Reliability of newer cars going downhill?

[Burt]

Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: Burt
Making reliable cars is all about doing the same thing over and over again, using well proven technology. I went from a 2010 BMW to a 2011 Lexus and was amazed that the Lexus was a generation or two behind BMW in navigation, back-up camera, etc. At the time Lexus had virtually no cars with turbos and no whiz-bang surprise and delight features. It's just dead on reliable.

The 'tricks' that manufacturers use to improve performance and mpg generally lead to problems down the road. Remember when cars first came out with turbos? My Windstar had nifty vacuum actuated tuned intake manifold runners that greatly increased HP, but the diaphragms in the actuator rotten by 150,000 miles by which time the screws holding them had fused into the intake manifold necessitating a $1,000 repair. Eventually they replaced the vacuum diagrams with electronic buggers.

They ain't putting in a turbocharger that spins at 120,000 rpm and handles 1200 degree exhaust gas to improve reliability. Same goes for most new technology.



Are you a auto engineer?
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: Burt
Making reliable cars is all about doing the same thing over and over again, using well proven technology. I went from a 2010 BMW to a 2011 Lexus and was amazed that the Lexus was a generation or two behind BMW in navigation, back-up camera, etc. At the time Lexus had virtually no cars with turbos and no whiz-bang surprise and delight features. It's just dead on reliable.

The 'tricks' that manufacturers use to improve performance and mpg generally lead to problems down the road. Remember when cars first came out with turbos? My Windstar had nifty vacuum actuated tuned intake manifold runners that greatly increased HP, but the diaphragms in the actuator rotten by 150,000 miles by which time the screws holding them had fused into the intake manifold necessitating a $1,000 repair. Eventually they replaced the vacuum diagrams with electronic buggers.

They ain't putting in a turbocharger that spins at 120,000 rpm and handles 1200 degree exhaust gas to improve reliability. Same goes for most new technology.



Are you a auto engineer?


No but I play one on TV.

Actually I am have a BSME but worked in fluid flow and thermodynamic areas.

 

[nwjones18]

Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: Leo99
Originally Posted By: nwjones18
Originally Posted By: Vuflanovsky
The stop/start function would have to be defeatable in any vehicle I'd buy for that very reason. Heavy commute traffic and having to approach the pedal a certain way could almost be like driving a clutch if the linearity isn't there. Apparently, some systems are better than others. The vast majority of my cars have been manual transmissions, but I would have to have control over that function if I was to buy an automatic because of a heavy daily commute. Any potential insanity inducers have to come with an off switch.


Same here I cannot imagine owning a car with stop/start and my commute isn't even that bad. It would drive me nuts. I also really don't love cylinder deactivation. I want my engine to run on all of its cylinders all the time.


You get used to it. Took me a few days when I rented a Mercedes in Munich. The first 2 days I turned it off. Sitting at stop sign with the engine off and then having to go when the traffic clears but you see a car a ways off in your path takes some getting used to. Almost every taxi I've been in in Europe has the stop/start function.



The "new fangle tech phobia" is alive and well here on BITOG. The same thing is said on here OVER AND OVER AGAIN when any "new tech" that is added to vehicles. Last time it was the sensors that keep your car in the lanes. Many reviews on this Start/stop I have read said it's pretty much seamless and transparent.

I rode in a Prius taxi in Canada and I couldn't even tell when the motor kicked in.


This whole post is about new cars being less reliable, tell me how do you think start/stop technology and cylinder deactivation are going to affect the reliability of the vehicle over its life? Do you think it will be more reliable because of these technologies? I personally do not.

 

[CKN]

This whole post is about new cars being less reliable, tell me how do you think start/stop technology and cylinder deactivation are going to affect the reliability of the vehicle over its life? Do you think it will be more reliable because of these technologies? I personally do not. [/quote]


I know the starters in start/stop cars are more robust. That's what has been stated in the reviews I have read. They would have to be. The same thing has been said on BITOG on just about every new tech that has come out. GM has had cylinder deactivation on it's 5.3 motors since '07. I am thinking about the Silverados/Sierras which they sell 40,000 plus units a month-the vast majority with the 5.3. While the earlier AFM (cylinder deactivation) motors did have issues-they were addressed. SO- you can do the math at 40,000 units a month for the last 10 years-the issue of reliability is pretty much a non-issue.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
I firmly believe that American cars have improved tremendously. As one example I have a 100k mile 3500 service van (2013) that has had nothing but routine oil changes since new despite a grueling duty cycle.

It still has over 7mm of original brake pads left.

Just as noted above, there are a lot of opinions here but the real data is few and far between...
Try 350,000 on the engine, tranny and rear brakes of a 1999 Camry I4.


Not discounting it a bit, it all depends on the driver. I had an 04 3500 van that I sold last year with over 500k miles on it. That vehicle had tires, a battery, brake pads, and an alternator during its life here. EXTREMELY tight and ran great when sold, but in no way is that a "typical" fleet vehicle for us. It was a factory freak.

Just remember, to simulate what we do you would need to put another Camry on top of that one while driving and make sure and park it running at 1500 rpm for thousands of hours as well...

 

[PimTac]

I've been away so sorry for the late response. Cherry picking? Nope, just personal observation and coffee chatter. Overall reliability? Yes cars have improved. No more fiddling with carbs, floats, points, plugs, condensers, rotors, etc. But, those could be done on a Saturday morning. Complication? Yes indeed. I refuse to buy a car with start-stop. I have even wondered about hybrids having driven them on cold mornings. They start off on battery then the engine starts and immediately takes the load. But then I haven't heard of many engine failures due to that.

I drove several 60's, 70's cars. Generally good but the 70's started to go downhill and progressed lower into the 80's. I had a 85 Ford Ranger with the Capri 2.8 v6. It was junk. Constant issues. The onboard computer fried three times during my ownership, once in -5 F winter. The third time was just a few weeks after the second failure so I fired that truck so to speak and bought a Toyota Tacoma. 1995 with the 2.7 4 banger. Also had a Mitsubishi with the 1.8 . Both of those vehicles ran and ran with no issues. I liked the Mitsubishi so much I traded it in on a Montero Sport that also ran forever.

Now, I'll put on my flame suit here but I noticed a big difference between Japanese built Mitsu's and the Illinois built ones. I have seen this same discrepancy with Nissan and Toyota as well although not as severe. Now I'm not going to discount a US made vehicle in the future but I will give them the full scrutiny. The Tacoma was built in Cali at that time but the engine was Japanese.

Thanks for some interesting responses.

 

[Jetronic]

I've noticed the same with Japanese built mitsubishis vs made elsewhere, and silk reported similar findings. Honda suffered the same, top tier being built in Japan, bottom tier in the UK, and the US in between.

 

[JustinH]

I agree on the Toyota comment. I have owned several Toyota's. The tech and gadgets seem to be a generation behind than the others. However they have been the most reliable of the cars I have owned.

I expected our Scion to have tons of gadgets as it is aimed towards a younger crowd. It doesn't even have bluetooth, and it has one analog headphone port in the center console, to connect your smartphone. It doesn't have sat radio either, or HD radio.

Also as far as I know, Toyota hasn't gone to the GDI game either, and their cars are super easy on oil. Coming up on a 5k oil change for the Scion and the oil looks nearly new, where as my GDI Hyundai destroys oil within 1000 miles.

When I moved down south, I learned about two makes that I thought were junk, and they were very slow sellers up north.

Friend has a newer Mitsu Outlander Sport SUV. It is well appointed and has given her no problems in 75k of service. Another friend has a Suzuki SX5 car that has been beat up by her, and is very reliable.

Another friend has a new focus, that always seems to be in the shop for odd problems, and it has low mileage.

 

[PimTac]

Mitsubishi is a very underrated automaker. Suzuki as well. The US market is a tough audience. Both companies will continue now that they have the big boys taking care of them Mitsu has Nissan who owns 33% or so if the company and Suzuki has Toyota who has been swallowing up the smaller Japanese automakers left and right .

 

[aquariuscsm]

My Mitsubishi (100% built Japanese 3000GT) was the best and most reliable car I ever owned. My Nissan (also 100% built Japanese) as well.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
My Mitsubishi (100% built Japanese 3000GT) was the best and most reliable car I ever owned. My Nissan (also 100% built Japanese) as well.



The mention of a 3000GT goes way back. That was some car in the day.

 

[Jetronic]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
My Mitsubishi (100% built Japanese 3000GT) was the best and most reliable car I ever owned. My Nissan (also 100% built Japanese) as well.


And from what I heard, every part of it was actually Mitsubishi. not Bosch, ACDelco, Delphi or any other parts suppliers...

 

[Vuflanovsky]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
My Mitsubishi (100% built Japanese 3000GT) was the best and most reliable car I ever owned. My Nissan (also 100% built Japanese) as well.


I always have that thought when the Mitsu hate crops up on here. I owned a '97 Japanese-built Mirage ( back when it was a compact ) and that overall was the best and most reliable car I've owned. I did a major service/tune up every 30-40K miles and it was closer to flawless than any of the 8-9 cars I've owned.

 

[MCompact]

I had a 1979 Mitsubishi(Plymouth) Arrow GT 2.6 that I bought new. It had four wheel discs, a five speed manual, and a four cylinder that punched above its weight. It was a great car.

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: Malo83
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
trucks are 100 year old tech. Why folks pay $$$ for them ( as personal use vehicle) is beyond me.

The Great FORD and Chevy truck generations were LONG ago.

Turn in your Man Card.

Sorry, your "man card" has been revoked but you PE pill prescription has been doubled and you will receive a free copy of "Simple repairs for Dummies" with a quick reference book for things like "Don't call an electrician to change a light bulb".

ARCO is right.

This is a truck:

This is a peacock cod piece for useless wannabes who want to look like they can do something. You might as well being carrying a designer handbag. POSERS!!!

Listen, if you use a truck as a general commuter vehicle, have leather seats, faux-wood dash, and anything other than jump-seat for a work crew, chances are, you are posing. Heck, if you would be worried about cow-sh!t ruining your interior, you have the wrong vehicle.

Truck interiors should only come with hard plastic, vinyl floors, cloth/vinyl seats and if you splurge, a radio with BOTH AM and FM on the dial.

Heck, I know someone who uses a Prius as their work/contract vehicle (They also have a F350 too) but the Prius does 90% including hauling bags of concrete with a lot better fuel mileage which this person needs as they travel a long, long way to jobsites.

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
I firmly believe that American cars have improved tremendously. As one example I have a 100k mile 3500 service van (2013) that has had nothing but routine oil changes since new despite a grueling duty cycle.

It still has over 7mm of original brake pads left.

Just as noted above, there are a lot of opinions here but the real data is few and far between...


Not discounting it a bit, it all depends on the driver. I had an 04 3500 van that I sold last year with over 500k miles on it. That vehicle had tires, a battery, brake pads, and an alternator during its life here. EXTREMELY tight and ran great when sold, but in no way is that a "typical" fleet vehicle for us. It was a factory freak.

Just remember, to simulate what we do you would need to put another Camry on top of that one while driving and make sure and park it running at 1500 rpm for thousands of hours as well...


I agree with you on use and hours. However, it cuts both ways. Idling is not going to have as harsh impact on items like brakes and suspension components. Sure, the engine hours are going to be higher, but the rest of the vehicle is not being used. So a highway Camry can be tougher on other items even if the engine hours are low. I have the other end of the spectrum: local-only vehicles in motion (average speed is 12.5) for 14+ hours a day with little/no idling.

I have two 2009 E450s with 80K and 90K miles and they are no longer cost-effective for us to use. One (the 80K model) is now a parts vehicle for us. The 90K E450 is now a reserve vehicle. Granted, both have 12,000+ hours on them but it is tough for me to explain to to my finance folks that a 8 year old vehicle with less than 100K is a junk-yard bound vehicle. I also have an 2014 E350 with 66K and we are now on the 5th or 6th set of tires and brakes. We get about 10-16K out of each. It averages about 165 miles a day but runs an average of 14.5 hours of use across 2 or 3 shifts. The front and rear suspension is shot (replaced at 60K) and while it has been a fantastic vehicle, we have had a water pump and steering pump failure.

The 2016 Transit we have are a mixed. One had a throttle control failure at 4K miles and the other is good. However, the throttle-issue van was just rear-ended and replacing the plastic body cladding was $850 on one door... because Ford mounted the camera as a single unit. So the body damaged the plastic but the functional camera had to be replaced. A 15 rear-end accident was $7,000 to fix. Luckily the the guy paid, I am not happy with those costs. They are now at 10-15K miles and already had their brakes replaced, tires are looming but doing better than the E-series vehicles surprisingly.

I also have a fleet of 25 "light duty" vehicles. Minivans, suvs, sedans. US makes are better overall. No doubt. They still are not consistent. Toyotas are reliable and generally consistant. US makes can squeeze invincible vehicles out followed immediately by junk. I see this frequently as some of our vehicles are or are nearly consecutive VINs... amazing. I have 4 Impalas. Two eat accessory items (Steering pumps, etc). Another has suspension and transmission replacement at 40K. The last is over 100K and almost trouble free. Just went in for its first real repair. Evap emission sensor failure. So 3 are junk and one is bulletproof (so far).I see this in the 9 Caravans as well. Some are fine, others are repair queens. The only thing consistent are that Chevy Uplanders should be sent straight into the sun for being the worst vehicle of all time.

 

[SteveSRT8]

^^^Haha, we all know our lemons. I had a 3500 savana like that, with the windshield up over the lip in the front and myriad small things wrong. Drivetrain was stout, though.

Note our trucks never see the highway except to sprint across the bay to another county. All city work. Our equipment is estimated to use about 30 hp at 1500 rpm and 35 hp at 1750. So it's really about a 45-55 mph pace while sitting still.

We have dozens of added heat shields under the van to protect things from the heat. It can be dangerous in many vehicles to run them as stationary power sources without careful preparation...