What's the most over-engineered "mainstream" car ever built?

[white_goodman]

As above, you would hope your money no object cars: Rolls Royce, Bentley, Veyron, McLaren were built to last but how about more normal "mainstream" cars?

I can't say I have driven anything post-1995 that felt built to last. 1980s VW Polos and Golfs felt pretty bombproof and many still survive but my 2000 Golf was a basket case at 7 years old and my dad's 2006 Golf was starting to feel a bit ropey at 4 years old (but it had done a lot of miles). Toyota has a good reputation for making tough, durable cars but we've just bought a new Toyota and I can't see it still being around in 20 years time. It's not really in the manufacturer's best interests to over-engineer their new cars now, as they want you to buy a new one in 3-5 years time.

I suppose by over-engineered, I mean feels built to last, reliable, durable, needs few replacement parts or the ones they have last a long time and cope with a lot of abuse. A few suggestions:

Toyota Hilux/Landcruiser
Lexus LS400
1980s Polo/Golf
pre-1990s BMW/Mercedes/Audi (although Audi were potentially still over-engineering cars right through the 1990s before they became rebodied VWs, ahem, Audi TT)
Peugeot 504/505 (my 205 GTi was still going strong after 11 years and 170,000 hard-driven miles, so mechanically very strong but electrics/trim not so. Lots still survive though and you can't say that of many small cars of that age).

[white_goodman]

Sir Fergie said:

Agreed - overengineered means - its better then it needs to be.

For example - a Sierra might last 10 years - and that's seen as okay - a Volvo 240 on the other hand could last for over 20 years with decent maintenance - therefore the Volvo is over engineered - its build stronger to last longer then the Sierra - but the Sierra is still seen as okay - hence the 240 is a lot better then it needed to be - so over engineered.

I think over engineered is a good thing in this regard - I like the idea of having something that will do 300,000 miles or more without issue.

Many manufacturers don't agree however

Thanks. You explained that better and more succintly than I did in the OP!

And yes, I forgot about the Volvo 200/700/850/900 series (in fact any Volvo prior to about 1995 with the exception of anything with a Renault engine - they were crap!)

Pre-GM Saab too (I seem to remember reading about a classic Saab 900 and a Volvo P1800 with 1,000,000 miles+ on the clock).

Defender/Series Landrover - well they should be (simple, the military use them, you see them all around the world and the survival rate is very high but at the same time I hear of some people having lots of problems, so maybe the older ones you see have an element of Trigger's broom about them)!

Pushing the "mainstream" thing a bit but I also hear the pre water-cooled 911s and the Porsche 944/968 were very over-engineered cars.

Would have said more Japanese stuff in terms of mechanical and electrical reliability but many 1980s/1990s Hondas/Toyotas seem to have rusted out by now.

In my experience classic Subaru Imprezas seem to take abuse well with few problems and the 2.0 turbo can achieve some high, reliable power figures without issues.

I'm surprised a few people mentioned the W140 S-Class, as I thought this era (W202, W210, W140) ushered the decline of Mercedes. Wasn't the W126 the last "bulletproof" S-Class?

I buy modern cars for the performance, economy, safety and features but I have still yet to drive a modern post-1995 car (even a premium car) that feels like it would romp past 100,000 miles without major issue in the same way as a 1980s Mercedes/BMW/Audi/Volvo would. Perhaps this was the sweet spot between modern performance, reliability and durability? Bizarrely, if I was going to buy a new car to rack up 100,000 miles at my own expense, I wouldn't buy a VW, BMW, Mercedes or even a Honda or Toyota. I would probably buy a Hyundai or Kia, as they seem to have the confidence to stand by their product when it comes to longevity!

VW/Audi certainly give a good illusion of quality (soft touch plastics, doors that thunk etc) and as an ex-VW salesman, I was very impressed with the new Phaeton and thought that it felt like a better-engineered car than the contemporary 7-Series/S-Class/A8 with the added kudos of sharing some architecture with Bentley but how this worked out long-term I'm not so sure.

The first-generation A-series Audis (A4/A6/A8) still felt like highly over-engineered cars but was this the case in reality?

Edited by white_goodman on Thursday 24th July 16:16

[white_goodman]

skyrover said:

American HD pickups trucks are also pretty over-engineered.

The RAM 3500 is rated to tow 14,000 KG

Edited by skyrover on Thursday 24th July 08:13

That is pretty impressive but transmissions and front suspensions are known weak points on Dodge/Ram pickups.

No, the longest-lasting (most over-enginnered) American pickup is the 1990s Chevrolet Silverado/GMC Sierra.



They do rust but are made from very heavy-gauge steel and seem to last forever. My BIL just sold his 1992 Sierra very much like this one for $7500 with 550,000km on the clock (granted the engine and transmission were newer than that though and it had something pretty special under the bonnet)! Thousands of these still in daily use in USA and Canada!

[white_goodman]

ging84 said:

I think the OP and this thread seem to be confusing over engineering with good design

An over engineered car is not one which 15 years and 200k miles is still going strong as a good car of it's day, and in many of the examples given, only really advances towards greater efficiency and obviously there slightly dated appearances stop them remaining a good car of any day.

An over engineered car is one which solved problems which didn't exist, to the detriment of the car, eg making it too heavy, too expensive or too complicated.

I'd say the BMW E39 is a good example, it was much more hightech than the previous generation and now if you look at them now they have something of a reputation for electrical issues, older bmws also had a bit of a reputation for electrical issues, but the e34s are considered a very safe bet, if it wasn't for the very dated appearance and the lack of decent diesel models i suspect e34s would be be far more popular old barges than e39s.
Basically they took a step backwards before they could take the next steps forward

Not sure whether I agree with your definition but it's in interesting point. Would VW creating the ultimate (but fragile) diesel engine, the 5.0 V10 and then quietly dropping it a couple of years later be a good example of this?

[white_goodman]

scarble said:

How many Coras Bs are still going? Is that reliability or did they just sell loads?
Seem to be a lot of Mk6 Escorts about too and mine took a lot of punishment, clutch adjuster aside it held up well.

Actually, I would say you don't see that many Corsa Bs or Mk6 Escorts around any more, bearing in mind how many were sold. Scrappage scheme perhaps? Didn't even Mk6 Escorts rust out to the extent that it wasn't viable to get them through an MOT?