Today's legendary reliability vehicle is?

[Jetronic]

Mitsubishi Outlander was the top scorer in the SUV class here in Europe. Honda CR-V came second. Toyota RAV4 came in 4th place.

http://www.image-bank.n/suzuki/download/Automankementen.pdf

All in all, toyota scores high in nearly every class. Mitsubishi was only present in 2 classes, but scored well in both.

Hyundai scored average everywhere really.

For those interested in the link: the first number was the amount of breakdowns that incapacitated the car (towing the only option), the second where the car had to be fixed urgently, the last where the repairs could wait.

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: Cujet
www.truedelta.com is the best and probably the only viable place that tracks actual long term and short term reliability. It also includes real repair reports, the type of repair and the cost.

The most reliable popular vehicles seem to be the Camry/Accord pair. With newer Camry's edging out the Accord by a percent or two.

The most reliable brand is clearly Toyota.

2001 thru 2016 = Toyota
2013 thru 2016 = Toyota
(or any other combo of years between 2001 and 2016)

Most Toyota cars are not "driver car", performance/handling are not better than average of its class, but they are best selling mainly because of their reliability was and is at the top of any list.

Toyota became the world best seller mainly because of reliability.

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR

Most Toyota cars are not "driver car", performance/handling are not better than average of its class, but they are best selling mainly because of their reliability was and is at the top of any list


This is quite true. A Camry, for example, is not a BMW or a Porsche. And even the awesome value car, the Accord "Sport" is not a drivers car, even if it has bigger wheels, tires, better exhaust and more HP. They are, however, very capable appliances.

The one exception may be the Scion FR-S (and Subaru BRZ) cars. Even so, they are on the "toy" end of enthusiast cars. And of course, Lexus (a Toyota company) does make a few models that are truly fun to drive.

But, yes, the Toyota brand is largely "white bread and butter" .

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Cujet
the Accord "Sport" is not a drivers car, even if it has bigger wheels, tires, better exhaust and more HP.

The Sport model has 4 more HP and 1 more lb-ft of torque compared to all the other 4-cyl models. Woohoo!

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: Nate1979
HD gas trucks. Work day in day out and will outlast anything on the road with no issues. GM 6.0 6 speed Powertrain one example.


Father-in-law ('09 Chevy 2500) just replaced the engine. 158K miles and the rod bearing decided to give up. So far, this has been his "best truck". It has had a lot of other "issues".

HD trucks are not great. The difference is that they get repaired because they are tools. $5000 for a new crate motor vs $40K for a new truck... $5K all day. You are not going to drop $5K on a Hyundai hatchback to replace the motor after 7 years and 160K miles. Do not mistake "willingness to repair" for reliability. My family owned a '91 Towncar and despite getting 230,000 it was as far from reliable as you can get. Most of that car was not on the assembly line rolling out...

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
My family owned a '91 Towncar and despite getting 230,000 it was as far from reliable as you can get. Most of that car was not on the assembly line rolling out...


Reliable or durable? Did it need towing? Was it in the shop a lot?

1991 was practically a different age. 100k was a good distance back then. Yes many cars lasted longer, but repairs were expected.

But what is your last line? Did you add/modify the car, or are you indicating you got a stripper?

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: Lolvoguy
Originally Posted By: CincyDavid

Mercedes and Volvo USED to build cars that ran a LONG time, I don't see that with their newer products.


Blasphemy! how dare you drag Volvo's good name through the mud! Many folks on here swear by their Volvo's (GHT included).

Actually I wholeheartedly agree with you (see username).


Transmissions and AWD systems should be able to withstand enough spinning to blow out two tires!

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
My family owned a '91 Towncar and despite getting 230,000 it was as far from reliable as you can get. Most of that car was not on the assembly line rolling out...


Reliable or durable? Did it need towing? Was it in the shop a lot?

1991 was practically a different age. 100k was a good distance back then. Yes many cars lasted longer, but repairs were expected.

But what is your last line? Did you add/modify the car, or are you indicating you got a stripper?


As in we called it the "limpin' Lincoln". All stock. My father ran it and ran it (thus stock). In theory, it was going to be my bother's first car but it was too unreliable for a 16yo. Our '91 DeVille ran around 270K with 1/100 of the "issues". FYI, this is in the late 90s and early 00s so it was not a 20yo car... yet. It made it to 15yo...

Most of that car was replaced when we eventually sent it to a junkyard. I opened the door handle and the door fell off the vehicle. The entire headliner collapsed... not just the fabric, I mean the resin backing as well... while driving. All of the electric window switches and door locks had to be replaced (multiple times)... and then liked to fall into the door. The tranny was replaced. That #$%^&*^%$#@#$%^&* air suspension. OMFG that air suspension. Radio, alternator, AC compressor, dash/instrument panel, ignition... and then the "leather" shredded like string cheese at year 8. We kept it "stock" but the only thing original to that car was the frame and 4.6. Despite owning a '82 Chevy and a '79 Z, I learned more from wrenching on that than other cars.

Wait, there was the timing chain issue too.

 

[FutureDoc]

So the moral of the story is that you have to distinguish between willingness to repair vs vehicle reliability. Some vehicles by their occupation (taxis, farm trucks) can be horrifically unreliable but their owners will repair them... or if your father is "mentally ill" and will repair a vehicle way beyond the cost effectiveness and is prone to own lemons and Chryslers (same thing really). You would think that with a family that has 4-6 cars with over 175,000 miles, we had great luck but that was never the case.

Some folks who live/grow up without something tend to hoard that item later in life. At one time, my family (of four) owned EIGHT vehicles. (79Z (mine) 82 C10, 91TC, 91 DeVille, 92 Lebaron, 98 Sebring, 00 Neon, 2006 Sebring) Why? because many of them were broken. That is why I am planning to sell my old car when I bought my new car... but dragging my feet because, well, you never know...

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: cadfaeltex
Have we seen the end of legendary reliability?


With the introduction of variable valve timing and direct fuel injection, yes.


How does VVT and FI make a vehicle any less reliable?

 

[supton]

VVT might be less tolerant of getting gummed up by sludge (ignoring that it isn't exactly good for the rest of the engine either). VVT is more parts but IMO it hasn't been a real issue, outside of maybe a few initial examples.

Direct fuel injection (DI) may have issues with fuel dilution; change the oil on time and no issue. The loss of performance from intake valve deposits may be costly but that's not a "reliability" issue as long as it keeps running. Now if the deposits get large enough to cause misfires then that is definitely a reliability issue.

What I haven't heard of is issues with longevity on these DI injectors. Eons ago I recall reading how DI was impossible with gasoline (think early 90's) due to lack of lubricity. Apparently they got past that. Given the issues that high pressure diesels have had, I'm somewhat surprised that DI gasoline hasn't had fuel pump or injector problems--must be running low pressures, or it's just that well designed.

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted By: cadfaeltex
Hmmm. My son likes the look of the Fiat 500X. FCA really that sub-par?


Yes.

I took a look at Truedelta.com and found that Fiat is overall not very reliable.

 

[SeaJay]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
So the moral of the story is that you have to distinguish between willingness to repair vs vehicle reliability. Some vehicles by their occupation (taxis, farm trucks) can be horrifically unreliable but their owners will repair them


Bingo, this is the correct answer. The livery driver owners by me are living paycheck to paycheck and have to pay to fix and keep running. The prices charged by the repair shops competing for all of that business keep the repairs more affordable than for the average Joe needing a repair.

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: supton
VVT might be less tolerant of getting gummed up by sludge (ignoring that it isn't exactly good for the rest of the engine either). VVT is more parts but IMO it hasn't been a real issue, outside of maybe a few initial examples.

Direct fuel injection (DI) may have issues with fuel dilution; change the oil on time and no issue. The loss of performance from intake valve deposits may be costly but that's not a "reliability" issue as long as it keeps running. Now if the deposits get large enough to cause misfires then that is definitely a reliability issue.

What I haven't heard of is issues with longevity on these DI injectors. Eons ago I recall reading how DI was impossible with gasoline (think early 90's) due to lack of lubricity. Apparently they got past that. Given the issues that high pressure diesels have had, I'm somewhat surprised that DI gasoline hasn't had fuel pump or injector problems--must be running low pressures, or it's just that well designed.


Keep in mind that like all technologies, some do it better than others. DI is a prime example as Mazda, GM and Hyundai's DI seems to be relatively "fine" with no major common issue (yet) however, VW and BMW's DI is horrific and that is the horror story with DI engines. Should note than poor quality gas can make it seem like it is the DI's problem, rather than looking at the fuel source.

As for VVT, the tech has more moving parts (thus a greater chance) but the tech has been about as reliable as any innovation could dream to be. Considering that the tech is well over 20, nearing 30 years old in wide-spread application (although it was developed in the 20s I think) the only common problem I can think of is that Ford had issues in some V8 with their cam phasers. Really the only way to have VVT issues is my neglect or lightning-strikes-you-twice type of luck.

Originally Posted By: cadfaeltex
Hmmm. My son likes the look of the Fiat 500X. FCA really that sub-par?


I don't know how it happened, but Fiat is worse than Chrysler. Of the major makes, Dodge is the best ranking 22 (of 28) Chrysler trails that 23 (of 28), Ram edges it out at 26 (of 28), Jeep brings it home at 27 (of 28), and Fiat bests all others in dead last 28 of 28. And when I sat Fiat is last... it is -175 last.

 

[clinebarger]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
HD gas trucks. Work day in day out and will outlast anything on the road with no issues. GM 6.0 6 speed Powertrain one example.


Father-in-law ('09 Chevy 2500) just replaced the engine. 158K miles and the rod bearing decided to give up. So far, this has been his "best truck". It has had a lot of other "issues".

HD trucks are not great. The difference is that they get repaired because they are tools. $5000 for a new crate motor vs $40K for a new truck... $5K all day. You are not going to drop $5K on a Hyundai hatchback to replace the motor after 7 years and 160K miles. Do not mistake "willingness to repair" for reliability. My family owned a '91 Towncar and despite getting 230,000 it was as far from reliable as you can get. Most of that car was not on the assembly line rolling out...


I have maintained several fleets of HD trucks during my career as a Shop Foreman/Technician, Some big as 150+ trucks. I will have to disagree with you. 2500 & 3500 trucks from the Big Three are VERY reliable, They get driven by employees that don't care, Tow at & over the GCWR, Some try to break their truck intentionally. And STILL.....Engine replacements are few & far between. And even then, 99% of the time is because it got Hot or got ran out of Oil.

Bearing Inserts don't fail just because after 160K miles without issues, Something else happened that your FIL didn't tell you about, It's amazing what people will do/say/not say just to "Save Face".

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
As for VVT, the tech has more moving parts (thus a greater chance) but the tech has been about as reliable as any innovation could dream to be. Considering that the tech is well over 20, nearing 30 years old in wide-spread application (although it was developed in the 20s I think) the only common problem I can think of is that Ford had issues in some V8 with their cam phasers. Really the only way to have VVT issues is my neglect or lightning-strikes-you-twice type of luck.


That was my point, VVT hasn't been a problem. It ought to be less reliable, more parts and all; but really, it seems to just keep going. It's other stuff that breaks it seems.

 

[Cujet]

I wrote Michael over at truedelta.com about the possibility of a list of "the best".

What he came up with was "reliability by generation" . It is a sum of the reliability for each generation of a model across the span of years it's produced, based on trips to the mechanic/per year/per 100 cars.

So, for example, the 2012-2015 Prius, as a group, is among the best. Same goes for the 2014-2016 Corolla and Camry. In fact, Toyota is very well represented at the top of the list.

But the Camry is at the top. So, to answer the OP's question, today's legendary vehicle reliability goes to the current generation Camry.