independent front suspension in the new models that replaced the solid front axle in the previous model. Some of the cabbies also preferred the flathead engine to the OHV engines. They thought the solid front axle and flathead engines were cheaper to maintain.
Speaking of car repair and flathead engines, here’s how you rebuild the flathead Ford:
Closely studying the survey, repairs are counted as maintenance. The realities that this survey points out why I am now driving a Camry rather than the Chrysler or Dodge I really like better.
Being bought and sold by the Germans, then acquired by Fiat has not been good for Chrysler Corp.
If I was still buying used cars, I would still look at Chryslers, they sell at quite a discount compared to other makes and have by far the best ergonomics for me.