Go Green By Driving It 'Til The Wheels Fall Off

fintail · November 2011

I think Ford used thin metal in the floors or something - I seem to recall seeing others just as bad.

lemko · November 2011

During much of the 1960s, Ford had something called a "drop-in fuel tank." The top of the fuel tank was literally the luggage compartment floor!

fintail · November 2011

That was a Mustang/Falcon thing right?

lemko · November 2011

I think they even did it with the big Galaxie!

fintail · November 2011

I don't remember if my car had that or not...guess I should have known with how much gas I had to put in it. I remember my dad dropping the tank out of his 60 Ford and cleaning it/sealing it as it had set idle for several years.

andre1969 · November 2011

I think they even did it with the big Galaxie!

I think Ford might have tried that drop-in gas tank in just about everything, at one point. I remember reading a story about some Ford executive who got rear-ended in a Lincoln, and even its tank ruptured and the car caught on fire. He was able to get out of the car without injury, but supposedly that incident prompted him to push Ford to move away from those drop-in gas tanks.

And then Ford gave us the Pinto.

Which, for all the bad publicity it garnetred, had about the same death-rate-due-to-fire as any other small car of the era.

stever · January 2012

"The average age of autos on the road has reached a record high."

Average age of cars on U.S. roads rises to record 10.8 years (LA Times)

I guess I'm setting the curve - the van was purchased in Dec. '98 so it's a bit over 13 years old now. The '97 wagon is still humming along too.

andre1969 · January 2012

My youngest, the 2000 Park Ave, is 12 model years old now. I've thought about buying something new(er) this spring, with the intent of retiring my '85 Silverado and selling the Park Ave to my roommate. But, today, I drove the Silverado, and was thinking to myself....it's not *THAT* crappy. :P

Mr_Shiftright · January 2012

Probably out of necessity rather than any 'statement' I'd guess.

hpmctorque · January 2012

Out of necessity in many cases, but I imagine that better reliability, build quality and corrosion protection also contribute to the rise in the average age of today's vehicles. Plus, one more thing; more than ever, cars are just considered a means of conveyance to a growing number of folks. That's especially true of young people, many of whom don't equate cars with cool, as contributors to these forums do.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2012

But do you think 2001 cars were any more reliable than 1991 cars?

xwesx · January 2012

Possibly not, but definitely more reliable than most of the junk built in the '80s. The last sentence of the article, "Overall, average vehicle age has increased an entire year since 2006 and almost two years since 2000," doesn't surprise me one bit. I imagine people were jumping over themselves to get rid of older daily drivers from the late '80s, and some of that fear of the aged car probably rolled through a generation or two of replacements.

hpmctorque · January 2012

I have no statistics comparing the reliability of '01s and '91s, but my perception is that the '01s are generally more reliable than their counterparts of a decade earlier. That said, the newer ones are also somewhat more expensive to repair, when major components fail, so I don't know how the cost-to-own compares. How do you see it?

fezo · January 2012

We've had teh 00 Accord 11 years so I'm a little ahead. Of course the Celica is 13 model years old. The other two cars are mere pups at 5 model years old.

stever · January 2012

Have to wonder if the average age would be yet another year old if Cash for Clunkers had not happened.

hpmctorque · January 2012

Okay, but what's your point?

hpmctorque · January 2012

Ah, good point, but wasn't there an age cut-off for that program (I'm too lazy to research it)?

stever · January 2012

Well, we qualified and almost bit the bullet. But we decided that the van was still meeting our needs pretty darn well. Anyone else probably would have gone for it. :shades:

Mr_Shiftright · January 2012

I would be under the impression that a person would be more likely to ditch a 2001 car if it had engine or transmission issues, or severe electronic defects, because things like engine swaps or transmission swaps are so much more complex than with a 1991 car.

fezo · January 2012

No point. It was a pointless post. I'll be hanged come morning.

Left to my own my cars tend to rack up a lot of years and/or miles. I don't even blink at 100K anymore. Just make sure the timing belt has been done.

hpmctorque · January 2012

Oh, no harm done, for sure. Sorry to disappoint you, but it doesn't even qualify for one night in jail. Was just wondering whether I had missed something.

I can identify with your car retention habits.

andre1969 · January 2012

I have no statistics comparing the reliability of '01s and '91s, but my perception is that the '01s are generally more reliable than their counterparts of a decade earlier.

I don't have any reliable statistics either, and even my personal experience is sketchy. For example, my '00 Intrepid was way more reliable than my '89 Gran Fury. The Intrepid was still going strong at 150,000 miles when it got totaled. The Gran Fury needed a new engine around 73,000, when the #8 cam lobe wore out, and the city of Richmond, VA, retired it. Now, the place I bought it from threw in a 318 from a wrecked '88 Diplomat with 75,000 miles on it. I got rid of that car with 118,000 (120,000 on the engine). So I guess you could argue that while the original engine only made it to 73K, the second engine made it to 120K! But, as far as things that Gran Fury needed under my watch, that the Intrepid never did: 4 or 5 new starters (I lost count!), fuel pump, radiator, freeze plug, two power window motors, distributor, and a water pump. Thing the Intrepid needed, that the Gran Fury never did: a/c compressor, new front rotors, and bearing hubs. It still ran okay when I got rid of it, but the water pump was starting to go. And by that time I had too many cars, so I was starting to pull parts off of it...

But, on the flip side, my 2000 Park Ave Ultra, at 78,000 miles, doesn't seem like it's going to turn out to be half the car my grandmother's '85 LeSabre was. That car was pretty reliable up until around 144,000 miles, when she gave it to me, but then it started going downhill. Still ran well by 157,000 miles when we got rid of it, but the brakes had gone out, and I knew it wouldn't pass emissions the next time around. Plus, it was just one of too many cars that I didn't need, so we got rid of it.

In contrast, the Park Ave has already needed suspension work, a rebuild on the front brake calipers, rotors, new belt tensioners and pulleys, and other odds and ends.

My Mom and stepdad had a 1991 Stanza, which started to lose its transmission around 90,000 miles, although they managed to get it to 110-120,000 before selling it. It also needed exhaust work and a few other odds and ends. Their replacement '99 Altima lost its transmission completely at 35,000 miles, but was replaced under warranty, and the car now has over 330,000 on it.

Oh, as for the cash for clunkers qualifications, I think the car had to be between 1984 and 2001, or something like that, and the combined EPA rating had to be either less than 18 mpg, or 18 mpg or below. To get the combined rating, I think they took the formula they apply to 2007 and newer cars and back-dated it to 1984. So for the most part, the only vehicles that qualified for it were trucks, SUVs, maybe a few minivans, and cars that had an engine displacement of around 5 liters or greater.

stever · January 2012

Just make sure the timing belt has been done

I'm only ~65,000 miles overdue on the Quest for that one. Did the Outback, but it's an interference engine.

I don't know if the van will make it to 200,000, but it'd be a fun milestone to reach. I'm getting pretty insufferable about it already, having passed 150k in October of 2010.

andre1969 · January 2012

I don't know if the van will make it to 200,000, but it'd be a fun milestone to reach. I'm getting pretty insufferable about it already, having passed 150k in October of 2010.

I've had two vehicles that had surpassed the 200,000 mile mark, although not completely under my watch. First was a 1968 Dart that I bought with 253,000 on it, and finally retired at 338,000. I had let it sit around too long, fuel pump went bad, and it wouldn't start. I didn't have the time or money to mess with it at the time, so I just let it sit, and it deteriorated pretty fast, unfortunately. The guy who bought it from me though, got it to start back up, and it sounded great, for the few seconds that it ran!

The second was a 1979 Newport that I bought from the junkyard, with 230,000 miles on it, for $250. Got rid of it with 250,000 on it when the water pump went out. I replaced it with the '89 Gran Fury I mentioned previously, a car that, 10 years newer and with roughly 30% the miles, I figured HAD to be more reliable. Alas, it wasn't. Although it was easier to live with, as the a/c worked, it had power windows, and a nice stereo. And was a lot quicker!

I seriously doubt any of my current fleet will make it to 200,000 miles, simply because I don't drive enough. My '85 Silverado has about 137,000 on it, but it's such a guzzler that we try to drive it as little as possible. I think it only went about 2200 miles last year. Mom gave it to me back in October 2002, over 9 years ago, with 109,000 on it. With the way the body and suspension are deteriorating, there's no way it'll make it to 200K, although the engine and tranny probably could.

The Park Ave had 56,372 miles on it when I bought it in December of '09, and is currently around 78,500 or so, so it's averaging out to around 11,000 per year. But, at that rate, it's going to take 11 years to get to 200K. And I just don't think I'll have the car that long.

All the other cars are antiques, under 100K miles (although my '67 Catalina is suspect), and rarely make it over 1,000 miles per year, so I don't see any of them ever making it to 200K, either.

Now, one of my friends has an '06 Xterra with 85,000 miles on it. The way he drives, I guess he could see 200K. His previous vehicle was a '98 Tracker that he traded for the Xterra, at 134,000.

andre1969 · January 2012

A friend of mine had a 1995 Grand Marquis GS that he bought in 1999, with about 55,000 miles on it. Traded in 2004, with 175K, for an '04 Crown Vic LX with just under 10,000. He's now pushing 200K on the Crown Vic.

The '95 was getting pretty tired by the time he traded it. Paint was starting to peel, and it was actually rusting in that sloppy, exposed seam where the top of the C-pillar meets the roof. Check engine light was on, engine was clattering, and it was smoking a bit. The '04 is holding up much, much better. I think the most expensive repair he's had to make on it was when the intake manifold started to leak. At one point, the windshield wipers were acting up and started parking in the upright position, which I think was a common problem on those panthers. Now, it had other issues over its life, I'm sure, but overall it's held up pretty well.

So, I think overall, cars definitely are getting better. Only problem is, nowadays you can have one single component fail on them, that makes them cost-prohibitive to fix. For instance, if the transmission went out on my Park Ave, it would cost around $1800 to replace. That's not too bad. But just think of how much these modern 5, 6, 8+ speeds, etc are going to cost to replace, as the cars they're in age!

stever · January 2012

The rust does concern me. The van lived most of its life in the high desert of Boise, where nothing rusts. So far so good here in Michigan, but this is just the second winter.

lemko · January 2012

Panther problems: Windshield wiper switch is one. I had that happen to my Grand Marquis early on. Another problem is the HVAC controls - a notorious problem. The air only wants to blow out the defroster vents. I currently am having that problem, but waiting until the spring to fix it as a new unit is $700 but can be rebuilt for around $150, but I have to take the unit out, and send it away for two weeks. I'm not going to freeze for two weeks awaiting it repair. I figure in spring, I'll be neither too hot or cold to deal with not having HVAC.

xwesx · January 2012

Assuming it will run at all without that module?

My '98 Grand Caravan wouldn't have. Great mechanicals on that van, but the electrical system was a nightmare! I sold it at 215,000 to a guy who claimed to know what was acting up on it, and I still see it on the road now and again two years later. I was a little sad to see it go because listening to it purr like a new car upon start-up, I just hated to give up on it.

stever · January 2012

If you finally replaced an old car, please email pr@edmunds.com to share your story with a reporter.

xwesx · January 2012

What?! You're barking up the wrong tree, Steve. :P

:shades:

stever · January 2012

Fishing in the wrong pond again? Just like me. :shades:

I posted elsewhere about getting a flat on the interstate last week in the '97 Outback. A new car with TPMS technology would have let me safely exit, and perhaps I wouldn't have ruined yet another tire like I did last September on the van.

More than two airbags would be nice too.

But geeze, I just rolled over 86,000 miles with it this trip. Be a shame to retire it.

Was looking at the gas logs too - last year I filled up the Outback 12 times, about once a month. Already filled it up six times this year. What a difference a road trip makes.

andre1969 · January 2012

I posted elsewhere about getting a flat on the interstate last week in the '97 Outback. A new car with TPMS technology would have let me safely exit, and perhaps I wouldn't have ruined yet another tire like I did last September on the van.

Well, provided something didn't break in the TPMS system. My buddy's 2006 Xterra, with about 85,000 miles on it, has had two sensors in that system replaced. Fortunately, when they fail, they've (so far) triggered the idiot light, letting you know something is up.

But, I guess that can be dangerous too. As the vehicle ages, I can see someone getting tired of replacing those sensors and just leaving them alone. Or, after having the system cry wolf a few times, they might think it's just another sensor going bad when this time it really is a tire going flat!

Oh, as for dumping a beater, I am thinking that 2012 might be the year to finally retire my aging Silverado. It ain't looking so great, these days...

stever · January 2012

Heh, that looks like every other truck here in the UP.

The other half are F-150s that look just like that.

Those sensors aren't cheap and on some, when the batteries fail after ~5 years, you have to buy a whole new sensor.

xwesx · January 2012

Twelve times in a year! That's amazing. I was marveling just last night that my gauge in the Escort was only at 50%, with nearly 200 miles on the trip, and I had not filled up since Monday, 1/16. I generally fill it weekly. Sometimes, I even re-plan my day if my miles are too high and I am otherwise not likely to make it a week.

Of course, part of the reason for that is my having to drive the plow truck ('76 F250) into town a couple days ago, which more than made up for the fuel savings on the Escort.

stever · January 2012

We really should just go back to one car. If the van did better in the snow we might do that. Guess I could get some wheels and some dedicated snows for it. It's more comfortable to ride around in, but the miles on it are getting up there.

With old cars, having a spare can be handy. So long as you don't get too carried away like Andre, LOL.

xwesx · January 2012

Thanks, Steve. It was gracious of you not to use me as the example.

fintail · January 2012

That rear wheel is a nice touch :P

tjc78 · January 2012

Another problem is the HVAC controls - a notorious problem. The air only wants to blow out the defroster vents.

Its the vacuum solenoids in the control head. Specifically the "o" rings aren't sealing any longer. If you are handy I bet you could do it yourself.

Pretty good explanation: Click Here

lemko · January 2012

Isn't that one of your Catalina's wheels on the left rear? Look how much smaller that tire is compared to the front.

andre1969 · January 2012

Yeah, I took that pic back in late September, I think. My roommate had driven the truck to work but got a sharp piece of metal stuck in the tire. Unfortunately, the bracket that holds the spare in place under the truck was rusted in place. Spare was flat anyway, so that was a moot point!

So, to get the tuck home, I pulled one of the wheels off the Catalina, which uses the same 5-on-5 bolt pattern.

I think the front tire on that truck is a 255/70/R15, and it's mounted on an extra-wide 15x8" truck rally wheel. In comparison, the Catalina rally wheel is a comparatively petite 15x7", and the tire is a 225/70/R15.

xwesx · January 2012

Optical illusion! :P

No, I seem to recall Andre relating on another thread that he had a flat and went through quite an adventure getting it home.

Oops! He beat me to the punch.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2012

Well a couple of weeks living with my TPMS might cure your lust. They can be *fussy*. I'd recommend buying a scanner for resetting the code. Sometimes any little thing sets the sensors off.

But you were smart to get off the freeway. A tire is a small price to pay for your life.

stever · January 2012

Well, yeah, but first I had to put the compact spare on the Subie before I could get off the interstate. The truckers were great; must have been chatting to each other for miles behind me. Traffic wasn't all that heavy but every truck passed in the far left lane.

Friend of ours back in Boise got hit by a sleepy Prime trucker changing a flat 12 or 15 years ago, and it wasn't pretty. Long recovery. Prime had a pretty bad reputation but that was a bankruptcy or two ago.

After I got the spare on I exited at the next exit for the last two hours of the drive.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2012

I finally found out the approx. cost in energy to build a new car...figure about 50 barrels of oil (smaller cars somewhat less). So industry standards say that there are roughly 19.5 gallons of gasoline in a barrel of oil.

So, very roughly speaking, it costs 1000 gallons of gasoline to build your new car.

So if you buy a new car that gets 45 mpg to replace your old "gas hog" that got 25, and you drove 12,000 miles a year, you'd have to drive the new car 5 years to break even on your energy consumption.

the_big_al · February 2012

Awwww... seeing your truck just brings back memories of my '82. Same exact paint scheme, although mine was a GMC. Loaded as it could be for '82 but minus the rust. On it's third motor by the time I got rid of it. It was a franken-motor with a 76 block from a junkyard Blazer, original 82 exhaust manifolds and 86 heads and manifold and carb configuration. On top of that was a propane conversion carb and propane tank in the back since it was a farm truck and propane was ultra cheap.

Body never rusted, but I hit a telephone pole and crunched a fender (but not bad enough to really replace), had the front bumper torn partway off being yanked out of the mud, 4 different sized tires on it and a sagging rear suspension. Top it off with no mufflers (just a couple of pipes that were cut off just behind the cab and it was a hell of a beast to look at and hear coming down the road. But it's my favorite vehicle I have ever owned. It had probably close to 200K on it when I left home and left it behind.

Your's is nice (except for the rust spots) compared to what mine looked like... I'll have to see if I can find a picture of it somewhere...

andre1969 · February 2012

Your's is nice (except for the rust spots) compared to what mine looked like... I'll have to see if I can find a picture of it somewhere...

Well, mine looks nicer in pics than it does in person! It has a big dent in the passenger side door where it looks like someone kicked it in, and the rust is actually worse on that side.

I'm not sure how, exactly, the rear bumper got that bend in it. I had gotten rear-ended twice in late 2006. First was a hard hit from a 2000 Infiniti I30 (or I35, or whatever they called the Infiniti version of the Maxima). Here's a pic I took of it, after that impact...

The bumper itself didn't seem to get bent, but the brackets mounting it to the frame did. The repair shop replaced everything, and it was about $350, paid for by the other person's insurance company. As for the Infiniti? Headlights smashed out, hood pushed back, radiator appeared to be pushed back at an angle. Grille was gone. I don't remember if the fenders got bent or not. It didn't deploy her airbags. I'd guess the damage could have been an easy $5,000 or more...it doesn't take much to rack up big bills on modern cars.

Well, about a month or so after that little misadventure, a girl in a 2003 or so Hyundai Elantra ran up under my bumper in a traffic jam in DC. The light was green, but traffic was gridlocked, so there was really nowhere to go. However, as traffic inched forward, I let off the brake, let it idle forward, and then when I stopped, happened to look back and see this Hyundai wedged under there. She had tried to change lanes, I guess because she thought the other lane would move more quickly, but was too close to complete the maneuver and hit my bumper when I stopped. And, you know what she had the nerve to say to me? "Why did you stop at a green light?!" Umm, because traffic was GRIDLOCKED?!

That impact bent the edge of the bumper. Got it fixed, but then a couple months later, I happened to notice it bent again. I'm guessing someone backed into it in a parking lot somewhere. That time, I just left it alone.

Anyway though, the old beast is still kicking. I drove it to work every day this week. It started every single time, never stalled out, and nothing fell off of it, so I guess it's not time to put a bullet in it just yet!

the_big_al · February 2012

I don't have a picture (only because they are in a box that is probably buried under another box which is behind a stack of furniture in a storage unit) but I had a similar experience. Only I cause the damage not the other way around. We were late for a football game in high school and to speed things along while I was waiting for my sister to finish gussy-ing herself up, I positioned the truck so I coudl reverse real quickly and then tear out of the driveway.

Well I forgot that my mom had music lessons (why I forgot I don't know because she taught music lessons every day) and forgot there was another car parked in our driveway. I jammed the truck into reverse and floored the pedal. Ad mist the spraying gravel I failed to notice the car behind me. I crunched it right at the A-pillar. It was a Chevy Cavalier and I ended up totaling the car out. Bent the door, the fender and the frame so much it wasn't worth repairing the car. And the truck?? Wouldn't even know it had been hit, aside for the the already slightly upturned real bumper.

stever · February 2012

A reporter is looking to hear from consumers who own "code reader" - either an app or an appliance that allows the user to tap into his/her car's diagnostic system to understand why the Check Engine light etc is on, and perhaps shut it off. If you have used one of these apps or systems and are willing to share your story with a reporter, please email PR@edmunds.com no later than Monday, March 5, 2012 with your daytime contact information.

hpmctorque · March 2012

"As Cars Are Kept Longer, 200,000 Is New 100,000"

It sounds about right to me. Do you agree?

Mr_Shiftright · March 2012

Might be a bit of a stretch, since most people still ditch their cars (or have them ditched for them by drunks) after about 10 years---so saying that the average american drives 20,000 miles a year isn't correct.

I'd say 150K is the new 100K, and I'd also offer the opinion that 150K is a very good time to bail out of a car. "nice enough to sell, old enough to be risky".

The problem with modern cars is that after 10 years, they are vastly depreciated, even though they become more expensive to repair as time goes on. This means that their market value is often more or less equal to the cost of a major repair. So if your 150K car is running well, maybe you can get $6000 for it, but as soon as the transmission goes, you lose MORE than the price of a new transmission--essentially your vehicle becomes a parts car in the snap of the fingers.

Go Green By Driving It 'Til The Wheels Fall Off

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles