What To Look For (And Maybe Avoid) In Your Next New Car
March 12th, 2008 Posted in Eric Peters, Tips
By Eric Peters, Automotive Columnist
There’s an engineering principle worth bearing in mind when shopping for a car — used or new. It is that the greater the complexity of any system, the greater the odds of a failure of some kind. And its corollary is that the odds of problems developing increase at an almost geometric rate as time goes by.
With older, out-of-warranty (or soon to be out-of-warranty) cars, this can mean unanticipated, expensive repairs that can, when they get bad enough (and frequent enough) render the car a money pit not worth keeping.
With newer, still-covered cars, repairs may not cost you money. But there’s no getting around the hassle of things that don’t work right and which leave the car at the dealership rather than in your driveway.
If anything, it’s worse to be the unlucky owner of a brand-new car that needs constant fixing.
When you buy an older car, you accept going in that things may not be perfect. It’s the risk you take in return for the lower price. With a new car, on the other hand, the whole point of paying a butt-load of money is to have a problem-free car. If it ends up having problems anyhow, the fact that it’s “covered” isn’t much comfort.
Ok, so what about some specifics?
Be leery of “first generation” anything, but especially “latest thing” electronics.
Give them at least a year to sort the bugs out — and for unknown problems to become known. This is a modern-era version of the ancient wisdom about avoiding the first year of any new car model. These days, the cars themselves are usually pretty well sorted-out. But software/supplier/durability glitches often aren’t.
Avoid complexity for its own sake.
Several new car models have (or offer) systems, such as “mouse inputs,” that are almost certainly money pits in the making. Aggravating to use when they work, they are sure to be hugely expensive to restore to working order when they inevitably develop problems down the road. Steer clear if possible and save yourself some drama. Similarly: rotary knobs are more durable than “touch screen” anything — and a lot cheaper to fix if and when they do require fixing. If you’re physically able to handle it, manual sliding doors (and trunks/liftgates, etc.) are likely a safer bet, potential problem-wise, than electric-assisted ones.
And so on.
When buying used, buy the simpler car.
The higher-end (or higher-performance) the car, the more apt it is to have things like an electronically adjustable/auto-leveling suspension, high-end and high cost optics (headlights, instrument panel illumination), and a driveline (engine/transmission) more prone to problems than a simpler, more basic car’s driveline.
For example, overhead cam engines are very popular today — especially in import/higher-cost cars. But overhead cam engines often need periodic (and expensive) timing belt changes. Overhead valve (”pushrod”) engines are much less maintenance-intensive on this — and other — points.
Manual 4WD (where you pull up on a handle to engage the 4WD) has historically been more trouble-free than automatic 4WD (where the system is engaged and disengaged electronically and controlled by a computer).
Anti-lock brakes offer a safety advantage — but a car without ABS brakes will be cheaper to service. There’s no $800 ABS pump to fail.
The bottom line is that stuff that looks gee-whiz on the show circuit and which magazine reviewers (who, remember, are just test-driving someone else’ brand-new car for a couple of days) fawn over may not be such a great idea out in the real world — where it’s up to you to foot the bill — or put up with the hassle of a car that’s constantly in the shop for “diagnostics.”
Comments? www.ericpetersautos.com
Image Credit: spakattacks
Other Related Articles
7 Responses to “What To Look For (And Maybe Avoid) In Your Next New Car”
By John on Mar 31, 2008
Someone is asleep at the wheel in this article with regards to safety issues. While I whole heartedly agree in avoiding necessary gadgetry like high-tech convenience features and many new models for the first six months or so, I cannot fathom that anyone with a conscience would advocate avoidance of cars because of antilock brakes, most of which also now include traction control. What next, avoid any thing with an airbag becasue it might cost a lot to repair? And avoiding overhead cam engines? Hmm, that leaves most of us driving 1982 Chevettes or 2 ton pick up trucks. What the author should be saying, is either look for an overhead cam engine that utilizes a timing chain rather than a timing belt, or research the used car models where a timing belt change is a $200 hit every 75,000 miles. They do exist.
By Chris on Mar 28, 2008
Folks, get a bicycle and pedal your way up to 2008.
How can a motorist website suggest to buy a used car, or any car for that matter, without an ABS is beyond me. Failure of ABS pump is possibly the least probable of all the failures. I’ve only have experience with Mazdas, but even 10 years old the cars with 170,000+ miles have ABS in excellent condition. But of course, there are brands too…
And avoiding DOHC engines? You can’t be serious…
It really looks like someone wants to sustain a constant flow of repair cash to Detroit…
What about serious advice, such as check out the suspension as it may be worn out, check out the wear on the tyres - uneven suggesst suspension/braking/wheel alignment issues or even past crash. What about check the car for rust, check the oil, try the car under braking…., try to start the engine when cold and see what kind of smoke goes out of the exhaust. Any suspicious noises?
And most importatnly, check the body and engine numbers as these may have been tampered with and the car may have been stolen, written off…. etc.
By dave on Mar 24, 2008
I think this article was written in 1982 lol
By Steve on Mar 18, 2008
Avoid OHC’s? You’re joking, right? I thought this was an enthusiast’s site.
Gee, the only engine I’ve had go belly-up on me was an ancient-tech GM 2.5l 4-cyl (yes — it was a HUGE mistake) that ate its timing gear.
After I unloaded that pig, I’ve driven nothing but OHC-engined cars since and have had to replace one belt unexpectedly (did it myself on a Saturday).
50s/60s cars have a nostalgic appeal, but I don’t think many folks today would put up with their need for constant tweaking, poor performance and spartan accommodations (old Coupe de Villes notwithstanding…)
By George on Mar 14, 2008
A car without ABS has flat spotted tires.
You can’t avoid ABS. ABS is integral to EBD.
and ABS is integral to stability control, whose mandate is coming pretty soon.
By Douglas Guerra on Mar 13, 2008
Avoid OverHead Cam motors and ABS? Sounds like this article was written by a North American auto executive. Maybe we should all be driving Ford Model T’s.
By Gareth on Mar 12, 2008
Having worked in the parts distribution centre (spare parts dep.t) of a major auto manufacturer, I agree wholeheartedly about avoiding ‘first gen’ new cars. I spent nearly 2 years shipping valve tappet sets worldwide after the company introduced a new engine. For the first 6 months of production the old design of tappet was built into every engine built - even though the company KNEW there was a problem and had a redesigned part already in production. It was deemed cheaper to replace the faulty part under warranty than it was to delay production to change the part during build.
To give an idea of how large the problem was, the depot was shipping an average of 20,000 tappets a week for 2 years. Over half a million cars worldwide were affected…