Old cars,built better ?

Old cars,built better ?

Author
Discussion

Colonel D

628 posts

71 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
rose tinted glasses I would think (guilty of it myself)

older cars were easier to repair, mechanically and bodywork was stronger, was again easier to repair, and in the case of a light accident the older cars didn`t have airbags deploy to be pretty much written off. Nothing quite like beating a dent out, filling it with lead and then metal finishing back to new (last time I seen that was as a first year apprentice).

newer cars have to meet new standards, collapsible panels to soften the impact, as mentioned airbags and lots of other changes to protect everyone involved in an accident. Mechanical wise todays cars are offering far more performance than you would have dreamed of back in the 80`s or 90`s but because they are higher tuned and more prone to something going wrong they are seen as "softer or designed to break" but the build quality is far superior

jeremyh1

1,348 posts

126 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
I have a 96 Saab 900 not as solid as the first generation of 900s but far better built than the modern cars

cerb4.5lee

30,177 posts

179 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
98elise said:
Cars today are way better built.

Cars of my youth would rot and would need fettling to keep them running. I've had cars which had a starting routine that you needed to follow just to get it running.

These days you can buy a rust free 10 year old car with 60k on the clock, and add another 60-70k with it starting first time every time, and it never having any serious problems.
I agree and my 330i was 11 years old when I sold it and it was rust free. Every Ford I've ever had has been a rust bucket from years ago. Engine's now go 20k miles/2 years without an oil change, whereas my old 200sx needed an oil change every 6k miles/6 months.

Cars today are way better built for me.

bearman68

4,642 posts

131 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
bobmcgod said:
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.
Not convinced - go and read 'the machine that changed the world' by Womack Rees and Jones. Eye opening multi faceted study into manufacturing techniques used by the worlds car makers.

caelite

4,273 posts

111 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
I think to sum it up, sometime between the 70s and 90s there was a shift in design culture. Previously cars where designed with maintainability in mind, the perfect example being the old series land rovers, the reason there are examples still on the road 50+ years later is that everything within their design can be replaced, and often for cheaper than the cost of a new vehicle. However there has been a cultural shift from this maintainability to one of designed obsolescence, and replaceability. Whilst the strive for longevity is still there, modern designs seek this through complication, reducing overall life cycle maintainability.

So, older cars are easier to fix, newer cars are more reliably built.

s m

23,164 posts

202 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
Depends on the model as well as the make sometimes. Plus enthusiast owned are sometimes better maintained and looked after. All my RS Escorts seemed to last better than the cheaper 1300/1600s - maybe because they were washed more thoroughly

You'd have to treat 2 cars the same from new to run a real test though.

E21 BMWs were built well I terms of trim but rusted just as badly as others esp round the boot floor.
Best old car I've seen in terms of build is my friend's 190E

colinrob

1,198 posts

250 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
I think cars have got better built and more reliable since the 90’s yes there was a blip in the early 2000’s when Mercedes and BMW went to water based paints but most cars are solid, I remember looking at 7 year old cars in the late 70’s and checking there were no holes in the sills or through the floor, would never do that now, have a 2001merc c class surface rust on wings etc but solid underneath only drive it about once a month but always starts, also got an SQ5 think it is better built than older cars

ruhall

506 posts

145 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
A MK 1 or MK 2 Escort better built than a Focus. Absolute tosh.

I'm amazed at prices asked for, and often paid, for old Escorts. They weren't well-built back in the day and were simply 'transport'. Some models were, and still are, fun to drive, ie RS2000s, RS1600 etc., but an Escort 1100L or an Escort MK2 1.1 Popular? Okay, they're RWD and had good gearboxes, but that's about it.

Old Alfas, BMC 1100s, Minis, Vauxhalls, Cortinas, early Japanese imports etc. etc. would all rust in front of your eyes. Modern cars are much better built but do have potential reliability issues with their electronics.

The Ford Granada, however, was a well-built car for its time.


eta: typo

Edited by ruhall on Wednesday 25th April 22:50

RDMcG

19,093 posts

206 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
No comparison...




I recall all the maintenance intervals, rust,unreliability and so on. Old cars were more heavily built sometimes but infinitely more dangerous in an accident.
Shorter lives, poorer tolerances, still a romantic nostalgia;lgic glow of course.

Like remembering an IBM PC from 1982 or a black and white TV.

Sure,.would be nice to have an old E Type or the like, and very valid to have one, but its an antique and as such is not expected to be as good as a modern car - just a representation fo another era.

Valgar

850 posts

134 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
No way were old cars built better.

However I would say modern cars have too much st on them to go wrong. I picked up a year old Yaris Hybrid yesterday, the TPMS is fked and I've got a CEL, it's under warranty but it's hardly reassuring the the future, I don't want to be the owner when the warranty is up.

A.J.M

7,893 posts

185 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
Modern cars are in general built better.

The body’s are built better, rust treatment is better, rust traps are pretty much eliminated.
Drivetrains are better, they don’t wear out and leak oil like old. You don’t get oil stains on your drive or road anymore in a modern car.
An older car would mark its territory.

Interiors are better, more equipped and fit better.

You also have the huge demands of crash and pedestrian regulations so bodywork has to crumple and protect the occupant and however you run over.

You don’t have to take the heads off engines to decoke them, they don’t burn oil unless German, the head gaskets don’t blow.
The electrics don’t suffer damp and fail to work, carbs are no longer needed.
You can pretty much guarantee it will start first time. Regardless of outdoor temperatures and conditions.

The flip side is the demand for more gadgets and this adds weight and complexity.

Older cars may have light weight and more driver connection at times.
But modern cars have become white goods with their reliability and for a lot. Are good, but boring.

wc98

10,334 posts

139 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
r129sl said:
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.
i often wonder if it would be possible to re engineer some newer stuff into fitting slightly older pre strict emission test chassis,without all the bells and whistles.i think some of the engines and interiors going to scrap these days are a terrible waste. to be fair the eastern europeans seem to be able to do it judging by the amount of older high end stuff they are shipping back home.

Digby

8,230 posts

245 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
It really depends. Less rattles and far better quality plastics used on my 30 year old Volvo than on our 67 plate, 2k mile Smart.
It's also not broken down on me yet, unlike the Smart..
It's also rust free, even in all those dodgy areas (behind rear lights, battery tray etc)

It reminds me a great deal of my old 190's. They felt more solid and well put together than the modern cars I owned at the same time.
Even the paint used on the Mercs and the Volvos seems better to me.

tomic

720 posts

144 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
IMHO there were golden periods in certain models of 1980’s German and 1990’s Japanese cars where this was true.

Examples of this would be low spec W123/W124 Mercs, 8v Mk2 Golf GTI and facelift 6 cylinder BMW E34. A Honda Accord or Toyota Camry from this era would go forever. The Swedes were in on it too with the pre GM Saab 900.

Other than those and probably a few other examples I’d say modern is better every time. Some late 70’s Fords were already rusting when they left the factory.

Gary C

12,313 posts

178 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
The 90's toyotas I had were bomb proof, very solid engines and little rust, easy 100k miles.

70's and early 80's escorts rusted like buggers, common to have holes on a 5-6 year old cars.

A 2005 Peugeot diesel. You would think an easy 200k miles, no chance. Engine knackered by 90k (well, flywheel, turbo and emission control equipment)

So I think mid 90's cars, good rust proofing, overbuilt engines without the complex emission control need to run so near the limits.

Mine you, my nice car is 29 years old this year smile and still going strong.

ruhall

506 posts

145 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
r129sl said:
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.
7 years is the figure I've had quoted, twice. One was from a JLR engineer whilst talking about some parts for the previous model Range Rover. I can't recall who / which company the second was but it wasn't JLR.

It stuck in my mind as I always thought the 7-year figure was low, only to have it reinforced by somebody else . It's probably more to do with the march of technology, they certainly don't anticipate them rusting out in seven years.

Basically, I agree with your comments and also believe that MB had a much longer design-life years ago.

Did you actually write, rather than email. If so, I bet that confused their customer-services dept, " Look what we had in the post, one of those funny notes on a piece of paper. How do we deal with this'

Slow

6,973 posts

136 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
ruhall said:
r129sl said:
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.
7 years is the figure I've had quoted, twice. One was from a JLR engineer whilst talking about some parts for the previous model Range Rover. I can't recall who / which company the second was but it wasn't JLR.

It stuck in my mind as I always thought the 7-year figure was low, only to have it reinforced by somebody else . It's probably more to do with the march of technology, they certainly don't anticipate them rusting out in seven years.

Basically, I agree with your comments and also believe that MB had a much longer design-life years ago.

Did you actually write, rather than email. If so, I bet that confused their customer-services dept, " Look what we had in the post, one of those funny notes on a piece of paper. How do we deal with this'
But a 7 year old Range Rover will be fine mechanically, it will have electrical issues with things which old cars didnt even have such as heated steering wheels. The actual car will work as a car for much longer period than a older car.

Mum has a 180k and 200k mile Range Rovers, 2002 and 2006, both are mechanically ok (other than the flawed td6 gearbox which was "sealed for life").

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

253 months

Wednesday 25th April 2018
quotequote all
People say a lot of things that plainly are not true.

Cars today are built better. More reliable, safer, less prone to rust etc.

They are built to last 150k miles without troubling the manufacturers too much with warranty claims.

They are also cheaper more economical and faster, better equipped too.

Imo the motor industry has come a long way, I kind of put the split at the original Ford focus / 1999 or so.

Mr Tidy

22,065 posts

126 months

Thursday 26th April 2018
quotequote all
No way were 60s, 70s or 80s cars built better than newer cars - easier to fix maybe, but that's because they needed fixing so often!

My first car in 1976 was a 1967 MK2 Cortina - I spent most weekends applying filler, sanding it down and using rattle cans!

Then in 1977 I got a 1970 Fiat 125, and spent most weekends doing the same!

In 1979 I got a 1973 Rover P6B 3500S - at 6 years old it was as rotten as the 9 year old Fiat it replaced!

But then in 1981 I bought a 1978 MK2 Granada Ghia - no issues with that, but then it was so much newer. But it still felt like a really solid car.

I think quality generally took a massive step forward around 2000 (well apart from Mercedes)!

I sold a 2002 BMW in February this year and it was completely solid - the only crusty bits were brake pipes, etc. which is hardly surprising.

Now I have a 2006 BMW with 133K recorded miles and it's in great condition, and running fine.

What might kill "modern" cars is electronics - 2005/2006 BMWs with the N52 engine have an electric water pump that costs £500 from BMW! When those cars get a few years older it could be almost uneconomic to fix a failure.

And now everything has electrically adjustable driving modes, electric parking brakes, etc. there is so much more to go wrong!


Klippie

3,096 posts

144 months

Thursday 26th April 2018
quotequote all
Coming from a string of late 70's and early 80's rust bucket Fords to a new Golf GTi in 1988 it was a revelation it felt like it was made from 1/4" plate compared to the Fords, I was amazed at the paint finish and amount of rust proofing wax used around the car...VW built a good car back then.

A guy I used to work with was big into Saab's I fitted an alarm to his 900 Turbo it was the first time I'd worked on a Saab and couldn't believe how well the car was put together it felt incredibly solid...I was very impressed.

I do like modern cars though they are completely different with all the crash protection etc, they don't feel solid but are very strong structurally, I'd rather have a crash in my Swift Sport than my old GTi.