Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The longevity and longevity potential of old cars is severely underrated. My '66 Dart WAS city (surface street) driving about 90% of the time. As mentioned, I did not baby it, too. Just the opposite!
There were quite a few cars/engines with well-known reliability and longevity... the Mopar Slant Six, the Mopar 273 and 318 V-8, the Chevy 283, 327, 350, the Cadillac 472 and 500, the Oldsmobile and Buick 400, the Pontiac 389, the Ford 6-cylinder and 289 V-8, etc.
My point is: You know which ones they were. You could practically count them on your hands. So the most you can say is "certain old cars...."
Do you know if ODB gadgets are always reliable? I have one from my insurance company since my policy is per-mile based. It's been telling me the engine codes are all clear, but my SES light is still on.
It depends on the software. The ODB II tools that are mostly designed for emissions don't look at much of the data. You need a tool that has software that knows how to look at all of it for that particular model car. I own one that only knows how to read and write the tire pressure monitor subsystem. I have a 7/100k extended warranty so I'll let the dealer use their tool that can do everything. When I had VWs, I owned the VW/Audi-specific USB gadget and laptop software that could see everything and program everything.
Pretty much any auto parts store will read your fault codes for free.
My point is: You know which ones they were. You could practically count them on your hands. So the most you can say is "certain old cars...."
I had catastrophic engine failure on a Ford 200" 6 in a Mustang at 50,000 miles. I had the same engine in another Ford that went 110,000. Metallurgy, lubrication technology, and manufacturing automation have come a long way since then. Sure, you could get 150,000 miles out of a 1970's engine before it needed to be rebuilt but that wasn't normal. The technology to expect most engines coming down the manufacturing line to go 200,000 miles wasn't available yet. You could apply 2016 technology to those engine designs and easily achieve that now.
Do newer cars require less maintenance than older ones?
Definitely.
Decades ago, vehicles required oil changes, lube, and tune-ups much more frequently than cars made in the past 15 years or so. The auto industry has improved their product in just about every way except for styling.
Probably but everybody has an exception to the rule. The owned by self, by parents, neighbors, uncles, classmates, colleagues, etc. old 302 Windsor, 350 SBC, Olds, Pontiac,etc.etc that ran forever on original plugs and oil or sometimes no oil,etc.etc.
Heck I have a few stories like that and the older they become the more amazing the tale.
Yes, newer requires less maintenance...until they also become old.
True.
But 'old' isn't what it used to be. Fifty years ago, a car hitting 100k was generally nearing the end. Now, that same numer of miles is practically 'low mileage', and one can expect to get another 100k out of a vehicle. The point at which repairs become cost-prohibitive in terms of number of miles, on average, has been pushed way back from where it was in decades gone by.
Like some others have said, cars before the late 80's and early 90's were primarily mechanical machines with some pretty simple point to point wiring. Reliability was modest, they were prone to moisture problems, needed constant lubrication, needed tune up's frequently, front end alignments, shocks, tires every 40- 50K miles, brakes maybe once a year. Prior to the 70's cars didn't even have seat belts, your protection was to be more massive than the car you hit or got hit by. But a new car was typically under $4K in the 70's and under $10K until 90's. Now, cars are high tech, you're pretty much driving by wire as almost everything in the car is going through the computer. The engineering is far more refined and you now get almost as much horsepower from a 4 cylinder as many people got with 8 cylinders back in the day. Economy, safety, reliability, comfort and style are part in parcel for the new generation of cars, but at a cost. So, yes, they probably require less maintenance than a generation or two ago, but a lot more expensive. My old toolbox consisted of a good socket set, wrenches, pliers and screwdrivers, a timing light and maybe a continuity tester. The modern mechanic probably needs a metric and sae socket set, a fancy automotive computer analyzer, a multimeter, and a subscription to an engineering hotline. Whereas the simplicity of old cars allowed someone with reasonable mechanical ability to maintain our cars back then, now it takes a technician or engineer to troubleshoot and repair, that costs $$$.
My point is: You know which ones they were. You could practically count them on your hands. So the most you can say is "certain old cars...."
Yes, certain old cars. But quite a few of them!
The same can be said for modern cars. I have seen threads here before about avoiding certain cars after the warranty is over because repairs are expensive.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do newer cars require less maintenance than older ones?
