Wow, 13,000 miles and nary a problem yet? That's amazing! You'll have to accept anecdotal evidence (shouldn't be a problem since you freely offer the same), but I see virtually every Focus nickel and dime their customers pretty badly, and a good number cause enough expensive problems to total the car (as they lose value very quickly that isn't too hard). It's tough to sell anything as their customers don't spend any money anyway. As I said in an earlier post, I think the Focus is actually a bit better in reliability and cost of ownership than most other Ford products, but that isn't saying much.
Some of my friends would add to your comment that owning them sucks too ;>)
As I have said, I have owned two Passats, both really good cars. My friends have gotten some lemons. They cant seem to make either a good, or a poor, product consistently.
I applaud your friends' thoughts! The problem is, I've never met anyone who didn't think their VW/Audi was the greatest thing ever or at minimum a good solid car that was perfect for their needs. I guess they are the perfect cars to drive into the ground while never fixing anything.
Indeed, they make unreliable vehicles! The 2009 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study shows them second from last! Only Suzuki is making worse. Not sure how Land Rover finally got out of last place this year...
The only thing I'm failing at is responding to a premier 'too much time on his hands' kinda troll. Firstly, prove me wrong about Toyota owners taking care of their cars more thoroughly compared to most other makes' owners, then explain how your contention, (though not strictly true) "any car will easily run to 250,000 miles if given the proper preventive maintenance" refutes my last post, and finally explain how the makes/models I've mentioned in the past as being more trouble prone RE: major expenditures is flawed. How many transmission overhauls are acceptable within the first 100k miles, Ford and Chrysler? LOL
"Maintenance" doesn't include major component overhaul, it simply encompasses fluid changes, wear parts replacement such as brake pads, and designed adjustments where applicable. I can't imagine anyone thinking that maintenance includes trans or engine overhaul in this era. The definition has changed significantly since the days of the horseless carriage. I can't help but also mention that I wrote the above paragraph to ask MyCunt how what he wrote refuted my statement that he responded to. Again, a trans overhaul isn't maintenance. Again, I'll take the worst Toyota over the best Ford in a durability competition.
Toyota has had some auto trans problems, usually concentrated around new design rollout, but they have been very minor statistically. People seem to think I'm a Toyota apologist. Whatever, I see them all the time and know what they can do. Frankly, I would me much better off monetarily if they did fail more often. Why would I want my bread and butter repair line to be infallible? There's a difference between being a Toyota fanboy and offering sound purchase and repair advice. I try to adhere to the latter philosophy here on usenet and to friends/family. If they don't want to listen or agree, so be it. Before I knew anything about cars mechanically (and was too young to buy a car anyway) I used to think I'd buy 'Murican just for the sake of the country. Now I buy whatever I want because I can gix it if necessary, and advise others to buy what I think is best for their needs. Given that lowest overall cost of ownership rates highest on most people's needs lists, usually it is a Japanese company's product that I recommend, and usually the product is made in 'Murica, employing 'Muricans.
Exactly. Most every manual is fairly durable. Here's a "surprise" honest statement, though I've said it before and other lines have suffered the identical fate: The E250 MT, notably on Rav4s from 96-00, would routinely wear out it's 5th synchronizer, often under 100,000 miles. I don't consider that acceptable.
Good thing you said "almost", your statement was almost ludicrous :-) With regular maintenance, as defined above, yes, any model that Toyota puts out today or in the last 15+ years will easily surpass 250k - with very high statistical positive result. There will be less lemons in any sample compared to the poorer built and QCed domestic products out there.
That is exactly what happens in a lot of cases. See it all the time.
Agreed. It is especially cost effective to do the repairs oneself if one is adept at such. Even if you consider having a properly equipped and trained shop that charges what they're worth to fix these issues before they stack up (and possibly pass on the minor stuff like broken interior trim, an inop right rear window motor, etc), the cost to keep a car is lower than buying new even by the time the average car has multiple serious issues stacked up. Now that same owner, going to a butcher shop, bad dealership, or typical tire chain theifmart, is not going to realize much in the way of long term savings. I kinda think that the same people who let themselves get boned at bad shops for a long time are the same people that regularly turn into the disposable car types.
As cars and design practices continue to evolve, the problem with that concept is that parts are being stocked for shorter periods of time. If you were to tell someone to buy a used 2002 XYZ now and keep it forever, and he has the unlucky misfortune to suffer a widgetmajoogle breakdown in 2012, he may discover that it isn't available used or new at that time. I see this happening more and more (especially Ford, they are far and away the worst at dropping replacement parts within 8 years -- even emissions related parts!), along with the ideal of making smaller sub components unavailable, preferring to offer diagnostic procedures and parts only as complete assemblies. If anything, I'd suggest that someone following your logic buy the most popular car on the road (that isn't a Ford) and then hope for the best. Reasonably, (and I'm sure you aren't being absolute regarding "forever") keeping a car for as long as is financially sound, eliminating new car purchases, and only buying another used car when the first becomes too expensive to repair is very sound financial advice.
Thanks, I'll look into that, practical limitations of the concept aside :-)
Very interesting Mike...How much would you take for that 63 1/2 Mustang? Must be very, very rare as production on the Mustang did not start until March of 1964. Hmmmm!!!
I'll assume that your comment was smiley based. If not, personally I'm tired of his lies and bullshit and can't always let them go. It never changes with this guy. How do you really know he's 83? Forgetting and lying are two different things. Again, this response is only in case you didn't intend to smiley your post :-)
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.