• Hikermick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    They also last longer. Cars used to turn into a pile of rust before they hit 100k miles

    • Podunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      For light or commuter use maybe. Ive had three ford pickup trucks that have spent more time in the dealer shop than on my farm this year. And a waiting list over a month to get them in. Constant problems from day one. Recalls, premature breakages and issues i normally dont see until well past 150k miles. Mid duty or heavy duty use vehicles dont exits anymore. I cant even change brake pads on a new chevy truck without a computer reset at the dealer. It is beyond infuriating.

    • AlDente@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      Hard disagree. Rust is a consequence of the material, not of the vehicle’s vintage. Furthermore, older cars are not only simpler and easier to work on, but also, parts are cheaper. If any 1990s Honda isn’t making it to at least 200k miles, its an anomaly.

      • Zipitydew@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        7 months ago

        Older cars for sure did rust faster because the manufacturers didn’t adopt galvanizing until the late 80’s. Then in the 90’s various other spray coatings and sealers became common. Aluminum is also now prevalent to save weight.

        Old cars in the south and southwest didn’t have road salt accelerating the oxidation. But if they were brought up north they caught up quickly. Cars in the north prior to galvanizing would be rotted out in 100k miles easily.

        • AlDente@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          Neat, i’m glad we agree. Early 90’s is still very early in perspective to this audience. I’m driving a '92 and that’s 32 years old now. The cars from that decade last much longer than the 100k quoted above. Also, this is beyond 2.5X the average quoted in the OP article. Clearly, these are “old” cars. In sum, the 100k-till-rust-apart claim isn’t anchored in reality.

          • Zipitydew@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Except that only started on luxury brands. And the Japanese brands have struggled with it the most.

            Hondas were still well known for rusting out too quickly into the early 2000s. They even had recalls on 2007-2011 CR-V.

            Toyota in 2016 settled a class action suit for multiple models from 2004-2008. And that was on top of a different recall for rusting that spanned 1995-2003 models.

            Nissans still tend to have the transmission blow up before the car can rust out. But did have their own rust issues.

            Basically, Japan doesn’t use road salt. And their engineers had much less experience dealing with it. But the issue has persisted way longer than it should have taken them to solve for.

      • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        What are you talking about? American made cars (majority of historical volume) were notoriously bad until recently. Hondas and Toyotas were the exception. Now the expectation is that every make/model makes it to 200k miles.

        And rust was an issue because they used inferior paint on older vintages. I don’t see how blaming it on material deficiencies supports your point.

        • AlDente@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          I think you’re conflating American-made and American-branded. Most of the Honda, Toyota, Subaru, etc. vehicles are still made in the USA and are part of the majority market share you mention. These cars lasted 200k easily, and usually past the 300k mark.

          • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            That’s the case now, but not historically. The big 3 were making garbage cars until foreign companies expanded their US presence with domestic manufacturing. Widespread foreign makes built in the US is relatively recent.

            • Hikermick@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Yeah in the 80’s people in the US were freaking out about Japanese cars but in the end the US cars became better in order to compete

      • OutsizedWalrus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        The newer cars aren’t any harder to work on for driving related functionality. Or, at least they’re not any harder than they were 20 years ago.

        The electronics are a layer on top of a relatively legacy layer of “car”.