re: A car dealer’s scientific guide to the 10 worst and 10 best used vehicles

quote:

---

eah, good luck finding a used one of those. My FIL was looking for a low mileage one for over a year before he had the lexus shipped in from Colorado

---

friends' dad is a wholesale dealer. he found my used 4runner for me for a great price. I told him I wanted a used land cruiser first and he laughed and sais that was the one car he wouldn't sell to me bc the demand is so high both here and overseas that he'd lose 15k if he gave me a good deal. evidently they like the cruisers in the middle east

quote:

---

Volkswagen New Beetle

---

There is no way that this car isn't #1. They break monthly, it's unreal.

I'm with you CAD.

98 Landcruiser with 245K miles in the house.

She's thirsty, but unstoppable.

@ this list.

True, the turbo MZR was a piss-poor match for the CX-7, but AFAIK, that particular engine hasn't proven to be that problematic in the MS3 (aside from engine mount issues).

I'd much rather take my chances with a CX-7 than any Land Rover, Jag or VW.

And the Camry? My parents owned a few over the years (1st, 2nd & 4th gens). Yeah, the engines were largely bulletproof, but you'd be surprised how often they were in the shop for brake, suspension, electrical and exhaust work.

quote:

---

Im sensing a theme here

---

What, that Mazdas are junk and Toyotas are the ne plus ultra of reliability?

Did I mention that my parents switched over from Camrys to Mazda 3's in 2005 and that their reliability hasen't been any worse?

And it's not as if Toyota's been without its fair share of problems during the past decade.

Hondas/Acuras aren't without their gremlins either.

quote:

---

I think this is interesting since the Mercedes, VW, BMW, and other European makers have such good reputations.

---

The only Euro brand with a well-above average rep for reliability is Porsche.

(LOL @ BMW!)

quote:

---

Yeah, no. Anything after the 7.3, 2003 and above, especially when Ford took over for International has had issues. Also, engine may be great, same as the Dodge, its the rest of the truck. Transmission on Ford, you just know you will have to change it eventually. Also, there are tons of quirks. So no not even close. People are more apt to accept stuff when you have so much invested in it.

---

200,000 and 300,000 miles (or more) on a Ford F250 or the Chevrolet/GMC full sized trucks and SUVs are not uncommon. A transmission replacement on powerful, heavy trucks like that after a couple of hundred thousand miles shouldn't be unexpected- especially if used for towing. You'll still hear people complaining that their very high mileage 10 year old Suburban or F250 needs a new A/C or fuel injector.

Owners of some of those vehicles seem to have a higher standard than the typical vehicle buyer. A Suburban or a Land Cruiser breaking down before 150,000 miles is going to infuriate the owners. 150,000 miles would be a massive achievement for the owner of a Dodge Caravan or gas-powered Volkswagen.

You seem to get what you pay for in most cases. With the exception of the Camry, most of the cars and trucks on that list are $30,000 or more when new.

I'm surprised Audi [yes i know VW did] didn't make the list.

If I have any problems with a vehicle before 100k I will be pissed, and anything major before 200k pisses me off as well.

Then again, I've been driving GM trucks my whole life.

quote:

---

If I have any problems with a vehicle before 100k I will be pissed, and anything major before 200k pisses me off as well.

Then again, I've been driving GM trucks my whole life.

---

The owners of a Dodge Caravan might be happy to get 150,000 miles out of them before they have numerous, major problems.

That's the point I was making. I have a Silverado that's needed nothing but basic maintenance for 130,000 miles. It's not expensive to own outside of having typical fuel economy of a full sized truck. I'd be furious if it needed serious work before 175,000 miles, but I'd consider it a huge win if I could go 300,000 miles without replacing the A/C or transmission. We buy Honda and Toyota cars and GMC/Chevrolet trucks almost exclusively.

It seems to me like the owner of a Toyota 4Runner, Ford 250, or Chevrolet Silverado would be absolutely furious if their vehicles required major repairs before 150,000 or 200,000 miles. The used examples of those cars seem to be fairly well maintained and are expected to last. The marketing efforts for those products, when new, seem to be that they are "tough", "strong", or more durable, so it attracts a buyer that's more likely to place value on longevity and probably appreciates the importance of regular maintenance....so it's sort of a self-fufilling prophecy.

I guess it doesn't matter....but either the owners of Toyotas, Chevrolets, and Fords work harder to maintain their vehicles or their cars and trucks are actually better/easier/cheaper to maintain in the long run and are thus better choices for used car buys. It could be some combination of both.

I'm also curious if some of the smaller, cheaper cars that are marketed towards lower income buyers or fleet buyers would be on this list if the manufacturer included free maintenance. The Corolla, Taurus, Impala, Civic are actually fairly durable vehicles when maintained.

I have about $90K miles on my Chevy 1500 (mostly city driving). The check engine light came on about 5k miles ago.....

Guess it's time for a tune-up.

Never really been in the shop for anything other than normal wear and tear.

Would buy again.