Old cars,built better ?

Old cars,built better ?

Author
Discussion

J4CKO

Original Poster:

41,284 posts

199 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
Keep seeing this, mainly in relation to old Fords, apparently MK2 Granadas are "built like tanks" and a MK1/2 Escort is far better built and higher quality than a current Focus is ? the new Focus has zero chance of surviving 40 years it is so poorly made.

Personally I was thinking that the modern stuff seems to be much better built, because,

It doesnt rot through in four years
You dont die if you crash it
The shell is much more rigid, built to tighter tolerances using more advanced techniques and materials
If you service the engine, it doesnt nee a rebuild before 100k

I had old cars and dont Remember them being massively well made, aside from the really expensive stuff, which still used to rot lavishly.

people didnt used to treat cars as so disposable, there were less about and harder to get hold of, i.e. you couldn't get a brand new car for the equivalent of £150 a month, hard won items people tended to look after despite being a lot less dependable.

Cars dont last now as they are end up worthless and uneconomic to keep on the road, when really they are a lot more viable than the old bangers people used to have to keep dragging themselves round in the sixties, seventies and eighties ?


I do concur that sometimes a daft fault in an expensive module will do for modern stuff quite easily as you cant get one from a scrappers as it needs coding first, otherwise, would take my chances now with a ten year old car before a ten year old one in say 1980.



bungz

1,960 posts

119 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
I have had a 98 Escort and a 98 Vectra be absolutely rotten before their ten years old, holes in sills and boot lids.

My current Mondeo is just ten years old and is more or less spotless.

Think in most cases cars are far more solid these days.

Scootersp

3,107 posts

187 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
There is no one answer to this as it varies between manufacturers and even periods within the same manufacturer, however over a long timeline you can't really argue things don't improve in general, but for some changes the manufacturers get it wrong or skimp where they shouldn't and it bites them (or more to the point us down the line sooner than anyone would like)

Merc's in the 2000's that rusted worst than their previous cars, so no doubt some penny pinching/'we made the previous cars too well so can cut back on this' adjustments. 205's being galvanised, fiesta's of the same era er not so much?

The modules/electronics thing you mention puts off some from the newer/old cars, but generally as all new cars become older the tech/readers/knowledge is leaked and what was once a costly issue can generally be got around in some way or another at far less cost.


TwistingMyMelon

6,385 posts

204 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
Yes and no

Yes for the points that have been raised

No :

I think 90% of a car has to be recyclable and environmentally compliant, years ago you could use harsh chemicals/plastics which were tougher

Cars are much more complex, so there there is simply more to break

Bean counters price up everything and cost cut more, whats the point of making a car last more than 10 years??? Car companies make money from new cars. The old 80s adage that merc realised they were making their cars too well and no one was buying new ones!!

It varies between brands over the years

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
My first car in 1992 was a C reg MK3 Escort making it 7 years old at the time. It had around 70k on the clock but every single panel had some sort of rust on it. The gear shift was so vague that you could not tell if you had selected first or reverse and it didn't like to start when cold due to a rubber diaphram in the carburetor perishing.

Pretty soon the speedo stopped working which is because the plastic drive wheel gets chewed up because the gearbox has had it.

I am currently driving an 11 year old Megane with similar mileage, everything works and there is not one spot of rust. It is spotless underneath and it is still on the original exhaust.

My brother has just scrapped an 04 plate C2 due to the clutch going. Again not a spot of rust and the engine at 100k miles does not burn any oil at all.

No way are older cars more reliable than modern cars.

When I was younger I remember people would have their cars up on axle stands at the weekends to work on them so they could get to work on the monday. I still remember my dad sitting in the kitchen lapping valves in for hours before refitting the head.

Who these days even lifts the bonnet?



Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 25th April 12:59

DJP

1,198 posts

178 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
bungz said:
I have had a 98 Escort and a 98 Vectra be absolutely rotten before their ten years old, holes in sills and boot lids.

My current Mondeo is just ten years old and is more or less spotless.

Think in most cases cars are far more solid these days.
Mostly that^^.

That said, I had a 1990s Volvo V70 that was spotless at nearly 20 years old and there's a couple of 1980s Mercs and Volvos around here that are still going strong.

By contrast, pre 1990s Fords & Vauxhalls rotted before your eyes.

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
Forty years ago it was a novelty to have an odometer with 6 figures.

Nors

1,291 posts

154 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
Always thought going backwards that the E21 & E30 3-series was always better built and less flimsy than the E36.

In terms of interiors, apart from Audi's, lots of cars from the 90's , especially Merc & BMW seemed to be on a enconomy drive.

bobmcgod

405 posts

193 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
People say this. Nothing's built to last these days.

But imagine Rover were still around and decided to make the SD1 again but with mordern manufacturing techniques. I bet such a simple (reletively speaking) machine built with 2018 spec CNC machines with CAD drawings, welding robots that do the same high quality welds every single time, more advanced metals and other materials, the multistage chassis dipping and protection and painting methods would make for a much more relia ble car than either a modern one due to the complexity or and older one due to the lack of technological advancement.

By more reliable I'm saying that there would be less lemons in the simple machine with modern manufacturing per 10,000 built than old and new.

r129sl

9,518 posts

202 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
I would be very interested to know whether design life has changed. When Daimler-Benz launched the w126 S-Class in 179, the company stated that the design life was 20 years and 500,000miles. I would be very surprised if today's w222 has a design life beyond 12 years. I did write to Volvo asking what as the design life of its handsome S80 and received the reply that the warranty period was three years. Which is a bit like me asking you what the weather is doing and you replying that you'd like a ham and cheese roll.

My feeling is that most cars are vastly better designed and built than they were 25 years ago; premium cars are much more sophisticated but less repairable, less simple and less long-lasting; and all cars are much more disposable. I incline to the view that the greatest environmental harm done by motoring is production- and disposal-related and not emissions-related.

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
Nors said:
In terms of interiors, apart from Audi's, lots of cars from the 90's , especially Merc & BMW seemed to be on a enconomy drive.
Because Audi know it is better to spend the money on the parts people see and touch rather than on the oily bits that nobody cares about. Better to give the car a thin vaneer of quality so that people are impressed with the soft touch dash and thunk of the door than the fact the engine burns a litre of oil every 1000 miles.



stugolf

473 posts

202 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
Without a doubt older cars are better, well the one's I buy anyway.

I have a MK2 Golf Gti 16v and had a MK7 Golf GTD and now a BMW m235i.

The MK2 is miles better than both of them, I think the metal in general is inferior on the MK2 and rust can be an issue and not as well protected but the way the thing is screwed together is a different league than the MK7 and BMW.

Nothings loose and nothing rattles, yes it has its faults and has wear and tear but I don't think the new cars would fair so well when they hit 26 years old.

The engine has done 160,000 miles but it runs like its brand new.

Examples of quality are the headlights, made of solid glass in the MK2, plastic in every car I've had in the last 8 years! The window switches and mechansim is better tha in modern cars, door shutting including boot and bonnet are better, more robust hinges etc.

Yes the 2 new cars are much more advanced but I do feel the manufacturers have found ways to do it as cheap as possible rather than the "over-engineering" days of the MK2.





Edited by stugolf on Wednesday 25th April 13:26

dbdb

4,311 posts

172 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
There is more than one measure of quality - the technical design element has never been better and modern cars are built with a greater degree of accuracy than was achievable in the past.

The quality of the actual materials used has not always improved. This varies between makes - some have not reduced - but the decline in the quality of materials used can be rather stark in some manufacturers.

Cars have never been more affordable than they are now, especially the 'Premium' makes Mercedes, BMW and Jaguar - all three of which are making cars in completely different sectors to their traditional cars. They're now a lot cheaper. Twenty five years ago the thought of any of the three making a Cortina/Mondeo rival as their staple product would have raised eyebrows, so it is unsurprising that corners have been cut and the quality of materials fitted to the car (as opposed to manufacturing accuracy) is often much reduced in these cars.

The average car though has never been better - to the extent that there is often little between them and the 'Premium' makes now. Are there even any 'bad' cars left?

Edited to add: I remember my father's Granada Mk2 2.8 Ghia feeling to be better quality than the E28 BMW 5 series which he replaced it with, though it was a lot slower. It seemed to be a high quality car.


Edited by dbdb on Wednesday 25th April 13:22

mike13

715 posts

181 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
My 1987 Fiesta failed it's first mot due to the sills needing work!

Triumph Man

8,670 posts

167 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
Joey Deacon said:
My first car in 1992 was a C reg MK3 Escort making it 7 years old at the time. It had around 70k on the clock but every single panel had some sort of rust on it. The gear shift was so vague that you could not tell if you had selected first or reverse and it didn't like to start when cold due to a rubber diaphram in the carburetor perishing.

Pretty soon the speedo stopped working which is because the plastic drive wheel gets chewed up because the gearbox has had it.



Edited by Joey Deacon on Wednesday 25th April 12:59
Exactly, you couldn't imagine a 7 year old 70k car being like that today!

PH5121

1,963 posts

212 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
stugolf said:
Without a doubt older cars are better, well the one's I buy anyway.

Yes the 2 new cars are much more advanced but I do feel the manufacturers have found ways to do it as cheap as possible rather than the "over-engineering" days of the MK2.
I think you've hit the nail on the head there, especially with German cars of the 80's and 90's that had a reputation for solid engineering, cars such as those manufactured by Mercedes, Porsche and VAG.

I'm sure what you refer to 'as cheap as possible' manufacturers will consider to be efficiently built compared to previous models. The cars become cheaper to build whilst the sale price rises. Such an example of this springs to mind with Porsche.

I'm biased in that I like old 911's, when the newer air cooled ones were introduced Porsche adopted more efficient production methods and achieved great financial success compared to being in the doldrums only a short period of time before. However they in my opinion went from being over engineered to being only just engineered, hence the issues that some M96 engined cars have experienced.

I know that they needed to do this to survive and thrive, (but I still like the old ones even if they are slower and less fuel efficient).



warch

2,941 posts

153 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
Agree on the Mk 2 Golf comparison, they're way better made than their modern descendants.

One example of a car that has become progressively more badly made was the Land-Rover. They were pretty good up until the early 60s, suffered a slight dip in quality to the early Seventies, then were made from old biscuit tins until construction ceased in 2016

I think things like gearboxes and drivetrain components were much stronger on the early vehicles, failures are rare on any Land Rover to the launch of the Defender (c. 1990) and very common thereafter. I think modern CAD is to blame for this, manufacturers no longer need to overbuilt components like they used to.

In general old cars were crap by modern standards.

J4CKO

Original Poster:

41,284 posts

199 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
MK2 Golfs varied over their production run, the earlier ones seem to fare better than the later ones, 84 to about 87 seemed to be the best, then later ones seem more rust prone like they dumbed down the quality.

Tigger2050

625 posts

72 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
Having had cars since 1967 I can tell you that there is no comparison in build quality and engineering between older cars and modern cars, current cars are light years ahead.

Cars from the sixties, seventies and eighties would just rot away from under you, Rust treatment was poor or non existent. On damp mornings you never knew whether they were going to start and the carbs would flood at the slightest provocation.

I used to always carry a ring spanner in the car because starter motors would regularly get stuck in gear and you would have to get under the bonnet to free them off.

On my first car a Morris Minor 1100, besides the rust, once when I was going round a slow left hand turning a front wheel just fell off, a fairly common occurrence on them.

On my second car, a Mini Cooper, the subframe rotted out and then the engine blew up spectacularly on the M1 at about 70.

A car from that era getting to 100K was rare either it just rotted away or would need some sort of huge rebuild , nowadays it is commonplace, they are engineered to do so and you know the body will last.

Cars are enormously quicker, better to drive and safer now for an added bonus.

Mind you I did have a 1991 MK2 Golf GTi big bumper model and that was the best screwed together car I had had up to that point.

Edited by Tigger2050 on Wednesday 25th April 14:02

sr.guiri

477 posts

88 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
You only have to look at a Merc W123 or Porsche 993 to know the answer to this.

Rumour has it that the 996 was 50% cheaper to produce than the 993, and I doubt the current 99 whatever it is, is anything like the 993 was.