Talk:Car longevity

This link points to an infomertial that sells one of those miraculous engine additived, complete with 1-800 number and everything!

2. ^ Bob Sikorsky "Family Car can last 1,500,000 Miles or a Lifetime The Auto Channel

Should I delete it?

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.176.189.201 (talk) 02:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

It would be really nice if this article contained anything that wasn't completely general, speculative, or vaguely alluding to anecdotes. I mean some actual factual information would be really nice.
 * I agree that we need facts, perhaps similar to what has been done for life insurance. Where can these be found that is web accessible? In the meantime, this is not a bad start as the life of a car depends upon many things (some of which are listed) that can be maintained. jmswtlk (talk) 00:57, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Examples
As can be seen, there are examples emerging. We need more. Longevity ought to be measured in either miles or time. The current focus seems to be miles. However, age is as important in cases where the usage is daily but for shorter trips (oh, the folklore is that this does not happen?) and for an occasional highway trip. For example, I can easily point to actual autos/SUVs (that are in good shape and continue to provide reliable transportation without any coddling) that have (or had) continuous service years of 32, 15, 12, and 7 years (and still counting). The last one has almost 130,000 miles, mostly highway). And. No rust. No new engines. No new transmissions. Of course, new tires (the first big key item). The public has a right to expect longevity, hence makers are using 100,000 mile warranties as an enticement. jmswtlk (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Ford

 * A common long lasting car is the Ford Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis and Lincoln Town Car based on the Ford Panther platform. These vehicles are used as limo, police interceptors and taxi services in North America and often have 500,000 miles before requiring engine or transmission rebuilds. The highest recorded mileage is a 1983 Lincoln Town car with 1.3 million miles, the power train was rebuilt after 1 million miles.

This piece was removed from the article on 22 June 2014 (when was it added?) and was brought over here in order to generate some visibility. So that sources might be sought, for one thing. (Aside: The other day I saw a glimpse of Streets of San Francisco (a real 70s show) on a TV (the general resurrection that we see); the set included many 70s-model Fords in their newer state. Also, I see these on occasion rolling around). jmswtlk (talk) 23:18, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Ford 250
Not an automobile, but close enough. Ford-250 reaches a million miles in just four years. Note, there was maintenance cost, mainly in oil changes and tires. We need to read more stories like this. Perhaps, we will get actuarial data and analysis, open to the public, at some point. jmswtlk (talk) 13:04, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Austin/Rover Montego
Many years ago CAR magazine (UK) ran a piece about a long-distance courier – his name was Hugh something – who had racked up (IIRC) ~1.3 million miles in a diesel Montego estate. I've still got the mag, so may eventually get round to digging out a proper reference. Mr Larrington (talk) 23:02, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Sub-systems and components
Somehow, longevity has connotations of overall duration which is usually an after-the-fact measurement. The real question is expected life estimates, before and during the fact, which is a function of how long the pieces last. That is, keep the pieces going, and the car will keep going. Some of those expectations are subsumed in the maintenance schedule (or, we would hope). However, we see all the time that systems break early (quality issue) or that they are replaced too soon (supposed safety issue). Take plugs as an example, of the variety that are 100K miles of expected life (that is, to be changed at 100K).

I know of, at least, a couple of case where they have gone well over 100K with no diminishing in performance. In one case, the ticker is at 133K miles. Perhaps, when these are changed it might be good to see photos of their state. The theme of this page raises the question of how does one get good data on the pieces? How else can we be expected to solve the overall system life question? Anyone know of a portal where such data could be collected and discussed (hopefully, more than just an anecdotal mix)? jmswtlk (talk) 01:50, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Plugs changed at 134K. Looked like they still had some life, that is, the gap could have been reset. However, since failure likelihood rises with age and use which could be of several types, why push further? jmswtlk (talk) 02:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Belt changed at 154K miles. No cracks however was stretching under certain loads. Obvious performance improvement with the change. jmswtlk (talk) 02:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)


 * This vehicle is approaching 180K miles with no problems. Since the last report (2 Aug 2011), other than the usual maintenance, the major work has been to replace a bad sensor and to put on new tires. Within the last year, the owner has received queries about selling the vehicle. Seems that the 2004 Buick Rainier (some anyway) appears to be desirable from a longevity viewpoint. jmswtlk (talk) 23:08, 16 September 2012 (UTC)


 * 189K+ and a new water pump. Changing that afforded the opportunity to replace the hoses.jmswtlk (talk) 12:28, 3 October 2013 (UTC)


 * 198K+ mode actuator stuck (supposedly due to a dead battery). Rating at Kelley Blue Book. jmswtlk (talk) 20:33, 19 June 2014 (UTC)


 * 200K+ and still rolling along. An analog to use for projections might be pickup trucks (see story, this page, on F250 - million miles in four years) and their SUV cousins (say, Suburbans). But, semi-trucks rolling over 750,000 miles is fairly common at a rate of several thousand miles a week. ... Still, where is there actuarial data related to this large piece of any family's asset mix? jmswtlk (talk) 13:09, 12 October 2014 (UTC)


 * 220K+ and runs like a charm. Looks good, too. Accomplished several trips of over 1,100+ miles one-way. jmswtlk (talk) 10:56, 22 May 2016 (UTC)


 * 235K+ and still running the roads. Put on a new set of tires. Time for another go around with tuneup, etc. One engine problem light was due to a cut sensor wire. That's a puzzle. Paint still looks good. Had engine steam cleaned. Looks new. If the miles seemed to have slowed down, that is true. Have been renting cars to get familiar. Stories to tell? You bet. jmswtlk (talk) 01:01, 27 January 2018 (UTC)


 * 260+ and running well. Transmission replacement. jmswtlk (talk) 00:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Summary, to date, on one vehicle: there yet. How far can we expect to push a car in ordinary situations? Given that 100K warranties are becoming the vogue, is 200K out of the question for most cars? jmswtlk (talk) 15:02, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

The Writing in This Article
Is some of the worst I've seen on Wikipedia. Long sentences that feature excessive clauses for their own sake, and various Latinates that are pointless or obscure rather than elucidative are the worst offenses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.64.216.217 (talk) 16:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice to see the criticism. Can critics ever show how they would do it better? jmswtlk (talk) 15:59, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Some of the prose could be simplified. However, one important missing piece would be a listing of sub-systems (or components) with an expected life value. I saw one for the household that I'll find and put a pointer here, as an example. jmswtlk (talk) 15:59, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * De Vries' list, US Inspect's list, Do it yourself, ... jmswtlk (talk) 16:32, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

The fact that a car, as added today, can go 3,000K miles is sufficient reason for this page. Now, reporting why and how often this can occur needs to be followed up on. jmswtlk (talk) 17:27, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Sources for Statistics section
Why are the Environmental Protection Agency and The New York Times used as a sources for vehicle longevity in this article? These sources have as much competence as American Bar Association in matters of vehicle longevity. The article itself states that the EPA "assumes". If you want accurate unbiased information, go to fleet maintenance organizations, or mechanics. These organizations are very knowledgeable in the true longevity of vehicles. The NYT (paid in-part by car advertisements), EPA (emission goals), and car manufacturers (car sales) are all motivated to have newer cars on the roads. Not implying that these organizations are outright lying. However, how can one use exclusively these sources and simultaneously state that they are being unbiased? Emeraldinspirations (talk) 17:03, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The EPA regulates car emissions and fuel economy, which requires having engineers who understand virtually every aspect of a vehicles operation. The reason longevity is important to the EPA is that their interest extends behond how the car performs the day you drive it home from the dealer. They track how emissions and fuel economy play out in the real world, and how that performance changes over time. There is a federally mandated warranty on all emissions related components, and in many cases the EPA asks car makers to extend the warranty beyond these time and mileage limits. They also collect data about how many years people keep cars, and how much they drive them, in order to estimate the emissions performance of the entire public auto fleet. You can't assume all cars on the road are 2017 models, but you also can't assume that 1915 Fords make up an appreciable number of cars out here. So you need data on how long cars actually last, and data about the behavior of consumers.As far as the idea that the NYT are "not experts", I'd ask you what subject they are experts on. Only journalism? That's their only job. In fact, the Times, like other reliable media, can be expected to meet basic standards of fact checking and corroboration on any subject you can imagine, from the moon landing to breastfeeding. That's the point of journalism. As a secondary source, we generally prefer that kind of source, rather than a primary source, because Wikipedia is written for the general reader.The NYT article cited here is written by Dexter Ford, who has been published in several motorcycling magazines since about 2010, and began freelancing on automotive subjects for the NYT, LAT and other major newspaper about 5 years ago. He is a professional, an expert in the field, and the publication is professionally edited and fact checked, which is what we look for in Identifying reliable sources.That doesn't mean every reliable sources is the last word. Other sources might have different information. If major points of view disagree, then we can describe both. Nobody is stopping you from adding information from fleet maintenance organizations, if you know of a publication that has collected data from them. Or a survey of mechanics' opinions. But I don't think fleets are representative of all the types of cars that the general public drives, or that fleet driving is representative of how many miles the general public drives their cars. Though I would think that you'd have to trust a journalist to report the survey, because mechanics are not in the publishing business. Regardless of what you cite, adding more points of view from published reliable sources is almost always an improvement. Please do go ahead and expand the article with the sources you have.You haven't even said which part you disagree with. That Americans drive their cars about 15k miles a year, or that they used to last about 100k and now last longer? It's not very specific, but it's a more or less accurate summary. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:09, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Sources for stories
Finally, seeing good stories: Vehicles most likely to hit 300,000 milesjmswtlk (talk) 00:39, 5 January 2022 (UTC).