18th Jan 2018, 16:30
...and it is simply impossible for a new Mercedes to be worth so much money if every knew it would fall apart in less than a couple of years with low mileage. No one would buy a new car if they were that bad.
I suppose I could tell you about my 1980s E-class with over 100,000 miles that has had its fair share of problems, but is a well looked after car and everything works, so if that's not too hard to believe, then I would expect a 2014 to be pretty much perfect.
I too find reviews that claim cars to be faultless annoying, however comments like yours are equally annoying if you can't believe a decent car can be made to reach a high mileage; the "multiple design faults" and "dead at 100,000" myth applies to maybe 1950s or 60s cars, but since the 80s things have come a long way and 100,000 plus is always expected (maintenance aside), and certainly modern cars are expected to last and be tough.
18th Jan 2018, 19:38
Your statement about 1950-60s cars will likely cause knicker knots for a small but vocal group of commenters here.
19th Jan 2018, 11:16
Probably. But I don't mean to deliberately cause arguments on this forum. In fact I still like this site better than many other reviews sites out there. Lots of good honest reviews.
Anyway, I was talking to a mechanic the other day, and he said older cars had their head gaskets go at any point beyond 100,000 miles due to the head gasket being cast iron and the block being aluminum, and the difference in temperature over time causes the seal to fail no matter how much preventive maintenance you do; that MAY be where the old thought that cars are automatically dead after a certain mileage came from. Of course, as I mentioned earlier on here, most modern cars (by modern I mean late 80s onwards, after fuel injection came about) had fully aluminum blocks and head gaskets, and other such things were less of a problem, but can still happen obviously.
The point I'm trying to make is no extreme ends of this argument are a good place to be. Obviously no car makes it 200,000 without a repair. Likewise, buying new does not automatically mean trouble free either; most people I know with new cars are back and forth to the dealers for small electronic problems and other recalls. You need to find a happy medium - I believe the best advice financially is a nearly new car that's been looked after.
19th Jan 2018, 16:00
Cars from the 50s & 60s weren't controlled by electronic & computer technology. Once you have those problems (and they do occur), you can kiss the car goodbye because it ain't worth fixing. Even with advanced diagnostic services.
19th Jan 2018, 19:25
I have certainly seen some come and go. Strictly used, only a disposable vehicle. Yet my old one runs like a charm and keeps escalating in value.
19th Jan 2018, 19:54
What brands are you talking about? Most if not all the older American name plates were durable cast iron blocks that stood the test of mileage and time.
Early aluminum engines were a disaster, including Chevrolet's Vega and Cadillac's HT 4100.
19th Jan 2018, 20:34
Agreed. I'm half and half on modern vs. old being durable or better. While I grew up, buying even a humble Mercedes 200 meant you got something which was built like an anvil and could be thrown off a cliff and would still run, taking a step back to assess the current situation has me giving modern cars their due. When I was growing up in the tropics, a 5-year old car needed rust taken out of the panels, and a 10-year old one would be on its way to the junkyard. "Overhaul" was a normal part of a car's life (the engine, that is). And a car, even well-maintained, may decide to simply not start for whatever reason one morning.
Here came electronics and fuel injection, airbags and ABS. I thought, here we go - unrepairable, disposable components. But, my not very light 2001 BMW hatch uses less fuel than my first car, a 1981 Mitsubishi Mirage/Plymouth Colt. Cars start with one turn of the key even parked on the street in winter. Car bodies don't routinely rust anymore - even when the bodies aren't galvanised. And my folks just got a new Honda to replace their 1996 Mazda 323i (22 years old, with all the electronics, airbag and ABS) which is still in running condition. Never been overhauled, no rust taken out. Cars are very different now, but I can't really say they've gotten worse compared to the 10-year old overhauled-motor rusted junk cars from not too long ago.
20th Jan 2018, 05:47
Engines from that era also didn't have vital engine parts made out of plastic such as intake manifolds.
20th Jan 2018, 12:52
Yeah you're right. That's why you see so many non-wrecked late model cars in salvage yards. Their owners kissed them goodbye because they couldn't get them fixed, EH?
20th Jan 2018, 16:32
Never said they can't be fixed. If you feel that sinking hundreds if not thousands of dollars on a modern car with computer control and electronic problems, then hope that the car will still run the same is logical, then go for it.
20th Jan 2018, 21:35
Hmff. First you said "kiss the car goodbye cause it ain't worth fixing".
Now you are saying you "never said they can't be fixed".
Explain why if new cars are so unreliable and expensive to repair, why aren't more people hanging onto their (according to you) ultra-reliable and easy to repair older cars?
20th Jan 2018, 21:39
I suppose the next debate on here will be the worn out assertion that new cars are easier to work on. Yeah, especially with engine compartments that are the size of a shoe box with the motor shoe-horned inside.
21st Jan 2018, 14:57
You're right, but again, it varies. Some cars are easier to work on than others due to more space, but as for new and old, generally older cars can be simper and anyone with competent mechanical ability and knowledge can probably do most jobs with a service and repair manual, and the right tools.
Modern cars on the other hand... it depends on the right diagnostic electronic tools you may or may not have access to; some dealers when a car is new are the only place you can go, later on information and tools are available at small independent garages and you may get a cheaper fix when it's a few years old, should electronics cause you trouble.
21st Jan 2018, 18:32
First, you explain why you are under the impression that older cars are so unreliable, when your modern day cars are likely to have more problems with the computer technology that the older ones don't have.
I've seen your same comment chime in on different reviews on here, but yet you never back it up by setting examples on why older is oh so unreliable.
I'm not saying new cars are bad, but they are prone to more expensive repairs over time.