You'd think so, but then things like modern engines survive far higher mileages than the simple ones fitted to older cars. And break down far less often.
Perhaps you don't remember, but BMC had a nice little earner supplying gold seal re-con engines for their cars. Short of a disaster, most engines live as long as the car these days.
It's quite a common design these days.
Tends to be because most garages don't have people trained in electrics/electronics. Or even with much in the way of training at all.
Quite understandable as the customer is just used to paying whatever they ask for.
But then cars are so much cheaper these days used.
My first car cost me about half a years average pay. Was 9 years old and had a clapped engine and tyres. One in better condition would have cost more.
For a lot less than half a year's average pay these days you'd have no problems finding a very decent car.
By contrast, my first minivan, in 1971, cost about a month's pay. I ran it for two years and had to rebuild the gearbox, replace the front swivel ball joints, and replace the steering rack. As well as routine things like tyres, oil, brakes (single leading-shoe drums - horrible).
Ultimately I removed the good headlight bulbs, started it, removed the good battery and replaced it with a dud one; and drove it to a scrap dealer who gave me £15 for it (there may have been some petrol in the tank). A friend later saw it being driven about by a pikey with his wife and kids on board - and the reason I took it to a scrap dealer was because by then it was really unsafe (the rear wheel bearings had collapsed and made horrible squeaking sounds!).
More that older car diesels were so pedestrian you couldn't afford the power losses.
They also run better and more consistently during that time, largely thanks to the electronics that everyone blames. As Dave says elswehere in this thread, a lot of the problem is that lots of mechanics have little experience or training with electronics.
Longer, as a rule.
And the similar DSG is, in my experience (and that of my local independent VW specialist) generally reliable if maintained. I had one from 19K miles to 120k miles, with a good amount of that mileage on West Midlands motorways and urban areas in rush hour, despite all the early scare stores about them self-destructing at 60k.
Yes. My first car was bought some 10 years earlier. The advent of the MiniVan at under half the cost of a previous small car revolutionised the banger market. I had several
I'm surprised you weren't proficient at replacing Mini wheel bearings. ;-) And of course the rear subframe - if there was anything left to fix it to.
Twas ever thus. As you may know, I've had a Rover SD1 EFI for something like 30 years. When new, only certain Rover dealers were 'trained' to fault find it. I got a good deal, as it wasn't running too well, at 3 years old. And fists of receipts from an approved main dealer who'd tried to sort it (Henley's Golders Green).
I bought a BL workshop manual and read up about the EFI. Including about all the special test equipment BL sold for it, and implied was essential. Which seemed to me just to be flashing LEDs for those who couldn't use an AVO meter.
Just about the entire injection system had been replaced. ECU, AFM, injectors and various sensors. And the camshaft. Mostly paid for by the previous owner.
The symptoms were that of a weak mixture. And so it was - a fuel pressure/delivery problem. One of the first things you'd look at with those symptoms on a carb car.
well it was possible as all the fire engines of that era had 10litre perkings diesels and autoboxes
-Thinking back, I had replaced the front wheel bearings, but by the time the rear bearings had failed I decided I wanted a (slightly) newer car. I also had a bit more money.
Indeed, but also the size to fit a hefty autobox. Harder in a FWD hatchback :-)
In about 1998/1999, my other half had a 1996 Mini with single-point EFI. It broke down on her, so got towed home, with the recovery co saying it needed diagnostics.
When I got home, I found the same LT connection on the coil loose that had failed on me 10 years earlier in a points-and-carb Mini.
ECUs aren't magic, and they rarely fail. Electronics have made cars immensely more efficient and reliable.
Diesels have a tiny power band. Like 2k rpm to 4k rpm, on a good day. This is why you now have gearboxes with 8 or 9 ratios.
That's a much smaller band of usable power than a modern turbo petrol, which will get away with a fewer number of ratios.
Will your PDK or Porsche Doppelkupplung mean that your car will eventualy wear out two clutches which needs to be replaced?
Electronics in cars was supposed to be cheaper than mechanics. Think of the machining cost of a carburettor!
A while back (1984?) I had a Cavalier SRi where the ECU developed an intermittent fault. From cold it would run normally, but if started when warm it would operate in "cold-start" mode until switched off and left overnight to cool down. I proved that when warm the ECU was ignoring the signal from the incoming air temperature sensor, and the fault was somewhere inside the box containing the ECU.
The electronics for this must be as complicated as a pocket calculator so the expected price as a spare would be £5, but in reality it cost about £400.
And many buses. Rather more than 20 years ago.
Not that where the torque is developed matters much to an auto. Like most gearboxes, it's the maximum torque that matters.
;-) Suppose so. But hopefully no sooner than a epicyclic auto would wear out its clutches.
But at least the clutches can't be abused in the same way as a manual box one can be. So easier to spec them for a given life.
Extra Lower gear is to help it pull away fully laden with a trailer. It's only a little "downsized" engine but has the power of something 2x the size so needs a bit of help getting off the line. Extra "double" overdrives are to reduce engine speed for better mpg. So you really only have a 5 speed + low + double overdrive. Needs more stirring than a manual 4 speed + overdrive or a 3 speed auto
2K to 4K range on an engine with a 4.5K rpm peak speed is very good. 44% of the rev range is usable.
Now take a typical normally aspirated SI engine. Peak power is at 6k rpm, peak torque 4k rpm, redline 6.5k rpm. 2.5k rpm range is 38% of total range.
So you have a 6 speed Corvette C5, 400bhp 6k rpm, peak torque 4.4K rpm. Just 32% usable range. As it has a "double overdrive" in 6th at 70 mph it's way outside the usable range at 1.55K rpm.
You should never look at the numbers. What counts is the number/peak.
Don't need a "modern" SI turbo. 1988 Nissan CA18DET, redline 7.2K rpm, peak power 6.4K rpm, peak torque 3k rpm. Usable range 58%, 65mph >
140mph in top (not an overdrive, 140mph = 6.4K rpm), 4th 55 mph > 133 mph, 3rd 42mph > 100 mph, 2nd 27.7 mph > 66 mph and 1st 16mph > 38 mph. With an overdrive it would be outside its "usable" range at 65-70mph.The issue with turbos for many is the lack of engine "lugging" torque and the Jekyll and Hyde nature of the engine. Just 500 rpm below peak torque they drive like a N/A engine in need of a tune up. This causes much hardship as one has to think about stirring the gears. Better get an auto which won't let one use "lugging" torque to accelerate, press the go pedal and its down though the gears.
What most people really want is an electric motor but they just don't know it yet. Peak torque from ZERO all the way to peak power and then peak power all the way to the redline. 100% usable range, no need for gears as it will wheelspin off the line and reach top speed all in one gear.
The only ECU failure I've had was the ABS ECU on my last car (a Leon). The actual failure was a pressure sensor, but that was built into the ECU. Original cost £1500 :-O. Thankfully VAG, shamed by the number of failures of this bit of kit, did an exchnage programme and slashed the cost. I think it came out at about £500. The same ECU was used by Ford/Mazda and BMW, IIRC.
This was certainly the problem with early auto diesels. The very low output ones car used before turbos arrived. The auto was made for the wider power band of a petrol engine, so didn't have enough gears.
But most petrol engines ain't turbos.
Are you implying the torque goes from near zero to peak in a few hundred rpm? Be a very odd road engine indeed that did that.
Complete bollocks, as they say. You don't need peak torque on a powerful vehicle to cruise at 70 mph. All you need is enough torque to maintain that speed. My car has a peak RPM over 7000, but cruises at under 2000 rpm at 70 in top gear.
If you had 'peak BHP' over a wide RPM band, it means the torque is falling away in proportion to the RPM.
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.