The "good old days" when engines were reliable is nonsense
Discussion
I have seen a number of posts on the internet recently where the sentiment is expressed that modern engines are too complicated and unreliable, and wishing for a return to the good old days of simple reliable engines. .
My own personal experience runs completely counter to that. Reliability in the past was terrible, with poor engineering, and poor quality control. Despite the complaints every time new tech is introduced, each generation of cars has turned out to be more reliable and better built than the last. There are obvious over engineered standouts in each generation, but the overall trend has been better every decade.
Although they are more complicated, my own experience has been that in many cases nowadays its easier to resolve common issues, the computer tells you whats wrong and you plug a new module in. As an example, solving a misfire back in the day could take a whole day, checking the coil, the points, the carbs, fuel pressure etc, and it all had to be done step by step with analogue tools, in contrast, 90% of misfires can be solved in 15 mins by a competent tech these days.
I don't think there is any truth to the idea that in the old days, engines were simple, reliable, and ran without issues, they may have been simple, but not reliable, and required regular tuning to run optimally.
My own personal experience runs completely counter to that. Reliability in the past was terrible, with poor engineering, and poor quality control. Despite the complaints every time new tech is introduced, each generation of cars has turned out to be more reliable and better built than the last. There are obvious over engineered standouts in each generation, but the overall trend has been better every decade.
Although they are more complicated, my own experience has been that in many cases nowadays its easier to resolve common issues, the computer tells you whats wrong and you plug a new module in. As an example, solving a misfire back in the day could take a whole day, checking the coil, the points, the carbs, fuel pressure etc, and it all had to be done step by step with analogue tools, in contrast, 90% of misfires can be solved in 15 mins by a competent tech these days.
I don't think there is any truth to the idea that in the old days, engines were simple, reliable, and ran without issues, they may have been simple, but not reliable, and required regular tuning to run optimally.
Engines were simple and many people could work on them with simple tools - now the tech is very complicated with much more critical tolerances.
My old MG Metro needed valves re-lapping at 60,000 miles and a refresh...at 100,000 miles the engines were starting to get low oil pressure but it was all easy to work on in an afternoon and you could lift them out without a crane and just a mate to help lift.
My old MG Metro needed valves re-lapping at 60,000 miles and a refresh...at 100,000 miles the engines were starting to get low oil pressure but it was all easy to work on in an afternoon and you could lift them out without a crane and just a mate to help lift.
Caddyshack said:
Engines were simple and many people could work on them with simple tools - now the tech is very complicated with much more critical tolerances.
My old MG Metro needed valves re-lapping at 60,000 miles and a refresh...at 100,000 miles the engines were starting to get low oil pressure but it was all easy to work on in an afternoon and you could lift them out without a crane and just a mate to help lift.
Surely it would have dissolved into the ground by 60k miles, let alone 100k?My old MG Metro needed valves re-lapping at 60,000 miles and a refresh...at 100,000 miles the engines were starting to get low oil pressure but it was all easy to work on in an afternoon and you could lift them out without a crane and just a mate to help lift.
normalbloke said:
There was definitely a sweet spot, up to about 05/06 ish. So before everything became CAN infested..I wouldn’t choose to own any modern vehicle outside of the manufacturers warranty.
I think I would agree with this.Late 90s to mid 2000s cars were reliable and long lived. Current cars are an order of magnitude more complex, particularly in terms of electronics, but this has been driven more by functionality and cost saving than it has reliability.
I'm not sure I'd even say modern engines are "peak reliability" in terms of the basics. Timing chain issues seem far more common now than they were 20 years ago, particularly so on German and JLR products. Coking up was also a relic from the 70s and earlier that was pretty much eliminated in the 80s and 90s, but which has reared its ugly head again in the modern DI world.
And that's without the Heath Robinson emissions paraphernalia nailed on to diesel engines that is known for throwing eye watering bills (and even wrecking engines) if it fails, or if the car isn't used in the right way.
Another piece of anecdotal evidence that things are actually going backwards is that a neighbour of mine used to buy 3 year old, relatively high mileage ex fleet / lease stuff at auction, run it for 3 years, sell and repeat. Usually 80-100,000 mile nicely specced BMWs, Audis and the like. He said he used to expect to be in for the odd clutch or transmission service, maybe the odd bush or bearing, but they'd generally provide great service up to about 150k. He reckons post 2010, he's seeing expensive stuff like timing chains, turbos, major transmission failures and electrical gremlins before 150,000 miles that simply never used to be a thing. And the cost of rectifying them is eye watering in many cases.
Caddyshack said:
Engines were simple and many people could work on them with simple tools - now the tech is very complicated with much more critical tolerances.
My old MG Metro needed valves re-lapping at 60,000 miles and a refresh...at 100,000 miles the engines were starting to get low oil pressure but it was all easy to work on in an afternoon and you could lift them out without a crane and just a mate to help lift.
And you cant on the modern equivalent, say an Aygo ?My old MG Metro needed valves re-lapping at 60,000 miles and a refresh...at 100,000 miles the engines were starting to get low oil pressure but it was all easy to work on in an afternoon and you could lift them out without a crane and just a mate to help lift.
Well, you can, heard of one changed in an afternoon, in the pits of a racetrack, things is you rarely need to, throw its some oil every year or two on those and you wont hear a peep from it, ever. Sure they have a few more pipes and hoses, but not that many, and ECU's arent that much of a mystery if you can use a laptop and a cable.
Older engines werent built to he same tolerances as modern ones, and designs not as well refined, plus the combustion process was dirtier due to using carburetors rather than fuel injection, which tend to go off tune and gunk things up.
Modern engines tend to fail for one of two main reasons, a design/manufacturer foul up, such as BMW timing chains or JLR 2.0 diesels being a ticking time bomb, or otherwise the emissions control/systems breaking.
Rarely do most engines these days develop a rod knock, spin a bearing, throw a piston if its standard and cared for as per the manufacturers instructions.
I think the thing about the early noughties being a sweet spot is true, take a Japanese N/A petrol, say a 1.8 16 valve or similar, and treat it to regular oil changes, change the cam belt on time and I dont think you could actually kill one. With clean oil and sympathetic use an engine can be in a state after 100k where there is no discernible wear, the factory cross hatching on the bores still intact, all bearing shells still coated in white metal etc.
Suspect most cars are finished off by a long MOT defect sheet or a bump of some kind, major its a given, and even minor ones can finish a car off pretty easily as repair costs are so high.
But, will all be immaterial, chances are an electric motor will outlive the owner in most cases, and the batteries arent proving quite as flaky as first envisaged, cars no longer rust to a serious degree, can see an EV having a longer lifespan.
Always makes me laugh when folk who love old cars say they were better built, and citing a 70s Ford as an example, we had them when we were kids, remember saturdays round our way smelling of Dupli Colour and Isopon, Dad out checking valve clearances, spotting a new rust bubble or two, I have an eight year old Ford, is still like new by and large, an 8 year old Ford from 1978 in 1986 would be disintegrating unless garaged and never used in the rain.
I agree there was a sweet spot whereby engines were reliable and fairly straightforward to work on - probably from the late 90s until mid 00s.
Recent engines can be reliable, but an absolute pain when they need working on.
For example, a mate of mine has a 2019 MB using a PSA engine... he asked me if I could take a look as he had an oil leak.
After looking, it was coming from the rocker cover - looked like the seal had failed (RTV and not a traditional rubber gasket).
In order to remove the rocker cover to reseal, a whole host of things needed removing - fuel lines, fuel pump, cams, timing, as well as the intake manifold.
I told him it was about 5p's worth of sealant but I wasnt going to take it on due to the tooling required.
Get a call a few days later, he'd been told the same by a few smallish independents so went to MB - over £1k to sort and no good-will, even considering its only really just out of warranty and on 32,000 miles.
Im out.
Recent engines can be reliable, but an absolute pain when they need working on.
For example, a mate of mine has a 2019 MB using a PSA engine... he asked me if I could take a look as he had an oil leak.
After looking, it was coming from the rocker cover - looked like the seal had failed (RTV and not a traditional rubber gasket).
In order to remove the rocker cover to reseal, a whole host of things needed removing - fuel lines, fuel pump, cams, timing, as well as the intake manifold.
I told him it was about 5p's worth of sealant but I wasnt going to take it on due to the tooling required.
Get a call a few days later, he'd been told the same by a few smallish independents so went to MB - over £1k to sort and no good-will, even considering its only really just out of warranty and on 32,000 miles.
Im out.
LJF_97 said:
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I actually preferer more electronics in cars.
Plug in a reader & the car tells you exactly what the problem is. Simple.
If only that were true. Very often, multiple parts will be thrown at it, at the customers expense, before the OBD jockey manages to replace the correct part. If at all.Plug in a reader & the car tells you exactly what the problem is. Simple.
Limpet said:
normalbloke said:
There was definitely a sweet spot, up to about 05/06 ish. So before everything became CAN infested..I wouldn’t choose to own any modern vehicle outside of the manufacturers warranty.
I think I would agree with this.Late 90s to mid 2000s cars were reliable and long lived. Current cars are an order of magnitude more complex, particularly in terms of electronics, but this has been driven more by functionality and cost saving than it has reliability.
I'm not sure I'd even say modern engines are "peak reliability" in terms of the basics. Timing chain issues seem far more common now than they were 20 years ago, particularly so on German and JLR products. Coking up was also a relic from the 70s and earlier that was pretty much eliminated in the 80s and 90s, but which has reared its ugly head again in the modern DI world.
And that's without the Heath Robinson emissions paraphernalia nailed on to diesel engines that is known for throwing eye watering bills (and even wrecking engines) if it fails, or if the car isn't used in the right way.
Another piece of anecdotal evidence that things are actually going backwards is that a neighbour of mine used to buy 3 year old, relatively high mileage ex fleet / lease stuff at auction, run it for 3 years, sell and repeat. Usually 80-100,000 mile nicely specced BMWs, Audis and the like. He said he used to expect to be in for the odd clutch or transmission service, maybe the odd bush or bearing, but they'd generally provide great service up to about 150k. He reckons post 2010, he's seeing expensive stuff like timing chains, turbos, major transmission failures and electrical gremlins before 150,000 miles that simply never used to be a thing. And the cost of rectifying them is eye watering in many cases.
A very simple reliable car, engine and gearbox still very sweet, but rust is now killing from the inside.
Disagree, my 91 toy celica managed to do 248,000 miles with limited servicing, my old 94 E30 M3 went onto 178,000 with 1 oil change per YEAR and my legacy managed to do 120,000 all with no issues!! i now have an 08 635D which is now on 110k miles and the engine is still going strong, brakes and tyres are the issue....
LJF_97 said:
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I actually preferer more electronics in cars.
Plug in a reader & the car tells you exactly what the problem is. Simple.
No, the reader will tell you what the system thinks the problem is, this doesn't always align with reality!Plug in a reader & the car tells you exactly what the problem is. Simple.
It's a very useful part of diagnosing the problem, but it's by no means a magic bullet, particularly when dealing with any non-generic codes that require a proprietary system.
As for the thread subject at large, I agree that 90s to mid 2000s is the optimal window for reliability vs complexity.
I absolutely do not agree that mid 90's to mid 2000 was the golden era.
Most of the popular makes of cars have improved hugely in that time.
Mercedes made rusty cars with soluble wiring. Would I have a E- Class W210 over a 212 or 213 ? Hell no. 2002 GLS ? not with someone else's barge pole.
BMW cooling and suspension systems were made of cheese. Vanos was a massive issue. Oil used to leak from various covers, Still a lot of dodgy quality present, but at least modern BMWs generally have dry engine bays now.
Volvo have come a very long way since the 2000's, the XC 90 is much better car than anything produced back then.
Ford were terrible with poor wiring, rust and engine issues.
The entire french car industry has taken huge leaps forwards. Remember how bad the Laguna X74 2000 was ?
Most of the popular makes of cars have improved hugely in that time.
Mercedes made rusty cars with soluble wiring. Would I have a E- Class W210 over a 212 or 213 ? Hell no. 2002 GLS ? not with someone else's barge pole.
BMW cooling and suspension systems were made of cheese. Vanos was a massive issue. Oil used to leak from various covers, Still a lot of dodgy quality present, but at least modern BMWs generally have dry engine bays now.
Volvo have come a very long way since the 2000's, the XC 90 is much better car than anything produced back then.
Ford were terrible with poor wiring, rust and engine issues.
The entire french car industry has taken huge leaps forwards. Remember how bad the Laguna X74 2000 was ?
It's hard to say because cars have changed dramatically. Emissions gubbins seems to cause a tonne of issues and you'd imagine a car made from 10,000 pieces is going to go wrong less than a car made with 20,000 pieces. Usage has changed too. People are on lease deals and don't care what happens to a car because it's someone else's problem after a few years. Back when cars weren't so readily available, people would take care of them better.
As other seem to think, the 2000's seem to be the sweet spot for modern motoring with all the relevant toys and solid reliability.
As other seem to think, the 2000's seem to be the sweet spot for modern motoring with all the relevant toys and solid reliability.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff