Durable Car Ownership?

[Justin Case]

 The idea comes as antidote to all the threads saying 'buy a cheap shitter, run it until the MOT runs out,weigh in and repeat the process'. The title comes of course from an article by Charles Ware of Morris Minor Centre fame, and suggests that  you can keep a car running indefinitely by repairing and relacing parts as they wear out rather than scrapping the car. His theory was developed for the Minor, which in car terms (well Traveller at least ) is the motoring equivalent of  a medieval timber-framed house; you can just cut out the rot and replace it with an identical part rather than just patch it up to pass the MOT.

This may be OK for 1950s technology, but would it work with more modern stuff? For example, my car is coming up to eight years old ( paint just dried by Autoshite standards) but  it is still rot free and everything works. With a car that age is it best to just run it into the ground and get a few more years out of it with minimum cost as it will be too epensive to repair it by then, or build up a stock of spares and trust that today's five year old are so clued up in IT that by the time that they enter the job market they will be able to hack into a cars electronics and fix it easily as their grandfathers could change a set of plugs and points.

This week's Saturday night debate, your contributions welcome

[dollywobbler]

I can't do proper bangernomics. I hate driving around in a car that I know has faults that could be fixed. I've not had final bills yet, but I reckon it won't be long before I've spent more on the XM than I did buying it. I prefer to buy shite, but at least attempt to look after it.

 

The 2CV would fit Ware's theory well, if I'd done a slightly better job of looking after the body. Mind you, I reckon that I haven't spent more than £10,000 on it in total (all bodywork and mechanical repairs) in 14.5yrs, and it only cost £450 to buy. So, £721 per year all-in - that's cheap motoring, even if it does occasionally throw a £2000 bodywork bill in my face (I suspect it could easily eat up £10,000 to restore again though).

[anonymous user]

I fear that modern cars have already become items to be consumed and thrown away to be replaced by something newer/more fashionable. Whilst I'm hoping that there will be a few specialists around to rebuild/modify/upgrade components, I expect they will be more for the expensive cars than the run of the mill (as there'll be more money in it.

 

 

[richardmorris]

As Mr DW said, the 2cv can follow this idea too, but like the minor is based on technology many decades old. Unlike many on here I buy cars to last a long time and probably keep them going long after common sense would suggest it's better to let it die.

I used to think that plastics (eg dashboards splitting) would be what stopped people restoring "modern" motors, but I now realise that it's the complex electronics that will do for them in the end.

 

I hope to have my merc for a good few years yet as any body issues can be taken care of by my welder friend ( well he is a friend now after I think I paid for his house with my last cxs issues), or a paint shop. My fiat could be more of a problem but there are lots of panels available now and I am fortunate to have it in original unwelded condition and keep it that way with biannual waxoyl baths.

 

On the other hand, I can certainly see temptations like v12 jags with 6months mot for £500 being very attractive as long as you do weigh it in as soon as a big bill arrives.

[barefoot]

I own four cars and a motorbike thing.

My VW 1303 has been laid up in the garage for about five years, but I've owned it since 1985.

Porsche since 1994

T2 since 1996

Scirocco, I think I've owned four years?

Honda ST70, ten years?

It feels like every single bloody thing on the T2 has been replaced, the bottom foot of bodywork, all of the doors apart from the tailgate and all of the engine ancilliaries apart from the fuel pump. And it's only done about 170,000.

The Porsche and the Scirocco also seem to have had afair bit spent on them, but they will always start when I go out to them, seldom break down and I know what is up with them at any given moment and what is likely to break/fail/pack up next.

I've never read the Charles Ware thing, I am just aware of the title and have used it as my philosophy for many years. The T2 is probbaly the easiest to keep on the road, all bits still available followed by the 944, there's a breaker within spitting distance. The Scirocco bizarrely is a complete bastard, no scene tax, no bloody bits to be had. The next exhaust I buy will have to be custom build stainless effort.

 

I agree with the proposition.

[catsinthewelder]

In theory it's possible that even Laguna 2's could be run indefinately if you have enough spare parts and the correct tools and computers to fit them.

 

It would depend on what you term 'spare parts' though.

 

Renault gearbox's?

 

Saab bulkheads?

 

Vauxhall paintwork?

 

Eventually you would get to a point where you would need to spend a vast amount to fix an issue with a part that is no longer made for any car and degrades with time rather than use,  see BL displacers etc

[Bamboocarman]

I, too, agree with the proposition.

 

However, when you can afford it, it's great fun to run a super cheap car for a couple of months, then dispose of it without a backward glance.

 

Then again, there's much to said for the long term view in correctly repairing and maintaining a motor in small low cost steps, and taking the Forth Bridge approach to gradual and continual refurbishment. I'm attempting this method with the Minor and 2CV. 

 

An alternative approach is to find a low mileage, v good condition, low tech, modernist simple car and 'conserve' it, rather than rebuild and restore. My 18K mile, now on 21K, PG 106 is an example of this; v cheap, easy parts and service, comfortable, economical, fun to drive and anonymous; don't matter if it gets bumped or scraped. The Peugeot is roughly on the same accessible level of tech as the Minor (it has a carb, for example) and, because it's not been messed about by 16 previous owners, is clean and straightforward to work on.

 

Problem is, I get bored quite easily, so six months to a year is usually my time for change. That said, have run the Daihatsu for four years now, as it's such fun, etc.

 

The iQ was bought as a longer term prospect, is ideal for London and Brighton conditions, is fun to chuck about and surprisingly quiet and comfortable; Sussex to Tyneside return trips regularly in that one; as a long term conservation project , maybe not a good idea cos of all the fly by wire technology, but as Justin C states, todays children are tomorrows ICT fixxit experts?

 

So, it's long term careful nurturing and repair for me (if I don't get bored over time) - the prospect of a baling wired, bodge up on wheels makes me a little too anxious.

 

[Leyland Lawrence]

Had an interesting chat with an experienced bodyshop owner today. I was moaning about the ease at which the z4 stonechips despite being a modern car/paint. He said that, in his experience, whereas cars historically rusted due to shortcomings in technology and just standards of the day, today's cars have been built more cynically. He said the paint was extremely thin -just good enough to get by really. The cars at the cheap end of the market, Hyundais etc., were particularly thin to the point that re-paints would come out 'richer' because they'd have applied a decent thickness whereas the manufacturer's paint was only a few microns over the primer.

 

I think the techology exists to make cars last for ages but they are intentionally designed not to. My next car will definitely be a Volvo 240 as I don't get the feeling these were built cynically. They really did seem to be built to last.

[richardmorris]

I should have mentioned that our 2cv is a bit like trigger's broom. Same car for 30 years, but new engine, chassis, floors, wheels...

[oman5]

Durable car ownership? Hmm, let me think....

 

 

 

[jakebullet]

I'm planning on keeping my disco 2 for the long term unless it does something terminal like engine dies, as td5's from crashed ones are just too silly money. I've got a gizmo for doing the electronic gubbins, and if I fill my shed with things like abs pumps I should be good for quite a few years yet.

[Shep Shepherd]

In my experience, RWD Volvos are splendid cars for 'durable' ownership:

 

 

11 years and counting 

 

 

[vulgalour]

It can be a lot of hard work and wallet punishment to maintain an old car, you can see why people sometimes just get rid.  Start with something good and improve as you go is the most sensible option and this can be true of even modern cars.  Every component has a way of being kept in the rudest health, someone will find a way to prevent modern electrics from degrading too rapidly and even being able to repair it.  The simple cost of obtaining a new car, rather than the ease, is what will likely keep people with the car they have for a long time.

 

I suspect the Xantia is going to become a long termer as most of the parts I need to keep it going are easy to get due to parts bin mechanicals amongst the PSA range, it's determination not to break down and it's lack of propensity to turn into rust.  Just a shame it's such a horrible thing to work on.  The Princess is definitely a long termer, I've had that car for nearly three years now and even though it sometimes feels like I've only driven it about 4 weeks out of those three years it is a much easier thing to work on.  Parts are a bit of a nightmare at times, it seems the only bits that break are the bits that are hard to get and with no dealer network or scene to speak of it does make keeping it going a tougher proposition.

 

 

So for longevity buy something that exists in large numbers with a big following and that while not necessarily cheap to maintain has at least got the ability to get parts and knowledge pretty quickly.  Minors and MGBs are excellent in this regard, newer stuff like the Peugeot 106 and Citroen Saxo are equally good and any of the Toyota Aygo range of sibling cars should be a good bet into the future as the platform was shared with so many different manufacturers.

 

 

If you're stubborn enough, any car can be kept going indefinitely.  You'll often need deep pockets or deeper resources of time and skills to manage it past the first 20 years of a car's life though.

[dollywobbler]

I should have mentioned that our 2cv is a bit like trigger's broom. Same car for 30 years, but new engine, chassis, floors, wheels...

 

Very much the same here. Engine, gearbox, a couple of suspension arms, the entire lower bodywork, fair chunks of the upper bodywork, chassis, seats, steering wheel, bootlid, doors, vent flap, hood, bumpers, wheels have all been changed during my ownership alone. Some bits several times (gearbox, sills). That said, I'm pretty sure that it's still on the original rear suspension arm bearings. Not bad for 199,000 miles. Original engine lasted 170,000 miles - it only needed new pistons and barrels but I haven't quite got around to doing that...

[mat_the_cat]

I was thinking of starting a similar thread tonight as well! I'm in it for long term ownership as well, Stellar for 17 years, BX for 11, LT for 8, Discos for 4 and 8 years respectively. The Kangoo was bought as a cheap to run 'just a car' vehicle to spare the BX from high mileage daily driver duties, but I suspect that I'll end up keeping it long term too, if (and it's a big if) I don't suffer modern diesel problems. Will be interesting to see...

[richardmorris]

The 2cv is currently on 140ish k miles. Body is original, ditto sills, seats and covers, doors, bonnet and bootlid and gearbox and all glass. So not too bad. It's going to need toe board and front jacking points next mot though.

[dollywobbler]

Impressive. You really do need to make sure you find someone good to do the bodywork though. Mine is a victim of LOTS of different people 'having a go' at it over the years. Too many 2CVs (even nice, shiny, expensive ones) are ruined by the standard of restoration work.

[New POD]

Whilst in the 1st Year of a HND in Production Engineering I wrote to Charles Ware, in order to try to attempt to get my industrial training year in an subject area which I was actually interested in, the remanufacture and improving of classics.

 

He did 2 things for me.

 

One was to get me an interview with a small engineering company call AD Engineering Based in Wells who had a few CAD PC's and a workshop, along with what can only be described as a mental rally minor. A very highly tuned minor with all their suspension, braking and gearbox mods, with full roll cage, which they figured if they rallied it would go someway to proving the reliability of the product. Charles Ware was paying them for the developments.  After the interview the MD took me out for a drive in it, and scared me witless. 

The second was to send me a book he'd written called Durable car Ownership which explained the concept.

Unfortunately I never got to work for them, for 2 reasons. The first was that they didn't want to pay enough for me to live. It was 1986, so I think I was justified in suggesting £95 a week before tax and NI would be about right. The second was that on transferring straight to the second year of the degree, the Course tutor thought the work wouldn't meet the requirements of the Degree and The Institution of Production Engineers.

 

So lets look at the concept as it was in 1986, and what it might mean in 2015

 

So the concept was that you purchased the BEST car you could, preferable a minor from Charles Himself, and then, instead of spending £X's per year on depreciation, you spend £X's on either making it survive, or improving it.  And you create a 5 year plan, which turns it from a crumbly old piece of shite into a nice solid reliable useable car.  So in the first year you sort the chassis, and make sure it never rusts again, In the second year you might add electronic ignition and disc brakes. In the third year, a suspension upgrade, in the 4th, you fit a 1300 unleaded engine, and in the 5th a Toyota 5 speed gearbox. 

 

You could apply this idea to a minor, a mini, a midget, MGB, a marina, a chevette, viva, nova.  But pick the right car, and it's a bit easier. Mind you I was at the VBOA a few years ago, and there was a 4 door chevette with XE, nice 14 inch wheels, manta gearbox, and suspension, and nice interior, and I did think that it could be the ultimate durable car. 

 

Move on to 2015 and look at something say 20 years old.  Cars from the 90's aren't bad enough to NEED totally re-engineering, so maybe subtle modifications and an over emphasis on maintenance.

[brickwall]

 

 

I think the techology exists to make cars last for ages but they are intentionally designed not to. My next car will definitely be a Volvo 240 as I don't get the feeling these were built cynically. They really did seem to be built to last.

 

I was reading on the EU website that new cars should only have manufacture support now for 10 years. After that it really is down to the after-market people. One supposes  this is to keep VAG's order books healthy.

[AnthonyG]

I remember the book, never really thought a 1950s/60s British car built of mild steel was a particularly good starting point. Durable? well if you live in Arizona or the Australian Outback I guess. Still he sold all the bits you needed to subscribe to his principles....

 

Start with something a lot more rust resistant for a start. Pug 205 or Volvo 740 as a example. Cavcraft will be pleased to hear that the 1990s Corsa also seems to fall into this category, saw several 15 year old + ones today.

[Shep Shepherd]

Start with something a lot more rust resistant for a start. Pug 205 or Volvo 740 as a example. 

 

The Volvo is almost 25 years old and has never been welded

[spike60]

I owned a Porsche 924 for a while this summer and despite being 34 years old and pretty battered had never been welded, nor did it look to need any any time soon. Certainly more rust resistant than the 1989 944 I saw!

[mat_the_cat]

Start with something a lot more rust resistant for a start.

 

...and something ideally with as much 'universal' switchgear as possible. They aren't going to stop manufacturing standard rocker switches in the foreseeable future, so are a much better bet than something with integrated electronic touch switches (which you can't tell whether are on or off by feel, but that's another whinge entirely...) Flat glass, so can be cut from sheet, and minimal trim to become damaged.

 

Hmmm, sounds like I'm describing a Series Land Rover, aside from the rust resistance! But one with a galvanised chassis and bulkhead pretty much ticks all my boxes.

[Alan_Green]

Thought this was all settled. Thought the most durable cars are those Citizen Khan/Mama Benz style Mercs; 

 

[forddeliveryboy]

2cv body is a little to fragile for the British damp and cold, imho. Its mechanical bits a bit unsuited, too. Which isn't to say they're not tremendous cars. Saab 96 makes more sense, plus they're cheaper with lower scene taxation band.

 

Buy what you like, though - a really good 2cv will last well if bought well and maintained correctly. I know someone with a '79 car which is on its original chassis, box and engine at 310k. He hasn't tried hard to keep it alive, just used it regularly. I think a bill for new seat covers and a rebuilt steering rack was the most he'd ever spent on it ever, last year. He uses the right oils, changed at the right time and greases up the kingpins twice a year. Goes sublimely, indecently well.

 

Buy something which is on top of your needs, slightly. So an old diesel Merc if you drive and sleep in your car, an old school hydraulic Cit (diesel, preferably) if you tow a lot and a late-eighties Owdi 80 or 100 if you don't like the idea of corrosion prevention maintenance.

[oman5]

Thought this was all settled. Thought the most durable cars are those Citizen Khan/Mama Benz style Mercs; 

 

W123s are great, except for the hideous rust problem and the sky high prices now being asked for ones that aren't hideously rusty

[Uncle Jimmy]

I wonder if the paint thickness on old 240s isn't thicker than the steel on modern crap; I read that Volvo used the same swage of steel for the roofs of 240s that BL were using for floors. Apparently Volvos, at least up to 1980ish used British steel not Swedish.

[Uncle Jimmy]

W123s are great, except for the hideous rust problem and the sky high prices now being asked for ones that aren't hideously rusty

In fairness I think W123s were due a price hike, certainly the saloons, they were ridiculously cheap a few years back.

[Ian_Fearn]

I've been a subscriber to this theory for years.

 

For me its a question of:

 

1. Purchase cost - needs to be sensibly low to justify the ongoing improvement/maintenance costs. Purchase cost being a function of popularity and age so you'll be driving something 'most' people think is shite.

2. Parts availability and cost of them - You can get service items for most cars but what happens with the ujermeflip dangle packs up?

3. Is it adequate for modern driving? - Safety and performance. This is why I stopped driving 2cvs. At the time they met points 1 and 2 but for me failed on 3. This is subjective though.

 

Build quality I reckon is more a reflection of an era rather than manufacturer. Sure some were worse than others but the late 80's/early 90's knocked out some well built motors from Vauxhall, Volvo, Mercedes, Citroen, Peugeot etc. Modern stuff is designed with obsolescence in mind.

 

I seem to recall Car Mechanics running a series on Cars to Keep Forever. It included stuff like the mk3 Golf (bit of a ruster but mechanically good), Volvo 240/740, Audi 80, Mk3 Cavalier etc.

[JohnDeere]

The most durable cars seem to be the ones that attract scene tax, where it's worth people's time and money keeping them on the road.  Which isn't really the Autoshite way.  Which leaves Ovlov 740s, and non-rusty Toyotas and Hondas.