12th May 2019, 18:43
12:13 makes reference to miles, so obviously in the US, NOT in the UK or New Zealand, where inspection rules are different. BTW, there is no "national" vehicle inspection program in the US (not yet, anyway, but who knows what will happen if the Democrats :( somehow manage to regain control).
Mostly 12:13 is just another tired claim for how much "better" cars were in the 80s and 90s. Yeah, that's why you still see so many still on the road.
13th May 2019, 19:02
Just because they were better, doesn't mean they have to be still on the road. Logically they all did their jobs as daily drivers, exceeding high mileage, and have since been retired.
13th May 2019, 19:48
The 80s and 90s were a long time ago; that's why cars from that time period are mostly gone.
Anyways, I do not agree it's a tired claim. In fact, a claim I get tired of hearing is that newer automatically equals better, which is not always true. Obviously newer cars are safer and generally better performing, but I think you are missing the point, it's all relevant to an individual's experience.
If for example a long time ago you paid very little for a car and got many years and a high mileage out it with relatively no issues, then of course you are going to be annoyed when newer cars break down and cost more to fix/buy overall.
I wrote the original review. Was surprised to see so many comments on this review. I hope we can all respectfully agree or disagree on here, after all that is what this site is about - reviews on cars of all ages and telling the world their pros and cons. I stand by my review that the S40 was a good car, but the fact is for a 2007 car it did not last as long as cars I had many decades before this. I find this unacceptable. I have since replaced it with a 2013 Ford Mondeo (might post a review soon); great car, but again, I'm not getting my hopes up about its longevity. I'll probably sell it before it gets to 10 years old.
13th May 2019, 23:52
Very nice comment; the problem is you're wasting your time. There is a small but very vocal group of "commenters" on this site who refuse to believe that cars from the 70s, 80s, 90s (take your pick) are just as reliable than those of today and will trot out the same old opinions and anecdotal evidence as "proof" that their statements are fact instead of just their personal beliefs.
16th May 2019, 20:39
I'll chime in a bit... Here in the US, it really depends on what state you live in AND what kind of vehicle it is too. That, and it depends on the car's age.
So for example: I grew up in Tennessee, which basically has zero vehicle inspections and fairly basic "requirements" for the car to be on the road. As in it has to have doors, seat belts, and working lights. Otherwise? I distinctly recall seeing what looked like literal, rolling piles of junk going down the freeway. Some belching burnt oil smoke.
But now I live in California. Here we have inspections every 2 years. Those cover primarily vehicle emissions and safety. If there are any engine trouble lights on, the car will be failed. If the car emits too much pollution it will also be failed. If it has a cracked windshield or non-operational lights, it will also fail.
But then again there's some odd exceptions. We also own a Chevy Volt, a plugin hybrid electric car. So even though it still has a conventional gas engine along with the batteries and motor, we will never have to have the car inspected. I assume because state regulators were too stupid to understand that it still has a gas engine under the hood.