The rest of the car almost certainly doesn't have 200,000 more miles in it, so who cares?
The rest of the car almost certainly doesn't have 200,000 more miles in it, so who cares?
People replace vehicles because they want and can afford replacement ones, not because they are mileage limited.
I'm guessing it was a Lexus?
That isn't quite true. It is often because it is uneconomical to keep.
The issue with many older vehicles is that it just starts costing more to repair it than the car is worth. You are constantly putting in good money, after bad and the the costs keep going up over time. At that point it is often better to buy another vehicle.
I could have kept my 2007 Vauxhall Astra going for another 100,000 miles. The issue is that the car was worth £600-1000. Each repair was costing upwards of £300.
I could buy another second hand Vauxhall Astra with the amount of money I was spending on the car yearly. It just wasn't worth it.
However that frequently isn't the case with car. It is £300-1000 every time I need to get it repaired. This happens at an increasing frequency as the car ages. This can then add up to several 1000s quite easily.
e.g In the last year I owned that Astra I had to to fix the following issue (all costs include labour):
- New Clutch (and it needed to be towed to the garage as the clutch wouldn't engage). £1000 for clutch replacement, £150 for the tow. I also needed to rent a car to drive to a funeral. That cost me another £100-200 IIRC. So we we are up to £1350.
- Car would randomly go into Limp mode. New sensor cost £300. Vehicle was never really fixed. It just went into Limp mode much less, so there was another problem somewhere. Which would need another trip to the garage.
- Service. This flagged several issues with the car. All these small repairs was another £800.
I am already upto £2,450 and I know I've forgotten stuff. I bought the car for £4000 originally.
If it was something like a classic barn on wheels Volvo which are bullet proof, or a classic Rover like a Rover P5. I might be willing to keep dumping money into it. But it isn't, it is a Vauxhall Astra.
I had one for 4 years, approaching 200k miles, it came to grief at the hands of a 95 year old lady driver. Her car was wrecked, the Focus stood up well but, alas, even the minor repairs required were deemed uneconomical.
No help to you, admittedly, but if it assists anyone else avoid a similar issue...
Ford Focus around the same time period are indeed decent. Going to try to get one at some point.
Then other things like hoses, anything rubber will perish and will be replaced. Everything starts going at some point and the cost mount up quick!
Things wear out on an engine over time, you lose compression over the time and thus power, you can have other components that will reach EOL. A lot of this starts happening on vehicles well before 200,000 miles. I know it does, I've had to deal with it. I am having to replace a knackered turbo on one of my vehicles, and I had to replace the belt tensioner and replace the timing belt, I've had to reseal the sump.
Rubber perishes over time. Regular maintenance and what conditions something subjected to can improve the life sure. I've replaced plenty rubber bits and pieces because they've perished. There is a reason they offer rebuild kits for some components, because those rubber / plastic parts go bad after a while.
These are just facts.
I drive a '91 GMC Sierra. It has 138k miles on it right now. It was made in 1990, making it 35 years old.
> Things wear out on an engine over time, you lose compression over the time and thus power
I've not put it on a dyno, but qualitatively I'd say the 5.7L (350ci) v8 in my truck has 90% or more of its original power. The miles are much less important than how it was used. Mine belonged to my grandfather, so it wasn't exactly street raced.
> you can have other components that will reach EOL.
Sure. This is called "maintenance". It's an ongoing cost - and a compounding one, at that, if you don't stay on top of it. If you do, an older vehicle can be kept in excellent working order for not much money at all.
> A lot of this starts happening on vehicles well before 200,000 miles.
Sure. Most modern vehicles require their first major service at 50k-100k miles.
That's not a defect. That's how they are designed. Some parts wear faster than others intentionally, because they are meant to be replaced.
> I know it does, I've had to deal with it. I am having to replace a knackered turbo on one of my vehicles, and I had to replace the belt tensioner and replace the timing belt, I've had to reseal the sump.
The turbo failing is the only thing here that raises an eyebrow for me; everything else is just standard maintenance.
Modern turbos are doing a lot of work, and depending on the vehicle are often included to meet environmental regulations.
---
More to the point, ICE vehicles are well-understood and can be both maintained and repaired by novices without significant risk. I recently bought my wife a 2019 F-150 Platinum. It was in excellent condition overall - interior and exterior are basically perfect - but had a massive oil leak around the timing cover. It had 97k miles on it.
We paid $22k for it. I put $1,500 in parts in it: replacing the $20 gasket meant tearing the front of the engine down, so I went ahead and replaced the cam phasers and all timing components at the same time. I expect it to last another ~60k miles before the next major repair.
I've already budgeted to replace the twin turbos and transmission over the next few years. Even with those costs amortized into my budget, and including the initial cost of the vehicle, I'm paying about 1/3 of what it would have cost me to buy a new vehicle of the same quality.
What's more, it gets ~24 MPG city and ~28 MPG highway. The only modification I've made to that effect is that I added a (~$300) soft tonneau cover to the bed.
My '91 GMC gets 12.5 MPG city... but its retail value is also ~$10k at most. I'd have to drive a lot of miles on a regular basis before it would make economic sense for me to replace it with something more efficient - and even then, I'd still want an older truck, because I don't particularly want to fill our shiny F-150's aluminum bed with gravel but have no problem doing the same with my GMC's steel bed that already shows 35 years of use.
From an environmental perspective, I bet I could drive that truck for the rest of my natural life before I consumed more resources or exhausted more pollutants than would be required to manufacture a new one.
Unless you drive much less than the avarage this is not true, engineering explained [1] did a video about this, and comparing a 24 MPG to a 35 MPG car you produce more CO2 with the 24 MPG car compared to a new 35 MPG car (including the manufacturing) considering your GMC has much worse fuel efficiency that break even point would be much earlier. This is not even considering the impact of recycling... So the best thing for the environment you could do is buy a new more fuel efficient car.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44951308
It is often not worth continuing to maintain a vehicle after a certain point.
I can do quite a lot of the jobs. But I don't have really anywhere to work. I live in the UK and I cannot even rent a garage within 30 miles. So I have to work in my car parking space.
Working on your car yourself, isn't hard if you have the time and space. I don't have space really.
> The turbo failing is the only thing here that raises an eyebrow for me; everything else is just standard maintenance.
I don't think the previous owner maintained it properly. It lived a hard life on a farm.
I keep a small toolbox in my vehicle. It's mostly inexpensive hand tools, but I include a Milwaukee M18 Fuel impact and a set of sockets for it - super handy for changing tires.
In my 25 years of driving, I've broken down probably a dozen times total. Of those, only twice have I required a tow - and one of those was in my wife's Kia Sorento, which we bought new.
Easily 90% of the usage of the tools I carry ends up being on other people's vehicles. I can swap a wheel on the side of the road in <10m with a bottle jack and a battery-powered impact, with no real manual labor involved.
Other breakdowns I've had in the past were things like the serpentine belt breaking or a coolant hose coming loose. Those are five minute fixes if you have access to a parts store. When the belt snapped on my Jeep in the middle of the night on a trip a few years ago, I used an pair of my wife's leggings that she had packed to get us home. I just tied them by hand, bypassed all the non-essential stuff on the motor, and drove the ~50 miles back home to deal with it the next day.
I service my own vehicles and do a lot of preventative maintenance and inspect the condition of my vehicles regularly, it's become a hobby since I enjoy working on them. I adhere to a strict schedule of maintenance and inspection. Just flushing and filling fluids (Brake System, Transmission, Power steering, Rear Differential, Coolant and Oil) can greatly extend the life of the power train. I have never had a break down where I needed to call a tow truck, Each vehicle has a small jump pack in the trunk, alternators, batteries can be tested for signs of degradation, why wait until they fail, replacing worn parts before they cause further damage. I always try to rebuild the OEM part since it is of higher quality then the replacements, like an alternator or starter. If I do need to get a replacement, Rockauto carries many OEM parts. I just replaced the original water pump on the Avalon, it had 160k miles on it. The 4Runner has approx 350k miles on it and many of the parts (alternator, starter, etc are original.
This what I find curious. It used to be cars were largely limited by their main driveline components. Now those components have been simplified. In a lot of the BYD cars it is literally the exact same driveline so for them it is almost commoditised.
My part of the world sees no snow or salt. So if the body is fine and the driveline is fine....
Why can't I run a car for a million miles and simply replace coils, struts, hubs, bearings, carpets, seats, the-tiny-electric-motors-that-drive-windows-and-seats-and-mirrors etc?
IE where is the electric version of the old landcruiser series?
The non reliable stuff is all the OTHER wiring/screen/software.
The paper that underpins the 80% claim is paywalled and I'm cheap so don't have the numbers to hand. But in the abstract sense being statistical could go the other way too - i.e. some might get to 90% before they start their exponential decay.
> And "exponential degrade" doesn't mean it's particularly fast.
True, exponential doesn't mean much other than e^n where it's implied that n > 1. However the value of n does matter, for example a decay rate for n=100 is quite different than n=1.1. Again, we're talking in general terms as I don't have the value of n for this. For better or worse, I'm taking the paper at face value when it talks of end of life at 80% - however it has been peer reviewed and is in a "proper" journal so to my mind that adds some credibility.
It's worth mentioning that the current DoE guidance on lifetimes is: "12 to 15 years in moderate climates (8 to 12 years in extreme climates)". Of course that guidance is also based on a statistical analysis that doesn't seem to account for modern battery management systems [1]. There are additional factors at play that govern battery degradation, including things like: battery chemistry, environment, EV charging habits, etc.
Ultimately the real test of EV battery life will come with time. It'll manifest as the change in average age of scrapped vehicles with large fleets of EV's on the road. In Norway right now it's about 18 years (for a mostly internal combustion fleet) [2]. However as of this year all private vehicles sold must be zero-emission - so in 10-20 years we'll have some interesting data [3].
[1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20250530000446/https://afdc.ener...
[2]: https://www.ssb.no/en/statbank/table/05522/tableViewLayout1/...
[3]: https://web.archive.org/web/20250530115356/https://www.regje...