The topic seems to have skipped a rather large point, reduction in energy consumption.
Actually, it was mentioned a page or two back, by Johnnypenso I think. And naturally, my post above re: fuel consumption was focusing on the same thing.
Cars are becoming more efficient in fuel, but their longevity seems to be ever decreasing! It boarders on false economy.
(Apologies for the long-ish post to follow...)
This isn't
strictly true. The main issue is a cultural one I think, rather than a longevity issue. We're in a consuming, rather than a conserving culture.
I read recently in an interview (I can't remember where, but I'll try and find it - was a fairly recent magazine I think) that a modern car is mechanically capable of quite easily lasting half a million miles before major components (engine, gearbox etc) require rebuilding or replacing. Even clutches last yonks these days, and oil change intervals are going up all the time because engines are being built to more exacting specifications, controlled more precisely with electronics, and the chemical composition of synthetic oils has improved.
When I first started looking at cars 11-12 years ago, cars with 100k miles on actually weren't that frequent. Today they're everywhere - partly because some cars from the 80s-90s are
already lasting longer than their 60s-70s counterparts. Give it 10, 20 years, and I bet we'll see a hell of a lot of 00s-10s cars with 200k miles on and think very little of it.
But this is where the consuming culture comes in.
Whether this is actually the case or not, people
seem to treat cars with less respect than they used to. They're more disposable. Despite lasting longer, people get rid of them earlier - people think cars are over the hill at 60k miles, which isn't the case. And because they change hands a lot, the price drops fast. And because the price drops fast, they get picked up by people who can't afford or can't be arsed maintaining them properly (witness the number of supposedly reliable yet pretty shonky 1990s BMWs knocking around), then they break, and then people get the impression modern cars don't last.
Suggesting that old cars are better could be a perception issue. They didn't do as many miles when new (my Beetle is on 124k (if the odo is correct) after almost 40 years. My old Rover had done nearly that in 11 years - and for its age, the Rover had average mileage) and it doesn't take into account just how many have succumbed to mechanical maladies or rust. There might be craploads of old Beetles around still, but I wonder what proportion of the original
21 million is left... I'd be surprised if it's more than 1/4. I'd
not be surprised if it's not even 1/10.
A good example of how modern cars
can last can actually be seen in the U.S. Something undoubtedly modern, yet good on fuel like a Prius, is happy to do 300,000 miles with no major work, provided it gets maintained well. And in the U.S, people tend to be fairly fastidious over stuff like that - changing oil well within the recommended intervals etc.
In other words, buying a modern, fuel-efficient car is only a false economy if you intend to keep it for only a few years.
TL;DR - New cars should last far longer than older ones have. We just need to treat them more like cars and less like last year's cellphone.
evil
thanks i appreciate it!
👍 And raises a good point: you can't expect everyone to get into a small FWD hatchback, because for some families that's just unpractical (it can be me, my parents and two large dogs sharing a car for example 
) then it's going to affect a huge amount of people.
