Connected to my other post.
I have been wondering what cars can carry onto high miles in the petrol range (2 litre) with little work done to them. What are the highest mileage cars people have seen? Also, can any owners tell me the MPG of 2.0 litre cars (any make) in town and motorway with high and low mileages.
Finally, what advise can be given for a petrol to last a long time and use the same amount of fuel even with high mileages.
Responses will be appreciated>
|
For cars, I offer Volvos and "small" Mercs.
mpg impossible to answer - varies so much because of (a) state of tune of car, (b) driving style and (c) weather.
|
A friend of mine had a Carlton 1.8 petrol Estate, which did 197k before the engine died on him.
He changed this, then the car was scrapped 70k later.
****Signature? - Ideas on a postcard please anyone!****
Hugo
|
|
|
|
Plenty of Volvo 1, 2, 7 and 9 series cars with 200-500k miles on. The Volvo Club in the UK keep a register for those interested!
www.volvoculb.org.uk/
|
|
|
My 2 litre petrol XM had its head gasket replaced at 195K miles.
I kept it until 247K miles. It still had planty of life left in it.
|
A story of use and abuse ...
We bought a 9 year-old 2.0 190E with no service history and about 90,000 on the clock. It had a Zender body kit but that's by-the-by.
Dad used it as his company car for about 9 years. He was a double glazing salesman (and chief exec) so he did about 30-45K per year. He doesn't believe in servicing so I think it was only serviced about once a year. If that.
I had it for the last two years. I gave it one Small Service in the two years or so I had it and an oil change.
In the end it was given to my mechanic as rust had got the better of it at MOT time. It failed once in the 9 years my dad had it and twice in the last two years that I had it.
It had new clutches, exhaust, steerin rack etc but nothing too untowards.
It had done 450,000 at the end (or maybe not, the mechaninc MAY be running it) of it's life.
I bought an S-Class but if I was short of cash I'd get myself a 200E. (A 190e is a bit cramped in the back).
The car gave plenty of warning for anything that was about to go wrong. Use your ears ...
rojer@lycos.co.uk
Astra, Renault 18, Renault 25 TXi, Astra Est, Passat Est, Mercedes 190E, Mercedes
|
|
TrevP: How does weather affect mpg? Not doubting you, just curious.
|
TrevP: How does weather affect mpg? Not doubting you, just curious.
Have you ever tried to drive into a headwind?? ;)
****Signature? - Ideas on a postcard please anyone!****
Hugo
|
Air temperature and rain (wet roads) makes a big difference to fuel efficiency.
|
Air temperature?
Do you ment when the car s cold?
rojer@lycos.co.uk
Astra, Renault 18, Renault 25 TXi, Astra Est, Passat Est, Mercedes 190E, Mercedes
|
I bought my 1993 Volvo Torslanda 5 years ago with 180,000 miles. It has just passed 280,000 miles. It averages 32 mpg, I have had up to 35 on a careful long run. Only 30 when pulling a caravan.
Nothing major ever done to engine, head never touched.
If seviced they can easily do 300,000, 400,000 plus is not rare.
|
"Air temperature and rain (wet roads) makes a big difference to fuel efficiency."
Indeed.
Examples:-
Cool, damp - air is denser, so slightly more power or slightly less fuel used for same speeds.
(same thinking behind intercoolers for turbos)
Freezing - engine take longer to warm up, and may even run overcooled (similar to old engine driven fans)
Hot - Aircon or open windows (latter ruining aerodynamics)
Another factor is height above sea level. At high altitudes, where the air is less dense, engines will experience reduced power because for each stroke of the piston, the engine will get a smaller mass of air.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes : last time I changed the air filter on my cavalier I didn't tighten the air intake pipe properly (so cold air was getting sucked in); knocked roughly 10% of my fuel economy.
|
|
|
|
|
There's a guy in the US who recently made the news with his P1800 Volvo (the sort 'The Saint' used to drive) that he bought new some 36 years ago and has driven over two million miles...
He put it down to regular oil changes, which sounds reasonable, although his long daily commute probably helped, too (difficult to go that distance with a short one, I guess!).
I believe that Turkish taxis also achieve astronomical mileages, as the same car is often driven by several people, round the clock, as it were :-)
|
The volvo was a very good car in the first place. All were faultless and the mileage is not too suprising for such a great car.
But, he failed to mention in the article what was replaced and done on his car and what mileage - I doubt few parts were replaced and little cost.
My subsequent question is what is the difference between the old and new cars, and why new cars cannot do the same miles as there predocessors. E.g. the volvo 240 went forever, and yet the new ones are not so good. Can it just be the electrics?
|
I was in a Merc taxi (190 or something like that?) in Cyprus a few months ago that had 575,000 kilometres on the clock, and still went fine.
I doubt it was clocked. :-)
Mike
|
|
|
New cars are not so good as old ones because of planned obsolescence. No sense in having all your cars doing astronomical mileages and customers not coming back for new ones.
Modern cars are built to be junked after a few years (as indeed most of them should be).
|
I would have said the opposite.
Old cars tended to die at around 60k (or rust through in 5 years), whereas newer ones will go on and on as technology has allowed the engine and bodywork (galvanised) to be designed better and lubrication has improved.
Just because something is designed to last a certain time, doesn't mean it won't.
There are probably thousands of cars scrapped each year, which are in good condition, its simply that they aren't worth anything.
The cars mentioned above are almost all 'quality' cars (mb and volvo) which were designed well and built using good materials. Modern cars are now designed even better. MB are even offering 30 year anti perforation guarantees on their products. Other manufacturers are offering 5yr warranties. It doesn't sound like the actions of a company obviously building disposable cars does it?
Jonathan
|
I think that older cars become 'obsolete' in the sense that they are not economic to repair these days; rather than gradually falling to bits, like they did in 'the good old days'.
My 13 year old 190K cavalier is now costing more than it is worth in repair bills this year; but I will continue to run it into the ground on the basis of virtually zero depreciation!
|
|
|
You're right, consumer pressure has led to cars theoretically being much more reliable and long lasting. However, as stated above, this is not in the manufacturers best interests.
I think that all this electronic stuff (ABS, TCS, blah blah) that is slowly becoming standard equipment is a ploy by the manufacturers. The more complicated stuff they stick in now, the more stuff is likely to go wrong in the future. A ten year old car with dodgy ABS is likely to be uneconomic to repair, and will end up scrapped or broken for spares - end result, demand for new cars remains. So although cars may be more reliable mechanically, just how modern day electronics will stand the test of time remains to be seen.
|
I was talking to a citroen dealer the other day and he said that cars are so complicated now even the people that build them can't always fix faults. They had a c5 that was blowing brake light bulbs continually. The wiring loom was swapped and they swapped over loads of items from one car to another identical one and the first still blew bulbs! Citroen in France have had it for 3 months and they still can't work out why it is blowing bulbs.
More worryingly he also mentioned that lots of electrical components are now initialised to individual cars so you can't try another ecu or whatever from the same model in another car as it won't work. They are all special order and have to go with the chassis number. It might be an interesting way of stopping thefts to order for bits but it is making fixing things a nightmare. Add in the cost of the diagnostic machines required (25k) with £2k a quarter update costs and you wonder why main dealers charge so much.
Cars are probably a lot more reliable than they used to be it is just when they go wrong it is in a much more complicated way. I am sure there is market out there for simple cars that people can fix themselves but that may not have the latest features.
teabelly
|
The old reliability/cost of fixing thing is one that makes our particular period in economic history distinctive. The world economy has divided into two main types of business: those that can improve productivity without sacrificing quality and those that can't. Car manufacturing is in the first sector, while car repairs, medical care, education, and so on are in the second. So while cars have become cheaper to buy as a result of productivity gains they have become more expensive to fix, a problem that is compounded by the fact that while increased complexity helps makers improve productivity it makes cars more of a problem when they break down.
The only way to make the fixing business more productive is for mechanics to fix more cars in the same amount of time: quality always suffers when that happens, just as it does with doctors, teachers, social workers and so on. Technology helps in diagnostics of course but it also increases the cost. So in order to attract customers at the higher prices these businesses have to charge to survive they have to offer value-added features. In the case of car repairs that's cups of coffee, courtesy cars, soft chairs etc. etc. Big deal, right?
A postscript to this is that government-run businesses/services tend to be in the second sector where productivity gains are almost impossible to achieve without affecting the service provided.
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
