Recalls & more recalls. Cars are now too complex!

[Kiwi_ME]

I agree with those who think new cars are simpler than those from 20 years ago. Certainly all those I've owned since 2000 have converged on a common design with the minimum components that will meet the product requirements. Emissions control systems are relatively simple now and nothing is half-baked like it was in the '80s. Mechanically it's all the same, 4-cyl, OHC, 4 valves/cyl, variable valve timing, fuel injection, primary and secondary cats.
Each major item (engine, transmission, body) has a rugged microcontroller on a 2-wire common area network (CAN.)

The quality of engineering in today's car is unmatched from a few decades ago, in no small part due to the computer simulation tools that are used. Sensors may be plastic but top-quality engineering plastics and well-tested. There is no other consumer product sold today that has such industrial levels of quality - at least where it counts.

Anyone who works in engineering knows how difficult it is to get things right and it's much harder in a big company. I'm really impressed with the reliability we get today, at least for the cars we get in this part of the world which are mostly Asian and European brands.

 

[cookiemonster]

Yes, parts that are essential have been improved dramatically, and that's a good thing. The problem is that "optional" parts (oil minders instead of a dipstick?, touchscreen HVAC controls?) have been added into the mix, overly complicating things - that's the bad part.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: Doog
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
As others have posted maybe you haven't actually read what the recalls are about because you are making the incorrect jump between recalls and modern car complexity.

I myself am glad of the car improvement over the years and very appreciative that I don't have to drive the cars of the 80's and 90's that your rose colored glasses don't allow you to see what a piece of junk they were. I am glad that I can safely drive a car expected to last >200k miles and not need a major rebuild every 100k miles. Also the safety of the new cars are greatly better than the piece of junk cars of the 80s. I appreciate the modern amenities that new cars have today. I can remember even in the late 90s where my truck didn't even have a CD player, cassette only. Sorry that junk isn't missed at all.

You are welcome to scrounge around the junk yards to find you an old used car. But with their high emissions and low quality that is pretty much where they belong.


+1 agreed. What only lasted 100k now easily goes to 200k


I sold my Cherokee with 220K...though it's a 1997, it is very much an 80's throwback: the AW-4 trans is a mid-80's piece, almost unchanged from 1987. Engine is, aside from OBD2, a 1991 upgrade of a 1987 engine...that is still, at its core, the early-50's Rambler six! Even had the original water pump, fan clutch, fuel pump, radiator, A/C compressor, and master cylinder.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: Rat407
I'm still running a 91 Jetta TD. So far it has 251k on the odometer. Sad to say it is going down hill, using a quart every 400 miles. It is a tough little car that still gets me 50mpg. But it isn't the cleanest burning things. LOL Super easy to work on. I grew up with my parents getting a brand new 79 Rabbit diesel. If I new then what I know now, we would still own it.


My father in law's Jetta was also using oil...engine was fine, he had a bad seal on the turbo.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: whip
The complex systems aren't the ones being recalled. It's the simple ones.

To those saying they'd love a more simple car, what car do you drive now?


See sig. Not even an electronic transmission in the driveway!

 

[jeepman3071]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: jeepman3071
The cars from the '80s and '90s weren't all amazingly reliable, but they were certainly a lot easier to fix.


I'm going to have to beg to differ on this one! The under-hood of either of our current cars ('05 MDX and '08 CR-V) is orders of magnitude less complicated than on my 1984 Oldsmobile Cutlass. That choking 307 V-8 must have had 27 miles of vacuum line under the hood. Try tracing a problem on THAT car.

I have found modern materials and build quality to be far superior to that of 10-20 years ago. Plastic door panels may not be as comfortable as soft velour, but they don't show wear/rub spots after 100k miles either. Both of our vehicles have 100k miles, give or take 10k miles on either side, and neither one looks any more aged than the day it left the factory.

I have found modern electronics to be far easier to diagnose than older stuff. That '84 Cutlass had a very rudimentary computer-controlled carburetor, where the mixture control solenoid was controlled by the computer, but that was it. It still had vacuum choke pull-offs and vacuum-modulated secondary butterflies, and a vacuum-controlled cruise control module. The miles of vacuum lines on that engine were enough for any mechanic to go grey or bald from constant hair-pulling!

I'm not arguing that modern cars are more simple than those of 20 years ago. But I do believe that they're built better; and that their systems are more durable and easier to repair.


Oh I agree. Carbs and emission controls do not mix. I had a friend with an '89 Jeep Grand Wagoneer. It was a beautiful vehicle but it had a carbed 360 V8 and like you said miles of vacuum lines. I guess I was thinking more of the '90s - early 2000s where cars had fuel injection and simpler emissions controls. I'm just stuck on Jeeps since they had fuel injection by '87 in the Cherokees I guess.

I don't mean to be a "cane shaker" as one poster mentioned, but my point is more that simpler is better because of the modern quality control issues combined with complex systems. A computer controlled carburetor is by no means simple, but neither are the systems in modern cars.

Obviously, there are many advancements in modern cars that have made life simpler. I would consider OBD2 to be a lifesaver for many problems. Simpler emissions systems that eliminated miles of vacuum lines are a plus. Fuel injection is a plus. At what point do we realize that having computers controlling everything isn't ideal though? I would say many would argue that computer controlled throttle body assemblies are a bit too complex for what they are. Why do I need a computer to open the throttle for me when I could use a simple cable to do the same thing? Look at all the problems/recalls associated with those. How about computer controlled HVAC systems or parking assist, will those be working in 10 years? How about those radar controlled cruise control systems that automatically sense when a car in front of you slows down? What happens when that system fails? Will it cause the car to rear-end the one in front of it when the driver fails to stop because they are relying on the system?

The 2014 Jeep Cherokee has a system where it automatically helps you back into a parking space. What happens when the sensors in that system fail? Will you be backing into cars?

I like nice gadgets as much as the next person, heck I work in IT, but there are some situations where longevity of the equipment is more important than fancy gadgets.

Cars from the 60s with carburetors are not my thing. I do like the simplicity and reliability of '90s - early 2000s cars though. They have electronic features such as OBD2 that are helpful, but are still simple enough to be reliable. Fuel injection, simpler emissions systems, cable operated throttles, etc. I don't need a computer to do everything for me, but then again I can also park my own vehicle without hitting stuff.

 

[dave1251]

The best comments are the ones that state new cars are not built to last.


How is that when the average American is owning their cars longer than ever before?

 

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: dave1251
The best comments are the ones that state new cars are not built to last.


How is that when the average American is owning their cars longer than ever before?


Most of those cars are from the 90s.

Which I said in my opening post have been the "sweet spot" with regards to the best combination helpful technology like fuel injection and OBDII diagnostics, and high quality builds,
(Honda, Toyota, Mazda, ect) were all very well built during this time with generally very high quality parts.

 

[SHOZ]

I like the elimination of EGR by the control of the cams.

 

[SLCraig]

Cars from the 90's are way better, don't care what anyone says. All this modern stuff just annoys me when I drive it. Too much gadgety trash and not enough driving enjoyment.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: SLCraig
Cars from the 90's are way better, don't care what anyone says. All this modern stuff just annoys me when I drive it. Too much gadgety trash and not enough driving enjoyment.


That's my complaint too....while many of today's gadgets are useful, many are also just added to the car to mark up the price of the vehicle and entice buyers....give me a simple vehicle with manual windows and an AM/FM radio that gets 50 MPG and will last 500K miles and I'd be all set!

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: dave1251
The best comments are the ones that state new cars are not built to last.


How is that when the average American is owning their cars longer than ever before?


Most of those cars are from the 90s.

Which I said in my opening post have been the "sweet spot" with regards to the best combination helpful technology like fuel injection and OBDII diagnostics, and high quality builds,
(Honda, Toyota, Mazda, ect) were all very well built during this time with generally very high quality parts.


I assume you have the ability to time travel and report that current cars are inferior to cars made 25 years ago?

 

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: dave1251


I assume you have the ability to time travel and report that current cars are inferior to cars made 25 years ago?


The only time travel I've engaged in is called "aging"...

I actually was able to drive and work at
$tealers that sold such cars, and my folks owned several 80s-90s Hondas. As a matter of fact I drove thousands of them when I worked at a number of these stores, everything from Accords, to CRXs, to Preludes, and Civics.

They are better when it comes to overall quality of build, durability, ease of service, and simplicity. I think they were better to drive too because they weren't bloated pigs loaded with electronic numbing steering and hydraulics for manual shifters.

Just wait until your 2000s and later model needs that very specific electronic module. First off will it even be available, and even if it is it will cost a small fortune.

A big issue also is that the electronics are heavily multiplexed so if you develop an electrical issue it could well be a nightmare to isolate.

Plus I am sick of the car companies loading the cars with all these stupid electronic gadgets and basically telling the consumer they "want" them. When many consumers do not. The consultants tell the manufacturers what they want to hear and pay dearly for that misleading information.

 

[TiredTrucker]

Would love going back to 1/2 ton pickups having standard production solid front axles instead of this independent CV axle stuff. Might be nicer for the ride, but a PITA when a person has the pickup for rural small farm use and has to go off road regularly and various other things. A good 'ol manual transfer case instead of these electronically controlled/shifted transfer cases. And no AFM cylinder shutdown stuff on the engine. And no stupid auto on lights and daytime running lights.

And J.D. Power can stick it.

 

[artificialist]

I'm still convinced that GDI engines are only going to be a problem if manufacturers make their engines the correct way.

Why don't we look into the past at fuel injection systems, MPI and TBI. Some were perfect, some were occasionally a problem, and other ones were awful. I never read a good thing about a TBI Mitsubishi, or a GM spider injection.

It also bothers me that new engines with turbos are assumed to be problematic. If that is so true, how did SAAB and Volvo find a way to make a >200,000 mile engine trouble free, 30 years ago? I'm convinced turbo engine durability is also based on how well the auto maker builds their cars.

In short, there is a way to build a car right, but not all manufacturers do things right.

There is only one time I believe cars couldn't be built right, and that was the 1970s. Smog laws got so tough so quick, that car technology couldn't keep pace for several years.

 

[Volvohead]

Many years ago, before most of us were born, Cadillac's engineering philosophy was to design without regard to cost. It was then the job of the production engineers and the bean counters to find ways to build that design at a profitable cost. At some point in the 1950's, that philosophy started to change. Now the whole process is upside down. Cars are now engineered to costs first.

Cost, and overcoming the cheapening of parts and materials when cost comes first, now more often overwhelms the design engineers who must constantly make less do more.

Electronics were at first a scourge, and later a savior to designers, as cost made engineering reliable advanced electro-mechanical systems impossible. But that was more about the evolution of electronics than automobiles. Now, it's impossible to build a modern vehicle without at least 4 or 5 computers. Unfortunately, you can't build the entire vehicle out of LSICs.

It's no surprise that component failures, some leading to recalls, are growing more and more common when cost trumps engineering.

 

[SHOZ]

The problem with 80's and 90's cars is the body rust out.

107k on my base '08 Hyundai Accent. Only problem was a ECU reflash for hard start when cold if you killed the engine right off the bat. Leaking axle seal and recalled brake light switch. 40 mpg.

 

[brages]

I have been hearing people say "cars are getting too complex" for the last 20 years. They were wrong then, and I bet they are wrong now.

Cars are getting better and better.

 

[SHOZ]

100k plus miles on spark plugs, no EGR, no points and condensers, no spark plug wires, OCI up to 7.5k miles, better gas mileage, more HP, easier diagnosis; what's not to like.

 

[Silverado12]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
With all the massive recalls going on now, I'm surprised that more folks haven't started to realize the obvious..that cars have reached the point of being too complex for their own good, now for small production items that can transport large amounts of people (eg. planes) it might be manageable for companies to deal with this and still make a profit and satisfy customers, but with the car being a mass market consumer item it looks like that is increasingly not going to be sustainable, even FIAT CEO Marchionne says that the cost of all these recalls will be passed on to the customer in the end.

We are at the point of dimishing returns when it comes to safety, emissions, and practicality.

The sweet spot was probably the mid 80s - mid 90s or so when the auto industry had, in general very good reliability, affordability, ease of service, and reasonable safety and emissions standards.

I for one would LOVE to be able to buy a brand new MK I or II
VW Golf GTI, 1980s-1990s Honda Accord or Civic, ect.

I'd love to see the car companies reverse course and build some more basic, simple, and more affordable cars.


I agree with you. I had an '88 S-10 2.5 Iron Duke 4 banger that went over 250K miles w/o any issues whatsoever. Guy I sold it to let his son drive it and popped an upper radiator hose. He tried to limp it home and the engine had a meltdown.