A 1987 vehicle might be more reliable now than a 2017 vehicle might be in 2047, but so what? No one's worried about breaking down 30 years from now. If you are comparing reliability you need to be comparing it for the trip you are taking next week. Is the 1987 truck or the 2017 truck more likely to get you there and back? No question that the 2017 is more reliable.

Now if the question is which will last longer you may have an argument. Will the 1987 truck or the 2017 truck be more reliable in 2047? If both are maintained by shade-tree mechanics I'd probably put my money on the '87 still being around and reliable.

And if the question is which truck would you rather be driving on that trip next week, for me the answer is clearly the '87 (although in my case it's a '97). I just don't like the newer trucks I've owned or been in. So I'm willing to have a less reliable truck (that's still quite reliable), and get worse mileage, to be driving a truck I like. But that's my choice, not an absolute truth that applies to everyone.

 

Sorry, but the one that died on Big Blue was a PowerMaster. Called them to get parts. They don't sell parts - you have to return it for repair. So I replaced it with a 1G I had on the shelf and away I went. I'm not going to run something for which I can't get parts. And when the PowerMaster starter fails it'll get replaced with another brand as well.

 

That's disappointing as my initial impression of Powermaster was they made quality parts from my experience with their performance as well as others on the forum. They may make quality parts but if they offer no support or customer service that puts them in a similar place as Banks... Offer decent things for what they are but proprietary and charge an arm and a huge markup from having proprietary patented parts. It's a crappy business model.

 

I agree, and one I won't be part of. The alternator wasn't very old and it just quit. The voltmeter bounced up and down for a while, but then it settled in at battery voltage. So I called PowerMaster to get a rebuild kit, but found they don't sell any parts. Given that, they go on the same list as Mr. Gasket - no way, Jose. As said, I'll run the starter until it dies, but will then replace it with another brand PMGR unit and not look back.

 

I kept this in mind while I was rebuilding/customizing my engine. Other than the intake manifold and the exhaust headers, EVERY SINGLE PART on my truck is a FORD part that can be looked up and found in any auto parts house in any town.

It really is a shame how CRAPPY replacement auto parts are now. After replacing my starter twice with junk parts store "remanufactured" units, I won't do that anymore, either. I found a local rebuilder who rebuilds starters, alternators, etc, and I haven't had a problem since.

 

On the topic of how expensive these new trucks are; it's fun to Google "build my 'x'" with x being a car brand. Often they have a thing to customize their vehicles, and it's fun to see how expensive you can make them. Here's an f350 with all the $$$ options:


Wouldn't buy it, but I'd drive it..

And then you can also build the comparable new version of your own truck (as close as makes sense) to find out how much it'd cost. Turns out the new version of my truck is expensive...




This was as close as I could get

 

Reliability as defined over a time span of 50 years. How many time will you be walking when driving that 2017 vehicle between now and 2067? How many times will the 1987 vehicle have you walking between 1987 and 2037? Or 2017 and 2067 for that matter?

To answer your question, I care very much about choosing a vehicle that won't be breaking down 30 years from now, that is why my daily driver is an '86 Ford pickup in the winter and a '71 Honda bike in the summer. From ym vehicle, above all I need them to just plain work every single time and get me where I need to be, when I need to be there.

You gamble on that 2017 vehicle for the next 50 years if you want to. It'll cost you a small fortune to buy and maintain and I believe it will still leave you walking.

 

Maybe just semantics, but I disagree with your definition of reliability, at least for a vehicle. To me 50 years is longevity, reliability is getting me home without problems on my next trip. Only after the next trip is complete is the trip after that the issue.

You ignored the next paragraph in my post where I said:
So no, I don't want to gamble on a 2017 vehicle for the next 50 years. I agree with you that the complexities of newer vehicles make them more difficult to maintain as a reliable vehicle over a period of decades. But I still say that for the short term, keeping an old vehicle reliable takes work, while new vehicles are reliable without needing work. Since most people are willing to replace vehicles every few years, it's very reasonable to have a reliable vehicle for decades by just getting a new(er) vehicle every so often.

That's typically more expensive than maintaining an older vehicle, but it's a lot easier. That said, people on this forum are pre-sorted to be people that can, and even want to do the work required to keep an old vehicle reliable. There's nothing wrong with that, and a lot right with it. But even well-maintained old vehicles are still more likely to have reliability problems than new vehicles, just not so much more likely that it's still worth driving them for the other benefits (cost, enjoyment of the vehicle, or whatever). Especially when they're being driven by people that understand and can fix their vehicle, which can compensate for most reliability issues.

 

The dealers have incentives all the time, altho recently that has been mainly directed to the 2.7L ecoboost in the F-150. The new ones do everything better functionally but of course it's taken the backyard mechanic part out for most things besides very basic maintenance.

And hey, if I was making the big bucks, I'd love a $80K King Ranch! Lol....

 

Wow....$1204 x 84 months =$101,136
$847 x 84 months = $71,148
Hundreds of thousands of people are paying these prices for pickup trucks and not even blinking. Simply amazing, for depreciating assets.

 

If you can't pay cash, you can't afford it. If the consumer clowns of society didn't blow money they don't have on fancy new luxury vehicles they would spend it on something else frivolous. I recall a time when someone was begging me for gas money at a convenience store, while I was getting into my '86 Ford and she was sitting in her brand new $30k+ luxury car. I laughed and said if you can afford such a fancy new luxury car you can afford gas. I have no sympathy for people who do it to themselves.

 

COMPLETELY AGREE

 

I need my vehicle to just plain work, day after day, year after year. A new vehicle can't offer me that, so I don't own one.

[QUOTE=Nothing Special;17082684]I agree with you that the complexities of newer vehicles make them more difficult to maintain as a reliable vehicle over a period of decades. But I still say that for the short term, keeping an old vehicle reliable takes work, while new vehicles are reliable without needing work.

Pick any brand new vehicle and talk to me about it's reliability after 30+ years of owning it since day one. Take previous owner neglect out of it, and I'm confident it will not be a reliable vehicle. One of the reasons I own only 30-50 year old vehicles is specifically because I don't want to be inconvenienced with a lot of work, particularly unshceduled, complex, and expensive work. Once you catch up on maintenance and fix previous owners hackjobs an older vehicle requires minimal work to keep reliable.

If there's something specific that you believe will fail and leave you walking, lay it out there. Suspension and steering components are typically much stonger and more serviceable (greasable, for one) on older vehicles and hence much less likely to fail catastrophically. Suspension and steering failures are the msot common thing I see on new vehicles on the side of the road. Ball joints or tie rod ends separated, even ridiculously undersized tie rods snapped. There are no sensors to keep a perfectly healthy engine from running, like the many dead new cars I've seen with bad sensors such as crank or cam position sensors.

Other than under-specced unserviceable parts and complex electronics and sensors new vehicles aren't fundamentally different. It's the same stuff just with weaker inferior parts and many more single points of failure. There's a reason why 60s vehicles are as early as I'll drive every day. Sure you could go as early as 30s for a daily driver but advances from 1930-1960 are significant and appreciable. Overhead valve engines, efficient cam and head design, better carburetor design, electric wipers, better brakes, better lighting, electrical and charging system improvements, etc... Advances from the late 60s to now are not significant, appreciable, or compelling.

That's a different point... But sure I can put on brand new socks and underwear every day to avoid having to maintain my old ones through their useful service life. That's a rich fools game, but sure it would be quite the luxury! Personally I'd rather retire while I'm still healthy and able bodied, one part of that is minimize TCO for vehicles (minimize repair and maintenance cost) and only buy vehicles that have depreciated to a stable value or are appreciating in value. There are plenty of people that apparently want to work until they drop dead on the job. Different strokes for different folks and all...

Examples of the reliability problems a 30 year old well maintained 1985 Ford is more likely to have than a 30 year old 2015 Ford?

 

We agree on all of the answers, just none of the questions. Personally I think it's pointless to question what's more reliable between one vehicle today and a different vehicle 30 years from now. If that is the question, then yes, I agree with you that the '85 is likely more reliable today than the '15 will be in 30 years. But it's not like anyone would ask the question "should I drive an '85 truck today or a 2015 truck in 30 years?"

 

Just wanted to say I respect each and every opinion offered here. Everything said is worth consideration.

For myself, I am no fan of the $80K truck. A large part of that reason is that there is no way I could afford such a vehicle. More of a statement of personal circumstance than any issues concerning reliability. Another issue is that I simply do not like the styling of modern trucks. I know a lot of this is mandated by safety legislation, but my personal opinion is that the most attractive truck ever built was the 1956 Ford. It is possible to drop $80K on a classic like that and I think 36 months down the road, the new truck will be worth 1/3 of the purchase price and the classic will have appreciated. So, you can count investment as another issue I would have with the new vehicle.

Still, there are those who need to purchase a new truck and will use it for the intended duration of it's service life. Part of this reason is the notion of reliability. I see it as a form of risk management. New car warranty can be a comforting thing when all those gizmo's and gadgets go wrong and yes, they do make life a little easier. Repair costs can be considerable with today's shop rates. The worst part is that the new vehicle was designed and legislated to not be serviced by anyone other than the qualified people at the dealership. The older vehicle is more likely to be maintained by the owner and a roadside repair would not be out of the question. New and old can and will break down. The new vehicle will arrive at the dealership on the back of a tow truck, (often an older model!). The older vehicle may be repaired roadside by the owner. It becomes hard to say which is more likely to complete the trip.

There has been a lot of innovation over the last 30 years and I for one do not miss carburetors. EFI systems have been around long enough that the scrap yards are already running short on the older models. Carburetors are long gone and even a simple carb kit may be special order at the parts store, but say, a replacement EFI fuel pump is easily obtained for most models. Engine management has evolved into total vehicle management systems that certainly add layers of complexity, but for my money, the most reliable vehicle would be a well maintained, EFI equipped model, preferably pre 2005.