|
There are cars that are very good in various ways, but there can't be a perfect car because people want different things from cars, and actually different things at different times...
|
|
I'd go even further than Lud - even for a specific purpose or tastes, you can only have the best compromise. There was a manufacturer whose advertising strap was "Built without compromise" which if it were true would have made them very bad cars. The trade-offs are everywhere - speed v economy, strength v weight, space v size for example.
|
|
but I'm not talking about how a car looks or goes. I'm talking about making each and every component work perfectly. A car could be as ugly as sin but if a maker was to ensure each and every part worked and did what it was supposed to, you'd have the perfect car, i.e a vehicle for transporting people and goods. My point was lots of recalls on various cars appear to be for very simple components or for things that have been around in design terms for decades and yet they still get get it wrong. In a way its worrying that a new car can have millions spent on it in the design and testing stages and yet within months of being sold to the masses, bits are failing, dropping off and breaking and the owners appear to be the final guinea pigs.
|
One of the things I like about my 15 year old Mercedes W124 is that you get the feeling someone spent a lot of time looking at every possible detail and trying to figure out a way of doing it better or nicer.
Apart from the electrically operated arms that present you the seat belt, how else can you explain extravagances like a laminated rear screen, pneumatically operated seat tipping and that famous jumping wiper blade?
The mulitlink rear suspension was revolutionary when it appeared, the bonnet is counterbalanced instead of using gas struts and you can open it without getting your hands dirty. There is a retractable sunblind behind the rear view mirror and the A pillars send water over the roof instead of onto the side windows. I could go on but you would get bored.
Not perfect, but thoughtful and thorough engineering.
|
|
|
Its not just recalls, iqn, its also what people perceive as faults... to one person a small sqeak in the suspension would be a fault whilst others would just turn up the radio...
No, I don't think there will ever be a perfect car!
|
I think the idea of perfection changes as the car ages, too. A new car should perform well, be smooth, refined, safe etc. An older car should have simple, durable engineering which is easy and cheap to fix. The two ideals are often mutually exclusive.
When new, electronic gadgets, sophisticated fuel injection, dual mass flywheels and the like make for a far superior driving experience than could have been dreamed of even 20 years ago, particularly in the diesel world. Yet, when a car ages, these fantastic pieces of technology which make modern cars so good to drive can quickly become liabilities in terms of servicing and repair costs, and even send an otherwise healthy car to the crusher prematurely.
|
|
|
|
That is always a problem to manufacturers;when a vehicle goes to the dealer to have a fault fixed,there is usually added"while you have it could you look at/fix this,that and the other".
|
|
|
|
the perfect car, i.e a vehicle for transporting people and goods
Oh for heaven's sake iqn, I thought you were talking about cars, not 'passenger-carrying devices'. Those are a different kettle of fish. Another bailiwick. A whole different pinkfluffydicing ball of wax, knowImean?
My perfect car - personal runabout you understand - would be a lightweight carburetted 1.5 litre V12 front-engined beam-axle Ferrari barchetta from the early fifties. Pity there are so few of those, and that they are worth millions and I am a pauper, but there it is.
|
|
I'll google it right now Lud.
|
|
|
Back along I had several perfect cars. Various makes and models but all perfect nonetheless. They autoreplaced themselves with a new model every March, used free petrol and cost nothing to insure or maintain. You could drive the doorhandles off them every day without fear of a big bill. No speed cameras to catch them and even the tax burden on them was negligible.
'80s company cars were great........
;-)
|
There is no such thing as "perfect"
reliability wise
There has never been a man made thing that has not had a failure. Even in those things where failure is unnaceptable.
Desirability or ergenomics wise
Nor has man made anything thats perfect for everyone in this respect because we are all different.
|
Surely the Lexus LS400 comes pretty close on the ground of reliability.
Read, for instance, HJ's Car-by-Car summary on the original model.
|
I think the Lexus was technically perfect, or very close to it. It had one of the smoothest engines ever made, and was quick, quiet, reliable, good to drive, beautifully built, fully loaded with toys, comfortable, long lasting etc etc. It was (and still is) by any measure, a brilliant car.
What the Lexus definitively proved was that British car buyers value a badge above all this and will actually pay more for an inferior product to get one.
Edited by DP on 29/04/2009 at 01:31
|
Quality is often best defined by whether it does the job.
I've owned several perfect cars, in that they did exactly what I purchased them to do. Included a BMW330d estate, a Minivan, a Mitsubishi Shogun and a Toyota Landcruiser. None of them were defect-free however.
Which car would I buy if money and practicality weren't important - a 1920s Bugatti. Was/is one perfect - depends entirely on what I think the ownership experience is all about!
|
I`ve always remembered a Rolls that one of my mates had a few years back. It was rusting underneath and yet a Peugeot 205 of the same age wasn`t.
|
There are cars that have no known faults outside of wear and tear items. My sister had me spend several weeks researching cars that were both different from the norm and which didnt have known weaknesses.
The car that we ended up at was the Suzuki GV1600 and that is what she has today.
She also loves it and wont part with it. And everything works as good as the day it was new 9 years ago. A check on the CBC shows there are very few issues to be expected and that is indeed the case.
If it matters to you, yes cars like this DO exist, but most people have much lower expectations.
Incidentally, my fiancees parents have a Toyota Corolla 1.6 on a K plate that they have had since it was new. It has never had anything other than service items in 16 years.
Its enough to make my customer with a VW choke on her cornfalkes!!
|
|
Its a bit of "luck of the draw", though, Stu... they might not have had problems with that model but others might have... there may be a perfect car, though I'm not convinced!
|
The perfect car is
100% of all production is 100% fault free for 100% of its design life time.
IS flawless in design execution and ergonomics for 100% of the buying population.
does not exist.
|
The car that we ended up at was the Suzuki GV1600 and that is what she has today. She also loves it and wont part with it. And everything works as good as the day it was new 9 years ago. A check on the CBC shows there are very few issues to be expected and that is indeed the case.
A pic taken from a recent discussion on another forum where an MOT tester failed a 53 plate Suzuki for rot near to an anti roll bar
tinyurl.com/cc33wt
Its enough to make my customer with a VW choke on her cornfalkes!!
Non of my VWs have had rot like this at twice its age
Edited by Dox on 29/04/2009 at 10:55
|
Problem is, in 2009 the majority expect the moon on a stick.
Perfect cars (in most peoples eyes) now include the ultimate luxuries.
Its like saying my toaster has mood lighting and a DAB / clock radio built in. It was the best toaster i ever had but it doesn't quite toast the left hand side as well as the right and unfortunately the heating element failed after 2 years. Luckily i had my old toaster in the loft which i've had for 10 years.
|
So reading these posts, the general view is to have the most basic car model (no toys) so that less goes wrong.
However most people want a car with all of the toys when buying new.
Two conflicting desires.
|
As I said before. Gadgets and experience improving technology are great when new and under warranty. Simplicity is good when old and maintained on a budget.
Most modern cars will be truly terrifying to own as they age.
|
>>Most modern cars will be truly terrifying to own as they age.<<
Quite agree there, if I wanted a car to last my lifetime, id be looking for a well maintained 20-25 year old Volvo, not anything modern with anything remotely electrical.
|
However most people want a car with all of the toys when buying new.
:-)
Can i correct that to "The Marketing/Advertising people have persuaded most people that they want a car with all of the toys when buying new"
There are certain extras that do make life safer but most of it is just "comfort" buying....
Rather like all the electrical goods we have lying around the house that the same people have persuaded us we need!
|
So reading these posts the general view is to have the most basic car model (no toys) so that less goes wrong. However most people want a car with all of the toys when buying new. Two conflicting desires.
No - far from it.
Buying new, my definition of quality might include wanting the toys and I might only care that it doesn't break down in the two years I own it.
If I'm buying with the intention of keeping the car for 10 years, I might have a different view on what quality means.
|
VWs may not rot, but such is the plethora of electrical gremlins on the MK4, you would write the car off financially anyway. My customer cannot wait to get shot of hers, its turned out to be even worse than her MK3 and that was
Incidentally, my sisters car has no rust whatsoever. I wonder if that is indicative of off-roading? My sisters car has always been a town car. Rust is a paint issue which is something you can easily prevent and see it happening, whereas mechanical and electrical issues just 'happen'.
Thanks for the info on that though as my sister is going to Austrailia for a year in June and will be parking her car up at my house, so I will do a thorough job with the waxoyl while she is away!
|
VWs may not rot, but such is the plethora of electrical gremlins on the MK4, you would write the car off financially anyway
Stu,
Sorry, but this is not borne out by my VW tech friend who fixes them.
The most expensive "common fault" is the DMF on diesels which can and does fail (sometimes catastrophically and take the gearbox with it). Otherwise, it's just bits. Climatronic (if fitted) can be troublesome), MAF sensors don't go the distance (£70 for genuine item, and 5 minutes work), the odd coked up turbo on mollycoddled TDIs (can be rebuilt) the odd instrument panel failure (can be rebuilt), electric window regulators, heated seats if fitted. Nothing there which can write the car off, apart from maybe DMF/gearbox at mega mileage.
There will always be other issues with other cars, but he assures me that's the list of inherent / common problems. Contrast that with many other cars on the road, and it's pretty good in my book.
My biggest gripe is the standard of assembly inside. Too many creaks and squeaks. Otherwise it seems a thoroughly decent, well engineered bit of kit.
|
>>My biggest gripe is the standard of assembly inside. Too many creaks and squeaks. Otherwise it seems a thoroughly decent, well engineered bit of kit.>>
My 1.6 petrol Bora is nine-and-a-half years old - it has no interior squeaks or rattles, even the driver's seat shows little or no sign of wear and tear and the paintwork still gleams.
|
dp, what was the problem with DMF ?
Did the DMF drop off and hit the gearbox ?
and, sorry to sound thick, what is a DMF ?
|
Dual mass flywheel. He's seen a couple which have broken up at high engine speeds and had bits go through the bellhousing.
|
ahh ok thanks DP.
Apart from VAG cars, does anyone else use DMF ?
|
does anyone else use DMF ?
Oh yes. Almost all (if not all) current diesels have a DMF, and an increasing number of petrols too.
Most do high mileages without trouble. I think the eyebrows are raised because flywheel replacement was almost unheard of until these were introduced. Now it's more common.
|
Sorry Stu but we have had a Golf since 1994 and has only had replacement rear silencer, new front discs, cam belt and service items. Its predecessor performed in a similar manner between 1984 and 1999. Actually it needed a whole exhaust system.
alfalfa
|
>>Sorry Stu but we have had a Golf since 1994 and has only had replacement rear silencer, new front discs, cam belt and service items. Its predecessor performed in a similar manner between 1984 and 1999. Actually it needed a whole exhaust system<<
I dont really care what experiences other people have had, it makes no difference to someone who has a dog of an example, infact two in a row. She had a Colour Concept MK3 and it was great and she had a MK2 which she also loved and it was these cars that were the basis of her current purchases.
Regardless of the positive experiences other people might have, for whatever reason my customer has had quite the opposite and admitted it had reduced her to tears on more than one occasion looking at the hard earned money that didnt seem to buy a car any more reliable than before it was spent.
Personally, I dont think she has bought the best examples and I commened her for sticking with a brand when clearly its not working out for her - she has certainly given VW a chance, 20 years worth infact. She actually asked if my sister would be interested in selling her the Suzuki.
Her current problem is the engine management light coming on and throwing the car into some sort of 'limp mode' but then the car isnt showing any fault codes, so it goes in, they clear the light then a few days later its back. Nobody seems to be able to tell her whats causing it and its now been in every week for the last two months, to both a specialist and main dealer.
|
>>It had one of the smoothest engines ever made>>
I went on the launch of the first LS400 in 1989 and several times over the course of the day thought that the engine needed re-starting...:-)
Toyota engineers' attention to detail was quite staggering.
|
>>Most modern cars will be truly terrifying to own as they age.
Lots of people said that when electronic fuel injection became standard fitment in the early 1990s.
Lots of people said that about ABS, closed circuit crankcase ventilation, hydraulic tappets, cam belts, etc, etc.
They were wrong then.
I think that, teething problems aside, cars won't be any better or worse as they age, and in general, electronic control units are among the most reliable parts on most cars.
So, I think the naysayers are still wrong now.
Yes, currently, there are problems with common rail, DMF, and DPF. They *will* be ironed out.
|
N_C
Ordinarily, I would agree with you, but things have changed since the examples you list. We now have components which are electronically coded to the car (or vice versa) which cannot simply be swapped out by someone handy with the spanners and with access to a breakers yard / donor car, which is often how cheap cars get repaired today.
You need expensive professional labour, with expensive special tools and expensive special software, not to mention the high cost of the parts themselves (this will probably fall, admittedly as recon/breakers supplies increase). Even so, and using a breaker, you would be lucky to change a common rail injection pump on say an 8 yr old Ford/Vauxhall/Peugeot type car for less than the value of the car itself. I'm not confident this will change drastically.
I want to agree with you, but I'm unconvinced.
Cheers
DP
Edited by DP on 29/04/2009 at 12:52
|
>>I want to agree with you, but I'm unconvinced.
When I was a nipper, it was common, if not quite routine, for diesel injection equipment to need regular maintenance. Some injector pumps had severe problems and never lasted long in service, and injectors needed new nozzles all too quickly.
Fast forward into the 80s and 90s, and injector pumps and injectors had become much more reliable, to the point where you were considered quite unlucky if an injector pump (especailly a decent Bosch one) failed.
So, yes, we aren't yet at the point where common rail has reached that level of developmental maturity, but, it won't be far away. Incremental advances in filter design - in particular, maintaining system cleanliness during filter changes will go a long way towards reducing the number of high pressure pumps which fail.
I agree about the coding issue, but, the need to swap these units is not great - nowhere near as common as the doom-mongers might predict.
Over the past 10 years or so, diesel engine technology and performance has seen a step change. Making all this reliable will lag a little - it's inevitable.
|
I remember sitting watching the glass of water on the inlet manifold trick on TG with my jaw on the floor. 6000 RPM and not a drop spilled. They tried it on a BMW straight six and the glass wouldn't even stay put. Amazing!
|
Since 'perfection', like scientific fact or truth, is most often a function of time - the answer must be no.
However, I've heard many people say they've found the perfect car for themselves - so I guess, empirically, perfection has & will continue to be achieved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
