Future reliability like other Toyotas?

[strat61caster]

Has anyone told you to expect Subaru reliability yet?

It's already had Subaru problems: bad tune, cam/vvt issues, oil leaks, oil burning, rattling interior, probably a few more I'm forgetting.

It should make it to 130k miles with little issue like most cars built in the last 30 years unless you get unlucky which people do, even with MR2's, no car is actually 100% reliable.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Pedro13

I think it is a misconception regarding what "reliability" means: Some people evaluates the reliability based in how much negligent has been taking care of the car, using and abusing it without the minimal care, not even check the oil once in a while... well, if this is the case, guess what? the older the car, the "most reliable" will be...Why? because the functionality is way less complex, i.e. I have a 2001 Corolla for a winter beater and even is a beater, I keep it well maintain, so the cars works great, but another factor is that ONLY have 2 ECU's: the Air Bag & Engine ECU. Of course was originally well designed meaning that if you provide the normal care, the car will be ok. That is why hard to compare old vs. new cars... The more the "electronic nannies" & gadgets have, the more the chances to fail and as T-Coat mention: the more the use, the more the wear.


Another clarification I like to express is that the key in a reliable vehicle comes from the design of the parts/components, so when was said "What's more reliable, a Japan made Subaru or a US made Toyota?" I said both, because in both cases the design came from Japan, so has to follow the Japan specs. Don't matter where is made has to follow the "TMS" (Toyota Manufacturing System).Two of the more recognized "reliable" cars from Toyota The Camry and Corolla, are made in North America.


But in summary, my bet is that our "Toyobarus" will be reliable enough, as long as we take care of them, because are well designed.

To add to this the definition of what "reliability" actually mean seams to have changed over the years. It used to mean does it start, run and stop like it should. Now leaky tail lights, squeaks from the trunk or chipped paint all are considered in the "reliability" category. People used to have Toyotas that were rotted out to the door handles but still ran fine and they said how reliable the car was. Now if the stitching on the seat isn't straight it will get a negative point for reliability from someplace.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Has anyone told you to expect Subaru reliability yet?

It's already had Subaru problems: bad tune, cam/vvt issues, oil leaks, oil burning, rattling interior, probably a few more I'm forgetting.

It should make it to 130k miles with little issue like most cars built in the last 30 years unless you get unlucky which people do, even with MR2's, no car is actually 100% reliable.

DAMNIT Are you saying mine should die any second now?

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

It should make it to 130k miles with little issue like most cars built in the last 30 years unless you get unlucky which people do, even with MR2's, no car is actually 100% reliable.

That's a pretty low standard there. I wouldn't even consider a car I thought would only make it to 130K miles. (but I do get your point).

[HKz]

unless you live in the rust belt I don't see why it couldn't easily last at least a couple decades...plus, prefer the simplicity of a longitudinal FR car over one with a transverse mid engine..

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

That's a pretty low standard there. I wouldn't even consider a car I thought would only make it to 130K miles. (but I do get your point).

That was OPs criteria as that's how many miles are on their MR2

Most cars start developing expensive habits between 150k-200k from what I've seen, but I don't haven't to contend with snow.

[alan.chalkley]

All modern cars have too many "nanny systems" and anti pollution systems , that are just more things that are expensive to fix.
One thing that determines the life of any car , is how much money the owner is willing to pay for continuos repairs.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Most cars start developing expensive habits between 150k-200k from what I've seen, but I don't haven't to contend with snow.

Yea, not much experience with Northern weather on cars, but the ones I've had tended more in the 200-250K range before they had what I would consider major, non-maintenance expenses. I've had 5 cars over the years in that range.

Originally Posted by alan.chalkley

One thing that determines the life of any car , is how much money the owner is willing to pay for continuos repairs.

Very true. Pretty much any car can be kept running nearly forever if you are willing to spend money to do it. Cars that reach a million miles don't get there without a lot of non-maintenance parts replaced.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by alan.chalkley

All modern cars have too many "nanny systems" and anti pollution systems , that are just more things that are expensive to fix.

The newest piece of technology on my FR-S is the Bluetooth phone connection... Which was patented in 1989 and was finding it's way to consumer devices in the early '00s, the first Bluetooth headset was on shelves in 1999.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

That was OPs criteria as that's how many miles are on their MR2

Most cars start developing expensive habits between 150k-200k from what I've seen, but I don't haven't to contend with snow.

I don't think "most" cars develop serious issues even close to 150,000 miles. Most of the new cars I have owned have doubled that without serious issues and I do have to contend with snow.
Now, if we want to talk 80s or earlier cars then yes if you saw 150,000 miles without issue it was time to celebrate. Any cars built after the mid nineties seem to outlast the older ones to a great extent. No idea how it happened but the higher tech the cars got the longer they seem to last.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

I don't think "most" cars develop serious issues even close to 150,000 miles. Most of the new cars I have owned have doubled that without serious issues and I do have to contend with snow.
Now, if we want to talk 80s or earlier cars then yes if you saw 150,000 miles without issue it was time to celebrate. Any cars built after the mid nineties seem to outlast the older ones to a great extent. No idea how it happened but the higher tech the cars got the longer they seem to last.

It depends on where you draw the line of 'serious issues' which I never said 'serious' if you look at my post, I said expensive issues, most people can not cover a $500 unexpected expense without going into debt for it and many cars require a service or parts replacement in that 150k-200k mile (240k-320k km) window that is near or above that line. For example: 2JZ timing belt/water pump service, K24 timing chain, replacing a catalytic converter (happened on our '93 Camry and our friends '99 Volvo), Honda Accords had this wonderful compliance bushing that likes to fail between 60k-90k miles, etc. Hell replacing the cam sprocket on an FRZ is $200 for the sprocket alone, easily >$200 for the labor and a known issue with this car. Throw out bearing? Oil seep out of the timing cover?

You have the income for quality mechanics (dealerships) to take care of your cars for the life of the vehicle and I'm guessing would consider a >$500 service over 150k miles (240k km) part of doing business. Not everyone would agree with you (see other post in this thread complaining about 'expensive anti-pollution systems' when a factory catalytic converter is ~$1k and lasts for at least 20 years so a whopping $5/month of service). How much did your throw out bearing replacement cost you (or would have if it wasn't covered)? I know I did it in my garage (hey my clutch pedal doesn't squeak anymore!) but I bet that's also a >$500 repair at a mechanic, some dealerships/mechanics have quoted >$1k for a clutch replacement on this car.


These cars are dipping towards $10k used, we're not dealing with people buying new cars and having disposable income to repair them as they need it anymore, we're into people who don't want to buy a Civic or Corolla and are looking at this for $12k-$14k sitting on the lot of the dealership hoping their parents/friends don't say "I told you so" when the thing is out of commission for a month because it spun a bearing due to over-application of sealant for the valve-spring recall and the dealership is blaming the owner trying to stick them for >$6k for an engine replacement while they're still making the ~$250/month payments on the thing.


tl;dr buy a V6 Camry

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

It depends on where you draw the line of 'serious issues' which I never said 'serious' if you look at my post, I said expensive issues, most people can not cover a $500 unexpected expense without going into debt for it and many cars require a service or parts replacement in that 150k-200k mile (240k-320k km) window that is near or above that line. For example: 2JZ timing belt/water pump service, K24 timing chain, replacing a catalytic converter (happened on our '93 Camry and our friends '99 Volvo), Honda Accords had this wonderful compliance bushing that likes to fail between 60k-90k miles, etc. Hell replacing the cam sprocket on an FRZ is $200 for the sprocket alone, easily >$200 for the labor and a known issue with this car. Throw out bearing? Oil seep out of the timing cover?

You have the income for quality mechanics (dealerships) to take care of your cars for the life of the vehicle and I'm guessing would consider a >$500 service over 150k miles (240k km) part of doing business. Not everyone would agree with you (see other post in this thread complaining about 'expensive anti-pollution systems' when a factory catalytic converter is ~$1k and lasts for at least 20 years so a whopping $5/month of service). How much did your throw out bearing replacement cost you (or would have if it wasn't covered)? I know I did it in my garage (hey my clutch pedal doesn't squeak anymore!) but I bet that's also a >$500 repair at a mechanic, some dealerships/mechanics have quoted >$1k for a clutch replacement on this car.


These cars are dipping towards $10k used, we're not dealing with people buying new cars and having disposable income to repair them as they need it anymore, we're into people who don't want to buy a Civic or Corolla and are looking at this for $12k-$14k sitting on the lot of the dealership hoping their parents/friends don't say "I told you so" when the thing is out of commission for a month because it spun a bearing due to over-application of sealant for the valve-spring recall and the dealership is blaming the owner trying to stick them for >$6k for an engine replacement while they're still making the ~$250/month payments on the thing.


tl;dr buy a V6 Camry

Anybody that can't afford $500 to repair a car should take a bus. As you pointed out even the most basic repairs are more than that. I probably spend almost $500 a year on windshield washer fluid (not joking I buy good stuff). I think that by setting such a low dollar amount that you have taken the "most car develop EXPENSIVE habits" to a different level. Yes what qualifies as "expensive" is subjective based on income but $500 will not even cover some maintenance tasks much less be considered an expensive repair in the larger scheme of things. Cars cost money to maintain. You can spend that money up front and do preventive maintenance or you can roll the dice and repair it if it breaks but in the end it costs the same. My chief dispute of your comment was the "MOST cars need expensive repairs at 150,000 miles" that is simply not a statement that can be substituted in any way. They may need it at 60K or they may need it at 600K.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Anybody that can't afford $500 to repair a car should take a bus.

Well maybe public transit wouldn't suck so much if we converted 40% of the US population to relying on public transit. (It's currently ~11% from what I could find)

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/20/here...d-expense.html

And by the way, Canada is on the same page as the ol' US of A:

https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/5...om-being-broke

Used cars would be a lot more affordable though...

I think that by setting such a low dollar amount that you have taken the "most car develop EXPENSIVE habits" to a different level.

You're right, I took it from the level of the top 10% of the 1st world population (of which you and @Dadhawk are) to being relevant to the majority of the first world population. Such as someone daily driving a 23 year old Toyota who does not want to worry about any issues whatsoever.

No rust, no mechanical issue, no problem at all.

My chief dispute of your comment was the "MOST cars need expensive repairs at 150,000 miles" that is simply not a statement that can be substituted in any way. They may need it at 60K or they may need it at 600K.

You're right, I took shortcuts in phrasing that sentiment so I'll be more accurate.

"I believe that most cars will incur expenses exceeding $500 between 150k-200k miles."

[Johnny Horsepower]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Anybody that can't afford $500 to repair a car should take a bus.

Yeah, I would consider a $500 repair on an old car to be nothing.

My 2003 Corolla with 142,500 miles needs a new power steering rack that will cost more than double that. (I passed on it for now, though the guy claims it will fail inspection in January because of the leak.)

I don't consider that to be anything out of the ordinary, just one of those things that happens. I don't know how you can avoid spending a lot on maintenance unless you do the work yourself (or buy a new car).