Decade of Worst Made Vehicles

[southgabimmer]

Just get a 1995 e34 touring or a new 2013 328i

[Threehz]

No one in the 80,s and early 90,s didn't have internet to complain about car problems on. This is the reason cars in 99 have less reports then cars from 2000 and up.

I think you missed that part.

I didn't compare any vehicles from the 80's, and you might have had a point if people weren't still driving those vehicles from the 90's. Not to mention, by 99 the internet was completely mainstream. I don't think that is a the most valid point though because look at us, 99% of the vehicles on this forum are from 83 to 91 and we're all constantly talking about them on the internet. Another aspect is that one place I referenced my data was from forums where you can find ample discussion of every age of vehicle.

You remember all the Toyota recalls over this last decade? Have you all heard about the Ford & Mazda recalls that just happened?

While I was just focusing on Toyota and Honda, it appears that everyone is in the game as well (I never doubted Ford made shit products though, sorry).

There was mention of Hyundai and GM making improvements. I have no doubt that since the company's introduction into the US market, Hyundai has come a long way in terms of quality of reliability. My mother drives a 2004 Hyundai Elantra that has given us a host of problems since we bought it new and it's just barely at 40,000 miles (and well-maintained). I've heard the same of all Hyundais during that era.. I have no clue about newest Hyundai's however.

The same applies to GM vehicles, I don't know whether their new vehicles are better-made because it hasn't been long enough. I do have faith in them though.

The race to add more and more technology in vehicles in my opinion is a huge damper on automaker's ability to make quality products. I grew up around electronics, my dad taught me to build a computer at age 3, and I've always been pretty familiar with all the amazing things electronics are capable of, as well as their many downsides.

If you think about an E30, and think about all the different areas that will cause a problem, there are many. When you have a rough idle, you methodically start checking things such as vacuum hoses, ICV, CPS, etc.. All in all there are a huge number of small items that CAN fail and cause a problem.

The electronic systems in modern vehicles present as many places to fail as the sum of probably ten E30's. Adding software into the equation multiples that number. When these systems control 90% of vehicle function it becomes a scary world. I'll take a gear over a wire any day.

These types of problems have already shown up even on vehicles less dependent on electronics. The reason that thousands of automatic transmissions failed on the 2001 to 2003 RAV4s is due to a ECU with slightly bad programming. People ran into $1000 to $3000 transmission and another $1000 to $1600 cost for the dealer to replace the ECU. Toyota ignored the issue until around 2010 I believe.

Competition and federal regulations are the main driving forces behind this though, not to mention demand for vehicles full of technology (I'll never understand this).

[Jon325i]

A lot of good points being brought up here....here's my take on it.

For the most part, today's cars are quite good. There are exceptions to this of course, but vehicles made today are better than those made 10-20 years ago. Safety, efficiency, emissions....all have improved vastly. Where I think you see a lot of the "issues" with new cars stems from neglectful owners. People simply don't take care of their cars cause they don't know how or don't have the time. I'm sure we've seen several examples of newer cars just being driven into the ground....squeaky brakes, front wheels coated black with brake dust, dirty exterior, etc. There's a good chance these are lease cars where the 'owner' doesn't care about it since at the end of 3 years he/she is returning the car. And there lies the problem. Our society has adopted this mindset of "gotta have it now......gotta get the next one the moment it comes out." Whether its cars or cell phones, this is how the masses look at things. Cars which are purchased fall into this same scenario too. The marketing folks and manufacturers are aware of this mindset of buyers so they sell them on the notion that ".....your first scheduled maintenance is in 15K or 20K miles." People feed on this and then proceed to run their cars into the ground.

My old man is of this mindset with his 2005 CLK 500 cabriolet. Granted its been garaged since day one and shows very well, but the dealer told him, "Mercedes uses Mobil 1 synthetic exclusively which is good for 15+K miles." My dad bought into this "...he doesn't have to do anything to his car" sales pitch. The first oil change happened around 20K miles. I've debated my dad on the (lack of) merit with this approach to car maintenance and it has fallen on deaf ears. He's retired....doesn't do much....and 'can't be bothered' with trivial stuff like this. He's a classic example of what I'm talking about.

The point being is this: new cars today can offer dependable service if you follow the maintenance procedures. Things can and do break on cars when they are used regularly.....it's all part of the car ownership experience. To the OP, don't completely write off new(er) cars for your transportation needs. Do your due diligence by researching what's out there and reading up on forums for specific makes/models.

Jon

[JA1991]

My girlfriend and I are actually looking at picking her up a different car and we think we're going to get the 1.8t Passat But if we can't find a nice Passat then we're looking at getting a GTI. Both have a nice amount of room, and both of them are known for getting at least 200k mile.

[rwh11385]

Bingo Jon - especially with Camrys and Accords, Corollas and Civics... people think they are bulletproof so they don't care take of them at all and run them into the ground. Compare that to our E30s, which we know of MANY issues - but proactively take care of them and look past the problems as "just the way E30s are". Any normal person would bitch and complain about E30 issues but we get over it because we're enthusiasts. And we buy parts from quality aftermarket suppliers (hopefully) that alleviates some stock problems too.

But if you treat your car like a rental car, it will end up with a foot in the junkyard very quickly. That's pretty much what people who cycle on leases do, like you mentioned.

OP, get a S60 (or V70 if you want more space):


Everyone I know with one enjoys it and has been happy with it. Plus, it doesn't hurt there are usually good independent service shops - the same few that do BMWs also do Volvos around here. Heck, one offers free spring inspections to take care of any issues before they are problems.

[JasonC]

Yeah, if people say "they don't make them like they used to"... they're right.

There is some controversy behind that test. It could be a vlad car and not up to snuff like when it rolled off the assembly line. Also another argument is the X frame that Chevrolets used wasn't that great. I know side impacts with the X frame cars was far worse then that of a car with a full frame from the same time.

[rwh11385]

There is some controversy behind that test. It could be a vlad car and not up to snuff like when it rolled off the assembly line. Also another argument is the X frame that Chevrolets used wasn't that great. I know side impacts with the X frame cars was far worse then that of a car with a full frame from the same time.

You can make any assumptions or defenses of the Bel Air about shenanigans or condition of the metal, or whatever you would like, but the fact will remain that modern cars crumple outside of the passenger compartment as a safety feature and older cars do not. You could re-make one from the original design and have it with zero-mile and zero-time on the car as it rolled off the assembly line again, but it won't have the safety designed into it like today's cars have. The common complaint about modern vehicles "not being made like they used to" and suffering more damage in small crashes versus older, more rigid ones misses out on the point that it is intention to reduce the forces that reach the passengers.

http://www.autoevolution.com/news/how-crumple-zones-work-7112.html

Early automobile design theories saw extremely rigid bodies that were very resistant during an accident and didn't allow too many deformations. As a consequence, all the forces were transferred to the occupants, most of the times this being quite fatal.

In 1967, the Mercedes Heckflosse (also known as the Fintail) was the first production car in the world with “crumple zone” safety features including a safety cage with crumple zones and a trunk that had been made almost 50% bigger.

Any "controversy" there doesn't change physics, nor make previous assumptions or design philosophies right again. Front/Rear deformation reduces the crash energy experienced by passengers and lessens protrusion into the passenger compartment.

[Threehz]

Jon, I completely agree that people don't care about their vehicles this day in age. I look forward to vehicle maintenance because I see it as a chance to make my vehicle perform better by replacing an aging part with a brand new one. The average person today sees an oil change, changing the spark plugs, or any other job as a mandatory pain in the ass. People will stretch maintenance to it's limits.

That being said, if you go look at the complaints against the vehicles I mentioned and you mentioned again, the majority of the complaints are from people who said they maintained the vehicle down to the tick. The Toyota engines that begin to guzzle a quart of oil every 100 miles (one of the most common Corolla/Camry problems) are from owners who claim to have maintained the vehicles perfectly (not to mention these symptoms have shown up as early as 30,000 miles). The fact that this exact problem (Toyota used pistons too small and tried to compensate with larger rings which leads to early failure and high oil consumption, as well as the valves failing) wasn't just specific to a few people, but across the line of owners makes it clear that it is more than poor maintenance.

In my title, "Worst Made" is referring to the build quality of the vehicles. I am sure that modern emission and safety is at the highest it has ever been.

Poor build quality is another quality that can be attributed to modern society. People want to buy a new car with all the new technology so they can feel good about themselves, try to impress people, and forget that they are actually driving. Those same people are the kind who always want the latest this or that, get tired of their new toys quickly, and subsequently move on to a new vehicle in a short time. The manufacturing of vehicles follows this trend, not to mentioned planned obsolescence has been pushing strong since the 50's and today the art of making disposable items has been perfected.

Products such as automobiles are built to last according to the right statistic. People work very hard to determine how long a vehicle should last to give a buyer the sense that it was worth it and keep brand loyalty, while not lasting so long that the buyer will feel the need to keep it and not buy a new car.

Anyhow, this thread just gets me going on and on... I'm thankful I have the time to waste discussing such mundane issues in the grander scheme of the world.

[Ryan Stewart]

actually it was the late 70's/early 80's when cafe standards were forced upon us
GM made their larger cars with 140hp 5.5 liter diesel V8's
real POS's
i was following one up a long hill, closer than he liked and he floored it
he didn't go any faster but the ungodly cloud of unburnt hydrocarbons that came out of his tailpipe killed all vision and i almost ran off the road until the daylight came back
plus the cars were butt ugly

This, it was really a dark time in automobiles and the stuff the japs were bringing in would make Daewoo look like NASA tech. The steel from Japan was nothing more than rust food and the paint Detroit was using was nothing more than some water-soluable frosting.

Really, during that time, only two European makers were really putting out anything reasonable and only because they got their shit-times out of the way 15 years prior.