The used car marketplace has changed dramatically since the early '60s. His book addresses a world that no longer exists. The economics of automobile purchasing are dramatically different, reliability is very different, leases (which did not exist for individuals in the '60s) has changed the profile of the used car marketplace, and even purchase financing has changed. I’d be reticent to use a book from the early '60s as a reference.
@the_same_mountainbik. At my age, the 1960s were not that long ago. In fact, in my way of thinking, a new car is one that was manufactured after WW II.
You are right, of course. A lot has changed in the used car market since Tom McCahill’s book. For one thing, much as I hate to admit it, cars last a lot longer than they did in the 1960s. Sears Roebuck and Montgomery Ward each had several pages of remanufactured engines available for many cars. A.230 cubic.inch remanufactured Dodge engine could have been made anytime between 1942 and 1959 and would fit any Dodge in this time period as well as many Plymouths. Engine swaps today aren’t that simple.
Model changes made cars depreciate rapidly back in the 1960s. There were many who didn’t want.to drive an out-of-date car and would trade in a.two year old.car for a more stylish new car. The.2017 Sienna I drive today has exactly the same body style as the 2011 I sold to our son. Only the color is different. I tell people it’s the same van with an Earl Scheib $39.95.paint job. My 2011 Sienna with 90,000 miles is worth roughly half what I paid for it in the.spring of.2010 when the 2011 models came out. A car that cost $2400 new in 1960 would.be worth less than $500 in 1966. Yes, the market has.changed.
I believe that some of that wisdom from the 60s holds true to this day. Somebody needing reliable transportation wanting a great deal on a car can sometimes find that by looking for cars that are not the most popular colors, don’t have the most sought after options or are ugly.
Doing some homework to be sure that these prom queen wanna-be leftovers don’t have any bad habits, prior to purchase, can net somebody a really good deal that fits their needs. 
CSA
1 Like
@common_sense_answer I bought unpopular cars years ago that gave me good service. The cars that stand.out were a 1965 Rambler Classic 550–a complete strippo sedan that was 6 months old when I bought it for $1750 in April of 1965 with 7000 on the odometer,. a.1968 AMC Javelin in 1971 that wasn’t popular because it had a 6 cylinder engine, and, a 1961 Corvair Monza for $450 in 1967 right after Ralph Nader published his book. The Corvair was purchased at the Rambler dealer. The car ran as if it might have needed a.valve job. The dealer.said his mechanics.wouldn’t work on a Corvair I thought I could live with it as an around town 2nd car. However,. I was out with it and got caught in a heavy rain. The Corvair ran so poorly I didn’t think I would make it home. I replaced the spark plug wires and.spark plugs and had a great running car.
I think even today I might be able to find a good transportation special.
Years ago I bought lots of $100 wonders, cars that were solid but had a problem and the owner was not interested in fixing it or paying to get it fixed. Back then new points, plugs and wires, a condenser and maybe a “Jiffy Kit” carb rebuild, air up the tires and off you went. If it died after a year or two, I found another. I don’t do that any more with cars, but I do buy good used cars and have found them to be fine. Because most of us on here are well informed about the machinery of cars we can do inspections and make decisions that are pretty good, but most people are not that educated, and they rely on a lot of BS throwing people who want their money. Period.
What I have learned is that if you are buying a new car, the more expensive specialized models are sometimes a much better deal over the long haul. Convertibles hold their value way better than sedans, for example. On the other hand, if you’re looking to buy cheap transportation, 4 door sedans from unpopular models can be a good deal.
Buying unpopular vehicles worked for us. I bought a new 2003 Olds Silhouette for thousands under MSRP and they threw in a 60/60 warranty for free because Olds was going out of business. We got a free transmission at 58,000 miles because of that free warranty. We have 180,000 miles on it after 14 years and it still runs well. One of the best buys we ever made. The GM minivans of that era were narrower than the popular ones, but we never noticed it. We bought a bare bones 2010 Cobalt LS in 2012 for $10,000. It had 14,000 miles on it. It was unpopular because it had hand crank and windows and manual door locks. The dealer let it go cheap because it was stripped and unpopular. I won again. My new 1998 Regal was a couple grand less than the Camry and Accord. I had a couple problems, but both cost way less than $1000. Another unpopular winner that was basically a reliable car for 12 years and 150,000 miles.
1 Like
@jtsanders. I bought a 2006 Uplander in 2006 from the Chevrolet dealer. It was a “program” vehicle (whatever that means) with 16000 miles. I paid $15000 for it and it still runs well at 200,000 miles for our son. I paid almost twice as much for the Siennas that followed. In fact the book value today of the 2011 Sienna with 90,000 miles is almost what I paid for the 2006 Uplander. I liked.the.fact that the Uplander was narrower than other minivans
At that time I had to back the van off a busy 4 lane street into an alley and maneuver the van between a utility pole and the building to load timpani into the minivan from an auditorium stage door. On other minivans I had to fold in the mirrors, but I didn’t have to do that with the Uplander.
You both beat me to it. Even four door sedans from the 50s are going for much more than original list price.
Perhaps. But today new car buyers have lots and lots of reliability and longevity information readily available to them that didn’t exist in the '60s, and choices are far, far greater. I believe reliability is a far more critical part of what makes a make/model popular or unpopular than it was back then, and the possible choices are far greater. Granted, emotions are still a big part of choices, but those wanting reliability have a great many more.
In short, I think reliability is a far bigger part of what makes a car popular or unpopular then it was in the '60s. So an unpopular car is more likely to be so because it has a poor reliability record or reputation.
I actually think it’s the opposite, that reliability is less a factor than it was in the '60s. The reliability differences from one make to another are narrowing and are nearly insignificant.
Today, a person who knows nothing about cars can waltz into any showroom of any car manufacturer and drive out with a reliable car. There’s not a hill of beans of difference.
Car rating organizations have had to invent new methods to try and magnify differences in reliability in order to create a new perceived reliability. That’s what sells subscriptions and lures followers.
Besides, it often takes several years to determine if certain cars develop common problems involving reliability. That’s when checking a certain model’s reliability record has meaning… buying a used car.
Notice I said “model.” Although all the car manufacturers now build cars with very good reliability, certain models (of every company) prove to be prone to slightly more problems.
CSA
1 Like
While I cannot agree with either point, I respect and understand your points.
Most of those in my life select from only makes that have good reliability reputations. Most were doing so long before I ever met them.
Here is a thought:. A car with a poor frequency of repair record over its first two or three years may be a reliable car after 5 or 6 years because the defective parts have been replaced. On the other hand, a car with a good record over its first two years, may after five or six years begin having the parts fail that would have been replaced in the car that was reliable over its first couple.of years.
Oh if only that were true.
I see two problems with that theory.
- the failed parts are replaced with parts of the same design. And the same weaknesses.
- poorly designed or manufactured cars generally have more problems built into them than those that fail in he first years.
Since most of the cars I buy are “re-owned” (USED) cars 
, and since I do most/all of the work on my cars…
… and I research cars before I purchase them and I pore through Manufacturers’ Technical Service Bulletins frequently and thoroughly (online access), …
… and since I have managed automobile dealer parts departments,I have an opinion on this point and feel somewhat knowledgeable.
Quite often when problems begin to show up on a certain make/model/model-year(s) vehicle the problem(s) is/are “common” to many/most similar vehicles. Much of the time replacement parts are improved or revised and issued a new or revised part number. This is done to remedy recurring problems.
I have owned cars where this was the case. Most are easy fixes to annoying problems and result in the vehicle not having continuing problems with a faulty part.
One of my most amusing anecdotes to illustrate my experiences involved our 1986 Dodge Aries that stalled when my wife slowed to turn. The car had never had any problems and was 2 to 3 years old.
I did the “key dance” and figured the easiest, cheapest repair was to purchase a new MAP sensor and pop it in the car. Had I gone to an auto parts store to purchase one then I probably would not have completely fixed the problem. I went to the local dealer.
The dealer had the part in stock and the new part number that replaced the old one was actually a kit that included instructions. I followed the directions, removing the old MAP sensor from the PCM (in the foot-well kick panel) and plugged in a harness there. I drilled a 1/2" hole through the firewall and installed a grommet and ran the harness through to a strut tower where I mounted the new MAP sensor.
We never had a problem, again. The new part and location solved a problem that most/all of these vehicles would eventually develop. Purchasing a 5 year old vehicle probably would have had this issue resolved permanently.
This type situation is nothing new. Almost any time I see recurring problems with a certain part on a certain make/model/year a replacement part has been revised or created to solve the problem and end the chain of failures.
I guess I look at the parts failure thing differently than you do. However, I don’t expect everybody to have the parts intrigue that I have. 
CSA
1 Like
Consumer Reports says it’s true. They say two things.
- Just because one model vehicle has a lower reliability rating does not mean vehicles from the less reliable model won’t perform satisfactorily for a new owner.
- CR says that the difference between the most reliable category and least reliable category is as little as 3.5%. It was in their used car guide about 5 years ago.
2 Likes
IMHO this should not be happening on new cars.
I’ve oft repeated my experiences with my '72 Vega and my '95 Saturn. Both had to repeatedly go back to the dealer for problems when new, some on recall and others due to failure. In '72 I thought this was normal, just part of owning a new car. But then, in '76, I bought a new Corolla. It was solid and comfortable and just ran and ran and ran, always reliably. It was a “wake up call” to me that my experiences with the Vega were not normal or necessary.
I bought Toyotas (and a Honda) ever thereafter and none had to go through “recall and warranty repair” years. Then my (then) wife persuaded me to get a Saturn. Back to the same old “recall and warranty repair” hole. Nowhere near as bad as the Vega, but nonetheless. For the last 12 years and 248,000 miles I’ve driven an '05 Scion. I didn’t have to go through that “rabbit hole”. Over the years I’ve had a few minor body hardware issues, such as a sunroof that didn’t seal fully (need to be “reinitialized”, a simple procedure once I uncovered it) and hatch air struts that failed after about the first five years. And after 7 or 8 years the alternator died. But nothing major at all. Everything else has been normal wear. Oh, and I had one recall to put a plastic sheet over my self-elevating glass wind spoiler for the sunroof, because some had experienced impact failure.
So, after 42+ years of buying new Toyotas and a Honda, interrupted only by a (very marginal) Saturn for the wife, I do not accept for a moment that all makes are now extremely close in quality and reliability. Nor do I accept that it’s normal for all makes to need warranty work or recalls. Even if the replacement parts have been modded to fix their original weaknesses, they shouldn’t have been in the new car to begin with.
Sorry, but I believe there really are still distinct differences in quality and reliability between brands. But I believe it takes having owned a few high reliability makes after having owned one or two of lesser reliability to realize that there really is a difference.
The old Ford Taurus comes to mind some years ago. You could buy them for little or nothing because of their transmission issues. So they were pretty much throw away cars. Buy one cheap and when the trans went, throw them away. There were no good transmissions in the junk yards. I guess its just a matter of pay me now or pay me later. I guess I’d rather pay a little more and have a car with fewer expected problems.
I have almost the same experience as @the_same_mountainbike.
My Vega was extremely unreliable. A real eye opener when I bought my first Datsun and how dam reliable it was. My next vehicle was a GMC S-15 pickup and back to unreliable. Went back to Asian manufacturers and never had any worries. For the last 3 years I owned my S-15 I was doing consulting. And lost several thousand dollars in lost wages because of that vehicle. I really didn’t want to get rid of a vehicle with only 120k miles on it…but I had no choice. My next vehicle (Nissan Pathfinder) have far fewer issues well at 300k miles then my S15 did at 120k miles.
I share your opinion, but that doesn’t change reality.
I frequently run across this and revised parts in Service Bulletins seem to be an “equal opportunity” event, included in bulletins by all car manufacturers.
One of the best examples is the latest air bag fiasco. Many consumers had to wait for revised parts.
It’s good to hear that the Asian cars have no recalls or warranty repairs necessary.
That’s what they call brand loyalty.
You are talking in terms of years past. I and many others find cars to be as reliable as you describe in recent history. Times have changed.
It’s that good anecdotal evidence “proving” the superior reliability of certain makes that keeps the myths alive and well.
CSA
2 Likes