The Maverick is coming back, supposedly next year as a small pickup, smaller than the Ranger and in a basic trim for under $20k.
1 Like
Sounds like they are replacing the power liftgate hydraulic cylinders.
The standard liftgate supports are $87 each, much like any other vehicle.
For comparison, the power liftgate unit for a Toyota Highlander is $1465.
If someone spends all their money on a used vehicle and can’t afford to repair the power liftgate they will have to live with the defect, I see many broom sticks in the trunks of Lexus vehicles.
3 Likes
I can assure you, based on an educated guess, that my esteemed colleague, Mr. Volvo, is not suffering from stress over this. He may cause stress, but I highly doubt a lousy car repair would cause him to suffer from it.
High prices are not proprietary to Volvo. Pick any car on the market and one would find that many items on those cars are expensive.
I have often wondered about the Studebaker Scotsman. Did replacing some of the Chrome bits with black rubber really save them and money, or did the tooling cost on what was a fairly low volume car cost them money? I did like the plaid interior. I had a 56 Commander and for road trips I much preferred the excellent 259 cube V8 that gor almost as good mileage.
I hald a 59 Lark wagon with that anemic flathead 6, the same engine as the pre WWII Champion. We were on a camping trip with our two children at the time and loaded with gear and food. We were going ofver a hill between Nunda and Dundee NY to get from Letchworth Park and Watkins Glen and I could not make the top of the hill in first gear (three on the tree) I had to unload my family frive to the top of the hill, unload the gear on the shoulder and go back an pick up my family and then load the gear.
As long as we digress, AMC plant, bud who worked there said the roof leaked and the water would go on to the stacked fenders and pool and rust on what would be the top of the fender, and start the rust cycle. A little new paint to match the rest of the car and off the assembly line they went
Hee hee, or they could have just gotten out and pushed a little. After the 60-62 Falcons, my Dad had a Lark used for the long commute. Pretty bare bones. Can’t recall what year it was but somewhere around the early 60’s. Yeah had to fix the fender rust and one day he came home and it was running terrible. I looked at it and the vacuum pipe had come loose. He thought I was a genius. Simple car.
I don’t think Studebaker replaced trim with black rubber on the Scotsman line, I suspect trim holes were not punched out, like a Chevy 150 vs a Belair.
But I could be wrong.
Plus the Scotsman had a number of painted pieces such as the bumpers, that were plated on the other models.
Even the hub caps were painted. And, IIRC, that model was only available in a few paint colors.
New cars are designed for appearance and fashion to appeal to the simple-minded. Then it is up to the engineers to find a place to stuff all the functional things. Repair costs are not a consideration. In any case, get an estimate from an independent servicer before making a decision.
Seriously , where are getting that. The way a vehicle looks has been a selling point for years . The same goes for things that make using a vehicle more enjoyable.
Also some repairs are best done by shops really familiar with the brand and has corporate help on hand.
1 Like
I am a retired engineer and had to do some of the stuffing. Despite my dire objections, design always triumphed. Go to the showroom. There will be a car you can get into, but you will have to ask for help to get out. The touch screen digital displays are a disaster. The flash memories are good for only so many cycles. They can wear out in a year or two from the repeated automatic fixes and upgrades. Check the Tesla recalls. You can’t drive and find and operate a control at the same time. Hollows in the body are stuffed with bundles of wiring, connectors, and little circuit modules. Problems in those areas are almost impossible to pin down.
1 Like
That does not apply to everyone for crying out loud. The only reason I don’t have a new C8 Corvette is because I just don’t drive enough to really enjoy it.
1 Like
I have not even looked, pick cars that my golf club fit in. Doubtful about the corvette. We are good for cars now so not even looking.
@oldtimer-11. The prewar Studebaker Champion used a 169 cubic inch flathead 6. This engine was enlarged to.189.cubic inches sometime in the early 1950s. The 189 cubic inch 6 was used in the Studebaker Scotsman. For some strange reason, Studebaker chose to revert back to the anemic 169 cubic inch 6 for its Lark. You are right that the 259 cubic inch overhead valve V-8 gave about the same mpg in the Lark as the 169 cubic inch 6, and in some cases even better. I think Studebaker should have made the 259 cubic inch V-8 the standard engine in the Lark and advertised the car with the acceleration of a V-8 and the economy of a 6.
3 Likes
I have a Miata. I had to develop new muscles to get out of that. Don’t use it much but I live on a mountain with miles of curvy roads and the Miata is just right for that. My neighbor is an engineer with BMW and they give him preproduction and experimental models to take home, drive around, and evaluate. A few years ago he invited me to check out an electric. I could not even get into that one and certainly would not have been able to get out. My yuppie daughter had a Volvo convertible and was stopped at a traffic light with a semi stopped behind her. Suddenly the truck crunched the rear of the Volvo. The truck driver got out and apologized " I forgot that you were there and I could not see you over my hood". Now she has a BMW SUV. Had to have a new engine at 63,000 miles because the timing chain tensioner failed. $25,000 repair, graciously marked down to $5,000 because the tensioner was problematic. Also needed 4 $400 tires.
A lot of people were unhappy with the fuel mileage and power of their new Studebaker’s because the engines were built to such tight tolerances that it took about 5000miles of varied driving to break in the engines.
Now of course manufacturing is much more precise and very little break in is required.
I never drove our 1960 Lark VI, but it seemed to have ‘adequate’ power for that era. We pulled a tent camper all over the Midwest with it. The downside no oil filter, got about 300 miles per quart of 30 weight oil.
That was traded in on a1962 with a 289 3 on the tree, quite good power.
Most underpowered car I ever owned, a Renault Caravelle. Drove a company car, Plymouth K car with the 2.2, dangerously underpowered.
Yeah, that never happened in the old days. Oh, wait…
There’s a reason one of the lauded features on the Tucker was curve-around door tops so you could get in the thing without bashing your head or knocking your hat off.
And if anything, unless you’re looking at something like a Lotus Exige, modern cars are easier to get in and out of. After all, most of them are SUVs, and those that aren’t are taller than cars from 20+ years ago.
Only in Tesla, and only because Tesla decided that automotive-grade electronics were an unnecessary expense. Which was a stupid decision that none of the other auto makers have made. The touch screen in my old Acura still functioned like new the day I snapped the axle.
The trouble with making blanket statements is that they’re fairly easily disproven.
4 Likes
This statement is from a person who has a Miata 
.