The Most and Least Expensive Cars to Maintain(yourmechanic.com)
yourmechanic.com
The Most and Least Expensive Cars to Maintain
https://www.yourmechanic.com/article/the-most-and-least-expensive-cars-to-maintain-by-maddy-martin
352 comments
> there's a certain smugness (and sense of power?)
Yes! I have had this idea floating in my head for a while now. At some point opening a can of soda I experienced this wave of humility. Sitting there mindlessly drinking sugar water for the zillionth time and finally realizing the achievement of engineering necessary for that mundane experience. The aluminum is recycled. It's a continuous cycle that obviates the need to clean glassware. Later I learned about the design of the pull tab mechanism. It's pretty sophisticated. It's specifically designed to have two operating states. You usually experience them when opening a can of soda if you're paying attention. It replaced the removable tab that caused littering and slightly sub-optimal recycling efficiency. It's a very subtle design change that likely required massive overhauls in manufacturing equipment.
Yes! I have had this idea floating in my head for a while now. At some point opening a can of soda I experienced this wave of humility. Sitting there mindlessly drinking sugar water for the zillionth time and finally realizing the achievement of engineering necessary for that mundane experience. The aluminum is recycled. It's a continuous cycle that obviates the need to clean glassware. Later I learned about the design of the pull tab mechanism. It's pretty sophisticated. It's specifically designed to have two operating states. You usually experience them when opening a can of soda if you're paying attention. It replaced the removable tab that caused littering and slightly sub-optimal recycling efficiency. It's a very subtle design change that likely required massive overhauls in manufacturing equipment.
Here's a video on soda can design: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUhisi2FBuw
Wow. That was an awesome video. Thank you. I didn't know why the top had a neck. Further efficiency apparently. He has an excellent explanation of the two-mode pull tab towards the end. Direct link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUhisi2FBuw&t=508
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUhisi2FBuw&t=508
I hated that original pull tab design as a kid. Those sharp edges were vicious.
This might interest you:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8098146
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8098146
I think, also, that Toyota still seems to understand the idea of a long-term investment. Other brands seem to be seeking the "short term fix" that will sell more cars this year, in search of immediate profits.
Hats off to Toyota. We're still driving our Prius 12 years after buying it, it's been a great car.
Hats off to Toyota. We're still driving our Prius 12 years after buying it, it's been a great car.
Our Prius has been going 14 years now. I've had to replace the battery once (last year) but otherwise has been a remarkably comfortable and reliable car. It's just a shame the new Prius models are so ugly.
I've had my scion for 11 years. Maintenance cost other than tires and oil - virtually zero. They use chains instead of belts too so I didn't even need to change the timing belt.
My '94 Saturn had a timing chain instead of a belt, which was awesome until the chain broke. Due to it being metal it shattered and fused itself in various parts of my engine, destroying the whole thing. Instead of having to pay for a new timing belt, I paid $2,500 for a new engine.
It's usually not much better if a timing belt snaps either. Two valves can't occupy the same space at the same time, so often you get shattered metal everywhere anyways. The difference is that timing chain failures are rare, timing belt failures are expected.
The country I live in owners change the timing belt before recommended date or else they pretty much can't sell the car for the price they want. It's a bid deal. So much so, that when I sold a car last year I was getting somewhat irritated by the question of it having been done or not (said so in the ad, tyre kickers don't know what else to ask about).
It's actually a valve and a piston you have to worry about. At normal engine speeds the valves will simply snap shut if the cam stops spinning.
Valves slapping piston is generally only a worry with an interference engine design.[1]
1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interference_engine
Valves slapping piston is generally only a worry with an interference engine design.[1]
1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interference_engine
Yeah, I was thinking of interference engines, especially OHC/OHV Interference designs. "Timing belt failure" is deeply anchored to Honda engines in my mind, which are pretty much all interference.
My '08 Honda Fit may be interference, but it also has a timing chain that /should/ require no maintenance for the life of the car.
There is a reason that Toyota completely dominates in most Of Africa - their cars just last and last in harsh environments. In addition, the mechanics are simple and not overly electronic in nature, meaning that the car can be relatively easily maintained without needing highly specialised equipment.
There's also a "network effect" at play: because Toyota's are already plentiful, spare parts are easier to come by and much cheaper for Toyota compared to any other manufacturer, thus encouraging people to buy yet more Toyota's.
They are special Africa versions though. Engines that burn less clean, much simpler electronics... You can buy them in the EU but only for export.
Toyota Hilux is the "AK-47" of military vehicles.
>An alternative view...is creating a bleeding-edge factory...
This is not what Toyota does. VW does this[1]. Tesla does this[2]. But not Toyota [3].
Watch those videos. Which ones are full of robots and computers? Which ones are all manual labor? My tone should give it away.
The Toyota Production System link you cite was heavily developed by Taiichi Ohno. You can learn more in his 1978 book: "Toyota Production System". There's a whole chapter on procurement. Taiichi san's very, very strong belief is:
Design emphasis is very conservative. Material choice is very conservative. You will not find innovation. You will find reliability. You will find simplification. You will find repeatability. As far as risk goes, Toyota is the bond market of the automotive industry.
They make a vehicle in nearly every category. It is a standout in none of them. The engines are bulkier. They are less fuel efficient. They underperform in nearly every metric. They are costly for their performance specs. But they last.
The interesting thing about their production line system is how much is focused on the people on the line rather than automating the process on the line. It's the YC version of "Talk to your users" - except applied to workers on the line. Most companies try to automate this step out. Toyota does remove their workers - but only to get more training. This English translation[4] of a Le Monde artice from a few years ago goes into extensive detail about the "Takumi" system of training master craftsmen.
Toyota gets a lot of deserved credit for making great products - how they make those products is frequently misunderstood - famously so by Detroit in the '80's. Their process is counter-intuitive and worth a study. I recommend starting with Taiichi's book mentioned above.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlIyDhss4Cg
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOXaBto7giY
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg5RlapdEtE
[4] http://www.worldcrunch.com/tech-science/takumi-toyota-039-s-...
[5] http://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2014/08/18/face-aux-r...
This is not what Toyota does. VW does this[1]. Tesla does this[2]. But not Toyota [3].
Watch those videos. Which ones are full of robots and computers? Which ones are all manual labor? My tone should give it away.
The Toyota Production System link you cite was heavily developed by Taiichi Ohno. You can learn more in his 1978 book: "Toyota Production System". There's a whole chapter on procurement. Taiichi san's very, very strong belief is:
When purchasing new equipment, we must consider buying the
minimum capable of meeting our requirements. Reliability and
ease of maintenance should be considered before features.
Bells and whistles can often be added later if the need
arises. We want to avoid buying features "just in case." We
must consider up-time, utilization and quality factors when
making equipment choices.
Design emphasis is very conservative. Material choice is very conservative. You will not find innovation. You will find reliability. You will find simplification. You will find repeatability. As far as risk goes, Toyota is the bond market of the automotive industry.
They make a vehicle in nearly every category. It is a standout in none of them. The engines are bulkier. They are less fuel efficient. They underperform in nearly every metric. They are costly for their performance specs. But they last.
The interesting thing about their production line system is how much is focused on the people on the line rather than automating the process on the line. It's the YC version of "Talk to your users" - except applied to workers on the line. Most companies try to automate this step out. Toyota does remove their workers - but only to get more training. This English translation[4] of a Le Monde artice from a few years ago goes into extensive detail about the "Takumi" system of training master craftsmen.
Toyota gets a lot of deserved credit for making great products - how they make those products is frequently misunderstood - famously so by Detroit in the '80's. Their process is counter-intuitive and worth a study. I recommend starting with Taiichi's book mentioned above.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlIyDhss4Cg
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOXaBto7giY
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg5RlapdEtE
[4] http://www.worldcrunch.com/tech-science/takumi-toyota-039-s-...
[5] http://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2014/08/18/face-aux-r...
> Toyota gets a lot of deserved credit for making great products - how they make those products is frequently misunderstood - famously so by Detroit in the '80's.
There is an great podcast episode by This American Life about NUMMI, the joint venture between Toyota and GM in 1984. Very well worth the listen: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/561/n...
There is an great podcast episode by This American Life about NUMMI, the joint venture between Toyota and GM in 1984. Very well worth the listen: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/561/n...
Too bad their overall engineering and manufacturing quality is let down by two factors:
The cars are uncomfortable for tall people.
The body rusts a lot faster than some competition. (Highlighted by the otherwise high reliability)
Both would seem to be relatively trivial issues to fix. After all, many other manufacturers have done that.
Both would seem to be relatively trivial issues to fix. After all, many other manufacturers have done that.
Most people in the world aren't tall. It'd seem counter intuitive to create a car specifically so it can fit such a small group of people.
But for the tall buyers it's close to a deal breaker. It's not like I'm 2 meters, just slightly above average in my country. I love Japanese manufacturing, engineering and design. I have three Japanese guitars.
However it's less likely I will ever buy a Toyota. Attitudes can change but I'm not going to get any shorter soon.
In today's world the brands resemble each other a lot, and are in fierce competition about some percentage points of fuel consumption, to the point of cheating. But most of the things that are mentioned in the advertisements or reviews don't matter if the seat is slightly uncomfortable, or you have to bend your knees a little bit more, or your shoe scratches the foot space ceiling if you're not careful. Indeed, a cramped car can scuff your leather shoe. How is it not possible to find a few centimeters more in a vehicle that's 4 meters long? It makes me feel they are either incompetent or just don't plain care. Compare that to something like even eighties-nineties vintage Volkswagen Golfs. They are not big cars, but I wouldn't even keep the driver's seat all the way back - they had excess space. Bliss. Every car has it's assortment of design mistakes, you just get to choose what they are. It's a bit counter intuitive considering how many billions are spent per model, but I guess the designers still have a self centered approach.
In today's world the brands resemble each other a lot, and are in fierce competition about some percentage points of fuel consumption, to the point of cheating. But most of the things that are mentioned in the advertisements or reviews don't matter if the seat is slightly uncomfortable, or you have to bend your knees a little bit more, or your shoe scratches the foot space ceiling if you're not careful. Indeed, a cramped car can scuff your leather shoe. How is it not possible to find a few centimeters more in a vehicle that's 4 meters long? It makes me feel they are either incompetent or just don't plain care. Compare that to something like even eighties-nineties vintage Volkswagen Golfs. They are not big cars, but I wouldn't even keep the driver's seat all the way back - they had excess space. Bliss. Every car has it's assortment of design mistakes, you just get to choose what they are. It's a bit counter intuitive considering how many billions are spent per model, but I guess the designers still have a self centered approach.
This is why as a tall person I'm not fond of 'world' cars. Americans on whole /are/ tall.
Yep, so true. The Toyota Tacoma is a great pickup but my head nearly hits the roof when I'm sitting in it.
> You will not find innovation. You will find reliability. You will find simplification. You will find repeatability.
As a consumer, I consider all of those qualities to be valuable forms of innovation. Techno-innovation for novelty's sake does not provide real value but it makes for great marketing. I'll keep my boring Toyota because it is superior to others in many innovative ways.
As a consumer, I consider all of those qualities to be valuable forms of innovation. Techno-innovation for novelty's sake does not provide real value but it makes for great marketing. I'll keep my boring Toyota because it is superior to others in many innovative ways.
> It is a standout in none of them.
Except perhaps the Prius? It is a jalopy for sure, but did the hybrid very well, when most hybrids were done very poorly.
Except perhaps the Prius? It is a jalopy for sure, but did the hybrid very well, when most hybrids were done very poorly.
I think I brought this up last time there was a post about Your Mechanic. But I am still curious about it. I wonder how much their data is skewed by the fact that they're a third-party mechanic. I don't think they necessarily see a representative sample of cars and problems, especially in the early years. I have owned different kinds of German cars for the past 15 years, and they've all gone to the dealership for the vast majority of service for at least the first 5-7 years.
I only take new-ish cars to a third party if I need something the dealership doesn't specialize in (body work, tires, etc.). I'm not that price-sensitive about service, and I like the dealership experience (nice new loaner cars, all the parts are on hand, etc.). So I'd wonder what it is that drives people to Your Mechanic, and if that affects the volume and type of problems they see. For example, maybe people are more likely to use them if they have just received a large estimate for a major problem from the dealer. Or people who are more price sensitive go there, which might skew the mix of models they see. And so on.
While this is interesting data, I have a hard time considering it representative of reliability as a whole without some additional context.
I only take new-ish cars to a third party if I need something the dealership doesn't specialize in (body work, tires, etc.). I'm not that price-sensitive about service, and I like the dealership experience (nice new loaner cars, all the parts are on hand, etc.). So I'd wonder what it is that drives people to Your Mechanic, and if that affects the volume and type of problems they see. For example, maybe people are more likely to use them if they have just received a large estimate for a major problem from the dealer. Or people who are more price sensitive go there, which might skew the mix of models they see. And so on.
While this is interesting data, I have a hard time considering it representative of reliability as a whole without some additional context.
It shouldn't be a problem if there's a bias towards certain car models. It just means that some models will get a larger sample size and other models will get a smaller sample size. They could easily account for this by sticking error bars on all their graphs, and ideally, reporting their sample sizes. The real problem is the other aspect you mentioned, which is that for any given model, owners of that model might be more likely to consult a 3rd-party mechanic for some issues than others.
You could imagine that owners of a more expensive car are more likely to use the original dealer for most repairs, and only seek a third party shop for very expensive repairs. Which, depending on methodology, might skew Your Mechanic's numbers. But that's only speculation given they don't reveal their numbers, methods, or sample sizes.
But it is an issue if there's bias towards certain (more expensive) repairs for those models.
A specific model being more expensive to repair is something I would want to know about.
No, that's differences between models. The problem comes when people go to the dealer for cheap repairs and only go to a 3rd party for more expensive stuff. Then taking the average of repair costs from a 3rd party shop would overestimate the true average.
These statistics here are collected by the semi-government run German technical control organization. Every car in Germany has to be checked by them every ~two years to be allowed in traffic.
http://www.anusedcar.com/
This is a different data source: they only check if the care is safe, i.e. cosmetic issues won't show up in the statistic. They also won't see cars that are actually broken. Also consider the skew by owners who care more about their car.
But overall, it might still be fair to extrapolate from fundamental safety issues to overall car quality. The numbers are quite different from what Your Mechanic reports.
http://www.anusedcar.com/
This is a different data source: they only check if the care is safe, i.e. cosmetic issues won't show up in the statistic. They also won't see cars that are actually broken. Also consider the skew by owners who care more about their car.
But overall, it might still be fair to extrapolate from fundamental safety issues to overall car quality. The numbers are quite different from what Your Mechanic reports.
These are the EU mandated car safety checks, focusing on breaks, tires, lights, visibility and exhaust.
It is required every 2nd year starting from when the car is 4 years old. Most car manufacturers will do this as part of the standard service interval anyway.
It is required every 2nd year starting from when the car is 4 years old. Most car manufacturers will do this as part of the standard service interval anyway.
The service department is a huge profit center for dealerships, enough to make up for the minimal margin they make on new car sales. Some people may be more sensitive to that cost than others.
Incidentally, does anyone have a list of reliable mechanic finder sites / apps (aside from the title example)?
I know the only reason I sometimes go to dealerships for maintanence is consistence. A bad mechanic is bad.
I know the only reason I sometimes go to dealerships for maintanence is consistence. A bad mechanic is bad.
The Car Talk Mechanics Files have been my go-to site: http://www.cartalk.com/mechanics-files
Great resource! Thanks for the link.
The data is good. I have been in the auto repair industry (in various forms)for a long time and can attest that the results are correct.
So have I and I can say I disagree with most all the data.
Take the section "Brands most likely not to start", and you see Mercury at the top. Strange, they only have a couple of models I wonder which it is? So you look at the section "Models most likely not to start", and no Mercury model is even listed. Instead Hyundai is at the top and it wasn't even on the first chart.
They seem to really love throwing Mercury under the bus with comments about how the company closed doors (had nothing to do with reliability, people today just don't want 20mpg vehicles) and never mind the several million mercury taxi cabs. And at least with the Grand Marquis, it is nearly bullet proof. Its design has changed very little over the last 20 years and the 4.6L engine will run 400k miles as long as you change the oil. And when something does go wrong, most parts are cheap and easy to replace.
And the "Brands that cost the most to maintain" section can be deceiving. For instance Honda is at the bottom making it sound like a good deal. Yet most all Hondas (and most Asian cars) use a timing belt instead of a chain: http://yourcarangel.com/2015/06/honda-timing-belt-timing-cha... That has to be changed every 50K miles because the risk of it snapping is much higher after that. And if it does snap, you could very well be looking at needing a new top half of your motor. I refuse to buy any car that has a belt instead of a chain. The only advantage is it saves some noise and a little bit of gas. But the disadvantages far out way that.
Take the section "Brands most likely not to start", and you see Mercury at the top. Strange, they only have a couple of models I wonder which it is? So you look at the section "Models most likely not to start", and no Mercury model is even listed. Instead Hyundai is at the top and it wasn't even on the first chart.
They seem to really love throwing Mercury under the bus with comments about how the company closed doors (had nothing to do with reliability, people today just don't want 20mpg vehicles) and never mind the several million mercury taxi cabs. And at least with the Grand Marquis, it is nearly bullet proof. Its design has changed very little over the last 20 years and the 4.6L engine will run 400k miles as long as you change the oil. And when something does go wrong, most parts are cheap and easy to replace.
And the "Brands that cost the most to maintain" section can be deceiving. For instance Honda is at the bottom making it sound like a good deal. Yet most all Hondas (and most Asian cars) use a timing belt instead of a chain: http://yourcarangel.com/2015/06/honda-timing-belt-timing-cha... That has to be changed every 50K miles because the risk of it snapping is much higher after that. And if it does snap, you could very well be looking at needing a new top half of your motor. I refuse to buy any car that has a belt instead of a chain. The only advantage is it saves some noise and a little bit of gas. But the disadvantages far out way that.
I own a saturn Aura (same platform as the Malibu and G6), and I find that the parts are cheap, readily available in aftermarket form, and easy to replace. Yes, I did have to do the wheel bearing ... but it took me an hour and a half, end-to-end. Super easy hub design to repair, and the entire hub cost me $40. I compared prices brand-to-brand for a 2007 Camry, and the camry hubs seem to run about $30 more than the hubs for my '07 Aura.
Anyway, I also wonder if people who prefer certain makes or models are more likely to do their own work, also skewing their reliability data.
Anyway, I also wonder if people who prefer certain makes or models are more likely to do their own work, also skewing their reliability data.
>Anyway, I also wonder if people who prefer certain makes or models are more likely to do their own work, also skewing their reliability data.
Land Rover. Notoriously bad dealerships, also very expensive (dubbed 'stealerships' on LR forums). Masses of electronics including air suspension in the 90s when it was not common on European cars leading to all sorts o f problems down the line.
And most owners buy them with the intention of maintaining them themselves.
A 3rd party garage won't ever see them either, because so much of the car can only be worked on by LR. My local garage turned me away in spring!
Land Rover. Notoriously bad dealerships, also very expensive (dubbed 'stealerships' on LR forums). Masses of electronics including air suspension in the 90s when it was not common on European cars leading to all sorts o f problems down the line.
And most owners buy them with the intention of maintaining them themselves.
A 3rd party garage won't ever see them either, because so much of the car can only be worked on by LR. My local garage turned me away in spring!
Land Rover being squarely in the middle seems very unlikely as well. This data is very suspect at best.
Agreed. I owned a Land Rover Discovery 3 for 9 years. It was disastrously expensive to run. Power steering, suspension compressor, park brake, turbo cross pipes; all failed multiple times. I'm now happily driving a leased Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV. Also got an old '99 Merc which is very reliable.
So which used models are the cheapest to maintain in your experience? What about total ownership cost?
I only buy toyota vehicles. Our household and immediate family are toyota owners (at least one per household, two at mine). I'm not a fanboy though. The cars are cheap to operate and last a long time. Plus the resale value is decent. They are boring cars though. Absolute appliances. Unless its an scion frs or a high performance lexus (or supra if you can afford it).
I have a very low sample size, but I bought a Nissan Hardbody (what later became a Frontier ) in 1993, and I only had to put a transmission in it besides the ordinary wear cycle parts. It's still running like a top, 23 years later. I donated it to my Dad, who assigned to a nephew ( his grandkid ) .
The transmission is on me. I drove it like I stole it for ten years before I needed one. It's an essentially underpowered truck but it goes like stink off the line. I was in the traffic hell that was Dallas.
I bought , of course, another Frontier. It has two or three disappointments ( no torque in top gear @ 55 MPH ( so push the overdrive disable, duh!) ; a bad tint job; mileage not correlated with ... activity ).
I expect it to outlast me. I think I'd have to go with a Cadillac type car to find something more comfortable on the freeway ( but it's not quiet by any stretch).
In that span, we probably went through three (really two) cars for my wife. She's settled on a '03 Ford Escape which seems to avoid the reaper so far. But it's needed expensive repairs. We love it anyway, even though it tried to kill me one time ( a piece of plastic in the inexplicably convoluted throttle arrangement broke, and the throttle body went wide open. No problem; I managed to use neutral and the key switch to get it safely grounded before calling a tow truck. But geez, Ford... four throttle cables ?)
The transmission is on me. I drove it like I stole it for ten years before I needed one. It's an essentially underpowered truck but it goes like stink off the line. I was in the traffic hell that was Dallas.
I bought , of course, another Frontier. It has two or three disappointments ( no torque in top gear @ 55 MPH ( so push the overdrive disable, duh!) ; a bad tint job; mileage not correlated with ... activity ).
I expect it to outlast me. I think I'd have to go with a Cadillac type car to find something more comfortable on the freeway ( but it's not quiet by any stretch).
In that span, we probably went through three (really two) cars for my wife. She's settled on a '03 Ford Escape which seems to avoid the reaper so far. But it's needed expensive repairs. We love it anyway, even though it tried to kill me one time ( a piece of plastic in the inexplicably convoluted throttle arrangement broke, and the throttle body went wide open. No problem; I managed to use neutral and the key switch to get it safely grounded before calling a tow truck. But geez, Ford... four throttle cables ?)
I've also owned a hardbody. Thing was a tank. The vg30 engine was indestructible. I sold it to my brother and somehow my dad ended yo buying it. In the process it got restored and will probably last like 20 more years. Parts are plentiful due to it sharing some with the z31 300zx.
The escape issues with the cable is widely know. I avoid them.
The escape issues with the cable is widely know. I avoid them.
I drive a 99 5.0 Mercury Mountaineer (aka nice Ford Explorer), even when I break an axle doing something stupid, it still gets me home. Great car.... other than the 3/8" motor mount bolts which I ended tapping out to 12mm.
Those are solid. The Windsor 302 engine is bulletproof. They are actually swapped into mustangs because they have a set of better flowing engine heads (named gt40p) and intake/exhaust manifolds.
Do they change the cam?
People will usually change the cam to a ford racing e-303. Its street legal and gives a nice bump in power. Specially when a supercharger is used.
Awesome. I didn't know there were cam's that are not street legal. $200!
http://www.americanmuscle.com/ford-e303cam-8595.html
I looked into superchargers, seems like it's cheaper to buy a bigger crate engine and slap it in? And since you know:) Which 302 headers should I buy?
I looked into superchargers, seems like it's cheaper to buy a bigger crate engine and slap it in? And since you know:) Which 302 headers should I buy?
The supercharger is a better investment because the problem with the factory windsor block is that it cracks in the (middle) lifter valley. There are aftermarket blocks that can be used and can reliably support 1200hp. The supercharger will provide most bang for the buck.
Can't recommend headers without knowing more. Feel free to email me to avoid cluttering the thread (and get down voted to hell).
My ford origins are showing. :)
Can't recommend headers without knowing more. Feel free to email me to avoid cluttering the thread (and get down voted to hell).
My ford origins are showing. :)
Is this accurate for the hybrids? I have a hybrid and I can't find a local independent shop who will work on the hybrid system. I'm wondering if those estimates include data from dealers.
The hybrids are very area dependent. Like you have experienced, service shops are not common. Although those things are reliable because the whole hybrid market would have tanked if they were lemons. So they were forced to overengineer them. A win for the consumer.
Whats wrong with the hybrid system?
I've had a decent amount of work done on my car. But the few bigger repairs were either expected, or unusual and not representative of the model (like the engine work I had to do). And the dealer has given me some significant goodwill discounts.
But one thing is that the parts of the hybrid system are different than normal gas cars. The transmission is probably different, and the gas engines are smaller. So most independent shops don't really have experience working on those hybrid-specific parts.
Another thing is that the HV batteries don't last forever, and are expensive to replace. And the warranties don't always cover the average life of a battery.
The third thing is that hybrid battery is high voltage. So most shops won't want to do any repairs that will touch the HV electrical system.
You can find independent mechanics that work on hybrids, hybrid car repair just require a little more specialization than other cars.
But one thing is that the parts of the hybrid system are different than normal gas cars. The transmission is probably different, and the gas engines are smaller. So most independent shops don't really have experience working on those hybrid-specific parts.
Another thing is that the HV batteries don't last forever, and are expensive to replace. And the warranties don't always cover the average life of a battery.
The third thing is that hybrid battery is high voltage. So most shops won't want to do any repairs that will touch the HV electrical system.
You can find independent mechanics that work on hybrids, hybrid car repair just require a little more specialization than other cars.
Based on your intuition?
Not at all. I:
Owned and operated various auto repair shops. Including on site repairs similar to YM.
Worked as an auto technician across brands.
Have a degree in auto repair.
Worked as a shop manager at a national repair shop.
Worked in commercial, retail and wholesale auto parts sales.
In all I have about 20 years of experience. Without mentioning my experience modifying and tuning cars because its not relevant.
Owned and operated various auto repair shops. Including on site repairs similar to YM.
Worked as an auto technician across brands.
Have a degree in auto repair.
Worked as a shop manager at a national repair shop.
Worked in commercial, retail and wholesale auto parts sales.
In all I have about 20 years of experience. Without mentioning my experience modifying and tuning cars because its not relevant.
Why is the most expensive BMW listed less than the average cost of BMW?
> Why is the most expensive BMW listed less than the average cost of BMW?
“In order to estimate annual maintenance costs, we found the amount spent on every two oil changes (as oil changes are generally done every six months).”
The oil change interval on a BMW 328i (F30, the current model) is 10000 miles or 1 year, whichever comes first. For the model from ten years ago (E90), it's as indicated by the engine (with a starting interval of 30000 km, ~18000 miles) or every two years[0]. Hence, the total cost for oil changes will be a lot lower than estimated, and the actual repairs needed in that interval do not make up for that.
[0] http://workshop-manuals.com/bmw/3_series_e90/328i_n51_sal/1_...
“In order to estimate annual maintenance costs, we found the amount spent on every two oil changes (as oil changes are generally done every six months).”
The oil change interval on a BMW 328i (F30, the current model) is 10000 miles or 1 year, whichever comes first. For the model from ten years ago (E90), it's as indicated by the engine (with a starting interval of 30000 km, ~18000 miles) or every two years[0]. Hence, the total cost for oil changes will be a lot lower than estimated, and the actual repairs needed in that interval do not make up for that.
[0] http://workshop-manuals.com/bmw/3_series_e90/328i_n51_sal/1_...
brogrammer90(1)
It's kind of crazy to think of it this way- most cars on the list have one engine to think about.
But the car with the lowest maintenance cost- the Toyota Prius, which had the full gas engine system PLUS an electric battery+motor, and the complexities managing the two together. Truly remarkable. Toyota should be really proud.
But the car with the lowest maintenance cost- the Toyota Prius, which had the full gas engine system PLUS an electric battery+motor, and the complexities managing the two together. Truly remarkable. Toyota should be really proud.
I don't think the hybrid nature of the Prius simply means that there's more opportunities for things to go wrong. The fact that there's a large battery capable of supplying power means that the engine RPMs don't have to spike as much when you floor the accelerator, so the presence of a battery could significantly reduce the overall wear and tear on the internal combustion engine and thus reduce the overall need for repairs, despite increasing the number of parts.
Right! This is the exactly way to think about it.
Engines are pretty much "figured out" by now. It's hard to get terribly complex there (exception: Audi. Seriously, fuck Audi).
It's all about performance relative to peak load! A power supply, like the one in your computer, performs much better over a longer life when it never crosses 80% peak load than one that is constantly above 80%.
It's all about performance relative to peak load! A power supply, like the one in your computer, performs much better over a longer life when it never crosses 80% peak load than one that is constantly above 80%.
I have a Prius that i drive daily so I can add a few more points:
- Engine shuts off a lot during normal gentle driving.
- The air conditioning compressor is electrically driven and only come on as necessary
- Regenerative braking reduces wear on brakes. I am still on original brakes after 72000 miles.
> Regenerative braking reduces wear on brakes. I am still on original brakes after 72000 miles.
Wut.
Wut.
My understanding is that the process of converting kinetic energy back to some form of potential energy in a regenerative braking system doesn't actually employ the brake pads at all. So the brake pads are only used when the driver pushes the brake pedal past the maximum capacity of the regenerative braking system. Depending on driving conditions, and especially if the driver maintains a proper following distance, this could be fairly rare.
Two things about the Prius are the motors are brushless dc motors and the transmission is (far as I know) a fixed gear planetary drive. Both are very reliable well understood technologies.
Prius also gets a double bonus in that Toyota is oriented around selling low cost of ownership cars; higher upfront cost offset by lower maintenance costs and higher resale value. And because the Prius was their first hybrid vehicle they put extra effort to nail down the design.
Prius also gets a double bonus in that Toyota is oriented around selling low cost of ownership cars; higher upfront cost offset by lower maintenance costs and higher resale value. And because the Prius was their first hybrid vehicle they put extra effort to nail down the design.
Close, the prius drivetrain is two brushless 3 phase motors nested in one another. This allows regenerative braking and charging while still providing power to the final drive. Fun fact the ICE in the prius is an (1) Atkinson cycle which operates at a specific efficiency instead of a powerband. The engine revs up to a low or high range but doesn't have a traditional linear powerband.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkinson_cycle
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkinson_cycle
There's another notable Atkinson engine in some petrol Honda Civic Euro FK2 (2006-2011), can't remember engine code, but on that one i-VTEC is able to let inlet valves up during the beginning of the up stroke compression phase, turning the 140hp 1.8l engine into down to a 1.6l one. Turbo-less downsizing with all the benefits of a full-size (aluminium, so lightweight) block. Interesting tech. I owned one, the resulting fuel economy puts diesel engine to shame.
(edit expired) Engine is R18A2.
Yeah. What I though was neat about the Hybrid Synergy drive is how they use the strength of each component to compensate for the weakness of the others.
Atkinson drive: very efficient, but over a narrow speed and output range. Mechanical gear train: Inefficiencies in the high nineties. But gear ratios are fixed. Electric drive train: Not as efficient as a mechanical gear trains, but is efficient over a very wide speed range.
Add those up and you have a high efficiency mechanical power path through the planetary gear. And you use the electric power path to divert enough power from the engine to keep it running at it's most efficient. Because you have the electric power path you can cycle energy to and from the battery. Which gives you regenerative breaking, and allows you to stop the engine completely when you don't need power.
Genius!
Atkinson drive: very efficient, but over a narrow speed and output range. Mechanical gear train: Inefficiencies in the high nineties. But gear ratios are fixed. Electric drive train: Not as efficient as a mechanical gear trains, but is efficient over a very wide speed range.
Add those up and you have a high efficiency mechanical power path through the planetary gear. And you use the electric power path to divert enough power from the engine to keep it running at it's most efficient. Because you have the electric power path you can cycle energy to and from the battery. Which gives you regenerative breaking, and allows you to stop the engine completely when you don't need power.
Genius!
They probably are, given the sales volume.
I do believe that, while Toyota should be commended on its engineering, the electric motor is actually beneficial to reduce wear and tear on the most expensive parts. This seems to be supported by the fact that are many other Toyota models in the low maintenance list, but only the Prius at the top.
The prius is pretty mature now too. And the "synergy" system is licensed to third parties. Nissan uses it on their hybrid models.
Disclaimer: Nissan Leaf owner. I am not expecting high maintenance bills either. The only thing that worries me is the weight of the vehicle and the crappy OEM tires it comes with.
I do believe that, while Toyota should be commended on its engineering, the electric motor is actually beneficial to reduce wear and tear on the most expensive parts. This seems to be supported by the fact that are many other Toyota models in the low maintenance list, but only the Prius at the top.
The prius is pretty mature now too. And the "synergy" system is licensed to third parties. Nissan uses it on their hybrid models.
Disclaimer: Nissan Leaf owner. I am not expecting high maintenance bills either. The only thing that worries me is the weight of the vehicle and the crappy OEM tires it comes with.
I don't trust those numbers for the hybrids. I have a hybrid and replaced the hybrid battery pack. It was expensive. I'd expect a dealer quote for a replacement would run several thousand dollars. I'd also expect the average battery to be replaced at least once in those ten years. That cost would be most of the average upkeep cost
You have options for non-oem battery packs that are less expensive, but you are going to have problems finding an independent shop who will work on it. Dealers won't work with non-oem parts, and most shops won't want to work on the HV electrical system in your hybrid. I haven't found a local independent shop who will work on the hybrid systems. You can do some work yourself, the companies that sell non-oem battery packs will tell you that you can. But you should definitely be comfortable working with HV electrical systems if you want to do it yourself.
Some independent shops will work on hybrid systems, I found a mechanic with a great reputation that I'm really happy with. He was literally half the price of some of the dealer quotes. But he's in an entirely different state. Independent shops that specialize in hybrids are hard to find.
Plus there are other systems involved with the hybrid, like the transmission, that I would assume would usually be a dealer repair. So I'm assuming this list isn't including the costs to repair the hybrid systems. I think those will usually be dealer repairs.
You have options for non-oem battery packs that are less expensive, but you are going to have problems finding an independent shop who will work on it. Dealers won't work with non-oem parts, and most shops won't want to work on the HV electrical system in your hybrid. I haven't found a local independent shop who will work on the hybrid systems. You can do some work yourself, the companies that sell non-oem battery packs will tell you that you can. But you should definitely be comfortable working with HV electrical systems if you want to do it yourself.
Some independent shops will work on hybrid systems, I found a mechanic with a great reputation that I'm really happy with. He was literally half the price of some of the dealer quotes. But he's in an entirely different state. Independent shops that specialize in hybrids are hard to find.
Plus there are other systems involved with the hybrid, like the transmission, that I would assume would usually be a dealer repair. So I'm assuming this list isn't including the costs to repair the hybrid systems. I think those will usually be dealer repairs.
Hybrids purchased in California have a 10 year traction battery warranty, so the replacement cost is zero.
That is true, but that is because of the state, not the dealer. I actually had some frustrating problems with that. My battery was out of warranty, but if I had been dealing with California regulations it would have been in warranty. I ended up getting a large goodwill discount, so that was nice of the dealer. But it was a little frustrating to realize that my expensive car repair would have been free in another state.
I was personally surprised by this as well. In fact, it's the single biggest reason I didn't purchase a hybrid vehicle outside of the initial cost being much higher at the time. My thinking was, yes electric cars are quite a bit simpler and have enjoyed a lower repair rate due to that simplicity but here's a car with all of the repair issues that would be found in a gasoline vehicle, all of the added repairs that might come up from the electric engine and then repairs associated with all of the fancy features like regenerative braking and such, not to mention the battery. And they're in the extreme minority meaning I'd either have to hunt for a third-party shop that happened to have a really skilled mechanic who happened to understand all of these odd systems (say goodbye to trusted family friend who's a mechanic and really inexpensive) or get utterly hosed at the dealer. I had a car that had to have the transmission rebuilt multiple times -- a very costly repair ($2400/time in the late 90s)
I guess, though, when I think about the common repairs that car owners experience, "Engine Failure" is rarely one of them, so maybe that's one of the core reasons that having two engines doesn't affect things much, but the battery, which is a part that has a guaranteed wear associated scared me quite a bit.
Impressive for Toyota, for sure.
I guess, though, when I think about the common repairs that car owners experience, "Engine Failure" is rarely one of them, so maybe that's one of the core reasons that having two engines doesn't affect things much, but the battery, which is a part that has a guaranteed wear associated scared me quite a bit.
Impressive for Toyota, for sure.
"What kind of engine it has" is very much secondary to build quality. An 80s Lada and Volkswagon both had the same internals, yet one had to be repaired before it rolled off the production line.
The design of the car places an upper boundary on reliability. Whether or not you hit that upper boundary is up to your manufacturing line.
As a Prius owner, I am also amused by the oft-repeated Tesla claim of 'All electric! Simpler system! Fewer repairs!' - given the many production defects they seem to have.
The design of the car places an upper boundary on reliability. Whether or not you hit that upper boundary is up to your manufacturing line.
As a Prius owner, I am also amused by the oft-repeated Tesla claim of 'All electric! Simpler system! Fewer repairs!' - given the many production defects they seem to have.
> As a Prius owner, I am also amused by the oft-repeated Tesla claim of 'All electric! Simpler system! Fewer repairs!' - given the many production defects they seem to have.
Those are not mutually exclusive. You can have fewer parts and a simpler system and yet a high number of failures. That just means they need to improve the manufacturing.
Another way to look at is: your Prius is not much more complicated than a "normal" car, as the EV portion adds so few parts ;)
And that's assuming Tesla really does have that many defects to begin with. Much like their accidents, could be biased reporting.
Those are not mutually exclusive. You can have fewer parts and a simpler system and yet a high number of failures. That just means they need to improve the manufacturing.
Another way to look at is: your Prius is not much more complicated than a "normal" car, as the EV portion adds so few parts ;)
And that's assuming Tesla really does have that many defects to begin with. Much like their accidents, could be biased reporting.
They aren't - but as a consumer, the only metric that matters is: "How often does the car break?" Cries of "Simpler system" cloud the issue.
When talking about reliability, I don't care if it's reliable because it uses an ICE, or because it runs on rainbows and unicorn dust. I just care that it's reliable!
When talking about reliability, I don't care if it's reliable because it uses an ICE, or because it runs on rainbows and unicorn dust. I just care that it's reliable!
Agreed. They are using the potential higher reliability as a marketing point. Everything else being equal, they'd be right. But everything else is not equal, at least not yet.
"As a Prius owner, I am also amused by the oft-repeated Tesla claim of 'All electric! Simpler system! Fewer repairs!' - given the many production defects they seem to have."
In theory, theory and practice are the same thing. In practice, they're not.
In theory, theory and practice are the same thing. In practice, they're not.
Is the modern system based on division of labor more reliable ? it can be much more reliable if designed properly. And there's no secret - smart complexity can buy reliability.
But sure, the toyota hybrid is an impressive piece of engineering.
But sure, the toyota hybrid is an impressive piece of engineering.
This is one reason why I don't buy American. I actually really like Ford's vehicles (the infotainment system might be the best available) but they consistently get bad reliability scores along with other American brands (Chrysler, Dodge, etc).
Why don't American manufacturers work to improve their reliability? People really are buying Toyota/Honda/Mazda for that reason. And while Kia might be unreliable as all heck, they come with the best included warranty available[0].
American vehicles actually cost more too in many cases, so you're paying for the "privilege" of getting a less reliable vehicle.
[0] http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=buy&story=ma...
Why don't American manufacturers work to improve their reliability? People really are buying Toyota/Honda/Mazda for that reason. And while Kia might be unreliable as all heck, they come with the best included warranty available[0].
American vehicles actually cost more too in many cases, so you're paying for the "privilege" of getting a less reliable vehicle.
[0] http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=buy&story=ma...
Ford has improved their reliability considerably, post-bailout. Ford is really the only example I can see of the bailout doing anything good.
Pre-bailout, Ford was pretty abysmal. I would actually say they were less reliable than GM. They took the influx of cash and overhauled their entire manufacturing AND design processes to turn out some great cars. The only thing in their lineup looking bleak to me is the Escape (ugh, just no).
The problem is that they're still pretty cheap on their interiors and panels tend to come loose and break a lot. American consumers tend to value interior over most other car features unfortunately. Modern Fords, save for the Escape, are pretty reliable and Honda has shown themselves to be much less so in recent years. Mazda is still too small volume to matter.
tl;dr: Ford is great now, Toyota is still on top, Honda is majorly slipping and GM still blows goats.
Pre-bailout, Ford was pretty abysmal. I would actually say they were less reliable than GM. They took the influx of cash and overhauled their entire manufacturing AND design processes to turn out some great cars. The only thing in their lineup looking bleak to me is the Escape (ugh, just no).
The problem is that they're still pretty cheap on their interiors and panels tend to come loose and break a lot. American consumers tend to value interior over most other car features unfortunately. Modern Fords, save for the Escape, are pretty reliable and Honda has shown themselves to be much less so in recent years. Mazda is still too small volume to matter.
tl;dr: Ford is great now, Toyota is still on top, Honda is majorly slipping and GM still blows goats.
Ford took no money from TARP, so not sure what you mean by pre/post bailout.
There was a seperate auto industry bailout program:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_the_2008%E2%80%9310...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_the_2008%E2%80%9310...
Ford didn't take money from that program either.
The bailout provisions required some pretty strict limitations on dividends. As I understand it, quite a few members of the Ford family derive a significant portion of their income from FoMoCo stock dividends.
It doesn't hurt that Ford was able to borrow large amounts of money before the meltdown, so they had the capital to weather the storm.
It doesn't hurt that Ford was able to borrow large amounts of money before the meltdown, so they had the capital to weather the storm.
Ford had been improving well before the auto crisis, but they were never in danger of going under. It was Chrysler and GM. Ford never took the bailout, honestly, I think that helped their sales a lot. Hard to shake the "Government Motors" or the "Fiat" image.
Toyota is still the best. People are always shocked when they hear how many miles I have on my 2006 Tacoma. I also like Subaru, surprised they ranked as that expensive to maintain.
Toyota is still the best. People are always shocked when they hear how many miles I have on my 2006 Tacoma. I also like Subaru, surprised they ranked as that expensive to maintain.
The only problem I have with Toyotas (and I'm in a new Camry rental after a Rav4 got totalled) is that the suspension, handling, and styling seemed to be designed by people who hate driving.
I have an 06 Tacoma and I prefer its handling to every other vehicle I've driven, including the F-150, Tundra, Outback (though the Outback is the most similar), Mercedes-Benz crossover (don't know the exact model.) I've also driven a Viper and a Corvette, but I'm not including those in my comparison for obvious reasons. I think it's just preference. Then again, trucks have different suspension than cars. My mom used to have a Camry, and I never liked driving it. It might just be a truck thing.
The mushiness of Toyota handling translates much better to trucks I have found.
When you take a small car and make the handling mushy, it's like driving a smore.
When you take a small car and make the handling mushy, it's like driving a smore.
I drive an FRS (Toyota 86) for this reason. It's an absolute joy to drive.
YMMV: We had a 2014 Fiesta with a DCT and the thing worked like a first time driver on a manual. Herky jerky, seemingly missing clutch engagement. They might have done a lot better with interior build quality, and their higher end models are impressive (hell, their 3 cyl 1.0L turbo engine for the Fiesta is a masterclass in small car powerplants), but they aren't even halfway to a Honda or Toyota, who have essentially reinvented (and continue to reinvent) car manufacturing.
I recommend watching James May's Building a Car documentary. It was a fascinating window into all the aspects of car QA.
I recommend watching James May's Building a Car documentary. It was a fascinating window into all the aspects of car QA.
Their manual transmissions aren't much better. I tested a couple of Focus STs and I _hated_ them.
I've heard a lot of complaining about Honda lately which bugs me. I actually purchased a Honda motorcycle[0] because of tens of industry reviews lauding the quality and reliability and avoided a Harley at least in part because of the "It's a Harley. Sometimes they stall."[1] (that, and I'm a twig of a man so I'd look ridiculous on a Harley).
[0] Specifically, I purchased a model they'd brought over from Europe (good sized engine, sport/touring, 100+ miles to the gallon but "you don't buy a bike to save on gas") and the reviews for the European model were universally good.
[1] This was an actual quote from the guy at the Harley dealership after he succeeded in starting a floor model only to have it crap out after 5 seconds of idling. He thought I'd be impressed with how loud the damn thing was. Little did he know I wasn't looking to be that guy, I just always wanted a motorcycle and the bike I purchased is exceptionally quiet.
[0] Specifically, I purchased a model they'd brought over from Europe (good sized engine, sport/touring, 100+ miles to the gallon but "you don't buy a bike to save on gas") and the reviews for the European model were universally good.
[1] This was an actual quote from the guy at the Harley dealership after he succeeded in starting a floor model only to have it crap out after 5 seconds of idling. He thought I'd be impressed with how loud the damn thing was. Little did he know I wasn't looking to be that guy, I just always wanted a motorcycle and the bike I purchased is exceptionally quiet.
I had a 2000 Acura Integra that I bought used (the model is essentially a gussied up Civic) that I loved and drove for 10 years. Loved that car. Comfy reliable etc.
I bought a 2007 Honda Civic Ex because we needed 2 cars. Its a nice car, but Honda reliability has definitely fallen (though it is still miles ahead of European and US cars).
The new Honda Civic looks really good and seems reliable so my next car might be a Honda Civic (the 2007 is going strong and we drive so little I hope it lasts another 10 - 15 years). But there was a point between 2009 and 2014 when I felt Honda had lost its way with the god awful cheap iteration of the Honda Civic. It was essentially a money grab based on their reputation.
The worst car I ever owned was a 1993 Mitsubishi Eclipse. I used to joke that friends don't let friends by Mitsubishi
I bought a 2007 Honda Civic Ex because we needed 2 cars. Its a nice car, but Honda reliability has definitely fallen (though it is still miles ahead of European and US cars).
The new Honda Civic looks really good and seems reliable so my next car might be a Honda Civic (the 2007 is going strong and we drive so little I hope it lasts another 10 - 15 years). But there was a point between 2009 and 2014 when I felt Honda had lost its way with the god awful cheap iteration of the Honda Civic. It was essentially a money grab based on their reputation.
The worst car I ever owned was a 1993 Mitsubishi Eclipse. I used to joke that friends don't let friends by Mitsubishi
We're not talking about motorcycles though. Their bikes are fantastic.
Yep. My 2009 Shadow isn't gonna win any awards in either handling or speed or even "coolest sounding exhaust rumble" but the damn thing is near bulletproof. Shaft drive is a little heavier but removes the need for chain/belt maintenance. It's been knocked over by teenage vandals and still started right back up with no issues. It was my first "proper" bike (after screwing around town on 50cc scooters) and it probably won't be my last but it's been a workhorse, no doubt.
A lot of it depends on the model and "generation". For example, the 2002-2007 (7th gen??) Honda Accords had bum transmissions that pretty much crapped the bed when hooked up to the V6. The I4 versions were really solid.
It's less about general dependability and more about a few slip ups that Honda made that are making people question the brand as a whole.
It's less about general dependability and more about a few slip ups that Honda made that are making people question the brand as a whole.
I saw an unofficial automobile brand slogans meme at some point. The ones I remember were "Toyota: for people who love white kitchen appliances" & "Honda: resting on our laurels."
[deleted]
Honda motorcycles have exceptional reliability but I'm not sure that is directly comparable with their auto line. Out of curiosity what model is getting 100+ miles to the gallon?!?
edit: I guess the Grom might come close?
edit: I guess the Grom might come close?
I should have clarified, I am reliably getting over 100MPG, but the motorcycle lists, I think, 50 or 60 MPG (still not bad). I generally use the bike only to ride up north and back and shortly after buying it I bumped the info button and noticed it had a MPG display. It was stuck at 99, which is the max it can display. I assumed it was broken but after several trips I realized they're a little over 100 miles each way and I was filling up the 4 gallon tank about once every two round trips, so I did a one way after putting a gallon in at a half tank and sure enough, I arrived with the needle a little higher than it was at (not perfect accuracy, but confirmation enough for me). I'm a pretty simple rider, no need to goose the engine (well, ok, occasionally). It's an all highway drive most of it rural highway (no passing lane) at 55 MPH, too, so it's basically the most ideal circumstances for fuel economy, too.
It's the 2011 Honda NT700V and I love the thing. It's a sport/touring (nothing like a crotch rocket or a monster touring bike), very comfortable to ride, quiet and since purchase it has had zero problems and I have been able to do all of the routine maintenance myself due to it being easy to take apart. Granted, I live in Michigan so I don't get to ride it 5-6 months out of the year and I've got under 10,000 miles on it so I'd expect it to still be running well. The only downside is the oil filter is a smaller version of a very common filter, requiring me to buy it online and it use 10-W30 oil which is really hard to find retail (Motorcycles use different oil -- wet clutch -- who knew?) -- online it's twice the price I can get it retail when enough of it is in stock (O'Reilly carries a high-end synthetic for it that I purchase a quart at a time when I'm there for other reasons -- they've never had 3 in stock at a time).
It's the 2011 Honda NT700V and I love the thing. It's a sport/touring (nothing like a crotch rocket or a monster touring bike), very comfortable to ride, quiet and since purchase it has had zero problems and I have been able to do all of the routine maintenance myself due to it being easy to take apart. Granted, I live in Michigan so I don't get to ride it 5-6 months out of the year and I've got under 10,000 miles on it so I'd expect it to still be running well. The only downside is the oil filter is a smaller version of a very common filter, requiring me to buy it online and it use 10-W30 oil which is really hard to find retail (Motorcycles use different oil -- wet clutch -- who knew?) -- online it's twice the price I can get it retail when enough of it is in stock (O'Reilly carries a high-end synthetic for it that I purchase a quart at a time when I'm there for other reasons -- they've never had 3 in stock at a time).
Ford wasn't bailed out.
Yes it was. Ford got $5.9 billion in TALF money. Nissan got some too. Just because it wasn't TARP doesn't mean that it wasn't a bailout. They also got a $9 billion line of credit from the government.
Clever PR misdirection on their part.
They were also lucky in their timing - they had already mortgaged about $18 billion in assets in 2006. Neither one of those events on their own would have been enough to save the company. Both turned them into a major competitor again.
Clever PR misdirection on their part.
They were also lucky in their timing - they had already mortgaged about $18 billion in assets in 2006. Neither one of those events on their own would have been enough to save the company. Both turned them into a major competitor again.
Ford took a loan. Ford got an interest rate that a normal citizen couldn't get, clearly there was special treatment. But it's not like we handed them 9 billion dollars. It seemed like banks were freaking out in 2009, and really wouldn't give a loan at any interest rate. Assuming a sane banking structure, where it was possible to get a loan, 1% on 5.6 billion is around 50 million a year.
"bailout" is a fairly fuzzy term. If the banking system was working, there would have been no need for DOE loans. There was also the benefit of improved milage, thereby reducing carbon emissions. This seems like the sort of thing the DOE does anyway, and wouldn't raise eyebrows in a sane banking environment. I think by your meaning of "bailout" student loans are also a bailout.
On the other hand, GM and Chrysler went bankrupt. They sold secured assets to new GM and new Chrysler and, i believe, gave investors quite a haircut.
"bailout" is a fairly fuzzy term. If the banking system was working, there would have been no need for DOE loans. There was also the benefit of improved milage, thereby reducing carbon emissions. This seems like the sort of thing the DOE does anyway, and wouldn't raise eyebrows in a sane banking environment. I think by your meaning of "bailout" student loans are also a bailout.
On the other hand, GM and Chrysler went bankrupt. They sold secured assets to new GM and new Chrysler and, i believe, gave investors quite a haircut.
So with the bailouts, they took the haircut right away and baked the risk into the deal they made with the auto manufacturers. Then they ate the risk in their transaction right away and wrote down the loss.
With the loans they made to Ford they used a different tactic -- they said to hell with the financial risk (which you usually bake into your interest rate) and made the loans anyway and left open the possibility of devastating financial losses. The only reason we're looking at this positively is because Ford was a success story. Had Ford folded, congressional heads would have rolled and we'd be cursing the TALF loans and praising the TARP bailouts.
With the loans they made to Ford they used a different tactic -- they said to hell with the financial risk (which you usually bake into your interest rate) and made the loans anyway and left open the possibility of devastating financial losses. The only reason we're looking at this positively is because Ford was a success story. Had Ford folded, congressional heads would have rolled and we'd be cursing the TALF loans and praising the TARP bailouts.
Just to clarify that the whole banking system was locked up and there was no capital. In a normal market GM and Chrysler could have done what Ford did.
Ford was in better shape than the others because they had mortgaged everything before the financial system locked up. That means they also started improving everything sooner.
From my perspective in Michigan the auto bailout was a huge success. My friends in the industry report that most of the cruft in the big three was cut or let go and they really shifted the culture. The whole industry is focused on technology. The suppliers survived. Hundreds of thousands of jobs exist because of the injection of liquidity.
Ford was in better shape than the others because they had mortgaged everything before the financial system locked up. That means they also started improving everything sooner.
From my perspective in Michigan the auto bailout was a huge success. My friends in the industry report that most of the cruft in the big three was cut or let go and they really shifted the culture. The whole industry is focused on technology. The suppliers survived. Hundreds of thousands of jobs exist because of the injection of liquidity.
I similarly think that the bailout was a success. I just think that people have a horribly myopic perspective when they act like Ford didn't receive government/taxpayer benefits during the financial crisis.
Fisker and VPG were clearly failures, Tesla and Nissan seemed to work out ok though. You're clearly much more well versed in this situation than i am. It looks to me like a subsidize what you want and tax what you don't style economic policy, just like corn in Iowa. or FHA loans.
But i think we agree (since you changed your terms) it's not exactly a "bailout", but the timing sure was super handy for ford.
But i think we agree (since you changed your terms) it's not exactly a "bailout", but the timing sure was super handy for ford.
Oh man...Fisker.
Not that they were doing well anyway, but Hurricane Sandy sure did kill off that company.
Not that they were doing well anyway, but Hurricane Sandy sure did kill off that company.
I think you're confusing the energy efficiency loans with the TALF money. TALF was the Treasury, intended to prop up the industry, and is arguably a bailout; the energy efficiency loan was the DoE thing and was predicated on development of certain models of electric/fuel efficient cars.
I suspect Ford would have had much better results over the last five or six years if their two biggest competitors had gone out of business.
They have significant supply chain overlap. Ford lobbied for a bailout of the industry.
The Ford lobbyists are a principle-agent problem on many levels, but of course all of corporate America is.
When a supplier loses two customers while all its other customers order more parts than before, there might be some costs associated with adjusting to the new circumstances, but it won't go out of business.
When a supplier loses two customers while all its other customers order more parts than before, there might be some costs associated with adjusting to the new circumstances, but it won't go out of business.
The entire car industry has supply chain overlap, to be honest.
Oh I agree.
We should have at least let GM burn in a fiery ball of death. Chrystler I'm a little less positive on as I generally approve of the Fiat deal and what the company has done since...some of it anyway.
We should have at least let GM burn in a fiery ball of death. Chrystler I'm a little less positive on as I generally approve of the Fiat deal and what the company has done since...some of it anyway.
I'll say this, there is a delay between a manufacturer improving and it actually showing up in reliability metrics. So perhaps Ford have improved, but their stats are being ruined by cars made in the early 2000s.
But that being said, the only useful data for reliability is after the first three years since very few vehicles have issues when they're "brand new." It is more in the long tail that they become expensive to keep on the road.
Next time I buy a vehicle I'll re-examine the reliability data and see if the picture has shifted.
But that being said, the only useful data for reliability is after the first three years since very few vehicles have issues when they're "brand new." It is more in the long tail that they become expensive to keep on the road.
Next time I buy a vehicle I'll re-examine the reliability data and see if the picture has shifted.
Surprised no one mentioned Ford hiring Alan Mulally from Boeing.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Mulally
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Mulally
I'm from Michigan. I've heard this so many times over the years, but you won't fool me again.
edit: Specifically cars only. Trucks are different.
edit: Specifically cars only. Trucks are different.
I've heard this line a lot, but what alternative do you have? GM is utter shit and Japanese cars traditionally rust to pieces there.
Not everyone can afford a Mercedes.
Not everyone can afford a Mercedes.
4-5 year old MB's are pretty reasonably priced (I tend to buy a little farther out on the price curve than that).
Mercedes also had a horrible rust problem with their mid-late 90s cars. They switched to an environmentally friendly paint process that was terrible for paint adhesion and rust prevention. I have a perfectly good '98 E300D that's going to go the junkyard because of rust issues. Explain to me how that's saving the environment again?
Mercedes also had a horrible rust problem with their mid-late 90s cars. They switched to an environmentally friendly paint process that was terrible for paint adhesion and rust prevention. I have a perfectly good '98 E300D that's going to go the junkyard because of rust issues. Explain to me how that's saving the environment again?
By rusting away, the car will turn into iron oxide, which is "natural" and thus helps the environment. They should have made the paint an energy source for microorganisms, then they could claim to have a biodegradable car.
> Japanese cars rust?
I've been in a climate known for being hard on vehicles (Minnesota) for ten years and the only rust buckets I ever see on the roads are older American vehicles (Dodge SUV's and minivans in particular). I've owned Nissan and Honda vehicles in that time and never had issues with rust.
I've been in a climate known for being hard on vehicles (Minnesota) for ten years and the only rust buckets I ever see on the roads are older American vehicles (Dodge SUV's and minivans in particular). I've owned Nissan and Honda vehicles in that time and never had issues with rust.
My relatives have no problems with Toyota cars since ~2009, unlike previous Big 3 vehicles with a continual trickle of issues, even in brand-new vehicles. Plus they're just nicer on the inside and hold up longer.
I'm not American, so I don't have an intricate knowledge about your car market, but isn't GM doing relatively well since the bailout? At least their Volt/Bolt models seem to be pretty innovative, at the moment it would be my choice (i.e. the Opel Ampera derivative) if I were to look for a new car.
Fairly well. I could be wrong but I believe during the big 2008 downturn people stopped buying cars, yet of course GM needed to keep paying off their capital expenses. So they had a classic cash flow problem. Now sales are normative like you'd expect. Might be a silver lining in that the crisis likely motivated management to make improvements[1].
Although I'm under the impression that their fiance division GMAC took big loses. The standard wikepidia link seems to say GM divested before the big crisis hit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ally_Financial
[1] Japanese auto companies tend to compete on quality and TCO. GM seemed stuck forever competing on sales price/brand loyalty.
Although I'm under the impression that their fiance division GMAC took big loses. The standard wikepidia link seems to say GM divested before the big crisis hit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ally_Financial
[1] Japanese auto companies tend to compete on quality and TCO. GM seemed stuck forever competing on sales price/brand loyalty.
Ford never took bailout money AFAIK. They revitalized on their own which is very commendable. If they were just a little bit more reliable I'd probably buy one.
My parents buy Fords almost exclusively and they range from about as reliable as my Honda to abysmal and expensive so YMMV.
My parents buy Fords almost exclusively and they range from about as reliable as my Honda to abysmal and expensive so YMMV.
Ford borrowed $5.9 billion from the Department of Energy in June 2009 through the TALF program. Another ~$2.1 billion was given to Nissan ($1.6b) and Tesla ($465m) from that at the same time. It was a $25 billion fund for encouraging higher fuel efficiency.
I bought a 2014 Focus, which I think has developed quite a reputation for expensive and frequent repairs. Fortunately, the primary (overwhelmingly so) candidate is the transmission.
This played into my decision when I got a 2014 Focus as well. I got a manual transmission.
Its much harder to screw up a manual. The Dual-clutch thing is somewhat innovative, but the Focus's engine is high-rev / turbo-charged (getting the most power at 4000+ RPM). At the low-end, the engine is jerky and everything.
Its much smoother when I rev the engine higher (maybe 3000+ or even 4000+) before shifting up. I'm not really sure how the "automatic" DCT of the Focus is supposed to manage the engine without things getting shaky.
I definitely recommend the 2014 as a manual car. Very simple driving behavior fix to just rev the engine a little higher.
Its much harder to screw up a manual. The Dual-clutch thing is somewhat innovative, but the Focus's engine is high-rev / turbo-charged (getting the most power at 4000+ RPM). At the low-end, the engine is jerky and everything.
Its much smoother when I rev the engine higher (maybe 3000+ or even 4000+) before shifting up. I'm not really sure how the "automatic" DCT of the Focus is supposed to manage the engine without things getting shaky.
I definitely recommend the 2014 as a manual car. Very simple driving behavior fix to just rev the engine a little higher.
We've got a 2012 Focus as our sole car (my other car is a motorcycle if I'm looking to go all "bumper sticker" with my phrases). I believe this was the first year that they switched the US Focus to be the same as the European version which was a different, superior vehicle in past years.
It's also a manual and it's the base model so the interior trim is boring black plastic. Stereo and all that are very basic and there's absolutely nothing exciting about the car.
That said, It was under $15k new in the late summer of 2011, hasn't had any major issues or maintenance other than scheduled visits, oil changes, and the like.
Granted we've only had it for 5 years but the thing is paid for and for $15k, it's been a fine commuter car and for the few longer trips we take every year. Previous car was a used (forget the year) Jetta with fancy heated leather seats, 6 speed, sweet stereo, moon roof, and all that fun stuff. The damn thing was in the shop at least two or more times per year during the few years we had it before we threw in the towel and traded it in on the Focus.
Sure, I sorta liked the perks and that 6 speed, 6cyl was a hell of a lot more fun to drive but it wasn't thousands-more-per-year more fun to drive. The car was also not new when we got it so it's not a fair comparison to a car purchased new. If anything, I think I learned that buying a new (or newer) car that's simpler with a lower base cost can still be less spendy than going used when you add in maintenance costs.
It's also a manual and it's the base model so the interior trim is boring black plastic. Stereo and all that are very basic and there's absolutely nothing exciting about the car.
That said, It was under $15k new in the late summer of 2011, hasn't had any major issues or maintenance other than scheduled visits, oil changes, and the like.
Granted we've only had it for 5 years but the thing is paid for and for $15k, it's been a fine commuter car and for the few longer trips we take every year. Previous car was a used (forget the year) Jetta with fancy heated leather seats, 6 speed, sweet stereo, moon roof, and all that fun stuff. The damn thing was in the shop at least two or more times per year during the few years we had it before we threw in the towel and traded it in on the Focus.
Sure, I sorta liked the perks and that 6 speed, 6cyl was a hell of a lot more fun to drive but it wasn't thousands-more-per-year more fun to drive. The car was also not new when we got it so it's not a fair comparison to a car purchased new. If anything, I think I learned that buying a new (or newer) car that's simpler with a lower base cost can still be less spendy than going used when you add in maintenance costs.
The Mk3 Focus (2012 and later) has a surprisingly perky engine above 4000 RPM. I'd say its one of the funnest rides under $20k brand new. As you note: there are plenty of low-end models that are ~$15k for a completely brand new car.
The Mazda3 manual transmission has slightly better low-end torque and a solid transmission. Its only slightly more expensive, but I personally didn't like the layout of the interior and the placement of the windows. Otherwise, great car with a superior engine to the Focus.
The Mazda3 manual transmission has slightly better low-end torque and a solid transmission. Its only slightly more expensive, but I personally didn't like the layout of the interior and the placement of the windows. Otherwise, great car with a superior engine to the Focus.
> Kia might be unreliable as all heck
Have had two Kia Rio's (2008 and 2013), the 2008 model was definitely maintenance intensive vehicle and frankly poorly built vehicle[1], but the 2013 seems to be a much better car. I'm at 130,000 miles and it seems to be doing fine and nothing big has happened and it deals well with ND winters when I cannot plug in the block heater[2].
1) the timing belt did fail a bit earlier than the maintenance checks suggest (yes, its game over right there), but the 2013 has a chain. Spark plugs were also an issue on the 2008 along with brakes.
2) no outlets at apartment, so goes the whole electric thing
Have had two Kia Rio's (2008 and 2013), the 2008 model was definitely maintenance intensive vehicle and frankly poorly built vehicle[1], but the 2013 seems to be a much better car. I'm at 130,000 miles and it seems to be doing fine and nothing big has happened and it deals well with ND winters when I cannot plug in the block heater[2].
1) the timing belt did fail a bit earlier than the maintenance checks suggest (yes, its game over right there), but the 2013 has a chain. Spark plugs were also an issue on the 2008 along with brakes.
2) no outlets at apartment, so goes the whole electric thing
Each has its bad models to stay away from. I find no problem with Ford. My 2000 v6 mustang is still fine at 200k miles. I have a relative that has 1989 Ford Ranger that has 450K miles on it. Same engine, never rebuilt. Though he did have to replace the transmission in 1996 and again just last year.
I think the thing that lead to Asian cars getting a good name was their switch to using all synthetic fluids in the late 1990's. You could buy a Nissan or Toyota and drive it for 8 year straight with no other maintenance other than oil changes and be just fine.
Do the same thing with an American car of that era and you will go through several stages. If you did nothing but change the oil, at the 5 year mark the car would be mostly destroyed. The conventional anti-freeze would have completely broken down at the 3 year mark and now your entire cooling system would be solid rust.
Your brakes will also be on the way out, as the normal DOT3 brake fluid absorbs water and after 5 years it will have become corrosive and it will be eating holes in your brake lines and brake pistons. The non synthetic power steering fluid will also be at the end of life and it will be destroying the seals in your steering rack.
And if its an automatic transmission, there is about 2 gallons of non synthetic transmission fluid in it that went bad 2 years ago and now the accelerated seal and metal wear is going to start clogging up the tiny fluid circuits so now one day your car will stay stuck in neutral... Oh and the engine will be running very rough more than likely too by now as the non-platinum sparks plugs are definitely wore out beyond use.
But if you change those fluids every 3 years or so, you are good for a few decades :)
I think the thing that lead to Asian cars getting a good name was their switch to using all synthetic fluids in the late 1990's. You could buy a Nissan or Toyota and drive it for 8 year straight with no other maintenance other than oil changes and be just fine.
Do the same thing with an American car of that era and you will go through several stages. If you did nothing but change the oil, at the 5 year mark the car would be mostly destroyed. The conventional anti-freeze would have completely broken down at the 3 year mark and now your entire cooling system would be solid rust.
Your brakes will also be on the way out, as the normal DOT3 brake fluid absorbs water and after 5 years it will have become corrosive and it will be eating holes in your brake lines and brake pistons. The non synthetic power steering fluid will also be at the end of life and it will be destroying the seals in your steering rack.
And if its an automatic transmission, there is about 2 gallons of non synthetic transmission fluid in it that went bad 2 years ago and now the accelerated seal and metal wear is going to start clogging up the tiny fluid circuits so now one day your car will stay stuck in neutral... Oh and the engine will be running very rough more than likely too by now as the non-platinum sparks plugs are definitely wore out beyond use.
But if you change those fluids every 3 years or so, you are good for a few decades :)
If synthetic fluids are the solution, why not replace with synthetic fluids?
You certainly can (in most cases). But the examples I spoke of are what I would consider extreme neglect (even though every one pretty much treats their vehicle that way).
Is your life that busy that you can't even find time once every three years to change the fluids yourself (or pay a shop to do it)?
Is your life that busy that you can't even find time once every three years to change the fluids yourself (or pay a shop to do it)?
You can't always substitute. Specifically in brakes, steering and transmission. The seals on the systems and the viscosities of the fluids are often set with very specific limits.
Anecdotes are not data but I have a 2002 Ford Focus that I'm hugely happy with. Approaching 200,000 miles and zero significant issues. Also previously had an F150 that was great also until it was totaled in an accident. I would buy Ford without hesitation.
I had a 2000 Ford Focus that I drove for 209,000 miles in 12 years. Great car. Mine was a standard and red. I had a few recalls early on but overall it was a great car.
In the past, there were some Ford vehicles that were well known for their ability to keep going for 300,000+ miles.
Like the early 90's Ford Trucks with the straight 6, the Ranger, and the Crown Vic with the 4.6L V8. All discontinued, or the reliable engine replaced with something not as reliable.
Like the early 90's Ford Trucks with the straight 6, the Ranger, and the Crown Vic with the 4.6L V8. All discontinued, or the reliable engine replaced with something not as reliable.
With the American cars, you have to focus on the flagship, high volume cars. They stuff the junk in to fill out the line (i.e. The Chevy/Daewoo thing)
My Ford vs Honda experience has been pretty similar. Great or Awful. I had a 2005 Odyessy and 2003 Pilot. Basically the same car, but the Odyssey was crap - literally had a door fall off.
Likewise, I had a Fusion and a 500/Taurus. The 500 had lots of stupid, expensive problems with trim, electronics, etc. The Fusion was flawless.
My Ford vs Honda experience has been pretty similar. Great or Awful. I had a 2005 Odyessy and 2003 Pilot. Basically the same car, but the Odyssey was crap - literally had a door fall off.
Likewise, I had a Fusion and a 500/Taurus. The 500 had lots of stupid, expensive problems with trim, electronics, etc. The Fusion was flawless.
i had a ford focus 2002, ran to 150,000 miles and it got totaled. The only things were replaced: timing belt, tires, brakes, fuel filter, plugs, O2 sensor, alternator, one of the solenoid (maybe 3rd or 4th gear). Besides the solenoid and the alternator all items are maintenance.
Does this count as good reliability?
Does this count as good reliability?
At 100K miles, there's a pretty good argument that the alternator is maintenance as well. (If it died very early, maybe not, but it's a rotating part with brushes; it's eventually going to need maintenance on any car.)
Absolutely agree. In addition to that we should include things like: radiator, radiator and heater hoses, air conditioning compressor, timing belt, break rotors (disks) and, automatic transmission, suspension bushes and shock absorbers, wheel bearings, exhaust pipes, mufflers, catalytic converters.
I only buy secondhand cars, and these are all things I've replaced, either myself or by mechanics. All these things will eventually wear out on a car, but replacing most of these parts is relatively straight forward, and I believe in expensive in comparison to the huge financial outlay require to purchase a new vehicle - in which we ought to include the depreciation as well as the running costs and maintenance.
I only buy secondhand cars, and these are all things I've replaced, either myself or by mechanics. All these things will eventually wear out on a car, but replacing most of these parts is relatively straight forward, and I believe in expensive in comparison to the huge financial outlay require to purchase a new vehicle - in which we ought to include the depreciation as well as the running costs and maintenance.
Maintenance items do not (or should not IMO) count as reliability items since they are similar expected expenses on all cars. Timing belt would be the only one I would look at because there can be significant differences in the mileage intervals. VW famously has (or had) a fairly short interval, like 30K miles, and very low tolerance for going over that. Other vehicles can go 100K miles before any engine maintenance beyond fluid changes.
I hope they are no longer using timing belts. We should expect at least chains. Last longer and tend to warn you before they break.
American Cars
I live in Michigan and my father owns a business that supplies to the automotive industry, so he's always bought from the Big Three[0]. Though I was really young, in the 80s, buying a Toyota or another foreign vehicle and parking in my part of Michigan had a high probability of coming back to your car and finding a nice, long, keying had taken place. It's rare now, but it's hard to forget and when GM/Chrysler were in crisis a few years ago, there was an uptick in that behavior.
Infotainment
Provided you have one from 2013 or later. Otherwise you get a really nice looking screen that won't fscking pair with your Android (or disconnects) 30% of the time.
Reliability/Ford
They do care about reliability (and the Ford Fusion was in that list). I've owned only American cars and with the exception of a Chrysler that was effectively a lemon, I've not had any that experienced expensive repairs over 8 different vehicles (anecdote, yes). The issue is that reliability has a cost and the Big Three have a unique cost not shared by the foreign manufacturers -- the UAW[1]. I think the number I read was $1,500[2] would be saved if the vehicles were built in a non-union plant. That has to come from somewhere. I think in more recent model years, though, the quality has improved due to competition from foreign brands breaking even the most die-hard "Buy American" people. The number of foreign non-luxury vehicles on the road in SE Michigan is way higher than I've seen it in my lifetime. It's still a minority, here, but if Michiganians are increasingly buying foreign, that's a wake-up call for the big 3.
You're dead on, though. At current count of family and friends, I have talked to eight people who switched to Honda or Toyota from Ford or GM. All of them cited a car with multiple quality issues as the reason they switched. The more interesting part for me was that all of them were on leases where their time of ownership put them within the warranty period for all repairs -- they didn't have to pay for any of them! But where we live, being without a car leaves you forced to rent (in one case for almost a month). Public transportation is limited to a really lousy bus service that might or might not arrive within an hour of the posted scheduled time (if at all) and require several transfers to get to your destination, making a 30 minute drive take ... an average Thursday by bus.
A fundamental change has to take place at the autos -- one with a focus purely on quality of the product. The US market vehicles, when I last purchased, offered few with warranties over 40,000 miles. They have a reputation for producing sub-par vehicles. To fix it, they'd need to do something extreme. Build a car with a hyper-focus on reliability and toss a 150,000 mile 10 year comprehensive warranty on it[3] (if it's built well, it'll cost them no more than it does today). If they take it to that extreme, they'll be believed by the industry press and the buyer.
[0] When people say "Buying American" they're usually referring to these guys, which is another way of saying UAW built cars. There's no car that I'm aware of that is built 100% in America with American parts and some vehicles from foreign brands have a larger percentage built in the United States (by non-union plants usually located in the South) than the equivalent in their categories from the big three.
[1] No, I'm not a union fan, but I also do not work in the automotive industry so, in general, I don't care.
[2] I don't have the exact number and I couldn't find it from a quick Google search. The counter to this is always "the foreign cars have import costs!" which is true, but so do the American brands (see point [0]) and in a lot of cases, the foreign brands offset that cost by assembling in American plants ... in the South ... that are non-union (and the workers actively resist attempts at unionizing them for whatever reason).
[3] When I purchased my Fusion, I got one with, literally, all the options. I was taken to what I refer to as the "Hard Sell Room" and explained the options for an (unbelievably expensive) Extended Warranty. The worst salesman ever said "You have this, that and the other feature. This one costs $500 to repair, this one costs $700 to repair" and went on before I cut him off with "So what you're telling me is that your cars are unreliable and I need to buy a separate insurance policy because if any of these shiny features fail, I'm going to own a rock with wheels". I, seriously, almost walked out of the dealership. I'm at 100,000 miles with no service required beyond routine maintenance.
I live in Michigan and my father owns a business that supplies to the automotive industry, so he's always bought from the Big Three[0]. Though I was really young, in the 80s, buying a Toyota or another foreign vehicle and parking in my part of Michigan had a high probability of coming back to your car and finding a nice, long, keying had taken place. It's rare now, but it's hard to forget and when GM/Chrysler were in crisis a few years ago, there was an uptick in that behavior.
Infotainment
Provided you have one from 2013 or later. Otherwise you get a really nice looking screen that won't fscking pair with your Android (or disconnects) 30% of the time.
Reliability/Ford
They do care about reliability (and the Ford Fusion was in that list). I've owned only American cars and with the exception of a Chrysler that was effectively a lemon, I've not had any that experienced expensive repairs over 8 different vehicles (anecdote, yes). The issue is that reliability has a cost and the Big Three have a unique cost not shared by the foreign manufacturers -- the UAW[1]. I think the number I read was $1,500[2] would be saved if the vehicles were built in a non-union plant. That has to come from somewhere. I think in more recent model years, though, the quality has improved due to competition from foreign brands breaking even the most die-hard "Buy American" people. The number of foreign non-luxury vehicles on the road in SE Michigan is way higher than I've seen it in my lifetime. It's still a minority, here, but if Michiganians are increasingly buying foreign, that's a wake-up call for the big 3.
You're dead on, though. At current count of family and friends, I have talked to eight people who switched to Honda or Toyota from Ford or GM. All of them cited a car with multiple quality issues as the reason they switched. The more interesting part for me was that all of them were on leases where their time of ownership put them within the warranty period for all repairs -- they didn't have to pay for any of them! But where we live, being without a car leaves you forced to rent (in one case for almost a month). Public transportation is limited to a really lousy bus service that might or might not arrive within an hour of the posted scheduled time (if at all) and require several transfers to get to your destination, making a 30 minute drive take ... an average Thursday by bus.
A fundamental change has to take place at the autos -- one with a focus purely on quality of the product. The US market vehicles, when I last purchased, offered few with warranties over 40,000 miles. They have a reputation for producing sub-par vehicles. To fix it, they'd need to do something extreme. Build a car with a hyper-focus on reliability and toss a 150,000 mile 10 year comprehensive warranty on it[3] (if it's built well, it'll cost them no more than it does today). If they take it to that extreme, they'll be believed by the industry press and the buyer.
[0] When people say "Buying American" they're usually referring to these guys, which is another way of saying UAW built cars. There's no car that I'm aware of that is built 100% in America with American parts and some vehicles from foreign brands have a larger percentage built in the United States (by non-union plants usually located in the South) than the equivalent in their categories from the big three.
[1] No, I'm not a union fan, but I also do not work in the automotive industry so, in general, I don't care.
[2] I don't have the exact number and I couldn't find it from a quick Google search. The counter to this is always "the foreign cars have import costs!" which is true, but so do the American brands (see point [0]) and in a lot of cases, the foreign brands offset that cost by assembling in American plants ... in the South ... that are non-union (and the workers actively resist attempts at unionizing them for whatever reason).
[3] When I purchased my Fusion, I got one with, literally, all the options. I was taken to what I refer to as the "Hard Sell Room" and explained the options for an (unbelievably expensive) Extended Warranty. The worst salesman ever said "You have this, that and the other feature. This one costs $500 to repair, this one costs $700 to repair" and went on before I cut him off with "So what you're telling me is that your cars are unreliable and I need to buy a separate insurance policy because if any of these shiny features fail, I'm going to own a rock with wheels". I, seriously, almost walked out of the dealership. I'm at 100,000 miles with no service required beyond routine maintenance.
> Build a car with a hyper-focus on reliability and toss a 150,000 mile 10 year comprehensive warranty on it
Which is exactly what Hyundai did. They offer 10 year / 100k miles warranty. Contrary to the perception, their warranty gave me confidence to try it, and I've been happy with it so far.
Which is exactly what Hyundai did. They offer 10 year / 100k miles warranty. Contrary to the perception, their warranty gave me confidence to try it, and I've been happy with it so far.
I was waiting in line at the rental car facility last year at Detroit airport. A guy kept letting people go in front of him since he "had to have a GM". I suppose it didn't bode well to visit some business in a non GM car.
Oh yes, very much so.
Depending on the company, you want to be in their car. I noticed the Ford plant on Mound has a large sign "Ford Only Lot". My dad does business with all of them (and a few of the foreign plants down south, too). I don't know what the politics behind it are -- my Dad sells to all of them and a few of the southern foreign car plants -- he drives a Cadillac. I'll have to ask him if he gets crap for that when visiting Ford/Chrysler (which are large contracts for him).
The funny thing is, even they've changed a bit. My mom is in a Lexus hybrid, which shocked me. Their friends and neighbors passed away and owned the thing for three years with a few thousand miles on it. The family was willing to sell it to her at such a low price she couldn't pass it up. And it's a really nice car. Family circumstances also resulted in my dad getting an Audi TT convertible sports-toy which he stores up north (shh, don't tell anyone).
Depending on the company, you want to be in their car. I noticed the Ford plant on Mound has a large sign "Ford Only Lot". My dad does business with all of them (and a few of the foreign plants down south, too). I don't know what the politics behind it are -- my Dad sells to all of them and a few of the southern foreign car plants -- he drives a Cadillac. I'll have to ask him if he gets crap for that when visiting Ford/Chrysler (which are large contracts for him).
The funny thing is, even they've changed a bit. My mom is in a Lexus hybrid, which shocked me. Their friends and neighbors passed away and owned the thing for three years with a few thousand miles on it. The family was willing to sell it to her at such a low price she couldn't pass it up. And it's a really nice car. Family circumstances also resulted in my dad getting an Audi TT convertible sports-toy which he stores up north (shh, don't tell anyone).
"Family circumstances also resulted in my dad getting an Audi TT convertible sports-toy which he stores up north (shh, don't tell anyone)."
Has his glove box door fallen off yet?
Has his glove box door fallen off yet?
yep, as a consultant who has done work in the automotive industry you need to show up in one of their vehicles
I'm on my second new American car brand. No problems whatsoever and I drive it hard.
In Australia Kia have their basic warranty at 7/unlimited. Which is pretty impressive.
Did I misread?
>In order to estimate annual maintenance costs, we found the amount spent on every two oil changes (as oil changes are generally done every six months).
This cost only considers oil changes? That is not a realistic cost of total maintenance over 10 years.
>In order to estimate annual maintenance costs, we found the amount spent on every two oil changes (as oil changes are generally done every six months).
This cost only considers oil changes? That is not a realistic cost of total maintenance over 10 years.
No, that makes no sense because you wouldn't see that kind of variance in the prices.
I think in your quote they're saying they're using oil changes as a unit of time. This is because oil changes are usually done on a regular cycles, and because when you get your oil changed you often get your other maintenance done.
I think in your quote they're saying they're using oil changes as a unit of time. This is because oil changes are usually done on a regular cycles, and because when you get your oil changed you often get your other maintenance done.
It's not written well, but I imagine they are getting the cost of all work completed when an oil change is completed. Typically owners will get scheduled maintenance done at the same time they get an oil change done. 1 appointment instead of 2.
By that logic my Nissan Leaf will have $0 maintenance costs.
The only listed maintence items to 120,000 miles are: Replace brake fluid, Replace in-cabin microfilter, Rotate tires
https://owners.nissanusa.com/content/techpub/ManualsAndGuide...
The only listed maintence items to 120,000 miles are: Replace brake fluid, Replace in-cabin microfilter, Rotate tires
https://owners.nissanusa.com/content/techpub/ManualsAndGuide...
Don't forget annual battery checks. Mandatory for warranty.
Your logic is not too far off actually. Our cars have no spark plugs(and cables), radiators, starter motors killing the 12v battery, gas pumps, fuel lines, fuel filters, oil, etc. So much less to worry about.
Heck, even the brake pads should last longer, due to the regenerative braking.
So barring any unforeseen events (such as something like the inverter or the internal charging burning out, which I haven't seen in the Leaf forums), the maintenance costs should be pretty low indeed. These things you mention are pretty cheap.
Honestly, they should depreciate way less than they currently do. Those things are incredibly reliable, and the current battery chemistry is way better than the first model, even if it is not thermally managed.
Your logic is not too far off actually. Our cars have no spark plugs(and cables), radiators, starter motors killing the 12v battery, gas pumps, fuel lines, fuel filters, oil, etc. So much less to worry about.
Heck, even the brake pads should last longer, due to the regenerative braking.
So barring any unforeseen events (such as something like the inverter or the internal charging burning out, which I haven't seen in the Leaf forums), the maintenance costs should be pretty low indeed. These things you mention are pretty cheap.
Honestly, they should depreciate way less than they currently do. Those things are incredibly reliable, and the current battery chemistry is way better than the first model, even if it is not thermally managed.
TL;DR I think this is a reasonable assumption.
Anecdata: Just over 250,000 on my 2007 Honda CRV and with $1k in unscheduled mechanical maintenance and around another $1k in non-mechanical maintenance.
Assuming a 10,000 mile oil change cycle (I only change the oil when the car recommends it, and it seems to avg about 10k miles) that's 25 oil changes so far, for a total of ~$1800 (assuming dealer oil change + full synthetic, which has been all but two of my oil changes so far; does not include tax).
Warning, opinions ahead: In my experience, most people do not follow the recommended preventative maintenance plans for their vehicles, and rely solely on oil, tires, and gas changes, and all three only when necessary.
Here be dragons: At an over-all average MPG (according to the car's own computer) of 25, I've spent more on fuel than the cost of the vehicle, including loan interest, in the 250,000 miles.
Getting waaaaay out there: 32k for car + interest, 35k in fuel, 10k in other scheduled work (I believe in preventative maintenance), upgrades, cleaning, etc for a total cost of ownership of about ~80k means I've paid ~$3/mile driven.
Anecdata: Just over 250,000 on my 2007 Honda CRV and with $1k in unscheduled mechanical maintenance and around another $1k in non-mechanical maintenance.
Assuming a 10,000 mile oil change cycle (I only change the oil when the car recommends it, and it seems to avg about 10k miles) that's 25 oil changes so far, for a total of ~$1800 (assuming dealer oil change + full synthetic, which has been all but two of my oil changes so far; does not include tax).
Warning, opinions ahead: In my experience, most people do not follow the recommended preventative maintenance plans for their vehicles, and rely solely on oil, tires, and gas changes, and all three only when necessary.
Here be dragons: At an over-all average MPG (according to the car's own computer) of 25, I've spent more on fuel than the cost of the vehicle, including loan interest, in the 250,000 miles.
Getting waaaaay out there: 32k for car + interest, 35k in fuel, 10k in other scheduled work (I believe in preventative maintenance), upgrades, cleaning, etc for a total cost of ownership of about ~80k means I've paid ~$3/mile driven.
I think you've missed a decimal in your reported cost per mile.
[deleted]
I don't think he did. 250k/80k ~ 3
Cost per mile would have miles as the denominator.
I feel silly. I guess I fell for the same trap. I think he meant to say he did 3 miles for every dollar...
I think most US consumers with newer cars typically only get maintenance done when they do their oil changes. Usually other services get tacked on the same bill. If they're just going by total receipt, this is probably fine.
Of course not. Those totals would be ridiculous if only for oil changes.
I'm really confused by this data. How could the average cost of the most expensive model be less than the cost of the most expensive brand?
For example, I'm taking issue with all BMW's costing $17,800 over 10 years on average. Yet, the BMW model with the highest maintenance cost, the 328i, only costs $15,600 over 10 years.
Edit: Tried, quite unsuccessfully, to improve clarity
For example, I'm taking issue with all BMW's costing $17,800 over 10 years on average. Yet, the BMW model with the highest maintenance cost, the 328i, only costs $15,600 over 10 years.
Edit: Tried, quite unsuccessfully, to improve clarity
> I'm really confused by this data. How could the average cost of the most expensive model be less than the cost of the most expensive brand?
It's because the brand estimates are not based on actual costs, but only on oil changes:
“In order to estimate annual maintenance costs, we found the amount spent on every two oil changes (as oil changes are generally done every six months).”
Yet the actual oil change intervals for at least BMW, Mercedes, Audi, and Volvo are between once a year and once every two years, or after between 7500 and 15000 miles, depending on the brand and model.
It's because the brand estimates are not based on actual costs, but only on oil changes:
“In order to estimate annual maintenance costs, we found the amount spent on every two oil changes (as oil changes are generally done every six months).”
Yet the actual oil change intervals for at least BMW, Mercedes, Audi, and Volvo are between once a year and once every two years, or after between 7500 and 15000 miles, depending on the brand and model.
Also, there's absolutely no way that the 328i is the most expensive BMW model. It's probably the most reliable (and highest volume) model sold in the US, and maintenance is cheap compared to the M-model and V8/V12 cars that BMW sells.
I was wondering a bit about this, myself. Also, the costs on some of the more extreme ends of the luxury markets are higher for pretty much everything. My parents own an Audi convertible sports toy. They had to have the clutch[0] replaced last year at a cost of almost $5,000. Oil changes run $100. Audi was high on the list, yes, but other luxury brands weren't that have similarly expensive repair/maintenance costs.
[0] For Americans, where Manual Transmission is much like the Big Foot. You hear about it, but nobody's actually seen it, this is a part of a Manual Transmission car that wears out over time and is guaranteed to require repair.
[0] For Americans, where Manual Transmission is much like the Big Foot. You hear about it, but nobody's actually seen it, this is a part of a Manual Transmission car that wears out over time and is guaranteed to require repair.
BMW has many more expensive models than the 3 series models. 5, 7, 8s are all much more expensive. Perhaps that is how the average 10 year cost is greater than the 328s?
Sure, but shouldn't the 5/6/7 series then appear as the highest-cost models rather than the 328i?
The article doesn't really explain things very well. Why did they only pick those 20 models to compare? I think they are all in the same price range? This is probably appealing to "mainstream" models, rather than enthusiast or luxury models.
Why don't you ask a recent BMW owner about spark plug & coil replacement cost sometime.
Even mention ignition coils around some of them and there will be much cursing.
Even mention ignition coils around some of them and there will be much cursing.
Hi, recent BMW owner. The dealership changed my coils out of warranty for free.
Maybe I got lucky, but you rarely hear people's good experiences, and you often hear the bad ones.
Maybe I got lucky, but you rarely hear people's good experiences, and you often hear the bad ones.
Ever priced an intake manifold (or are they using plenums now?) for a BMW? The parts alone set you back a pretty penny, then there is labor.
I may have miscommunicated but I wasn't concerned with the realism of the costs - I was questioning the relation of the values.
If you have two sets of numbers, S and T, then I'm quite confident MEAN(S ∪ T) must fall between MIN(MEAN(S), MEAN(T)) and MAX(MEAN(S), MEAN(T)) inclusive.
In this case, the costs of maintenance for a given vehicle model are the sets and, so, the cost for a brand as a whole would be (S ∪ T ∪ V...).
If you have two sets of numbers, S and T, then I'm quite confident MEAN(S ∪ T) must fall between MIN(MEAN(S), MEAN(T)) and MAX(MEAN(S), MEAN(T)) inclusive.
In this case, the costs of maintenance for a given vehicle model are the sets and, so, the cost for a brand as a whole would be (S ∪ T ∪ V...).
Yeah, I got ya now. The problem is that repairs can continue. $450 for brakes? Ok. $800 for tires + alignment. $125 for a new battery. $600 to replace a bent rim and it's pair. When data like this indicates that the maintenance cost of BMWs or other vehicles is higher, it's not just a question of quality: many times the parts + labor are just more expensive.
No, you don't. He's saying the math doesn't add up in terms of how they calculated the mean of the brand and the 'highest' avg. mean of the models (in that brand).
Yes, I do... the single model 328i, if it is in fact the worst of the BMW models, should be above the average cost of the BMW models. According to the first table, it isn't. They made a mistake.
Gasket failure is way more common than the manifold failing though (and it's a little harder to justify enormous prices for a gasket).
Why would a car need a new intake manifold?
It happens. My Wife's car needed a new intake plenum (it was an Mazda, not a BMW) $750. I priced for my Ford Fusion: $150 for a manifold.
The point is parts for imports here in the states are generally much higher.
The point is parts for imports here in the states are generally much higher.
Tough to trust this analysis... For example Cadillac is the #3 worst brand yet there are no Cadillac models in the worst 20 models.
Yep. And BMW at $17800 over 10 years, but the most expensive individual model for BMW was the 328i at $15600
I think you mean the least expensive.
BMW parts are expensive.
BMW parts are expensive.
Who's down-voting me for stating facts? The 328i is certainly on the lower-end of the BMW price spectrum...
https://www.google.com/#q=bwm+model+prices
https://www.google.com/#q=bwm+model+prices
You misunderstood the post you were answering.
Your answer doesn't help understanding how the article finds the average BMW maintenance cost to be higher than that of the BMW model with the highest maintenance cost. Unless brand costs are not calculated as a mean but something else very different, which is not explained.
Your answer doesn't help understanding how the article finds the average BMW maintenance cost to be higher than that of the BMW model with the highest maintenance cost. Unless brand costs are not calculated as a mean but something else very different, which is not explained.
Yes, I see now. I was confused.
Apparently, the 328i has a relatively common oil-leakage problem. http://repairpal.com/bmw/328i
Don't have the labor costs for a valve cover gasket, but they could be sizable. Scrolling down on repairpal web page above, apparently they can cost up to $1000?
No wonder BMW 328i is in the higher range for maint. costs!
Apparently, the 328i has a relatively common oil-leakage problem. http://repairpal.com/bmw/328i
Don't have the labor costs for a valve cover gasket, but they could be sizable. Scrolling down on repairpal web page above, apparently they can cost up to $1000?
No wonder BMW 328i is in the higher range for maint. costs!
My Yamaha R6 ($12k CAD brand new) was backed into by a car and the damage was mostly cosmetic but the parts and labour to fix it all still ended up at $9k.
The problem is that paying for parts and parts replacement piece by piece is significantly more expensive than buying a new bike (or a car) as a whole.
The problem is that paying for parts and parts replacement piece by piece is significantly more expensive than buying a new bike (or a car) as a whole.
Anecdotal evidence - my sister had a 1st generation SRX sport-utility, and for whatever reason, Cadillac decided to put different tire widths on the front & rear wheels, with directional tread. This means you can't rotate the tires. It's also an all-wheel-drive model. So if you have an alignment issue that causes tire wear, or a puncture that can't be repaired, you can't just buy one tire -- you have to buy a full set of four at $200 (front) and $250 (rear) each.
Repair costs like that adds up quickly. Like the $1200 3rd row seat motor that died. She started calling it the thousand-dollar-car, since any repairs were around that price.
Repair costs like that adds up quickly. Like the $1200 3rd row seat motor that died. She started calling it the thousand-dollar-car, since any repairs were around that price.
This is incredibly common among high-end luxury cars. The better handling that results from staggered wheel sizes is considered a luxury. The owner is assumed to be willing to shoulder a higher maintenance cost burden in return for a superior driving experience.
None of what you describe is unique to Cadillac -- this is what it is to own a luxury automobile. If it is not worth the price, don't buy one.
None of what you describe is unique to Cadillac -- this is what it is to own a luxury automobile. If it is not worth the price, don't buy one.
The Lexus SUVs that they have owned didn't do this. The tires for them were an odd size and usually had to be ordered, but all four wheels had the same size tire -- with standard (non-directional) tread. They still faced the "must replace all four" issue because of the full-time 4WD system, but at least they could be rotated to get full life out of them.
Which may be one reason why Lexus unexpectedly has a good total cost of ownership.
BTW, the Lexii had far fewer squeaks and rattles after 6 years than the Cadillac did, and had a much quieter ride overall.
Which may be one reason why Lexus unexpectedly has a good total cost of ownership.
BTW, the Lexii had far fewer squeaks and rattles after 6 years than the Cadillac did, and had a much quieter ride overall.
You should never buy one tire anyway. You should always replace at least pairs.
It's still a huge fuck-you move on Cadillac's part.
To what benefit on their part? They don't manufacture tires, so they don't profit if you have to replace them more often.
As another commenter pointed out, this is quite common on performance and luxury vehicles because it has handling advantages. If you're buying a luxury car, you're by definition choosing to pay more than is absolutely necessary for (what you consider to be) a better experience. The tires are part of that. You can argue that the line should be drawn elsewhere, but it's not arbitrary, and it's very much in line with the market segment they're going after.
As another commenter pointed out, this is quite common on performance and luxury vehicles because it has handling advantages. If you're buying a luxury car, you're by definition choosing to pay more than is absolutely necessary for (what you consider to be) a better experience. The tires are part of that. You can argue that the line should be drawn elsewhere, but it's not arbitrary, and it's very much in line with the market segment they're going after.
> Luxury car
It's a SUV. They get used to tow boats, take science-fair projects to school, and take the family on vacations. They aren't used for track days at Road Atlanta.
It's a SUV. They get used to tow boats, take science-fair projects to school, and take the family on vacations. They aren't used for track days at Road Atlanta.
Luxury vehicles (of which Cadillac is) I'll give you.
Performance vehicles I disagree. Handling choices are up to the mechanic/driver and you want to give them options but also make their maintenance choices simple. You should have a wide range of tire options on a performance car.
Performance vehicles I disagree. Handling choices are up to the mechanic/driver and you want to give them options but also make their maintenance choices simple. You should have a wide range of tire options on a performance car.
Hey, welcome to my Corvette life!
"This data reveals which companies live up to their reputation for reliability (Toyota), which brands sacrifice reliability for prestige (BMW and Mercedes-Benz), and which models deserved to be discontinued (the Hummer 3)."
Ouch. There's one more reason to laugh at people who bought the H3.
Ouch. There's one more reason to laugh at people who bought the H3.
Purely anecdotally, my ten year old Toyota Tacoma is the best vehicle I've ever owned, so I'm not really surprised to see it at number five on that list. Had one major problem in ten years (clutch springs broke at 60k). Otherwise with routine maintenance (oil changes, tune ups and tires) it just keeps working.
Ten loads of mulch in a weekend? No problem. Hauling a half ton of Bawls energy drinks to a different state over wet mountain roads? An adventure but no issues. Moved my (now) wife to town in 2007 and moved all our stuff when we bought our first home. We took our daughter home from the hospital in it. It almost feels like part of the family.
I kinda want a newer car, but I can't really justify it because my Tacoma just keeps working every single day (and it's paid off). Toyota can make a really good vehicle.
Ten loads of mulch in a weekend? No problem. Hauling a half ton of Bawls energy drinks to a different state over wet mountain roads? An adventure but no issues. Moved my (now) wife to town in 2007 and moved all our stuff when we bought our first home. We took our daughter home from the hospital in it. It almost feels like part of the family.
I kinda want a newer car, but I can't really justify it because my Tacoma just keeps working every single day (and it's paid off). Toyota can make a really good vehicle.
Does it take into account the fact that BMW offers free service (even oil changes) for 3 years (36,000 miles) and on top of that you can get relatively cheap extensions, and if you buy a certified pre-owned used car you get a "free" extra 2 years /50K miles on top of the original warranty and you can even get an extra protection plan for 6 years/100K miles.
I also wonder how that affects what the total amount 'billed' ends up being. For instance, if BMW corporate is footing the bill for all the maintenance/warranty issues for the first 3/4 years of ownership, are they more likely to 'repair' minor issues without asking the customer?
Where as say a Volkswagon owner may not bother to have the dealership spend 3 hours diagnosing a squeak or minor rough idle knowing they have to foot the bill?
Where as say a Volkswagon owner may not bother to have the dealership spend 3 hours diagnosing a squeak or minor rough idle knowing they have to foot the bill?
I'm willing to bet these numbers include the cost of 'included' maintenance/service.
Man, it would have been nice to have text instead of images for those tables. Would have made me more confident in my searching through them.
It's interesting to compare this US survey with this one from a 2015 UK survey of 50,000 car users.
In summary, Japanese cars were deemed the most reliable and relatively cheap to maintain, while German cars were the least reliable according to the survey's respondents.
The rankings were calculated according to how often a car needed to be repaired, and the cost of the repairs.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32332210
In summary, Japanese cars were deemed the most reliable and relatively cheap to maintain, while German cars were the least reliable according to the survey's respondents.
The rankings were calculated according to how often a car needed to be repaired, and the cost of the repairs.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32332210
I can't see how any of these lists could be at all useful.
Each manufacturer produces a variety of models and the reliability of each model can vary by the year.
If you want to buy a car, look at the model-years in your price range and then research which of those is reliable or a lemon.
Each manufacturer produces a variety of models and the reliability of each model can vary by the year.
If you want to buy a car, look at the model-years in your price range and then research which of those is reliable or a lemon.
I have a coworker with an Audi that spent months without driving. For some reason, it has 6(!) catalytic converters and multiple failed. The car refuses to drive if they are not working properly, so he had to save up to replace them all.
I would be curious of data on entry level sport cars that people use in commutes/daily driving i.e.: porsche
Your mechanic doesn't do much work Porsches. I have used them a lot in the past when I had a Saab (which is ultimately gm/American technology), but now that I have a decade old Mercedes and a decade old Porsche (I prefer maintenance over deprecation). Once a your mechanic contractor called me after the meeting was scheduled to start and told me that they couldn't service the car because they had no experience, diagnostic tools or spare parts for my car, and other interactions with them weren't better. Another time, their suggested 'OEM' quality parts really werent.
Another factor might also be that many high end imports are services at the dealer/speciality shops and the service interactions with your mechanic are for cars that have less than stellar maintenance-- which skews the picture significantly.
Another factor might also be that many high end imports are services at the dealer/speciality shops and the service interactions with your mechanic are for cars that have less than stellar maintenance-- which skews the picture significantly.
I have daily driver Porsche under warranty. I don't have hard numbers but it's been very reasonable. I had two certified pre-owned BMWs and never paid a cent for their entire lifetime. Porsche has cost me for tires but was brand new and under warranty. Fuel pump failed, replaced under warranty. I drive it everyday. It's brilliant. German engineering is great. Thinking S class Mercedes next. Is this helpful? or just bragging? haha :-)
Don't know about the current S class but the previous models were plagued with electronic issues. Source: father owned one and extended family owned every single one of them.
What's with Porsche's choice to use thin-walled Hankook tires on their cars lately? Why put the worst fucking tires you can get on such a nice car?
Blinker on a Ferrari or catalyst on Lamborghini can be easily $5,000 a piece. Have fun!
Ferrari/Lamborghini are definitely not entry level sport cars.
Alright, I assumed Porsche 911 to be entry level - for that both Ferrari and Lamborghini have similarly specced models. If you meant Boxster or even Cayman then maybe not.
911's start in the low $100k range. "On paper" the Ferrari 488 is ~$250k, the Lamborghini Hurrican is ~$210k, and the McLaren 570 is ~$190k. You can easily drive a 911 home for close to that $100k price. You probably cannot drive a 488, Hurrican, or 570 home for less than $250-$275k. Maintenance is similarly expensive.
I agree that the Boxster/Cayman are more aligned with "entry level sports cars".
I agree that the Boxster/Cayman are more aligned with "entry level sports cars".
I sincerely hope nobody is buying a 911 as their first sports car.
Or daily driving it.
Or daily driving it.
Why not? It's a very pleasant drive up to ~150mph, beyond that it becomes a bit unstable in turns. Lamborghini is shaking up to 150mph and then it goes smooth as a butter (I drove over 190mph in turns on Autobahn at 2am, fantastic). 911 and Corvette C6 would be my first choices for a 1st sport car as they feel pretty nice and you don't kill yourself by a bad downshift.
I guess this is a mental failing for me here. When I think 911, I still think of the cars as they were before AWD and traction control. To me, that's when they were the most fun to drive and had fairly homicidal tendencies. That's my ideal 911.
I don't really think of the new ones because they're almost boringly pedestrian to me. Not that anyone should need to drive a dangerous car to have fun -- you don't. I just find the last decade or so (or two even?) of the 911's history to be mostly devoid of character over its competitors.
Edit: Moreover, I don't want any car to be "pleasant" to drive at high speed. That sounds just way too relaxed for that level of speed. It should be pleasant at much lower speeds, absolutely, but honestly anything above 70mph and especially 90mph should require 100% engagement. That doesn't necessitate being difficult, but still not something I want to describe as pleasant. Your grandparents could probably comfortably drive the new GT-R at 130mph in pouring rain. That should absolutely not be encouraged. I've driven at that speed in bad weather and it requires me to be hyper-alert.
I don't really think of the new ones because they're almost boringly pedestrian to me. Not that anyone should need to drive a dangerous car to have fun -- you don't. I just find the last decade or so (or two even?) of the 911's history to be mostly devoid of character over its competitors.
Edit: Moreover, I don't want any car to be "pleasant" to drive at high speed. That sounds just way too relaxed for that level of speed. It should be pleasant at much lower speeds, absolutely, but honestly anything above 70mph and especially 90mph should require 100% engagement. That doesn't necessitate being difficult, but still not something I want to describe as pleasant. Your grandparents could probably comfortably drive the new GT-R at 130mph in pouring rain. That should absolutely not be encouraged. I've driven at that speed in bad weather and it requires me to be hyper-alert.
Ahh, the ones that were oversteering unexpectedly ;-) Yes, 911 nowadays is different, as you said pedestrian. For old-skool oversteering and difficult driving you have Porsche Carrera GT now ;-) 911 is IMO much easier to drive than most US muscle cars. Lambo with its changing aerodynamics and stiff suspension literally feels like butter at very high speeds and is a terrible shaker when driving slow.
Here in Germany a Hausfrau returning from shopping drives 120mph+ easily so people here are used to a higher default speed level than in the US where you are allowed 65mph. Often when overtaking on Autobahns you drive 130mph and some nervous Porsche/AMG etc. drivers blink at you to leave the fast lane so that they can pass.
Here in Germany a Hausfrau returning from shopping drives 120mph+ easily so people here are used to a higher default speed level than in the US where you are allowed 65mph. Often when overtaking on Autobahns you drive 130mph and some nervous Porsche/AMG etc. drivers blink at you to leave the fast lane so that they can pass.
It's not even so much about higher default level of speed to me. I'm used to driving quite fast.
I'm worried about physics. ΔV will kill you.
I try as much as possible to eliminate the compounding effects of things-gone-wrong. ΔV is a multiplier in an accident.
Edit/Aside: The ultimate oversteering screaming death car is the Omni GLHS. Man is that thing a hoot. But yeah, even if you don't hit them, I think that you should be able to see where the limits of a car may lie. I don't get that sense driving some of the modern "accessible" sportscars and that feeling actually makes me more nervous to drive them.
I'm worried about physics. ΔV will kill you.
I try as much as possible to eliminate the compounding effects of things-gone-wrong. ΔV is a multiplier in an accident.
Edit/Aside: The ultimate oversteering screaming death car is the Omni GLHS. Man is that thing a hoot. But yeah, even if you don't hit them, I think that you should be able to see where the limits of a car may lie. I don't get that sense driving some of the modern "accessible" sportscars and that feeling actually makes me more nervous to drive them.
Ariel Atom and K1 Attack might be in that category as well ;-)
[deleted]
I had a 6th gen Civic (DX Hatchback) for 7 years between 2005 and 2011. Most of what it needed, I did myself, cheaply:
- cracked exhaust manifold, replaced with boneyard unit, $80. Before that I went to the dealer, and they quoted me over $300 for a new one. Get this: they were so nice when I said I will probably get a used one, they gave me the new nuts for the joint between the manifold and the A pipe I would need. "Hey, you will likely need these; they are special heat-resistant nuts that don't expand."
- bushing gone on rear suspension arm causing clunks and squeaks: boneyard good part, $10. Couldn't remove a bolt in the suspension without an air ratchet: I broke two cheap socket wrench bits trying! I paid an air-conditioning garage to help me out, $40.
- broken manual window crank on driver's side door. $10 for used one.
- The ignition switch started cutting out. I Googled up that this was a secret warranty (big safety issue), and got free fix at the dealership.
- I paid a few hundred for an all-wheel brake job. At one point, the master relay went, so I paid a few hundred to get that taken care of. Car was completely dead; had to be towed.
- Fixed water leaking into the trunk. This ingress occurs through the tail light apertures! The fix was a $7 tub of silicone caulk on both sides of the tail light gaskets, with plenty left over to do a bathtub or three. The trunk was dry after that.
- Moisture destroyed the particle board trunk floor that covers the spare tire. Made a sturdy new one out of 6mm thick plastic: $30 bucks for that, plus labor.
- Cracked radiator: good used one for under 100 bucks.
- All fluid and other changes: engine oil, manual transmission, air filter, oil filter, etc, myself.
- Paid a few hundred for a timing belt and water pump change.
- O2 sensor changes, self, < $100 a pop for two of them.
- Spark plugs: don't remember; inexpensive.
- cracked exhaust manifold, replaced with boneyard unit, $80. Before that I went to the dealer, and they quoted me over $300 for a new one. Get this: they were so nice when I said I will probably get a used one, they gave me the new nuts for the joint between the manifold and the A pipe I would need. "Hey, you will likely need these; they are special heat-resistant nuts that don't expand."
- bushing gone on rear suspension arm causing clunks and squeaks: boneyard good part, $10. Couldn't remove a bolt in the suspension without an air ratchet: I broke two cheap socket wrench bits trying! I paid an air-conditioning garage to help me out, $40.
- broken manual window crank on driver's side door. $10 for used one.
- The ignition switch started cutting out. I Googled up that this was a secret warranty (big safety issue), and got free fix at the dealership.
- I paid a few hundred for an all-wheel brake job. At one point, the master relay went, so I paid a few hundred to get that taken care of. Car was completely dead; had to be towed.
- Fixed water leaking into the trunk. This ingress occurs through the tail light apertures! The fix was a $7 tub of silicone caulk on both sides of the tail light gaskets, with plenty left over to do a bathtub or three. The trunk was dry after that.
- Moisture destroyed the particle board trunk floor that covers the spare tire. Made a sturdy new one out of 6mm thick plastic: $30 bucks for that, plus labor.
- Cracked radiator: good used one for under 100 bucks.
- All fluid and other changes: engine oil, manual transmission, air filter, oil filter, etc, myself.
- Paid a few hundred for a timing belt and water pump change.
- O2 sensor changes, self, < $100 a pop for two of them.
- Spark plugs: don't remember; inexpensive.
I had a 7th gen Civic myself from 2002-2015. Not a terribly pretty car, but absolutely rock solid until about 2014. The cost of ownership was pennies per mile and was absolutely trouble free for the first 12 years I owned it. Other than normal oil changes and similar maintenance, I never had a single reason to take it to a mechanic.
The first time I did, the car stalled out in the middle of the road, the tow fee was a couple hundred dollars -- the cost to fix it and get it going? $150 with labor (some kind of sensor just got old and needed replacing).
As it hit 12 years, little things kept needing attention, but nothing was expensive. Yearly property taxes were in the dozens of dollars and the mechanics I took it to all kept wanting to buy the car off of me for a premium over the Blue Book value.
I finally replaced it, not because it was becoming expensive, but because, having 12 trouble free years with it, I found it annoying to deal with mechanics at all.
My wife had a 2004 Accord until 2015, and had a similar reliability story, just with a few more issues (and each issue was a little more expensive).
We replaced both cars with new Hondas.
Humans have been building cars for over 100 years, there's really not much excuse in my thinking for them not to basically be transportation appliances. I get people want to have different stylings and performance characteristics, but unreliability is an absolute non-starter to us.
It's not like information on car reliability isn't available from several sources, so I'm always mystified at my frustrated friends with the Dodge Caravans and such who are wondering why their cars are always getting worked on.
The first time I did, the car stalled out in the middle of the road, the tow fee was a couple hundred dollars -- the cost to fix it and get it going? $150 with labor (some kind of sensor just got old and needed replacing).
As it hit 12 years, little things kept needing attention, but nothing was expensive. Yearly property taxes were in the dozens of dollars and the mechanics I took it to all kept wanting to buy the car off of me for a premium over the Blue Book value.
I finally replaced it, not because it was becoming expensive, but because, having 12 trouble free years with it, I found it annoying to deal with mechanics at all.
My wife had a 2004 Accord until 2015, and had a similar reliability story, just with a few more issues (and each issue was a little more expensive).
We replaced both cars with new Hondas.
Humans have been building cars for over 100 years, there's really not much excuse in my thinking for them not to basically be transportation appliances. I get people want to have different stylings and performance characteristics, but unreliability is an absolute non-starter to us.
It's not like information on car reliability isn't available from several sources, so I'm always mystified at my frustrated friends with the Dodge Caravans and such who are wondering why their cars are always getting worked on.
I've heard people complain about the Dodge Caravans before, but myself and my family had Mopar vans, something like 7 or 8 total across everyone for the last 20 years and have had the least issues of any vehicle I've ever owned. My '99 plymouth has had zero major issues. Bought it new, it has ~250k miles plus - we drive it every day. I'm genuinely curious if the people who have trouble don't do normal maintenance or something.
I'd also like to see a breakdown by engine, because I almost feel like the 4 cyl which the majority of them have been is vastly more reliable.
I'd also like to see a breakdown by engine, because I almost feel like the 4 cyl which the majority of them have been is vastly more reliable.
The maintenance numbers don't make sense to me. I'll use the numbers for Mazda and Mini as examples.
They say that over ten years the average Mazda or Mini will cost $7500 to maintain. Both have a model in the top 20 most expensive to maintain with a Mazda 6 being $12 700 and a Mini Cooper being $11 200. Neither one has a model in the 20 cheapest to maintain list so their cheapest to maintain models must be at least as expensive to maintain as the most expensive car on this list. This puts a lower bound of $7500 on the cheapest to maintain car for each of them. How can the average for these manufacturers be $7500 if their cheapest car is at least $7500 and they each have a car that costs significantly more?
They say that over ten years the average Mazda or Mini will cost $7500 to maintain. Both have a model in the top 20 most expensive to maintain with a Mazda 6 being $12 700 and a Mini Cooper being $11 200. Neither one has a model in the 20 cheapest to maintain list so their cheapest to maintain models must be at least as expensive to maintain as the most expensive car on this list. This puts a lower bound of $7500 on the cheapest to maintain car for each of them. How can the average for these manufacturers be $7500 if their cheapest car is at least $7500 and they each have a car that costs significantly more?
> Brands most likely not to start: Hummer
There's something ironic about it. Here they got a car which "looks" like a reliable military vehicle, that you'd think could take it to some remove off-road location (desert, camping, etc). Yet as a brand, it is most likely to fail to start.
There's something ironic about it. Here they got a car which "looks" like a reliable military vehicle, that you'd think could take it to some remove off-road location (desert, camping, etc). Yet as a brand, it is most likely to fail to start.
Yes, something ironic about the fact it may have the same flaw as the military one, and that neither administration, nor the military forces that are making so much stats to evaluate their field incident saw it... Oh, I forgot, yes the humvee has flawed (lack of resistance against RPG, direct hit, bombs).
Guess that could be the reason why so much humvees have been given by the army to the police force recently thanks to the 1033 program.
Guess that could be the reason why so much humvees have been given by the army to the police force recently thanks to the 1033 program.
Well I am going to have to say pure electrics might fare better but we will need ten years of playing with the tech to know for sure. All the electronics are going to be fun. Almost all the unusual entries are engine related.
Before anyone runs off in celebration of pure EVs just note the number of vehicles being sampled. Issue arise from defects for sure, as they do for wear and tear. However a lot of issues on older cars are because of lack of care. One of the reasons manufactures like BMW include service for 4x50 is so that even the leased cars would get serviced.
There are a few exaggerated entries on the list, one I know of is the Nissan Murano. Its listed quite high but that might have been because of the CVT issues faced in 05-07 that were remedied with Nissan extending the warranties.
Before anyone runs off in celebration of pure EVs just note the number of vehicles being sampled. Issue arise from defects for sure, as they do for wear and tear. However a lot of issues on older cars are because of lack of care. One of the reasons manufactures like BMW include service for 4x50 is so that even the leased cars would get serviced.
There are a few exaggerated entries on the list, one I know of is the Nissan Murano. Its listed quite high but that might have been because of the CVT issues faced in 05-07 that were remedied with Nissan extending the warranties.
I'd also be afraid of the "theoretically more reliable pure electrics" suffering from premature failures due to poor implementation, as has happened recently in other markets.
Compact fluorescents should last ~6x longer than incandescents, yet since the commoditization of them, you'll find the circuits in the cheaper ones often fail long before the fluorescent tube itself would have failed (I recently did a teardown of about 20 of my own failed CFL's. About 2/3 had functioning tubes with blown circuits).
I similarly lament seeing an LED traffic light or LED vehicle tail light on the fritz, knowing that the individual LED's themselves probably had another 20 years of life left in them, yet met their fate early due to a bad solder joint or blown mosfet, etc...
Compact fluorescents should last ~6x longer than incandescents, yet since the commoditization of them, you'll find the circuits in the cheaper ones often fail long before the fluorescent tube itself would have failed (I recently did a teardown of about 20 of my own failed CFL's. About 2/3 had functioning tubes with blown circuits).
I similarly lament seeing an LED traffic light or LED vehicle tail light on the fritz, knowing that the individual LED's themselves probably had another 20 years of life left in them, yet met their fate early due to a bad solder joint or blown mosfet, etc...
The fun (additional) electronics on EVs are pretty standard stuff. Charger, inverter (do all EVs use AC induction motors? I think so), battery charge controller. They can be made very reliable and, at least for the popular EVs, they are indeed. I'd be worried about driving an EV created by some unknown chinese brand though.
Typo, Lexus should be Cadillac.
"Luxury imports from Germany, such as BMW and Mercedes-Benz, along with domestic luxury brand Lexus, are the most expensive"
"Luxury imports from Germany, such as BMW and Mercedes-Benz, along with domestic luxury brand Lexus, are the most expensive"
I'm confused as well. They call lexus domestic, plus one of the more expensive to maintain. Next paragraph they mention how lexus is cheap to maintain
They also show Lexus as third cheapest to maintain on the chart. Stopped reading at this line and came to HN comments to see if I was missing something. Very confusing.
I also noticed that and came to HN looking for comments. Interestingly, here in Cambodia there are so many Lexus SUVs you wouldn't believe it. Phnom Penh has surprisingly expensive cars all over (usually I see a few Ferraris or Bentleys every week), but Lexus is king. I wonder if this is part of Lexus's business strategy? Do they advertise their cheap maintenance cost, or are Lexus drivers generally aware of it?
I wish I could search their system and see where my car falls on each of those lists, rather than just the top/bottom 25 in each category.
A 328i costs $15,600 to maintain over ten years? My seven year old xDrive 328i hasn't had a single cost besides oil and tires. I don't know any friends that have paid an additional 15k to maintain theirs either. That's just nonsense.
The parts cost much more in luxury cars. Usually the mechanics will charge more too, as they need bs special tools, etc.
My friend in college had a Toyota Tercel -- I remember buying brake pads with him for $29. Same part in my Caddy? $150.
My friend in college had a Toyota Tercel -- I remember buying brake pads with him for $29. Same part in my Caddy? $150.
They must be counting some regularly scheduler dealer visits to have official BMW wiper blades replaced for $300 a pop.
Boring cars cost less to maintain.
Boring suburbs in boring states are cheaper to live in. Seems the market places quite a premium on excitement.
I had a Volvo (in Europe, so not an expensive import, but 'domestic') and it cost me a fortune. It was so boring I could feel it sucking at my soul when I got in it, and the engine timing could only be set by Volvo using specialist tools. There is something wrong in the car industry that regulation is not addressing, imo.
Zoom Zoom.
(Seriously, does anyone think Mazdas are boring? Do you drive?)
(Seriously, does anyone think Mazdas are boring? Do you drive?)
I'm curious to see how Tesla will compare to these after they have been out for a while. I heard they are cheap to maintain, I hope that turns out to be true.
In theory, because they have less parts that need maintenance they could be. Right now, from what I've read, the biggest problem with Tesla's vehicles is that so few places can maintain them.
That may change when Tesla's 30K-ish vehicle launches.
That may change when Tesla's 30K-ish vehicle launches.
Supposedly all those places are owned by Tesla.
It costs $1500 just to change the tires on a Tesla.
My last Jeep Wrangler tires cost $1300. Granted, they are a bit larger than stock, and I had to buy 5, but $1500 isn't grossly out of line for quality tires.
What is the best new car for the diy mechanic in terms of ease of maintenance and availability of parts / service manual?
Ford Panther platform (Crown Victoria, Grand Marquis, Town Car).
- parts are cheap, cars are well documented, failures uncommon
- easy to repair if in a crash too.
- not unheard of to see examples in the 300,000+ mileage range.
- parts are cheap, cars are well documented, failures uncommon
- easy to repair if in a crash too.
- not unheard of to see examples in the 300,000+ mileage range.
Assuming you're in the US - 1990's GM cars are dirt cheap to work on. Between RockAuto.com and your local pick and pull you'll be spending pennies on the dollar vs traditional dealer maintanance.
I hate so many things about how they are designed but for your criteria (diy, easy, cheap, documented) they are hard to beat.
I hate so many things about how they are designed but for your criteria (diy, easy, cheap, documented) they are hard to beat.
Id say Toyota Tacoma. Super simple. Easy to work on. Large support community and highly available parts. Plus extremely reliable and insane resale value. So insane really that you're usually much better off buying new (assuming you know how to purchase near invoice).
It's not the most practical of vehicles, but the Mazda Miata, especially the 1st and 2nd generations (1990-2005), would be up there. Large enthusiast community thanks to spec miata racing, and parts are cheap since they've always been entry level vehicles.
I've had BMW 528i since 1997. Still going strong, but those damn window regulators break so often. I blame it on my mechanic replacing them with cheap Chinese parts. The car went 15 years with no window problems and all of the sudden I've had to replace each of the windows at least twice in the past 4 years (driver side 3 times)!
Mazda would be much lower on their already low spot on the list if not for the Mazda 6.
Though my RX-7 is a beast to maintain, financially. I imagine they're only tracking models that are still current for the past 10 years.
Also some 'common' but lower-volume brands are not on the list at all (Alfa Romeo is a notable exception here)
Though my RX-7 is a beast to maintain, financially. I imagine they're only tracking models that are still current for the past 10 years.
Also some 'common' but lower-volume brands are not on the list at all (Alfa Romeo is a notable exception here)
I don't think anyone ever bought an rx7 for its reliability :) They optimized for smiles-per-kilometer.
Highly optimized ;)
FD's are, not so sure about their older counterparts the FB and FC. I had an FC. ;)
10AE FC driver here. I think you're way off.
I caught the power bug.
FC > e30 BMW > AP1 S2000 > W204 C63 P31
FC > e30 BMW > AP1 S2000 > W204 C63 P31
You can get quite a bit of power out of an FC for its weight :)
You can get above 500 horsepower on that light little car easier and cheaper than any other platform I can think of. Considering you're starting around 186 (Turbo S4?) that's pretty great...and the car will be ~2500 lbs with you in it?
You can get above 500 horsepower on that light little car easier and cheaper than any other platform I can think of. Considering you're starting around 186 (Turbo S4?) that's pretty great...and the car will be ~2500 lbs with you in it?
You have to put a big turbo, 3mm seals, and suffer turbo lag, etc. almost any car can get a lot of power with a turbo but N/A power is the place for me.
I'm rebuilding my S2000 right now turning it into a 2.4L stroker for 300+ hp. :D
I'm rebuilding my S2000 right now turning it into a 2.4L stroker for 300+ hp. :D
Yes I did look for Alfa in the list, I wasn't surprised it wasn't there, as in my experience it'd be so far off the top of the chart, the others would look tiny in comparison.
I loved our Alfa, but my word was it expensive to maintain (and broke a LOT).
I loved our Alfa, but my word was it expensive to maintain (and broke a LOT).
Loved mine as well ('86 Quad Spider) but mine was very easy on maintenance. Owned it about 20 years, daily drove it (year-round in Boston area) for about 10 of those, and in 135K miles, it left me stranded once when a Bosch distributor broke internally. Brakes and maintenance parts were very reasonably priced, readily available, and the car was easy to maintain except for some engine bay clearance issues [when changing motor mounts and the like] due to the bodywork shape.
Imagine where Jaguar would have shown up in the list in the pre-Tata Motors era.
Even though Ford made improvements, it wasn't until like '96 that Lucas went out of business and was out of the mix...
Even though Ford made improvements, it wasn't until like '96 that Lucas went out of business and was out of the mix...
Jaguar owners don't care about maintenance costs, anecdotally speaking, of course. Executive VP at an old job had a Jaguar (XJ-12 I think) that would occasionally catch fire and 'need some work'. I swear it spent more time in the shop than on the road, but he loved Jags.
Sorry for being (slightly?) off topic but you've prompted my curiosity now;
Owner of a mazda 6 (almost 2 years), no repairs needed thus far, when I got it it had been top rated in consumer reports; is there something I should be looking out for? (brief googling didn't turn up anything; to the child and others since I'm limited by response rate, my curiosity was peaked by the high cost I saw in the article, but I haven't heard what might cause that high cost)
Owner of a mazda 6 (almost 2 years), no repairs needed thus far, when I got it it had been top rated in consumer reports; is there something I should be looking out for? (brief googling didn't turn up anything; to the child and others since I'm limited by response rate, my curiosity was peaked by the high cost I saw in the article, but I haven't heard what might cause that high cost)
I had a horrifying experience with mine, a 2002 model. There were issues ever so often, but what took the cake was that, 6 years in, it started to burn oil, as, from full to low on oil in 100 miles. The car's diagnostics saw nothing wrong, so even knowing what to fix would have involved opening the engine up, and that's a lot of labor. Then you might end up with a costly part replacement on top. The actual recommendation from the mechanic, given that the car was still relatively new, was to fill the oil up and trading it in to a dealer without disclosing the problem, that there's no way they'd find anything wrong with it in any pre-purchase inspection!
So... yeah, Mazda6, not so much.
So... yeah, Mazda6, not so much.
The Mazda 6 is 9th on the list in that article of the top most expensive cars to maintain.
Mostly I've seen that they're fine though, there must be something that I'm not familiar with that's reflected in the data.
Mostly I've seen that they're fine though, there must be something that I'm not familiar with that's reflected in the data.
I really wanted to buy a Mazda, they're cheap, reliable, safe, and have nice features. But they literally don't sell one which has enough driver's legroom and headroom for tall people...
For example the Mazda6 has great legroom but bad headroom. The CX-5 has great headroom but bad legroom. The CX-3 has bad both.
If you need a vehicle with good headroom AND legroom you're almost required to buy a Subaru (Forester, Legacy, or Outback), Prius V, Toyota RAV4, or Nissan Rogue. It is pathetic how limited the choice is.
PS - You can see roominess metrics on Edmunds[0], just scroll down to interior measurements.
[0] http://www.edmunds.com/toyota/prius-v/2016/wagon/features-sp...
For example the Mazda6 has great legroom but bad headroom. The CX-5 has great headroom but bad legroom. The CX-3 has bad both.
If you need a vehicle with good headroom AND legroom you're almost required to buy a Subaru (Forester, Legacy, or Outback), Prius V, Toyota RAV4, or Nissan Rogue. It is pathetic how limited the choice is.
PS - You can see roominess metrics on Edmunds[0], just scroll down to interior measurements.
[0] http://www.edmunds.com/toyota/prius-v/2016/wagon/features-sp...
Ford Flex should be in that list. Or the Transit (Connect), even if it's an oddball choice.
I agree though. Luckily Toyotas and Subarus are a solid buy...well, with the subbies as long as you have no intention of modifying anything underhood (I swear that brand is the king of engine rebuilds).
I agree though. Luckily Toyotas and Subarus are a solid buy...well, with the subbies as long as you have no intention of modifying anything underhood (I swear that brand is the king of engine rebuilds).
The Ford Flex isn't available. They ran out of 2015 models and haven't got 2016s off of the production line yet. Great vehicle, but only when it exists. Not kidding, go the Ford Flex page and hit "search dealer inventory," put in your zip, and hit search. 0 results.
The Transit Connect isn't appropriate for consumers, it hasn't passed any of IIHS's tests, has no safety ratings at all, and is considered a commercial vehicle. I'm not putting my kids into something with no safety data on it.
But, yes, the list isn't exhaustive. I just wanted to make the point that Mazda in particular has slim pickings for tall drivers with long legs.
The Transit Connect isn't appropriate for consumers, it hasn't passed any of IIHS's tests, has no safety ratings at all, and is considered a commercial vehicle. I'm not putting my kids into something with no safety data on it.
But, yes, the list isn't exhaustive. I just wanted to make the point that Mazda in particular has slim pickings for tall drivers with long legs.
I have one. its about $1 mile in maintenance!
I'd really like truecar or carmax to start using estimated maintenance (maybe with MPG and expected resale) to provide a better sense of total cost of ownership for new and used cars. We need some way to make maintenance costs something producers actually transparently compete on, just like fuel efficiency and resale value.
It's just so hard to get that data. Even here we're grouping cars by make. Not model, not year, because there's just not enough good data on this.
It's a welcome start, but it'd be interesting to see what would happen if we just made all repair shops report more about the prices paid for what services at what mileages for each vehicle. We might uncover some really interesting things, and drive useful innovations from producers.
It's just so hard to get that data. Even here we're grouping cars by make. Not model, not year, because there's just not enough good data on this.
It's a welcome start, but it'd be interesting to see what would happen if we just made all repair shops report more about the prices paid for what services at what mileages for each vehicle. We might uncover some really interesting things, and drive useful innovations from producers.
this has 300 comments so probably just pissing in the ocean here, but this highlights nothing but confirmation bias.
title should be "how much people that uses our yuppie startup pays to maintain their cars"
of course the bmw diy wil not show up. nor the toyota that goes to the dealer the moment a dash light goes on.
title should be "how much people that uses our yuppie startup pays to maintain their cars"
of course the bmw diy wil not show up. nor the toyota that goes to the dealer the moment a dash light goes on.
Seems relatively likely that there's some selection bias going on here.
It could stand to reason that less reliable brands get discontinued. But there's an alternate explanation. If the only population of Saturns you're looking at is 5-10 years old, and the selection of Hondas your're looking at are 0-10 years old, the "average" Saturn requires more maintenance than the average Honda because on average, it's an older car.
It could stand to reason that less reliable brands get discontinued. But there's an alternate explanation. If the only population of Saturns you're looking at is 5-10 years old, and the selection of Hondas your're looking at are 0-10 years old, the "average" Saturn requires more maintenance than the average Honda because on average, it's an older car.
Interesting matches my experience - I've had many BMW's over the years - currently x5 4.8 and 535d - when they work, they are fantastic but and a big but, they are so unreliable and so expensive to maintain in the UK, main dealer labour rates are over £200 ($300) per hour, non dealers cheaper but struggle with the complexity so often give up and part prices can be crazy - eg £2k to replace a diesel particulate filter.
I've had this idea for a long time. It would be amazing to get the data on exactly what gets fixed in each of the auto repair shops, which then would let you figure out which cars are the most reliable, and how much owning one would cost in the long run, and maybe leads to some preventative measures to minimize the damage. I thought about it for years, and couldn't figure out a way to get the data cheaply.
There is no way to get the data cheaply. There's a sizable industry around this - of which YourMachanic is newer part.
Repair data is used to set part prices, determine the TCO of a vehicle (similar this report shows). It is also used by the US government to mine the data for recalls.
The residual data from the newer breed of online repair sites (YourMechanic, Mitchell's & Motor's offering, etc.) is hugely valuable... and in no way is easy to get to.
The reason is that repair information (part #'s, labor costs, repair procedures, fluid levels, etc.) is extremely hard to digitize from 25 different manufacturers. No one uses a billing / estimating system unless is includes that data.
Repair data is used to set part prices, determine the TCO of a vehicle (similar this report shows). It is also used by the US government to mine the data for recalls.
The residual data from the newer breed of online repair sites (YourMechanic, Mitchell's & Motor's offering, etc.) is hugely valuable... and in no way is easy to get to.
The reason is that repair information (part #'s, labor costs, repair procedures, fluid levels, etc.) is extremely hard to digitize from 25 different manufacturers. No one uses a billing / estimating system unless is includes that data.
There are probably some confounds to why some brands may not do as well particularly brands that make mini vans and/or all wheel drive cars.
AWD is just inherently more complicated and thus requires more maintenance. Thus Subaru probably has unfair advantage since almost all their cars are AWD.
As for Prius reliability... I have passed many stuck sliding on the road in New England blizzards... in my "high maintenance" Subaru.
AWD is just inherently more complicated and thus requires more maintenance. Thus Subaru probably has unfair advantage since almost all their cars are AWD.
As for Prius reliability... I have passed many stuck sliding on the road in New England blizzards... in my "high maintenance" Subaru.
Older Subaru vehicles were notorious for blowing their head gaskets. I think the new ones are much better.
My 2014 Audi A4 Quattro is the most reliable car I've owned. I took it in for a replacement oil pressure sensor at 48k miles which was replaced in 60 minutes under warranty. I can't really complain about that. I am currently on pace to put 30k miles on it this year.
That said Audi has a reputation for a reason, and previous model years were not so care free.
I think what is more important than the absolute cost per manufacturer is the cost of service as a percentage of car MSRP. Parts for higher end vehicles are higher quality/more expensive and the systems are more complex and require more man hours.
There's a reason why taxis in Bolivia and Peru are 90% Toyota Corolla's. It's because parts are dirt cheap, and labor is dirt cheap.
https://lemkeabroad.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/p1060985.jpg
https://lemkeabroad.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/p1060985.jpg
I'm confused by the author's assessment of Kia cars. It's specifically called out as being one of the most expensive lower-end brands to maintain but two of its most popular cars are listed under one of the cheapest cars to maintain (with none being on the expensive list).
Seems like an unwarranted callout at best.
Seems like an unwarranted callout at best.
I have to wonder if this takes into account self maintenance. It is my experience that labor makes up a significant portion of vehicle maintenance costs. That, coupled with the high availability of used parts for popular domestic models, seems like it would bring down costs for those vehicles significantly.
This is really interesting. I assumed when the Prius came out that it would be a maintenance nightmare, simply due to the fact that you've got a more complex system (electrical AND combustion) coupled together. Yet, it seems to work amazingly well. I'm glad I was wrong.
[deleted]
It's a bit early but would love to see how electric cars change the auto maintenance space...
Model year data is important. If there was one model year, like a bad transmission, it will mess with the data.
I drove 6 ford escorts before buying a newer car. The 93 model year was terrible but I pushed my 1998 and 1997 to over 250,000 miles each with minimal repair costs.
I drove 6 ford escorts before buying a newer car. The 93 model year was terrible but I pushed my 1998 and 1997 to over 250,000 miles each with minimal repair costs.
I would have thought for sure that the model most likely to not start would be a rotary like the RX-8. Those things are more likely to flood than start if not properly warmed up...
One of the things I wonder, as we stare at pulling a release at my work, is can elements of the Toyota Way be brought over to software?
We practice SCRUM, which supposedly learned from the Toyota Product System, but our quality assurance has a long way to go.
We practice SCRUM, which supposedly learned from the Toyota Product System, but our quality assurance has a long way to go.
Yes! We use Toyota/LEAN tools constantly to improve our code (and everything else).
Do you recommended any resources about this? I'd like to try to bring this over to my org.
Hmmm... There are many facets, but they roughly come down to a bottom up organizational culture of using the scientific method for everything. Every assumption in developing a process, code, or product should be rapidly validated with quick prototypes and other experiments. When determining the cause of issues, target process and design flaws with formal root cause analysis tools, rather than targeting people. Everyone does this everyday with all that they do, although large-scale improvements sometimes work better in organized events with all the stakeholders ("Kaizen Events"). My favorite book for getting started is "The High-Velocity Edge: How Market Leaders Leverage Operational Excellence to Beat the Competition" by Steven Spear. Then read skill-specific books like, "Understanding A3 Thinking: A Critical Component of Toyota's PDCA Management System", by Sobek II and Smalley, "Root Cause Analysis: Simplified Tools and Techniques, Second Edition" by Fagerhaug and Anderson, and the classic, "Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production" by Ohno and Bodek, which goes into the particular systems Toyota uses. Many people simply apply Toyota's car-factory-specific tools from Ohno's book in all sorts of situations, but LEAN/TPS is about developing tools and approaches on the fly, based on the scientific method and actual data from rapid experiments. Maybe that rapid experimentation shows that the car factory tools will work, maybe you end up with entirely new tools, specific to your particular situation. The "classic" tools in Ohno's book are specific, rapid-prototyped responses to particular issues faced by Toyota and their suppliers. Applying the LEAN/TPS philosophy to your company's specific coding and design practices may result in entirely new tools and techniques. The "classic" tools have become popular for re-use because the classes problems they solve appear in many other industries and situations. LEAN/TPS says that one would use the classic tools, if your own rapid experimentation showed that they will address the process and design defects you are encountering. That is, don't do kan-ban just for the sake of doing kan-ban; base your improvement decisions only on actual data from experiments.
My rule of thumb for budgeting is that a car is going to cost me about £1000 a year to keep and maintain. This includes road tax, insurance, tyres, brakes and servicing etc.
This will average out over time.
This will average out over time.
Tried to load the app at https://www.yourmechanic.com/book/. Does not work for me. Bummer
[deleted]
Would have been interesting to also have the data as percentage of model price. For a very expensive car, it's also normal that parts will be more expensive.
As a MINI owner, you can bump me up a few slots thanks to BMW.
I don't know how the Mini brand is near the bottom of the list but the Mini Cooper model is tied for 19th most expensive.
Yeah, I was surprised about that as well. Minis (post BMW acquisition) are always in the "fun to drive/expensive to maintain" as described by car mags. It was my understanding (when I purchased my 2012) that all maintenance was included in the purchase price (through 36k miles).
I purchased the "extended maintenance plan" (increasing all scheduled maintenance from 36k to 60k) on my 2012 for $2500 and have only paid an additional couple hundred in maintenance since then.
I'm not counting tires - which I have spent quite a bundle on due to having both summer and winter tires and wheels for my vehicle.
I purchased the "extended maintenance plan" (increasing all scheduled maintenance from 36k to 60k) on my 2012 for $2500 and have only paid an additional couple hundred in maintenance since then.
I'm not counting tires - which I have spent quite a bundle on due to having both summer and winter tires and wheels for my vehicle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki is missing
Why is the Prius so reliable? I know Toyota is good but I would have expected it to be less than the Toyota average because it's a more complex hybrid car.
Mechanically it's far simpler than any conventional transmission.
Automatic transmissions are incredibly complex, filled with several planetary gearsets and many clutch packs.
A Toyota hybrid has exactly one planetary gearset, and some motors. That's all.
Automatic transmissions are incredibly complex, filled with several planetary gearsets and many clutch packs.
A Toyota hybrid has exactly one planetary gearset, and some motors. That's all.
Land Rover showing up surprisingly (even suspiciously) low in this list. Almost makes me question the data entirely.
It's likely that Land Rover owners are taking their vehicles to the dealers for repair, and then running away from them as quickly as possible once they get the chance.
I've met quite a few first time Land Rover owners, I've never met a repeat customer.
I've met quite a few first time Land Rover owners, I've never met a repeat customer.
If you have any sense whatsoever, you go to an independent shop as soon as you're out of warranty. Also at least in my experience, quite a few owners of older LR's do much of the work themselves.
In my experience the Land Rover dealer network can't actually fix them. My local dealer was never able to fix the electric park brake on my Discovery 3. An independent specialist fitted a whole new park brake assembly, which cost ~1100GBP. Just one of several 1000+ fixes required. I'll never buy another LR product.
Yap, friend owns a BMW. He drives a BMW dealer loaner car quite often because his car is in the shop.
I wonder how this ranking corresponds to Dekra statistics that are a good source in the EU.
I'd be curious where Tesla would fall on this list. Obviously they haven't been around long enough to get the data though.
I found it interesting that the Chrysler Sebring was listed as the most expensive car to maintain. The first car I purchased for myself was a 1995 Chrysler LeBaron Convertible. I was 17 years old and had saved up money from a business my father had started for me when I was 13 years old and due to my dear Dad working in the industry, I was able to buy it on the "C-Lot"[0] for $12,000 (not bad with an all leather interior and 8,000 miles ... or so I thought). During the 5 long years I owned it, I went through not one, but three $2,400 transmission rebuilds. I was young and wasn't smart enough to know to ditch the car after the first. Nor did I know there was an 800 number I could have called that would almost certainly have resulted in a discounted/free repair for the first (which happened about 2,000 miles outside of the warranty period) or the two others (which happened within 1.5 years of each other).
This car soured Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth vehicles for me for life. I have never considered another car from that brand and I wasn't at all surprised to see many Chrysler vehicles on the high-cost list.
It was also nice to see several American made cars on that list[1], including my Ford Fusion. I own a 2012 model (last year before a substantial redesign[also 1]) with 100,000 miles on it and it has never required service other than routine maintenance (and a few more alignments than I'm used to, but I almost never drive being a work-at-home guy so I'm not sure what might be happening while all of those miles are put on[2]).
I would have loved to see the raw data behind the article for a few reasons.
1. Model years are missing and more details about how many kinds of failures would have been nice. Highlighting the most expensive is nice, but if several less expensive parts are failing, that's also very important.
2. The cost of routine maintenance for parts that are guaranteed to wear can vary dramatically depending on where the service is done. The dealer is the most expensive, almost every time, but things like brakes come to mind. Where I live, taking a car for a brake job at a brake place is highway robbery. A friend showed me how easy it is to do brakes and I discovered I could do all 4 for the cost of one at the shop (or just replace the brakes/rotors for the price of a pad job). I later learned that a good shop will do them for about $40 in labor over the cost of parts at a retail auto-parts store (and I thank God that I now have a family friend who owns said shop).
3. It has a bad smell to it and I'd like to understand how they interpreted the data or whether or not the data set is complete. For the American brands, some of those cars have corresponding models from their other affiliated brands (A Chevy X is a Oldsmobile Y or even extreme cases where Eagle [dead now] branded vehicles used to be Mitsubishi products) with very little differences in the vehicles. This makes sense in the case of non-luxury brand/luxury brand because there are more expensive parts and usually major underlying improvements in the luxury brands that affect repair frequency/cost. But in the case of that Sebring, at one point that was pretty much the same car as a Dodge model except for the exterior and I thought I spotted others on that list that had the same situation but with the equivalent vehicle nowhere to be found.
If anyone has that data set and can link to it, I'd be curious.
[0] I may not have this exactly right, including the name, but my understanding is that these cars were driven by higher level employees "lease-style" for a year at a discount (or as a perk). Suppliers and employees can show up on a designated day and commit to purchase the vehicle at a solid discount - mine was $12,000 for an all leather model with about 8,000 miles on it (that would be repaired at the dealership under warranty). The "catch", I learned years later, is that some/many of the employees exercising this perk don't bother doing routine maintenance on the car and generally treat it very harshly.
[1] I live in Michigan, my dad's business is a supplier to the local autos, and there's still a lot of us who remember the days of evil bastards keying non UAW-made vehicles so I'm stuck with the Big Three (making that Two in my case). The general rule has been never buy a car the first year after a substantial redesign and vehicles on the last year prior to redesign are usually the most reliable (kinks worked out). I don't know if that's based on real data or if that's just been good luck (and common sense), but it's been a reliable rule for my family in all but the LeBaron case (I think 96 was the last year). That rule, along with and "if you're buying new, do so when the dealers are trying to get the next model year on the lot" (it was a $7,000 difference with my Fusion) are the only two I know.
[2] I suspect a defect in this case or even more likely -- road conditions. My wife is a great driver, the car has original brakes at 100,000 miles (a feat the mechanic who inspected them last month was impressed with) and everything but the suspension is in amazing condition. The suspension problems and realignment frequency have me thinking her lack of gaming skills is at fault. In this part of Michigan, driving any freeway/major road is like playing a game of "Dodge the Potholes" where failure to win results in blown out tires (we've had two incidents), unusual suspension wear/problems and alignment issues depending on the angle of impact and depth.
This car soured Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth vehicles for me for life. I have never considered another car from that brand and I wasn't at all surprised to see many Chrysler vehicles on the high-cost list.
It was also nice to see several American made cars on that list[1], including my Ford Fusion. I own a 2012 model (last year before a substantial redesign[also 1]) with 100,000 miles on it and it has never required service other than routine maintenance (and a few more alignments than I'm used to, but I almost never drive being a work-at-home guy so I'm not sure what might be happening while all of those miles are put on[2]).
I would have loved to see the raw data behind the article for a few reasons.
1. Model years are missing and more details about how many kinds of failures would have been nice. Highlighting the most expensive is nice, but if several less expensive parts are failing, that's also very important.
2. The cost of routine maintenance for parts that are guaranteed to wear can vary dramatically depending on where the service is done. The dealer is the most expensive, almost every time, but things like brakes come to mind. Where I live, taking a car for a brake job at a brake place is highway robbery. A friend showed me how easy it is to do brakes and I discovered I could do all 4 for the cost of one at the shop (or just replace the brakes/rotors for the price of a pad job). I later learned that a good shop will do them for about $40 in labor over the cost of parts at a retail auto-parts store (and I thank God that I now have a family friend who owns said shop).
3. It has a bad smell to it and I'd like to understand how they interpreted the data or whether or not the data set is complete. For the American brands, some of those cars have corresponding models from their other affiliated brands (A Chevy X is a Oldsmobile Y or even extreme cases where Eagle [dead now] branded vehicles used to be Mitsubishi products) with very little differences in the vehicles. This makes sense in the case of non-luxury brand/luxury brand because there are more expensive parts and usually major underlying improvements in the luxury brands that affect repair frequency/cost. But in the case of that Sebring, at one point that was pretty much the same car as a Dodge model except for the exterior and I thought I spotted others on that list that had the same situation but with the equivalent vehicle nowhere to be found.
If anyone has that data set and can link to it, I'd be curious.
[0] I may not have this exactly right, including the name, but my understanding is that these cars were driven by higher level employees "lease-style" for a year at a discount (or as a perk). Suppliers and employees can show up on a designated day and commit to purchase the vehicle at a solid discount - mine was $12,000 for an all leather model with about 8,000 miles on it (that would be repaired at the dealership under warranty). The "catch", I learned years later, is that some/many of the employees exercising this perk don't bother doing routine maintenance on the car and generally treat it very harshly.
[1] I live in Michigan, my dad's business is a supplier to the local autos, and there's still a lot of us who remember the days of evil bastards keying non UAW-made vehicles so I'm stuck with the Big Three (making that Two in my case). The general rule has been never buy a car the first year after a substantial redesign and vehicles on the last year prior to redesign are usually the most reliable (kinks worked out). I don't know if that's based on real data or if that's just been good luck (and common sense), but it's been a reliable rule for my family in all but the LeBaron case (I think 96 was the last year). That rule, along with and "if you're buying new, do so when the dealers are trying to get the next model year on the lot" (it was a $7,000 difference with my Fusion) are the only two I know.
[2] I suspect a defect in this case or even more likely -- road conditions. My wife is a great driver, the car has original brakes at 100,000 miles (a feat the mechanic who inspected them last month was impressed with) and everything but the suspension is in amazing condition. The suspension problems and realignment frequency have me thinking her lack of gaming skills is at fault. In this part of Michigan, driving any freeway/major road is like playing a game of "Dodge the Potholes" where failure to win results in blown out tires (we've had two incidents), unusual suspension wear/problems and alignment issues depending on the angle of impact and depth.
jnevill(1)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Production_System