[Jeroen]

Some thought on this. First of all when discussing how long a car lasts, it is extremely important what criteria you apply. The two most common ones are technical life span and economic life span.

I don’t have data for India, but data from all western countries suggest that the average lifespan of motor cars is actually increasing!!

From Wikipedia:

In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency assumes the typical car is driven 15,000 miles (24,000 km) per year. According to the New York Times, in the 1960s and 1970s, the typical car reached its end of life around 100,000 miles (160,000 km), but due to manufacturing improvements in the 2000s, such as tighter tolerances and better anti-corrosion coatings, the typical car lasts closer to 200,000 miles (320,000 km).[6]

The above is still based on economic life span. I will come back to that in a minute.

When it comes to technical life span; there is virtually no limit at all to technical life spans of cars. Whether it is chock full of electronics and or computers or has no electronics none whatsoever.

As some of you are aware, I am a huge classic car fan. I own and do most of the maintenance repair on all four of my cars myself. I visit some 6-12 classic car shows all over Europe per year. And you can find just about any car from 15 years and upwards in perfect condition. As long as somebody has the patience, the knowledge and the funds to keep a car going indefinitely they will find ways to do so. Even I can make some of my own parts. Truly unique parts I can get 3D printed and so. In Western Europe there is a massive industry that cater for all the possible needs of the young- and oldtimer car owner.

I bought my latest car, a 1998 Jeep Cherokee for Euro 5000,— and almost 320000km on the clock. since I bought it I have spend about the same on new parts.

Not many people would spend that sort of money on such a cheap old car. Even though I have spend all this money on it, it is very doubtful I would get much more than Euro 5-6000 if I sold it now. But I believe it is a good condition now, it is reliable and I just enjoy driving this car immensely! In reality I would argue it is cheaper than buying a new car. Yes, my Jeep weighs a lot so I pay a lot of roadtax and yes it’s fuel efficiency is atrocious. But it’s insurance, as a classic car is dead cheap and I don’t have any depreciation to worry about. If I was to buy a 2-3 year old Ford Focus, the deprecation on such a medium size family car would be around Euro3500-4500 per year. That is more than the annual fuel bill for my Jeep!! For reference, the Ford Focus is slightly longer and wider than my Jeep. The Jeep does stand quite a bit taller though. Weight is about the same.

Most people will tell you that it is not economically viable to spend lots of money on older cars. So you see the average life expectancy going up, but the cut off point remains around the point where people believe you will need to start shelling out big bucks to keep it going. And they just don’t believe it is a sound financial thing to do. Again, certainly, from a technical point of view you can keep any car going for almost any period. Million of classic cars proof that every day across multiple continents.

My eldest sister has a 20 year old Toyota Yaris with an automatic gearing. She really needs her car as she is single and not very mobile anymore. About two years ago it broke down. Her garage diagnosed it as needing some part fitted to the automatic transmission, which would cost about Euro 1200. They told her she should consider trading it in as it was such an old car. A couple of her friend gave her the same advise. Don’t spend such a lot on an old car. But I did a bit of checking and found that this is a well know issue with older Yaris with this type of transmission. Everything else on this car was working fine and there are virtually no other week points that cost a lot in fixing. So I advised her to get it repaired. Yes it’s al lot of money, but if you can be reasonably certain that the car will run with just its regular maintenance for a couple of more years, it is a hell of a lot cheaper than being a new or even second hand car. So she did and we are two years and 22000km further.

I have have many friends and people trying to convince me, or probably themselves, it made economic sense to trade in their old for a new car. I always tell them I don’t believe them. The minute your car reaches an age where the depreciation bottoms out, you are are driving a very cheap car, even if it needs some more expensive repairs now and then.

The other thing, many people are very reluctant to own older cars because they believe they become more unreliable. Whenever my wife breaks down with one of our cars, she will call a taxi and go home. I will get a text where the car is left and a message in CAPITAL letters something along the lines of “ I will never ever drive this car again, ever!!! Get me a different car today!! I am not joking, it has happened twice in fourth years of marriage.

Again, whether it is technically true that old cars are less reliable than new is something we can debate, but the sentiment out there in the market is certainly in favour of new cars, if you value reliability.

The other thing is that a new car will come with more creature comfort, more power, better performance, better fuel efficiency etc. So no matter what comparing any new car to my 25 year old Jeep or my 40 year old Mercedes is very much an Apple to Pears comparison I believe.

Either you like driving old cars and feel comfortable doing so, or you don’t.
Just for future reference, EVs are likely topmusici the average lifespan of our motorcar up again!!

What we are really discussing here, my opinion, is economic life span overshadowed by sentiment. At what point in time will an average car owner (Indian) prefer to start investing in a new car, rather than keep paying for the old one.

I appreciate it might be more difficult in India to maintain old cars, especially those that come with complex systems. But there is no technical reason excuse for it. It’s a matter of skills, training, tools and attitude. That could be different in India and a genuine concern of course.

Jeroen

[GTO]

With very few exceptions, any car today will last 200,000 km if maintained properly. That being said:

- The global benchmark for durability is a body on frame Toyota. Within the Indian scene, think Innova, Fortuner & Hilux.

- Odds are, owners will get tired of the car before the car runs out of life.

- Heavy electronics mean that, anywhere between the 10 to 15 year mark (depending on the car), the cost of repairs will exceed the car's value. That's why you see so many abandoned Audis, BMWs & Mercedes' from the late 2000s. No one wants to spend 5 lakhs on an unreliable car worth 4 lakhs.

- With tech filtering down, the above-mentioned phenomena will apply to mainstream cars too. Example, will you spend 3 lakh rupees on repairing the DCT of your 15-year old Creta? I don't think so. In that sense, a 15-year old Brezza (oldschool tech) has a better chance of longer life than a 15-year old Creta.

- In big cities, the government will anyway ban 10-year diesels and 15-year petrols. These will find their way to B-towns for the final leg of their life.

[Sankar]

All modern vehicles are reliable, robust and long lasting. Bodies are stronger, safer and the engine and transmissions are built using quality components and precision manufacturing. So they should last long, yes?

Most often it is one component that failed and caused the breakdown or subsequent failures. The gradual replacement of metal components inside the engine bay with plastic component has been a bane of modern engines as they get old. EVs will hopefully replace IC engines before plastic takes them over completely. Then we would only have to worry about plastic in bodies and chassis.

The built to last a lifetime or more sort of over engineering philosophy seems to have been taken over by emissions, efficiency, reducing friction and weight philosophy. Using 0w16 or 0w20 oil in lieu of 0w30 or 0w40 oils are also part of that school of thought. Another anti-friction and less drag but maybe not as robust example is the width of the silent timing chain used in the new Maruti K12N compared to the old K12M engine. Thankfully though its still a chain and not a belt-in-oil!

Target audience of the new cars are partially responsible for the kind of vehicles they churn out for the respective markets. People feel the need for a change when the vehicle has been barely run in. Changing cars just for the sake of change at 5 or 6 years is waste of resources and why should the manufacturer over engineer it to last 20 plus years? The forced vehicle scrapping policy is a bonkers idea, all for the sake of driving the economy.

[Old_Salt]

I think I can relate it to in our industry.
Ships which were built in European shipyards almost 20yrs ago, are still going strong, structurally. You board these ships and you just feel they are “solid”.

Compare them with the ships being delivered nowadays from China and Korea and the stark difference in quality starts showing up around the 10yr mark. If we need to keep those ships until 25th, then a good amount of investment is required between the 10th and 15th year docking.

So yes, like humans, products now come with a shelf life / expiry date. They are build to last(few years) but with terms and conditions applied.
It’s like 10yr ban on diesel engines. Similar issues with older ships not being able to comply with new global standards with regards to emission and ending up in the scrapyard.

[abhatt]

Personally I own Polo 2013 for last 10 years and it still feels great. Not sure about longevity yet but the 2 year old Jeep Compass looks promising as well however some niggles which I never experienced in Polo, like rattles do annoy me.

[Durango Dude]

My dad's Amby was with us for almost 30 years (yes 3 decades); would any of us be ready or in the right frame of mind to hold on to our rides for 30 years now? I think not. In today's world 'durability' is a curse indeed. Only thing that's constant is "change" and that saying itself is a "conspiracy" by the "cartel". Suppose God made us all perfect and rid us of the 'expiry' date or death: just think of what would happen, besides doctors becoming obsolete there'd be no space for all the extra population and there'd be riots. Nothing and No One is/lives forever. Enjoy the change.

[vedirah]

An interesting saying we have in the industry -

"Anyone can build a strong bridge. But it takes a good engineer to build a bridge that's just strong enough."

This is true for all aerospace products. We want everything to be just strong enough, so that it's light and at the same time functional. I assume the same is true for automobiles. Manufacturers want to build products that are just strong enough for the purpose, lightweight, and cost as less as possible.

[Bismaya]

Instead of posting a deep neck analysis, I'll narrate a small anecdote.

The other day I was at the Bridgestone store for wheel alignment. This OLA Driver comes with an Alto 800 which has done 10K KMS and is 3-5 months.

He shows me how my 21 year old Maruti 800 is more strongly built by banging my hood with his fist (with my permission) and it remains intact. He does exactly the same on his Alto and bam, it deforms. It's like the sheet goes in like a temporary dent. I guess it says a lot about the build quality of a modern car.

[samitjain]

I think Toyota has followed KISS - Keep it simple stupid - philosophy.

Innovas and fortuners don’t have complex electronics. Rugged BOF Chasis.

Toyota has always been a step behind in adapting new tech. The reason they command such high resale value. My 8.5 year old Innova still command 6.5 lacs resale value.

As people have quoted that people sell their Toyota out of boredom and I am an example of that. I sold my Liva just out of boredom after 7 years.

Germans with their complex engineering and high spare costs are not seen on road after 12-15 years.

Today’s Kia and Hyundais - don’t know what fate has stored in for them with so many complex Electricals.

Nobody wants to spend lacs on an outdated tech for repair. I Would buy Toyota original product (Not rebadged) and live with less tech.

Most of the systems in Connected cars are so much interconnected with various functions that if one goes Kaput, car is rendered useless.

Can’t buy car Like Seltos and hope to keep it for 8-9 years like I am keeping Innova. Tier 2 cities and remote area and Hill states would prefer to buy cars with less tech.

Future of cars with so much tech will feel like mobiles today which get outdated in few years.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Bismaya

I guess it says a lot about the build quality of a modern car.

You guessed wrong, the sheet metal thickness has little bearing on either safety and or how long it will last.

Metal sheet thickness of current cars are about half what they were about 3-4 decades ago.

Safety of a car is created by clever design around structural rigidy and crumple zones and so on. The actual thickness is of less importance as well on how the metal is shaped and formed.

Current (relatively) sheet metal is much better protected against rust and corrosion than before too. Fourth years ago all cars rusted badly. We might have forgotten that, but it was one of the reasons they did not last long.

These days, rust isn’t an issue on most cars, certainly not to the point where rust is attacking structural integrety. That is almost unheard of these days.

Modern cars are made out of much thinner sheet metal than ever before. Even so, they last longer and are safer!!

Jeroen

[GrammarNazi]

I'm surprised this wasn't posted till now. Here's an evaluation of the mechanical difference between Toyota's built 15 years apart :

https://youtu.be/ZEYRwHnvdac

Cars built in the decade 2000-2010 were better because car manufacturers wanted to excel at engineering a good product. Toyota especially managed to optimise their cars for their launches in that decade. They were durable, relatively safe, offered good power to weight ratio and offered good fuel economy. Toyota and Honda both excelled at building very very reliable & economic CVTs.

Even apart from Toyota's, quite a few cars became known to be capable of lasting lifetimes. For example, Toyota's suspension could often last 1L kms even in Indian conditions, while many others would only optimise component quality for it to last ~60k kms. This was the case across the globe & it commoditised cars leading to them holding good value even after decades of use. They were fairly OK designed (ever notice that even by today's standards an old Corolla would not sore your eyes?).

This could saturate the highly penetrated car markets like US within a decade. Companies didn't like this because it put a lot of pressure to evolve products on value. Nissans' Carlos Ghosn particularly pushed for the industry to build cars that would last only a certain life and consumers should be expected to junk/recycle old cars & buy new cars.

Govts supported this because taxing cars was a massive² source of revenue. This led to a tougher push to tightening car emission regulations even in developing countries.

If Govts actually cared for consumers, they'd have devised global minimum safety regulations for cars to be built better in terms of crash safety. But did they emphasise it as much as emissions ? Not at all. It was left to consumers to choose to buy a safe car.

At the same time, cars are the most under utilised and fastest depreciating asset that people buy.

IMO modern cars are increasingly designed to last just a little more than the amount that the average consumer uses. Apart from that, as road infrastructure improves, car components of even newer cars will obviously last fairly long if taken care of.

[ritedhawan]

Originally Posted by GrammarNazi

Cars built in the decade 2000-2010 were better because car manufacturers wanted to excel at engineering a good product. Toyota especially managed to optimise their cars for their launches in that decade. They were durable, relatively safe, offered good power to weight ratio and offered good fuel economy. Toyota and Honda both excelled at building very very reliable & economic CVTs.

Even apart from Toyota's, quite a few cars became known to be capable of lasting lifetimes. For example, Toyota's suspension could often last 1L kms even in Indian conditions, while many others would only optimise component quality for it to last ~60k kms.

True. The Honda's and Toyota offerings from that period 2000-2010 had "Reliability written all over it." (Figuratively speaking). Less sensors and electronics strapped in, tried and tested AT's, less complexity leading to higher reliability.

Nice video shared, wonderful comparison between old and new Camry.
Severed head of a tooth brush being used as a pointer!!

[jono213]

An extremely thought provoking thread for sure! Just walking around and feeling out old cars built in the early 2000's reveals so much about the priorities of the manufacturer.

Circa 2005-2010, I personally feel the automobile market was way better compared to now, not in terms of sheer size but the quality of every product, not this new era of jacked hatchbacks (yes, i'm looking at the S-presso) and compromised cars.
Even pulling up a few examples like well kept Toyota products, the old Civic, City and Jazz, even some niche Maruthi offerings like the Kizashi and Grand Vitara reveals so much about that bygone era.
An era in which manufacturers were ready to take risks and enter some really interesting cars into the market, the sort of enthusiasm you never see anymore.

[Livnletcarsliv]

Just my 2 cents.

I would compare cars with mobile phones (from the tech perspective at least)
Nokia's, Ericsson's, and Motorola's of the late '90s and early 2000s were strong and robust. They served their purpose. However, can they be used today? Probably YES. But, as contemporary humans do we really want to limit/adapt ourselves to the useability (especially functionalities and features) of those Nokia's (3315, 6110, 6100, 6610, Nseries), etc? - NO. And automobile industry is no exception to this change.

Is iPhone 14 reliable and robust to last for another 10 or more years - Yes. Can we use it for 10 years? - Probably Yes. Can we use it beyond 10 years? - No.
Any machine (mechanical or electric or electronic) has a lifetime. And that TIMELINE depends on many factors including the people, the government, and the manufacturers themselves.

Moreover, we are now in a different revolution. After independence it was the Industrial Revolution, then the Technology Revolution, then the Information/Data Revolution, and now it is the Social Revolution. Today people migrate more, people relocate more, and people travel more. So they don't want to live an old life. People don't want to hold on to an old mobile, old TV, old laptop, and whatnot. And a car is no exception. So it doesn't make sense (financially and technically) to build a car that will outlive its owner in this contemporary world. A Toyota anywhere in the world is not significantly lagging in tech, complex electronics, or features over other vehicle brands. It's just that their process of building cars is more reliable. It is why we pay a premium for its cars.

So today's cars definitely reliable and robust. It just serves its purpose (whether it is for 5 years or 50 years). Of course, there are always some exceptions here and there.

[GreasyCarb55]

One of the last of the "built to last" cars in the Indian market imo was the 1st Gen Innova that lasted from 2004 all the way till 2014 before making way for the brand new Crysta in 2015. We have a Type 2 2011 Innova Diesel (8 Seater) and it's without a doubt the most comfortable car I've ever sat in, following a front end accident we converted it to Type 4 spec.

It just crossed the 1,80,000km mark a few days ago but it looks, feels and drives like it's ready for 18,00,000km more. At this point I'm convinced that a used but well maintained Type 3 or Type 4 Innova Diesel with an upgraded audio setup and Stage 1 upgrades under the hood is a better deal than most 7-8 seaters under 40 lakh. My parents haven't gone a single week in 2022 without someone or the other asking if the Innova is for sale.

We were discussing potentially selling the Innova for a newer 7/8 seater and I told them outright that unless they were going to spend 36 Lakh to get the top of the line Innova HyCross (and then getting thicker profile tyres) or 42 Lakh on a KIA Carnival they were better off keeping the Innova. If I wasn't far away from home attending college in Bhubaneshwar our Innova would've probably already received a mid life refresh with upgraded audio, an aftermarket air filter and a DieselTronic Piggyback ECU + Stage 1 tune.