Like most people who have bought a new (only once), nearly new, or quite new car I revelled in its spiffy performance when I got it. Over time however you notice its performance atrophying and gradually it becomes less and less fun to drive until after a few years you can't wait to be rid of it.
I've noticed this with several cars over the years and I'm sure part of this experience is simple psychology but I'm sure that a significant proportion of this is a real and provable loss of performance too.
My question is, particularly as a bit of a "car noob", why does it happen and is there anything I can do about it?
I'm aware that to a certain extent things wear out, and as they wear you are going to lose some performance. However most engines these days will do 100,000 miles easily so I wouldn't expect to lose a lot of performance by the time I had done 30,000.
I'm also aware there are items like the exhaust that gradually clog up or are worn down and this could be a source of performance going down. If this is the source of the problem, is it worth replacing these kind of items and how much difference is it likely to make?
Any enlightenment greatly welcomed!
Darkheart
Edited by Pugugly on 24/07/2008 at 12:38
|
|
I think it's in your head, you get used to the power. If anything, a new car will become more lively as the engine beds in.
|
|
|
Proper engineering helps to keep the experience fresh.
Are you sure it isn't just you, Owen? We all get used to a certain level of performance or comfort in due course and I, for one, get bored easily...
|
|
Yes, I think the performance will improve, certainly up to 10,000 miles.
|
|
|
Has the economy improved (with loosening of the mechanicals) or worsened because you have started to make use of the potential? All part of the psychology of ownership I guess!
.......the exhaust that ...... worn down
I suggest that you slow down over the road humps ;)
pmh
Edited by pmh on 24/07/2008 at 12:32
|
A lot is psychological, you just get used to the performance. This is why some owners (especially of turbocharged cars) get ECU upgrades or tuning boxes, because they want more poke.
I know a couple of people that have had their cars 'chipped' and have now got used to the upgrade, and want more still ...
I used to regularly check the in-gear performance (40-60mph in 4th gear) of my old B5.5 Passat 130, and it was exactly the same at 62,000 miles when I sold it, as it was at 500 miles from new.
As the miles went on, the engine got quieter and smoother but no quicker, or slower.
|
Quite. Unless the car is very venerable indeed or has something wrong with it, provided everything is working correctly there shouldn't be much loss of performance over a highish mileage. But familiarity, boredom sometimes perhaps, can lead to a feeling that they aren't going as well as they used to. I have never ever owned a car whose maximum speed was what I wanted it to be. They have all been too slow.
Over the years, too, one sees more recent vehicles of the same class which seem to be (because they usually are) nippier and a bit more athletic, as well as being shinier and more fully equipped.
New models are launched to make us dissatisfied with the old ones. Eternally unsatisfied consumers are just what the growth ideology requires. And that, in general terms, is what we are: a bunch of bleating ovines, manipulated and corralled, who believe democracy is really democratic and that we have free choice.
|
My 24 year old supra still does 0-60 as specified by Toyota.
Other than abuse or neglect there is no reason for a car to loose performance over time.
As others have already said, it's more a case of adjusting to it over time. It's human nature to always be wanting more.
|
|
|
I see we are in good cheer this fine PM Lud ? I suspect it is your natural jollity that keeps you spry ! Some people reach a stage in life where they become unbendingly cynical about the human condition y'know !
( only pulling your chain ! )
;-)
|
|
Ive foudn with alot of older cars that ive bought, be they high mileage, aged or both, a good service, tune up and general recon of perished rubbers can make a car feel fresh, perky and tight like it did when new.
|
|
Indeed. They have to be functioning correctly. A 'tired' car can usually be restored to normal sprightliness. Unless of course it has a real fault.
|
I swim with the general tide of response here.
The best way to stay satisfied with the performance of your car is to use it when you need to, not as a matter of course.
I will add that perceived performance invariably improves after the car has been vacuumed out and the windows cleaned. Works every time.
|
|
Beat me to it Manatee. I was going to say my car goes better after I've washed it.
|
|
Manatee is right about only using the performance when you need to as well. In my pedal-to-the-metal days I knew only too well how slow my cars were. These days they sometimes surprise me with their briskness (not always though).
|
|
|
|
|
I have no doubt it is partly psychological, but we have all seen the Top Gear tests where they have put old cars on rolling roads, or taken them round a track, to measure how much horsepower and top speed capability they have lost over time.
Even though TG is a totally entertainment-only program and nothing should be taken as fact, I think their tests can be relied upon to show that old cars do tend to lose a lot of acceleration and top speed capability. I imagine this would be a gradual loss but I wonder at what age the loss begins on most cars.
|
|
I saw the episode you're thinking of pendulum. You would expect a neglected and abused 'supercar', carp expression, to be nasty, fragile and not its real self. You wouldn't expect the same thing of a well maintained highish-mileage Eurobox though.
|
>>>I have never ever owned a car whose maximum speed was what I wanted it to be. They have all been too slow.<<<
I remember reading an interview with BTCC ace Steve Soper back in the day, he said that even if you give a racing driver 1000BHP, after 5 laps he'll want 1200 horsepower ...
|
1000BHP after 5 laps he'll want 1200 horsepower ...
Once its high-speed stability had been cured with the short-tailed, upswept, naked-rumped body design, produced I believe by a team-owning Porsche dealership run by Ferdinand's daughter, the Porsche 917 was wrung out to give that sort of power. That was the real pinnacle of endurance racer design, alongside the Ferrari (I think) 512 but more successful. But it was always a dangerous beast and killed several drivers including the very gung-ho (he would boot anything however terrifying round a course, the longer and rougher the better) Pedro Rodriguez who I once watched, along with a couple of colleagues, wrestling with three yowling Gulf 917s in the rain at Brands Hatch.
|
I'd love to have seen those cars in action, they were the fantasy racers of my childhood, F1 just wasn't in the same league at the time :-)
Nearest I got was watching the Group B rally cars on the RAC in the 80s ... absolutely flipping terrifying, especially the 205T16
|
|
|
|
