Rebuilt engines - good or bad?

I'm looking for an older, inexpensive station wagon (Corolla or Camry, if I can find one). A lot of the cars I'm seeing have rebuilt engines, even when they're not that old ( a friend is selling a 1997 Escort with

97,000 miles and a rebuilt engine and transmission).

Is a rebuilt engine a plus or minus? Does it mean the car had problems or saw a lot of use, and needed a new engine? Or does it mean I'm getting a new engine with plenty of life? My father always told me not to get used cars with rebuilt engines, but some of the cars talk about rebuilds as if they're good things.

SB

Reply to
skybearer
Loading thread data ...

I agree with your father, rebuilding and installing an engine is a big task, lots of room for new problems to crop up (non engine related too), I had a tempo with over 300K on it with original engine and transmission, but it had 30 oil changes, so something with original engine and 120-150K serviced miles on it should be your preference, in my opinion.. .

Reply to
bungalow_steve

I look at it as a minus. A good car engine well maintained should go over

100,000 miles. If it does not, it may be because the previous owner did not take care of the engine and probably not the other parts of the car.

I have had 2 cars, both Datsuns that had just over that on them and nothing had been done to the engine or transmission other than standard maintaince. Just retired a 1991 Camry I bought new with 190,000 on it and the only engine work was the timing belt and a water pump. That was not a breakdown but just the required maintanience. I also bought a Dodge RAm 50 with about

130,000 on it and it now has 160,000 on it. The previous owner had only put a clutch in the 5 speed transmission. Some cars just seem to have problems. I had a 84 GM product that the timing gear went out at 40,000 and again about 90,000. When I bought the car a friend told me I would be replacing that gear about every 40,000. Friend has a Ford truck transmission and he cant get but about 40 to 50 thousand out of it before the transmission goes out. This seems to be about standard for that modle.
Reply to
Ralph Mowery

Whether a rebuilt engine is a plus or minus depends on the skill of the person doing the rebuilding and the quality of the parts used in the rebuild. Since there is no real way to determine the skill of the person who did the rebuild, IMO, buying a car with a rebuilt engine is a toss of the dice.

Reply to
Ray O

I agree with your father: IMO, a "rebuilt" is a definite minus in a used car with which one is otherwise unfamiliar.

Reply to
Derald

Two things - One, a rebuilt engine is a red flag at 97K Miles - If they didn't cook the old engine (ignored blown head gasket, etc.) I'll bet you that's closer to 150K - 200K miles if it needed one. It's very illegal, but people still clock (rollback) cars odometers regularly - that's what CARFAX is supposed to catch but doesn't always.

Two, it's only a plus if the engine work was done by a competent shop that you can go check out, and the rebuild has a warranty with it that is transferable to you - should give you 3/36 at the least. The quality of the work done and parts used could be all over the map.

If you can't check it out, a new engine alone is not a plus. You still want to have a mechanic check over the car before you buy.

-->--

Reply to
Bruce L. Bergman

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.