Cars are a bit like kids -
To "do well" genes and care for kids by parents , quality manufacturer and care by owner.
|
It`s often forgotten that there are car drivers who can`t visualize the entire car - right down to hydrodynamic lubrication occurring in the plain crankshaft bearings - or for example - the entire engine -- rings working in bores - mental schematics of alternators and the entire body shell - with knowledge of every seam and what should or should not be attended to.
The above owner -- with motivation to intervene - as necessary in meeting each cars specific needs - can make a car last as long as he or she wants.
Contrast that with the low or none existent - commitment to effort, owner (nothing wrong with that - we all make life choices) reduced to passivity by being unable to know their cars needs and operating the controls as though it were a washing machine.
Any car can be made to last if it gets the interventions it needs.
My point is, that whatever the strengths or weaknesses of a car, regarding durability, It doesn`t have to be a passive approach to it`s care. It`s a `life choice` to neglect it and instead do something else with time - that could be spent learning and deploying that knowledge.
Some people will be unable to learn of course - but I`m referring to the large rump of the car owning population that can. But instead put 20hrs a week into howling at Big Brother - but not twenty minutes a year into wiping grease onto brake lines.
|
|
By the time a model has demonstrated that it can last 20 years, they stop making it.
|
|
|
|
But cars are not white goods while I may be persuaded to by one washing machine rather than another purely on the basis of longevity cars have to have some deeper appeal exude character and provide enjoyment rather than tedium.
I'd debate that, C.... that might be the view you take when buying a car, but I feel that the vast majority of car buyers do regard them as a "white good", to be bought and then disposed of after a few years with minimal upkeep to keep them going inbetween.
I'm one of the ones that put "practicality" above "character", btw! Hence I'd never buy a new MINI! ;-)
|
Can I take it from these responses that people would rather not have the information to hand?
Presumably so that next time the conversation comes up you lot can continue to come out with the worthless anecdotes no doubt....
Surely the required information must exist?
|
Basically we need details of all cars which have passed MOT in last 15-20 years.
But why would VOSA/DVLA hand such details over to us?
Without that data (or something very similar) we can't perform any analysis.
|
Basically we need details of all cars which have passed MOT in last 15-20 years. But why would VOSA/DVLA hand such details over to us? Without that data (or something very similar) we can't perform any analysis.
That data is in the public domain. That's the reason for the post.
It's slightly hidden away in an XLS translation of a PDF file that the BBC acquired from VOSA last month.
One of the fields is MOT passes per model.
I have crunched the numbers for a few marques for 2003-registered cars (the VOSA figures come from 2007). These show a consistent 90+% MOT'd figure for each marque at 4 years old -- much as you'd expect.
But I've only been able to find per-marque registration details, and then only back to 2003.
If we could get more detailed figures, and going back a lot further, it would be possible to script a bit of CGI to plot a graph showing % cars "alive" vs age.
It would give us the most accurate information available on the scrappage profile of the various models.
|
|
|
I'm sure this data must be available somewhere, ISTR a few years back reading a news article stating that the Mk3 Cavalier was the most depleted range (ie largest percentage of cars built have been scrapped). They must have had access to both sets of data to work that out.
|
|
Indeed -- but AE only ever released a few edited highlights to the best of my knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
I suppose it would be something nice to be able to browse... But when I buy an older car I tend to look at:
1. What my requirements are - such as my most recent pruchase had to be a small auto
2. Whats available
3. Mileage, condition, history...
Though there are some cars or engine I might avoid, on the whole its more about how tha car looks and whatever I can glean about its condition and history... The make of car and how many survive doesn't really come into it unless its on the basis that there may be more around if they last well, but that will also show up on the pages of Autotrader which would probably have similar percentages to the MOT stats.
|
Buy the best car in the best condition!
Not the newest plate, with the lowest mileage (currently displayed!) for the lowest price.........................
|
|
|
"Presumably so that next time the conversation comes up you lot can continue to come out with the worthless anecdotes no doubt...."
Worthless to you, Primeradriver. But interesting to others who have the ability to see shades of grey and not just black and white - and the empathy and intelligence to respect others opinions.
There are plenty of forums on the Usenet where rude, critical and sometimes disfunctional personalities seem to congregate - to slag each other off.
That`s why most forum member seem to prefer it here - despite the odd `bad apple`
|
Worthless to you Primeradriver. But interesting to others who have the ability to see shades of grey and not just black and white - and the empathy and intelligence to respect others opinions.
The problem comes when opinion is mixed with fact. If the fact that one car lasts longer than another is unimportant, then fine, but if it is to be mentioned then empirical data will always defeat observation.
But don't then arrogantly stress your opinion as fact when you are unwilling to help establish the facts in a more reliable manner.
It seems very odd how the people who are quite happy to state quite categorically that some cars fall to pieces early are often the same ones who are quick to dismiss longevity as unimportant when someone tries to establish the truth, and dismiss it as a meaningless statistic. If that is the case why opine in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
Can I take it from these responses that people would rather not have the information to hand?
I would love to see such a list. It's frustrating to see a raft of replies unconnected to the OP. Discard them.
|
The graph which primerdriver propses would, indeed, tell us what survives, however it will not tell us WHY certain models survive. Manufacture would be only one element of many, many variables.
It would prove nothing conclusively. But yes, it would be interesting.
|
The graph which primerdriver propses would indeed tell us what survives however it will not tell us WHY certain models survive. Manufacture would be only one element of many many variables. It would prove nothing conclusively. But yes it would be interesting.
Indeed so.
I personally am of the view that "longevity" means very little in any case -- it is how good a car is during its time that is the important factor.
However, there are a lot of people who seem to place a lot of faith in this crude method of evaluating a car.
If this method is to be used, it should be refined.
Looking around the roads tells us absolutely nothing, because it does not take into account initial sales, regional variances, or the subject's recognition of certain models.
Taking all these factors into account, a comment like "I see 20 C-reg VW Golfs around my estate" are essentially meaningless, because:
1) These cars may have been huge sellers in their early days -- in which case if there weren't a fair number of them there would be something wrong;
2) VW Golfs are instantly recognisable -- can anyone even remember what a 1980s Toyota Corolla looks like?
3) VW Golfs are well liked, and they are perceived as long-lasting -- the placebo effect.
Thus, the value in the comment is close to zero.
However, a comment like "100,000 C-reg VW Golfs were registered, and 5,000 of them still exist" is a far more valuable measure.
It is in no way infallible. It still doesn't tell us much. But it's worth more than a hundred people coming on here telling us that these cars run forever because of the above limitations.
My opinion is that there are a lot of prejudiced folk out there who like to think up reasons not to buy Japanese cars, and this is one of them. When they are presented with a method to bust their bubble, they don't like it. I want to bust that bubble, I make no secret of that fact.
|
>> 3) VW Golfs are well liked and they are perceived as long-lasting -- the placebo effect.
>>>>
Come again? Placebo effect?
You mean if you gave genuine VW Golfs to a sample of people, and vehicles that looked just like VW Golfs but weren't to another sample, but didn't tell them which was which, most of the people could not tell the difference?
|
"Sounds just like a Golf"
:o)
|
|
|
Come again? Placebo effect? You mean if you gave genuine VW Golfs to a sample of people and vehicles that looked just like VW Golfs but weren't to another sample but didn't tell them which was which most of the people could not tell the difference?
There will be a natural tendency for people to notice those cars on the road that reinforce their existing views.
|
SQ
There will be a natural tendency for people to notice those cars on the road that reinforce their existing views.
That's called prejudice. Nothing to do with the placebo effect.
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 01/02/2010 at 13:53
|
Yes it is prejudice.
And what is the effect of a placebo?
An outcome that is prejudiced by the suggestion of said outcome.
|
|
Come again? Placebo effect? You mean if you gave genuine VW Golfs to a sample of people and vehicles that looked just like VW Golfs but weren't to another sample but didn't tell them which was which most of the people could not tell the difference?
Maybe not so much placebo effect as self-fulfilling prophecy. If a particular model is perceived as having good longevity, then that will make it depreciate slower, so owners of that model will spend more money keeping them on the road towards the end of their life, so they stay around longer, so they get a reputation for longevity.
|
|
|
|
|
Car choice is a personal issue,i bought my car for functional purposes others do not.
I think Japanese cars are better built overall,but others look more easy on the eye.
|
|
If anybody is interested, here is the vosa link tinyurl.com/yehkgzr
|
Interesting document. A quick glance reveals most cars fail on these
Brake, lights, suspension etc.
The PDF is pain to do any proper analysis. We need in Excel format first :)
|
BBC did it for us.
As I say what I need is what models sold how many each year. Give me that and I will sort the rest.
|
Why does it matter how many were originally sold when all I want is one good example of my desired choice?
|
|
If it doesn't matter, then the whole question of which cars do/don't last also doesn't matter.
|
If I was looking for a modern classic 15+ years old to run on a classic policy I wouldn't consult a database, I'd view the car and buy the one in the best condition.
A 15 year old car could potentially be mint or on its last MOT certificate before the crusher, they'd both show up on your database...................
So, buy on condition :o)
|
A 15 year old car could potentially be mint or on its last MOT certificate before the crusher they'd both show up on your database................... So buy on condition :o)
True. But you wouldn't use the database to assess the merits of a particular car, only as a means of narrowing down the model it MIGHT be worth looking at.
|
True. But you wouldn't use the database to assess the merits of a particular car only as a means of narrowing down the model it MIGHT be worth looking at.
And what if you found all the results repulsive? You'd buy it anyway?
|
> And what if you found all the results repulsive? You'd buy it anyway?
So Dox, with that in mind, what use exactly is the thread about which cars don't deteriorate, or HJ's anecdotal remarks?
If you don't find the information useful you don't have to use it, but the fact that the debate exists, and is being used as a factor on this site demonstrates that it is an area that people take notice of.
|
Would this systematic approach really add anything?
A 10 year old car that's still worth 5 grand would be worth getting through the MoT. One that's worth £1000 might not. The reliability of the cars could be the same (each needs £500 of work to get it through) but the expensive one would live on.
there are a lot of prejudiced folk out there who like to think up reasons not to buy Japanese cars>>
Why do you care if people buy Japanese or not? I notice your username is Primeradriver by the way.
Speaking for myself, I'll buy a car I like. If it only needed a service every 100 years and did a million miles per gallon but was dull and ugly, I'd stay away. But good luck in proving whatever you want.
|
Why do you care if people buy Japanese or not? I notice your username is Primeradriver by the way.
My prejudices are not masked. If the results prove the opposite to my gut feelings, I will accept them with good grace. Will "the opposition" do the same?
As I have stated already, my aim is to dispel the old argument about "not seeing many of them on the road". It has always struck me as a completely specious comment for the reasons I have outlined.
I guess the real advantage of having something like this is so that the next time someone says "oh brand X rusts to powder after five years", then in a lot of cases we can say, "well actually you're talking out of your neck because 30% of them are still going strong" without fear of being shouted down by the usual ignorance.
This works both ways of course.
|
If the results prove the opposite to my gut feelings I will accept them with good grace. Will "the opposition" do the same?
There's really "opposition" to buying old Japanese cars? Is this an organised group or political breakaways?
I guess the real advantage of having something like this is so that the next time someone says "oh brand X rusts to powder after five years" then in a lot of cases we can say "well actually you're talking out of your neck because 30% of them are still going strong" without fear of being shouted down by the usual ignorance.
Not really, when a car gets older do you could longevity as just passing the MoT? What if all the window winders have failed, the heater only blows cold on one fan speed, the headliner keeps falling into your lap and the paint is flat? But as long as the exhaust is alright and there's no structural rust, your system would still class it as good for longevity?
|
1) These cars will eventually disappear. Law of averages.
2) Seeing a car drive past is a better way of noticing these problems?
|
1) These cars will eventually disappear. Law of averages.
Yes and your database marks them both the same, good and bad
2) Seeing a car drive past is a better way of noticing these problems?
Who buys cars that drive past them, view a car thats for sale and evaluate it, buy the best!
|
>> 2) Seeing a car drive past is a better way of noticing these problems? >> Who buys cars that drive past them view a car thats for sale and evaluate it buy the best!
That's fair comment, but this is the method people are using to make judgements on which cars last!
I take it from what you say that you also dismiss these judgements? If not then I hope you notice the hypocrisy of your position.
|
Further to this - what takes a car off the road? It is uneconomical to repair. Why? Expensive parts/servicing, retained value and damage.
So a Toyota MR2 mkI needs a cam-belt change and it is an engine-out job. A Focus is much easier. Equally a bird-strike with a Lexus might be expensive, but might write-off a 15-year-old Astra.
Finally the scrappage scheme: all those well-maintained, but financially-worthless cars suddenly were valued at £1000 and were scrapped while the scheme lasted. That works against the sub-£1000 cars.
So there's some skew in the data.
|
Well the scrappage scheme doesn't apply to the figures currently available -- although in the future yes this would be an issue.
Regarding the other comments, all salient points but there is no objective way of defining how these factors would skew the data. One must make a judgement call on them really, but like a lot of things it is a lot easier to make such a call when there is a greater quantity of raw data in front of you.
I think it is probably fair to say that when it comes to mainstream cars, the differences are not significant enough between models to make a massive difference.
|
"not seeing many of them on the road".
Although we discuss here cars in UK only, a vast majority of Suzuki, Nissan, Toyota are running in Asian and African continents for 15-20 years!
15-yr old Mercs are plying as taxis in several not so rich countries around the world.
A lot of cars which sell in UK (or in Europe) has no market outside the continent! The vice versa is also true to some extent (eg. Tata Nano).
In UK, many cars are decommissioned as owners get bored of them or repairing them is no longer economic.
While on developing world, a car is run till it literally falls apart.
Now that's the true measurement of longevity.
|
|
RE the 7 year old Citroëns become reliable topic, I've owned many many Citroëns over the years (only oleopneumatic suspended ones) I've found some can be awful which quickly end up in the scrapyard and what's left are usually the "good" ones. Towards the end of the production run they become more reliable as the bugs are ironed out. XMs are dirt cheap because of their (well earned) reputation but late ones are great. Xantia's were more reliable than Mondeos of the day because they were more likely to be privately owned and therefore looked after.
|
Steve, I don't doubt what you say, but my comment more related so some magical property of French cars that allowed a car that had spent the first few years as a lemon to suddenly become a peach when it gets older.
Forgive me if I don't buy this at all. The good ones will mostly have always been good, and the bad ones will mostly continue to give their owners a headache -- surely that's more logical?
|
|
Yes PD - I agree, I can't see a lemon, er, changing its pips, if you can excuse my mixing of metaphors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
