Modern used cars being less reliable a myth?
Discussion
Modern cars are so full of tech and sensors etc Vs cars of 15 years ago. Wondering how does that affect longterm reliability when the car becomes 10 years old. Stuff like lane assist, hill hold, electric handbrakes, blind spot assist, 360 degree cameras etc have been around for so long now there's no reason why they wouldn't be reliable as they get older since the tech is perfected at this point. Unless you go with a brand which is well known for having bad electrics
Nothing lasts forever and vulnerable to reliability, maintainability and testability issues exacerbated by increasing complexity and the relentless impact of obsolescence. Regarding the latter, improvements in reliability would reduce trade in spares so the better the quality the greater the impact of failure. The only way to remove the consequences of deterioration or failure is to remove the components or complexity from the equation.
In the olden days, failure of something like a 'door-open' switch would cause the interior light to stop working. Now, failure of same can cause errors in the central-locking system and immobilize the car.
Examples such as the above are why modern cars are likely to be shorter lived than their eighties and nineties counterparts. It's not that individual systems are less reliable, it's that systems can't fail individually like they used to, everything now depends on everything else courtesy of integration of the various circuits.
Twenty years ago, it was fairly common to drive round in a clapped-out luxury saloon with nothing much working beyond the engine, gearbox and as many electrics as were needed to get through an MOT - headlights and horn and so on. You can't really do that any more. A sensor breaking in a new car will take out the traction control, which takes out the ECU and so on like a chain of dominoes falling. Fair enough, one can replace the sensor, but that's expensive and does one want to keep doing it?
Where are the techno-cars of yore? The Nissan Twin Turbos and the Mitsubishi 3000s and the like? Gone. They went through a period of being about as cool as reading the Daily Express, and they rusted, but the principal killer was over complexity. Many simpler cars of the same period survive...
Examples such as the above are why modern cars are likely to be shorter lived than their eighties and nineties counterparts. It's not that individual systems are less reliable, it's that systems can't fail individually like they used to, everything now depends on everything else courtesy of integration of the various circuits.
Twenty years ago, it was fairly common to drive round in a clapped-out luxury saloon with nothing much working beyond the engine, gearbox and as many electrics as were needed to get through an MOT - headlights and horn and so on. You can't really do that any more. A sensor breaking in a new car will take out the traction control, which takes out the ECU and so on like a chain of dominoes falling. Fair enough, one can replace the sensor, but that's expensive and does one want to keep doing it?
Where are the techno-cars of yore? The Nissan Twin Turbos and the Mitsubishi 3000s and the like? Gone. They went through a period of being about as cool as reading the Daily Express, and they rusted, but the principal killer was over complexity. Many simpler cars of the same period survive...
Ever since dipsticks have been removed cars have been part of planned obsolescence by automotive companies, more control of their inventory and more money for them - I like tinkering with cars and doing as much work as I possibly can – My Jaguar XKRS is stretching it somewhat but so far so good, it has a dipstick….My hands have been bleeding working on this but so far so good.
They generally get you home, the exception being if you get a cut in a tyre, chances are no spare wheel but even if there is one apparently no one except the bloke who drives a breakdown truck can fathom the complexities of wheel changing.
Seriously though, its the myriad of warning lights and umpteen systems that 5 minutes ago weren't needed that are the issue now.
Whilst under maker's warranty, and anyone sensible spending their own hard earned won't be buying new cars for long term ownership with less than a 5 year warranty anyway, things are ok because the maker will (should) be fixing things, assuming you've kept religiously to the terms and conditions of warranty.
Once warranty is out everything changes, where the more systems that are fitted will inevitably lead to unviable repair costs causing premature scrapping of vehicles, not necessarily less reliable but where most of us could tinker our ways around issues on previous designs its no longer possible on modern cars stuffed with electronics.
Most of us can manage to keep our vehicles shiny side up and still on the road without all the nannying rubbish, but the MOT test doesn't take that into account, warning light not on or staying on means fail.
Seriously though, its the myriad of warning lights and umpteen systems that 5 minutes ago weren't needed that are the issue now.
Whilst under maker's warranty, and anyone sensible spending their own hard earned won't be buying new cars for long term ownership with less than a 5 year warranty anyway, things are ok because the maker will (should) be fixing things, assuming you've kept religiously to the terms and conditions of warranty.
Once warranty is out everything changes, where the more systems that are fitted will inevitably lead to unviable repair costs causing premature scrapping of vehicles, not necessarily less reliable but where most of us could tinker our ways around issues on previous designs its no longer possible on modern cars stuffed with electronics.
Most of us can manage to keep our vehicles shiny side up and still on the road without all the nannying rubbish, but the MOT test doesn't take that into account, warning light not on or staying on means fail.
Missy Charm said:
Examples such as the above are why modern cars are likely to be shorter lived than their eighties and nineties counterparts.
Really?I've had two cars from that time - I thought both were great cars and I enjoyed owning them but neither of them made it much beyond a decade before being scrapped as beyond repair. By contrast I've had more modern cars which approaching the same age as the older ones were when I bought them still felt much newer and like they had many years more life left.
Drive a 2014 car today and I bet it feels a lot more fresh and new than a 1994 version of the same car did in 2004.
Missy Charm said:
In the olden days, failure of something like a 'door-open' switch would cause the interior light to stop working. Now, failure of same can cause errors in the central-locking system and immobilize the car.
Examples such as the above are why modern cars are likely to be shorter lived than their eighties and nineties counterparts. It's not that individual systems are less reliable, it's that systems can't fail individually like they used to, everything now depends on everything else courtesy of integration of the various circuits.
Twenty years ago, it was fairly common to drive round in a clapped-out luxury saloon with nothing much working beyond the engine, gearbox and as many electrics as were needed to get through an MOT - headlights and horn and so on. You can't really do that any more. A sensor breaking in a new car will take out the traction control, which takes out the ECU and so on like a chain of dominoes falling. Fair enough, one can replace the sensor, but that's expensive and does one want to keep doing it?
Where are the techno-cars of yore? The Nissan Twin Turbos and the Mitsubishi 3000s and the like? Gone. They went through a period of being about as cool as reading the Daily Express, and they rusted, but the principal killer was over complexity. Many simpler cars of the same period survive...
That sums things up nicely IME. Examples such as the above are why modern cars are likely to be shorter lived than their eighties and nineties counterparts. It's not that individual systems are less reliable, it's that systems can't fail individually like they used to, everything now depends on everything else courtesy of integration of the various circuits.
Twenty years ago, it was fairly common to drive round in a clapped-out luxury saloon with nothing much working beyond the engine, gearbox and as many electrics as were needed to get through an MOT - headlights and horn and so on. You can't really do that any more. A sensor breaking in a new car will take out the traction control, which takes out the ECU and so on like a chain of dominoes falling. Fair enough, one can replace the sensor, but that's expensive and does one want to keep doing it?
Where are the techno-cars of yore? The Nissan Twin Turbos and the Mitsubishi 3000s and the like? Gone. They went through a period of being about as cool as reading the Daily Express, and they rusted, but the principal killer was over complexity. Many simpler cars of the same period survive...
My daily driver is a 2005 BMW 330i that has done 127K miles and drives like a much newer car.
But last August it had just passed it's MOT (thankfully) but when I went to get in to drive home the driver's door wouldn't unlock. All the other doors, boot and filler flap were unlocked, so I tried the locking button on the dash which made no difference. Tried opening it using the interior handle - still no joy so I had to climb in over the console and park it unlocked at home until I could book it in with my usual excellent BMW Indy.
It turns out there was a short in the passenger side rear door which blew the C/L fuse and this was the default result with a blown fuse apparently! After diagnosis, a new lock and door membrane the bill was almost £500, which was probably close to 50% of its' value as it was made a Cat N earlier last year after a minor tap in the rear.
Looking on the bright side I still like it and it isn't depreciating!
I have a ten year old XC60, all the tech works just fine. It has a rattling drip link though. It has never let me down.
I have a twelve year old van, all the few bits of tech that it has still works, rear shock bushes are getting a bit sloppy though. It has never let me down.
When I started driving in 1990 a ten year old car was scrap fodder.
I also have a company van, this is replaced every three years or so, and has been in no particular order two Vivaros, three Transits, one Connect, two Berlingos, a Nissan NV250 and NV400, and a Vauxhall Combo. Non of these has ever had the slightest fault, apart from the NV250, which somehow missed its cam belt change and lasted 130000 miles before the belt let go.
It has been over fifteen years since I was last recovered from the side of the road, other than the broken cam belt, and that was in a tired 850 T5.
People forget how bad cars from the seventies and eighties actually were, I’d have no hesitation buying just about anything from the last twenty years.
Wet belt Ford, and anything from JLR excluded. I’m not stupid.
I have a twelve year old van, all the few bits of tech that it has still works, rear shock bushes are getting a bit sloppy though. It has never let me down.
When I started driving in 1990 a ten year old car was scrap fodder.
I also have a company van, this is replaced every three years or so, and has been in no particular order two Vivaros, three Transits, one Connect, two Berlingos, a Nissan NV250 and NV400, and a Vauxhall Combo. Non of these has ever had the slightest fault, apart from the NV250, which somehow missed its cam belt change and lasted 130000 miles before the belt let go.
It has been over fifteen years since I was last recovered from the side of the road, other than the broken cam belt, and that was in a tired 850 T5.
People forget how bad cars from the seventies and eighties actually were, I’d have no hesitation buying just about anything from the last twenty years.
Wet belt Ford, and anything from JLR excluded. I’m not stupid.
I’m 39, and some people have been moaning about electronic complexity of cars as long as I can remember.
The fact is that the average age of cars on our roads has been increasing for a long time. There are still quite a few cars on the road from the first half of the 2000s.
That would have been like seeing cars from the early/mid 70s still on the road (and in good condition) in 1995. It just didn’t happen.
My recollection of the 90s was that 13-15 years old was the absolute age limit of what you saw, and they were close to scrap by that point.
The fact is that the average age of cars on our roads has been increasing for a long time. There are still quite a few cars on the road from the first half of the 2000s.
That would have been like seeing cars from the early/mid 70s still on the road (and in good condition) in 1995. It just didn’t happen.
My recollection of the 90s was that 13-15 years old was the absolute age limit of what you saw, and they were close to scrap by that point.
Mid naughties (2000-2010) era, I think was the best modern/reliability/safety of cars, as a peak. Especially the normal mechanical side of things.
After that, it was just a slight evolution of them in my opinion.
If you look at data there is still a massive chunk of cars from that time still on the roads, and seems to be increasing at some rate, many don't want newer cars for varying factors.
After that, it was just a slight evolution of them in my opinion.
If you look at data there is still a massive chunk of cars from that time still on the roads, and seems to be increasing at some rate, many don't want newer cars for varying factors.
Edited by 7 5 7 on Monday 23 December 07:55
When cars were much simpler it was generally rust that killed them, mechanically they were more or less infinitely repairable. When did you last seen a gen 1 KA for example? Simple mechanically but have turned to bran flakes and not worth the cost of welding etc.
Compare that to something like a Stag, wasn't considered a 'reliable' car, but if prepared to keep on top of the body there's nothing that can't be fixed mechanically.
However, if a microprocessor in a modern car goes 'fut' unless it can be replaced at a reasonable cost that's it for the car.
A Canbus interface failed on the AC compressor of our Forester, AC wouldn't work even though the compressor was mechanically fine, over a grand to fix. Subarus are (or certainly were) considered 'reliable' but on a lower value car it would write it off if a critical part.
Compare that to something like a Stag, wasn't considered a 'reliable' car, but if prepared to keep on top of the body there's nothing that can't be fixed mechanically.
However, if a microprocessor in a modern car goes 'fut' unless it can be replaced at a reasonable cost that's it for the car.
A Canbus interface failed on the AC compressor of our Forester, AC wouldn't work even though the compressor was mechanically fine, over a grand to fix. Subarus are (or certainly were) considered 'reliable' but on a lower value car it would write it off if a critical part.
I think a good example of this is the F10 5 series (2010-2016 for those who don't like the internal codes)
The oldest examples are now 14/15 years old, but you still see loads on the road, they aren't rusty, and despite being packed with electronics they seem reliable enough, they even still look "fresh" in the right spec. A 14/15 year old 5 series when this car was first launched would have been the last of the E34s/early E39s, and as much as I love E34s they were looking old then, and probably going frilly!
The oldest examples are now 14/15 years old, but you still see loads on the road, they aren't rusty, and despite being packed with electronics they seem reliable enough, they even still look "fresh" in the right spec. A 14/15 year old 5 series when this car was first launched would have been the last of the E34s/early E39s, and as much as I love E34s they were looking old then, and probably going frilly!
Baldchap said:
Statistics show a mid-table car today would have won reliability surveys a decade ago.
Someone made a similar statement in a thread a few months back, which prompted me to verify.Apparently the last 20 years have been remarkable constant in terms of 6-month and 3-year reliably measures - that followed decades of steady improvement. There have been a few fluctuations e.g. there was a hiccup in the early-2010s, supposedly linked to the mass-market proliferation (and subsequent maturing) of new UI tech.
In crude terms there has been an arms race between complexity and quality control, and there hasn't been a clear winner.
Forums | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff