But they don't tend to break down as often as the old ones despite much higher mileages and often poor maintenance in many cases... You can use personal examples all you want, J, but the fact remains that they are more reliable than they were in the 60s, 70s and 80s, quite honestly I doubt today's driver would accept what we did back then, most cars would have been returned as "unfit for purpose"... I take your point about "complete" failure, but it just doesn't happen that often, in most cases the system reverts to "get you home" mode, which might not be very quick but is a damn sight more comfortable than trying to fix it by the roadside like we used to have to...JPB wrote:[so it becomes a recovery job or it doesn't break down at all, no happy compromise that would get you home but no great leap forward either.
.
Modern rubbish?
Re: Modern rubbish?
-
Martin Evans
- Posts: 3277
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:16 am
- Location: South Wales.
- Contact:
Re: Modern rubbish?
60s, possibly (My father’s Escort would breakdown if rain was forecast, though it improved after he replaced Ford’s crappy plug leads), 70s perhaps depending on the model but 80s, I don’t think so. During the 1980s, we had a variety of new cars and all were reliable. My VW Golf GTI clocked up over 100000 miles and it never needed oil. My mother had two Vauxhall Novas and they were both reliable. Even my new Mini was reliable. What let it down, was a poor paint finish and I think poor paint (I believe they were experimenting with various paints to cut costs, so maybe my car was a guinea pig). From what I remember some of the other Austin Rover stuff was much the same in those days.
Perhaps some might find my old Golf GTI unfit for purpose (It had some of those dreadful handles, that you had to turn to open the windows and the sun roof) but I think that would say more about them than the car. You only have to look at car adverts, to have an idea of the sorts of pillocks they are trying to appeal to now. As I said earlier, I think some of those cars reached an optimum level then, before they really began to go over the top. Some of the better cars of the 1970s were pretty near it (The Mk 2 Golf was very much a refinement of the Mk1 and for sure the paintwork of the Mk1 was not as good as the Beetle had been but it got better) but the beauty of all of them, was that you could still work on them, without needing all the computerised equipment, that now seems to be necessary. I've always looked after my cars, so roadside repairs have not been a common occurence (The coil episode being an exception) but I still carry a toolkit and feel happier knowing that if something goes wrong, I have a chance of fixing it at the roadside. I'm with JPB on this
I would also suggest that there are fewer old cars (Bangers if you like) on the roads now. Part of this could be down to cars perhaps being relatively cheaper than they were 40 years ago (An element of easy come easy go) but also I think you will find that cars reach the point of no return sooner these days, due to the cost of repairs, especially when you get a serious electronic failure (Not to mention accident damage). I’m sure that scarp yard stock is newer these days than it was in the 1970s and 1980s. Perhaps too you have a public who are less willing and less able to get their hands dirty, due to the change in occupations since those times. This has the effect of giving the bodger less scope for operation (So it’s not all bad news
). You don’t see many cars up on bricks these days.
Perhaps some might find my old Golf GTI unfit for purpose (It had some of those dreadful handles, that you had to turn to open the windows and the sun roof) but I think that would say more about them than the car. You only have to look at car adverts, to have an idea of the sorts of pillocks they are trying to appeal to now. As I said earlier, I think some of those cars reached an optimum level then, before they really began to go over the top. Some of the better cars of the 1970s were pretty near it (The Mk 2 Golf was very much a refinement of the Mk1 and for sure the paintwork of the Mk1 was not as good as the Beetle had been but it got better) but the beauty of all of them, was that you could still work on them, without needing all the computerised equipment, that now seems to be necessary. I've always looked after my cars, so roadside repairs have not been a common occurence (The coil episode being an exception) but I still carry a toolkit and feel happier knowing that if something goes wrong, I have a chance of fixing it at the roadside. I'm with JPB on this
I would also suggest that there are fewer old cars (Bangers if you like) on the roads now. Part of this could be down to cars perhaps being relatively cheaper than they were 40 years ago (An element of easy come easy go) but also I think you will find that cars reach the point of no return sooner these days, due to the cost of repairs, especially when you get a serious electronic failure (Not to mention accident damage). I’m sure that scarp yard stock is newer these days than it was in the 1970s and 1980s. Perhaps too you have a public who are less willing and less able to get their hands dirty, due to the change in occupations since those times. This has the effect of giving the bodger less scope for operation (So it’s not all bad news
). You don’t see many cars up on bricks these days.Rules exist for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.
MG Midget 1500, MGB GT V8, Morris Minor Traveller 1275, MG Midget 1275 & too many bicycles.
MG Midget 1500, MGB GT V8, Morris Minor Traveller 1275, MG Midget 1275 & too many bicycles.
-
Xantia-nut
- Posts: 160
- Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:46 pm
- Location: Wolverhampton
- Contact:
Re: Modern rubbish?
Ay up!
I've had my 1993 Xantia for about 6 years now with only two breakdowns requiring a tow, and one of them was my fault! The other was frost damage to a water hose.
Apart from fair wear and tear, she's been excellent reliability-wise. Apart from refusing to part with this seized brake caliper!
I've had my 1993 Xantia for about 6 years now with only two breakdowns requiring a tow, and one of them was my fault! The other was frost damage to a water hose.
Apart from fair wear and tear, she's been excellent reliability-wise. Apart from refusing to part with this seized brake caliper!
If in doubt, give it a clout!
If that don't work, fetch a bigger 'ammer!
1993 Citroen Xantia 1.8i LX
If that don't work, fetch a bigger 'ammer!
1993 Citroen Xantia 1.8i LX
-
mr rusty
- Posts: 469
- Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 10:17 am
- Location: Harlow, the birthplace of fibreoptic communication, as the town sign says.
Re: Modern rubbish?
The reason there are fewer old cars on the road now isn't to do with their being 'rubbish' , it's to do with them being worthless...as cars. But as scrap they have value. It is now very difficult to find a £300- £500 'banger' to use as a semi disposable daily drive. I used to buy these sort of cars all the time, I had no qualms at all about buying a car with 150000 plus miles on it, my Rover was ex Essex council highways dept, it'd done starship miles up and down the A127, A12, A13, etc, but cost me £350. These bargain cars now go straight to the crusher to be turned into washing machines and the like, nothing to do with them being 'modern rubbish'.
In the seventies, a 100000 mile car was pretty much unheard of-they were totally mechanically shagged and rotten to boot...but just about affordable to a teenager. they weren't cheap then, and i reckon it's much better for youngsters now, £1500 will buy a really good car. In real terms they're just sooo much cheaper. Back then a new car was a rarity unless it was a firm's motor, these days they're easily affordable.
A modern car can knock 100000 miles in its first two or three years, no problem, with just routine servicing. Granted when things do go wrong they can be expensive, but that's always been the case during a cars' current period. I would imagine if we were time-travelled back to the 60's there'd be people moaning about the phenomenal cost of dealing with those new-fangled ohv engines and disc brakes now they're out of dealer servicing.
In the seventies, a 100000 mile car was pretty much unheard of-they were totally mechanically shagged and rotten to boot...but just about affordable to a teenager. they weren't cheap then, and i reckon it's much better for youngsters now, £1500 will buy a really good car. In real terms they're just sooo much cheaper. Back then a new car was a rarity unless it was a firm's motor, these days they're easily affordable.
A modern car can knock 100000 miles in its first two or three years, no problem, with just routine servicing. Granted when things do go wrong they can be expensive, but that's always been the case during a cars' current period. I would imagine if we were time-travelled back to the 60's there'd be people moaning about the phenomenal cost of dealing with those new-fangled ohv engines and disc brakes now they're out of dealer servicing.
1968 Triumph Vitesse Mk1 2 litre convertible, Junior Miss rusty has a 1989 998cc Mk2 Metro, Mrs Rusty has a modern common rail diesel thing.
-
tractorman
- Posts: 1399
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:22 am
- Location: Wigton, Cumbria
Re: Modern rubbish?
There's a lot of truth in there Mr R! I must admit, when the Golf tried to mate with the cobble last week, my first thought was to buy a £300 car. Not a sign of one! So the 40 year old tractor is the daily driver!
The first Golf I bought (in 1990) had 95K (or 97K?) on the clock, followed by a two year old Passat (96 - TD version) with 72K on the clock. Neither cars had real problems - though both did just after I sold them!! The Golf had done 185K when I sold it eight years later, the Passat had done 200K in the following nine years and neither used or lost oil! The second (deceased) Golf (a Mk4 - supposed to be bad, but weren't!) didn't make 100K - I have only been doing about 4000 miles a year for the last two years - and did less than 30K in the five years I owned it!
The next car will be a Bluemotion Golf (so has DMF and DPF as well as other TLAs!) and it's about 3 1/2 years old - with 112K miles on the clock! I have no qualms about buying it (it has FSH plus a printout of every job done - down to a sidelight bulb!) and, with my current annual mileage, I suspect it will be approaching normal VW annual mileage in four or five years!
The first Golf I bought (in 1990) had 95K (or 97K?) on the clock, followed by a two year old Passat (96 - TD version) with 72K on the clock. Neither cars had real problems - though both did just after I sold them!! The Golf had done 185K when I sold it eight years later, the Passat had done 200K in the following nine years and neither used or lost oil! The second (deceased) Golf (a Mk4 - supposed to be bad, but weren't!) didn't make 100K - I have only been doing about 4000 miles a year for the last two years - and did less than 30K in the five years I owned it!
The next car will be a Bluemotion Golf (so has DMF and DPF as well as other TLAs!) and it's about 3 1/2 years old - with 112K miles on the clock! I have no qualms about buying it (it has FSH plus a printout of every job done - down to a sidelight bulb!) and, with my current annual mileage, I suspect it will be approaching normal VW annual mileage in four or five years!
Re: Modern rubbish?
DPFs aren't anything to worry about as long as you drive normally and let the ECU take care of the purging cycle rather than trying to avoid certain conditions. It'll need to do that every so often regardless of how you drive but taking Watchdog's "expert" (ex= has been, spurt= small dribble) advice would be pointless.
DMF? I thought that the Blue Motion Polo and Golf had the 3 cylinder engine found in the Fox & the Up, but in a bigger, 1.4 litre capacity?
Certainly did when that controversial label** first appeared on the boot lid of the Polo, so no DMF needed there. Or in 99.99999% of four cylinder engines either if we're brutally frank about it. 
**
DMF? I thought that the Blue Motion Polo and Golf had the 3 cylinder engine found in the Fox & the Up, but in a bigger, 1.4 litre capacity?
Certainly did when that controversial label** first appeared on the boot lid of the Polo, so no DMF needed there. Or in 99.99999% of four cylinder engines either if we're brutally frank about it. **
a Gazette road test banner, some tears ago, wrote:"Blue Motion", the car range named for something that was flushed from an aeroplane's Elsan and ended up in your greenhouse....
J
"Home is where you park it", so the saying goes. That may yet come true..
"Home is where you park it", so the saying goes. That may yet come true..
-
tractorman
- Posts: 1399
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:22 am
- Location: Wigton, Cumbria
Re: Modern rubbish?
The new Golf (Mk5 Bluemotion) certainly has a four pot - more or less the same PD engine as my last Golf (Mk4) - 103BHP instead of the old one's 100. It certainly sounds sweeter than the 1.4 TDI Polos I tried (what an overrated car those are!!). I gather the latest Bluemotion Golfs and Passats have 1.6 or 2.0 diesels - both to be avoided I gather!
I've been watching the VW-Audi forum recently and the DPF problem doesn't seem to raise as many questions as the DMF one does - I think that says more about the real problem (ie it is not really a problem at all) and a common problem seems to be sensor-based than the DPF itself. I'll speak from my own experience sometime later on! There again, the ones that have problems are ones used for short journeys (eg the carer would often only go two or three miles between "visits" and the other Focus was rep for a farm supplies firm, so would often be on back roads and going slowly.
Apparently Ford tried a solid flywheel in the Transit, but had to go back to DMF - something about vibrations being transmitted through to the gearbox and damaging it. Again, this may be the Internet Folklore rather than real facts! However, where people were advising replacing DMFs on VWs a couple of years ago, they seem to say don't use solid flywheels now because of the vibration problem. I suspect that, like my previous two VW diesels, many vehicles had indirect injection, which was a lot smoother running than the direct injection engines, so didn't really need DMFs. Don't quote me though - I don't want to start another myth!
I've been watching the VW-Audi forum recently and the DPF problem doesn't seem to raise as many questions as the DMF one does - I think that says more about the real problem (ie it is not really a problem at all) and a common problem seems to be sensor-based than the DPF itself. I'll speak from my own experience sometime later on! There again, the ones that have problems are ones used for short journeys (eg the carer would often only go two or three miles between "visits" and the other Focus was rep for a farm supplies firm, so would often be on back roads and going slowly.
Apparently Ford tried a solid flywheel in the Transit, but had to go back to DMF - something about vibrations being transmitted through to the gearbox and damaging it. Again, this may be the Internet Folklore rather than real facts! However, where people were advising replacing DMFs on VWs a couple of years ago, they seem to say don't use solid flywheels now because of the vibration problem. I suspect that, like my previous two VW diesels, many vehicles had indirect injection, which was a lot smoother running than the direct injection engines, so didn't really need DMFs. Don't quote me though - I don't want to start another myth!
Re: Modern rubbish?
And there's the thing; it should make no difference whatsoever whether you spend all day every day pounding the motorway or cover the same distance on dust tracks that barely allow you to get out of 3rd gear. Unless the dealer didn't explain that the way to start the purge cycle isn't to switch the engine off then restart it a few seconds later, which will drop the idle speed back to where it should be but won't let it finish the job. Switching it off after its run and restarting it normally will allow it though, even if it takes several trips until it's done. But thanks to the ginger Botox victim and the man from Nissan (on their Cashcow's DPF "problem") talking cack on Watchdog, more people than ever are now mistreating their DPFs by believing that they have to treat them in any way differently from a system that isn't equipped with one. They don't, the things are capable of taking care of themselves.tractorman wrote:the ones that have problems are ones used for short journeys (eg the carer would often only go two or three miles between "visits" and the other Focus was rep for a farm supplies firm, so would often be on back roads and going slowly.
Me neither, that would be the BBC's job in this case.tractorman wrote: I don't want to start another myth!
J
"Home is where you park it", so the saying goes. That may yet come true..
"Home is where you park it", so the saying goes. That may yet come true..
Re: Modern rubbish?
In general, modern cars are far more reliable then old cars. I remember 20 years ago when I started driving, I would not consider looking at a car with more then 100k miles. That's because most of the cars I was looking at the time were about 15 years old, had carburetors and the engine required a rebuild every 100k miles.
Fuel injection changed that and now you have long life coolant that you can keep for 5 years, spark plugs that only need changing every 100k miles , oil changes at 15k miles etc etc.
OBDII also makes life simple. When my modern car develops a miss fire, the extent of the diagnosis is plug in my scan tool and it will tell me exactly what cylinder is misfiring.
Does it cost more to maintain? For sure, If you replace all the sensors on my car, it would probably cost more then a rebuilt Chevy small block. I have 8 coil packs, 4 cams, 32 valves that can bend if the timing chain snaps.
Would I complain about this? Heck no, I love my old cars, but I need one modern that I can get in and do 70 mph at 2000rpm while the a/c is freeing me out, an I don't even have to wait for it to warm up.
Fuel injection changed that and now you have long life coolant that you can keep for 5 years, spark plugs that only need changing every 100k miles , oil changes at 15k miles etc etc.
OBDII also makes life simple. When my modern car develops a miss fire, the extent of the diagnosis is plug in my scan tool and it will tell me exactly what cylinder is misfiring.
Does it cost more to maintain? For sure, If you replace all the sensors on my car, it would probably cost more then a rebuilt Chevy small block. I have 8 coil packs, 4 cams, 32 valves that can bend if the timing chain snaps.
Would I complain about this? Heck no, I love my old cars, but I need one modern that I can get in and do 70 mph at 2000rpm while the a/c is freeing me out, an I don't even have to wait for it to warm up.
Re: Modern rubbish?
I just completely identify with you Ab.. - I started driving even longer ago, actually over 50 years, and every journey was an adventure and just to arrive somewhere was an achievement.
Can anybody remember the trip to the coast in the family car? - bonnet up to cool things down was pretty common every time we stopped and we weren't the only ones. Also, avoiding certain routes such as Porlock Hill in case the old girl boiled up or couldn't make it even in 1 st gear.
Nice story about the first Taxi in Madeira which illustrates the point too - apparently it was a Standard 9, it was so lacking in power that the steeper bits of the island were always tackled in reverse gear because it just stalled going forward in 1st
Modern cars are A to B consumables is the reality but long live proper cars.
Can anybody remember the trip to the coast in the family car? - bonnet up to cool things down was pretty common every time we stopped and we weren't the only ones. Also, avoiding certain routes such as Porlock Hill in case the old girl boiled up or couldn't make it even in 1 st gear.
Nice story about the first Taxi in Madeira which illustrates the point too - apparently it was a Standard 9, it was so lacking in power that the steeper bits of the island were always tackled in reverse gear because it just stalled going forward in 1st
Modern cars are A to B consumables is the reality but long live proper cars.