For those interested in old cars.

[Hobby]

1 hour ago, APOLLO said:

The worst are ALL the German makes

 

I'm now on my eighth consecutive VW Group car, one failure since 2001 and even that was just a switch into "get you home" mode rather than parking up on the hard shoulder...

 

Not that my experiences counts against such illustrious knowledge... But my experiences with 70s and 80s cars would suggest that modern cars, despite (or because of?) the modern electrics are far more reliable... But that doesn't stop me wanting another to run as a classic, even though I know it'll cost me more to run than a modern!

Edited November 27, 2021 by Hobby

[russ p]

6 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

I'm now on my eighth consecutive VW Group car, one failure since 2001 and even that was just a switch into "get you home" mode rather than parking up on the hard shoulder...

 

Not that my experiences counts against such illustrious knowledge... But my experiences with 70s and 80s cars would suggest that modern cars, despite (or because of?) the modern electrics are far more reliable... But that doesn't stop me wanting another to run as a classic, even though I know it'll cost me more to run than a modern!

 

There is a lot to be said for running a modern classic as a daily.  I think the way to do it is choose a model that has good parts availability and buy the best example  you can find

I run an MG ZT CDTi as a daily.  Failed about a year ago with a  blocked plenum drain causing water to kill the ECU. It's only the diesels that suffer from this as the BMW ECU isn't waterproof unlike the rover engined ones. It was back on the road after a few hours thanks to a friend in the excellent owners club

The other thing to do is keep  regular rust proofing 

 

[MrWolf]

An old car, in my experience is only more expensive to run than a modern one if you're paying a specialist to service and maintain it. If you're doing the work yourself, it only costs the price of the parts. So unless you are running something that was exotica when new, it has to be cheaper. The cost of servicing and replacement of consumables on modern cars, I find incredible. £700 to change a cam belt? Two hours and about £15 on an old FD / FE Victor.

[MJI]

1 hour ago, APOLLO said:

 

I talk to my friendly local garage owner. It's getting worse every year (for him). The need for very expensive specialised tools and equipment for various makes etc.  The worst are ALL the German makes, most reliable are Toyota (Petrol) Honda (Petrol) & Hyundai.

 

What's the most reliable car I asked him, A Toyota Avensis petrol was his reply.

 

Servicing is important, but wont stop electrical control unit failures etc etc. Modern cars are over complicated these days.

 

And 1970's British Leyland, I have a 73 Rover P5B V8 in the garage, superb car, never let me down, simple tech and 'nowt goes wrong - but indeed change the oil & filter every year is a must.

 

Brit15

 

 

My last German car was fine, with British engine and French gearbox,  it had some beancounter issues on valve seals and was heavy on suspension bushes, but was well made and reliable.

[Dunsignalling]

1 minute ago, MrWolf said:

An old car, in my experience is only more expensive to run than a modern one if you're paying a specialist to service and maintain it. If you're doing the work yourself, it only costs the price of the parts. So unless you are running something that was exotica when new, it has to be cheaper. The cost of servicing and replacement of consumables on modern cars, I find incredible. £700 to change a cam belt? Two hours and about £15 on an old FD / FE Victor.

Won't cost a whole lot more than that on a lot of modern types, so long as you do it yourself.....

 

Most I've paid for a cam-belt job was a bit over £400, I presume £700 is the official main-dealer rate.

 

John

[MJI]

1 hour ago, alastairq said:

If I were to be guided by what I have read in the relibaility surveys,i wouldnt entertain anything coming out of the Land Rover factory.

Neither would I consider Renault [or anything French].....

{ I have poor experiences with the Peugeots I have had, better experiences with the  Renaults....and mixed experiences with anything coming from VW!

I have found the Japanese always seemed to make a reliable, if uninspiring [driving-wise] car.

Possibly same with other SE Asian makers?

Equally, Lada seemed to prove reliable as well.

 

When it comes to reliability, any maker is often in the hands of the makers of the ancillaries.

A duff alternator isn't down to the badge on the front...it's down to whoever made the alternator...

 

 

Ford, seem to be [pretty bad from experience, my dad had lots of problems with the Essex V6

Renault, CAN be good, but often are fragile. Would not risk.

Peugeot, keep buying and closing companies, made support of ex Rootes group cars hard. Used to be good, now boring.

Land Rover, depends entirely on the model, they can be reliable or a total liability. I would put upper cut off at D2, P38, and Def TD5. Them and anything older can be life extended indefinately.

 

You probably know I have a TD5 Discovery and it had had its fair share of parts, but all are either consumables OR ancillaries. But 60,000 miles in it and not been let down by a LR part, I have by a fuel pump (bought in but engine can run with no fuel pump), alternator twice (failed recon), battery twice, starter twice (replaced when started to play up and was winter so did not repair). Note good D2 prices are now getting higher than D3 prices

 

Luckily all cheap to replace. Except fuel pump.

 

Ancillaries are a real PITA, most of issues on cars I have had, they have all had batteries, a few alternators.

 

I would rather have a repairable long lasting car than one which would have to be chucked if it broke.

 

Engines  used to be pretty good, the GM V6s were real mile munchers, 170,000 miles and bores like new. TD5s are the most reliable engine to be fitted to anything Solihul. My Sunbeam 1600 managed well over 100,000 miles.

 

 

 

 

 

[MJI]

14 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Won't cost a whole lot more than that on a lot of modern types, so long as you do it yourself.....

 

Most I've paid for a cam-belt job was a bit over £400, I presume £700 is the official main-dealer rate.

 

John

 

 

I have done the GM V6 a few times, first time 200 from then on 100 as the fitting kit was around £100, and so was the belt and bits.

 

Couple of hours sat on the scuttle. Did it just before 40,000, cam belt is cheaper than a Y26SE

[russ p]

2 minutes ago, MJI said:

 

Ford, seem to be [pretty bad from experience, my dad had lots of problems with the Essex V6

Renault, CAN be good, but often are fragile. Would not risk.

Peugeot, keep buying and closing companies, made support of ex Rootes group cars hard. Used to be good, now boring.

Land Rover, depends entirely on the model, they can be reliable or a total liability. I would put upper cut off at D2, P38, and Def TD5. Them and anything older can be life extended indefinately.

 

You probably know I have a TD5 Discovery and it had had its fair share of parts, but all are either consumables OR ancillaries. But 60,000 miles in it and not been let down by a LR part, I have by a fuel pump (bought in but engine can run with no fuel pump), alternator twice (failed recon), battery twice, starter twice (replaced when started to play up and was winter so did not repair). Note good D2 prices are now getting higher than D3 prices

 

Luckily all cheap to replace. Except fuel pump.

 

Ancillaries are a real PITA, most of issues on cars I have had, they have all had batteries, a few alternators.

 

I would rather have a repairable long lasting car than one which would have to be chucked if it broke.

 

Engines  used to be pretty good, the GM V6s were real mile munchers, 170,000 miles and bores like new. TD5s are the most reliable engine to be fitted to anything Solihul. My Sunbeam 1600 managed well over 100,000 miles.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Isn't the TD5 a 5 pot version of the perkins prima?

[Dunsignalling]

8 minutes ago, MJI said:

 

 

I have done the GM V6 a few times, first time 200 from then on 100 as the fitting kit was around £100, and so was the belt and bits.

 

Couple of hours sat on the scuttle. Did it just before 40,000, cam belt is cheaper than a Y26SE

Most are supposedly not too difficult to do, it's getting at it and putting everything back together afterwards that both puts the cost up, and deters d-i-y-ers.

 

Designers these days place almost all their effort in ease of assembly in the factory with little thought given to access for repair/maintenance.

 

Given that Peugeot cam belts only require replacement at (iirc) the sooner of 80k or 8 years, I was a bit surprised to discover that VAG engines need them at half that....

 

John 

Edited November 27, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[APOLLO]

Cars I have owned, in the order I bought them. Some were concurrent as I have had 2 cars for many years, 3 for the last 15 or so.

 

1973 Morris Marina 1800 No problems except poor road holding (as they all had)

1975 Leyland Princess 1800 HL Bought new. - Great car, very few problems, none major, Very much maligned are these cars, usually by people who have never even seen one. Superb road holding for it's time.

1968 Beetle 1600 - Superb. Bought it for £350, sold to a mate for £350 who sold it to another mate who did it up and sold it back to me for £500, I sold it to yet another mate for £500 who promptly wrecked it !!!!!!!!!

1982 Ford Capri 1600 - Great car, wish I still had it.

Two 1980's Audis (100 & 90) cost arm and leg, never again. Vorsprung durch meine arsche !!

1986 Austin Montego 1.6 Bought new. No problems, boring car though

1989 Peugeot 405 Diesel Superb non turbo car, 54 mpg, had 3 years & sold to a taxi firm for not a lot less than I bought it for

1973 Rover P5B V8 Bought for £800 in 1982, still have it, insured for £10K. Nuff said.

 

In 1992 I had a company cars until I retired in 2003

Peugeot 405 GTDT - Top model, superb but the turbo meant about 35mpg (heavy right foot !!)

Citroen Diesels, A Xantia, three Synergies and a Picasso 1.6 Petrol.

Ford Focus Ghia - Another great car

Never any problems at all with all my company cars.

 

I bought a 1988 Rover 213 for my wife when she passed her test, quite a nice car with no problems. A mate replaced the cam belt for £50, Traded it in for the Galaxy. 

 

1996 Polo Salon 1.6 Petrol, Bought for my new part time job in 2004. A good car but a few niggles, 3 ignition coils, window winder, but even these I could fix myself.

 

I bought a 1999 Galaxy Zetec 2.3 Petrol in 2001, still have it, great car but only 25mpg overall and the aircon has gone. Just passed MOT with minor advisories, This car is so handy I intend to keep it until it no longer economic to do so. Never had any major problems, but the aircon doesn't work, blender motor flap gears in the dash - un uneconomic repair. The clear coat on the roof has gone flaky also.

 

Run around is currently a 2008 Seat Leon 1.6 Petrol - basically a VW Golf in drag. A good car, bought in 2016 for just over £3K therefore it now owes me nothing. Main problems have been 2 door locks , £250 a throw to have installed and reprogrammed. 32mpg not too bad though. 

 

Next car ? (Galaxy replacement) - Probably an estate / suv, small petrol 2 litre max. As I only do small mileages / run around these days I wouldn't touch a modern diesel with a barge pole these days, though I'll finish by stating my son bought a 1 year old Hyundai i30 diesel in 2017. 4 years warranty remaining. He does high mileages with long runs (Poole to Wigan). This car is just the job, over 50mpg and not a single problem, just brake / tyres as required. A superbly specced and built car. I would consider a petrol one.

 

Brit15

 

 

Edited November 27, 2021 by APOLLO
typo

[Hobby]

28 minutes ago, russ p said:

Isn't the TD5 a 5 pot version of the perkins prima?

 

Not really, some joint use of parts, but different...

 

"The Land Rover Td5 engine, a 2.5-litre, 5-cylinder turbodiesel used in the Discovery and the Defender had the same bore/stroke dimensions as the L series and used the same pistons, connecting rods and crankshaft dimensions. However, the Td5 was not simply a 5-cylinder L series. It used Lucas electronic unit injection, instead of the L series' direct-injection system, as well as a through-flow cylinder head and a very different ancillary equipment layout. The Td5 had been developed by the Rover Group under the codename 'Project Storm', which was originally to develop a replacement range of turbodiesels to replace the L series, with 4-, 5-, and 6-cylinder engines of 2, 2.5, and 3 litres respectively." (Wiki)

 

 

 

 

To reply to those who talk about changing a camshaft and other work needed to keep an old car on the road as if it's just a walk in the park I'd better say here and now I am not one of them! I enjoy driving an old car for nostalga's ake but I'm not mechanically minded, or any good at body repairs, etc, so I use a professional. hence my earlier comment about costs is perfectly valid... For me!!

[MJI]

2 hours ago, russ p said:

 

Isn't the TD5 a 5 pot version of the perkins prima?

 

 

It was supposed to be a series of 4 5 6 to replace the last rover group diesels. Prima is an ancestor

[Rugd1022]

Well it looks like I'll be walking to work tonight - My 'daily' Alfa has failed its MOT, the battery in the Maser is dead and one of the bolts holding it in place has rounded off, and I still haven't fixed the clutch slave cylinder problem in the Cooper S!

[MrWolf]

I've always had problems with any vehicle where the battery clamp is a metal clip that grips the base of the battery and secured with one or more bolts into the carrier tray. It's another case of the accountants interfering with good design to minimise component expenditure. The bolts always seize up before the likes of us can get them out and apply plenty of grease. I've always preferred the old arrangement with two J or T bolts and wing nuts (preferably brass) It just works. I've had to resort to brutality a few times to get those one piece clamps off.

Is the Cooper a 60s model? I've always found with hydraulic clutches that if the slave cylinder blows, the master won't last long and it's less aggro to rebuild both.

Hope that you get things sorted out soon. It's rather obvious what you are going to be spending your spare time on.

 

 

 

Edited November 27, 2021 by MrWolf

[alastairq]

On the topic of the reliability, ease of repair/maintenance, coupled with comfort etc...[except, perhaps, fuel consumption?] I have to  vote for the likes of my 1967 Ford Mustang coupe.

Glamorous the idea of using one may be, but Ford {USA] certainly knew how to build a cheap yet reliable car.

 

Spares, service items, ease of maintenance or repair, it is by far the cheapest of old cars I've ever owned.

But not if you make full & proper use fo UK-based suppliers, it aint.

 

[Although for some items I use UK based suppliers, for ease if nothing else...and the one main one is finally coming to realise some service items are better priced nearer those from the USA..mainly involving shipping costs.]

But obtaining items from the likes of RockAuto, in the USA, is a doddle....and they have very reasonable shipping contracts. Even delivery times are often a mere 3 or 4 days, all charges paid [up front]..Something even Car Parts Online can barely equal.

So I'd recommend a 50's or 60's more mundane family car from the big two or three US makers....[Mustangs have a cache which makes them a bit costly up front, for a daily user].  Maybe a Falcon, or similar? Going for  'standard' size US car isn't really practical...but the Falcon/Musang sizes are thoroughly useable in the UK!  Being as they are barely as long or wide as a Mondeo....with more space inside?

For engines I'd recommend the bare bones 6 cylinder motors, rather than opting for the more glamorous V8.s....fewer spark plugs to buy, for starters.

The sixes of both Ford & GM were pure torque motors....so can keep one ahead of all modern traffic with ease. Plus the fuel consumption can be in the mid-20's to the gallon, instead of the teens of a V8.

Do the work yourself...there are plenty of Youtube videos of US stuff to follow....and plenty of info and suppliers.

 

So that's my  two pennorth.....reliability being built-in to US market maker's ideas....Build them like tanks, and they'll go coast to coast without issue.

 

However, muzzie will have to go soon....it was merely a place to put some savings out of sight....but I will be sad to get rid of it. But I also lurve my Dellow..which is equally unable to conk out...

One US motor I would like to have as a 'user' is the IH Scout.....an early one would be nice, but I'd make do with whatever is cheap....They're ugly and unloved by most.....There used to be one living not many villages away from me here, some time ago...

If ever anyone has watched the crime series ''Jesse Stone'', starring Tom Selleck....as series I watch time & again, very dark in places, not at all glitzy....well, the main character initially arrives on scene in a Scout.... Built like a brick, probably drives like a brick, has no frills to speak of....just how I like them!!

 

[boxbrownie]

11 minutes ago, alastairq said:

On the topic of the reliability, ease of repair/maintenance, coupled with comfort etc...[except, perhaps, fuel consumption?] I have to  vote for the likes of my 1967 Ford Mustang coupe.

Glamorous the idea of using one may be, but Ford {USA] certainly knew how to build a cheap yet reliable car.

 

Spares, service items, ease of maintenance or repair, it is by far the cheapest of old cars I've ever owned.

But not if you make full & proper use fo UK-based suppliers, it aint.

 

[Although for some items I use UK based suppliers, for ease if nothing else...and the one main one is finally coming to realise some service items are better priced nearer those from the USA..mainly involving shipping costs.]

But obtaining items from the likes of RockAuto, in the USA, is a doddle....and they have very reasonable shipping contracts. Even delivery times are often a mere 3 or 4 days, all charges paid [up front]..Something even Car Parts Online can barely equal.

So I'd recommend a 50's or 60's more mundane family car from the big two or three US makers....[Mustangs have a cache which makes them a bit costly up front, for a daily user].  Maybe a Falcon, or similar? Going for  'standard' size US car isn't really practical...but the Falcon/Musang sizes are thoroughly useable in the UK!  Being as they are barely as long or wide as a Mondeo....with more space inside?

For engines I'd recommend the bare bones 6 cylinder motors, rather than opting for the more glamorous V8.s....fewer spark plugs to buy, for starters.

The sixes of both Ford & GM were pure torque motors....so can keep one ahead of all modern traffic with ease. Plus the fuel consumption can be in the mid-20's to the gallon, instead of the teens of a V8.

Do the work yourself...there are plenty of Youtube videos of US stuff to follow....and plenty of info and suppliers.

 

So that's my  two pennorth.....reliability being built-in to US market maker's ideas....Build them like tanks, and they'll go coast to coast without issue.

 

However, muzzie will have to go soon....it was merely a place to put some savings out of sight....but I will be sad to get rid of it. But I also lurve my Dellow..which is equally unable to conk out...

One US motor I would like to have as a 'user' is the IH Scout.....an early one would be nice, but I'd make do with whatever is cheap....They're ugly and unloved by most.....There used to be one living not many villages away from me here, some time ago...

If ever anyone has watched the crime series ''Jesse Stone'', starring Tom Selleck....as series I watch time & again, very dark in places, not at all glitzy....well, the main character initially arrives on scene in a Scout.... Built like a brick, probably drives like a brick, has no frills to speak of....just how I like them!!

 

Oddly for about 25 years we had American (genuine made in America, with one having the proud label on it declaring “made proudly in the USA by inmates of the penal system”!) and both were solid and dead simply engineered, when they did break down, and they did…..it was easy to take the lid off, they were both “top loaders” and get to everything inside and could be fixed with sticky tape and string.  The washer even had a delayed start timer, and when set you could hear it ticking like an old egg timer …….they weren’t sophisticated just simple…..hmmmm?

Edited November 27, 2021 by boxbrownie

[PhilJ W]

You mention Ford Falcon's. They were also made in Australia which has the advantage on UK roads of being right hand drive. Indeed as I understand it left hand drive ones were made in Australia for the North American market.

[alastairq]

To be fair, personally, I don't find left hand drive to be any sort of handicap, on UK roads.

I also suspect, getting hold of an Aussie-built Falcon of 60's vintage might prove to be quite costly?

 

The Aussies of Ford-land did improve on the US-designed inline six engine, however...although I'm not certain what the production costs differences would have been at the time?

To explain, the US Ford lot designed & cast the inlet manifold in unison with the cylinder head.  This leads to issues regarding inlet manifold integrity, etc....although it eliminates one major source of manifold  leaks.  How much this saved in production costs over the whole production span of the US Ford inline six I know not. {The US six was used from the 1950's right up until recently, in one form or another...To be found in Falcons, Mustangs, Broncos, Vans, pickups, and all sorts of industrial uses...and could be had in cubic capacities varying from 140 cu ins right up to 300 or 400 cu ins...although most made were of 200 cu ins, followed by 250 cu ins...The 200 cu in motor equates to 3.3 litres....although bhp at around 4000 rpm or so was [in mine] around 125 bhp. Lower bhp figures could be had as well....

But bhp isn't the name of the game when driving....its torque that matters.

When attached to a 3 speed or 4 speed [Ford] auto box, the ability to waffle off the line almost instantly is marvelous.

In my old Mustang, I've ''gone'' when most folks' left feet are still twitching on the clutch pedal.

Great at roundabouts.....I'm 'on', round, and off up the next road before others can even toot their horns at my temerity. Or realise I've pulled out ahead of them?

Old sixes are great for that......torque matters, not bhp....After all, where can I legally hit 95 mph or more on this country.....[and hope to get away with it?]?

 

I reckon the only thing quicker to 30 mph would be a Lambretta scooter?

 

 

[MrWolf]

I do find that six cylinder inline engines make for a good balance between outright power and ease of maintenance. I've owned quite a few old Vauxhalls with six pot engines, the equal bore and stroke "square" engines built post 1952 have plenty of axle tramping torque. 

They're really simple to work on and pretty much bomb proof of you change the oil regularly. 

95mph as you say is more than achievable and where can you do it? 

Contemporary tests of the 3.3 engined cars from late 1963 on had them out drag the Mini Cooper and Porsche 356. No doubt why they were found as motorway patrol cars.

The last batch of Senators were built to order as unmarked cars, by which time Vauxhall had found that buyers would rather have a no frills BMW for the same price because back then the spinning propeller bonnet badge told your neighbors that you had "arrived". 

[boxbrownie]

3 hours ago, alastairq said:

To be fair, personally, I don't find left hand drive to be any sort of handicap, on UK roads.

 

 

I had LHD yank and Aussie vehicles as company work cars in this country, no issues at all and a big advantage when travelling abroad especially at the toll booths.

[MJI]

14 hours ago, alastairq said:

To be fair, personally, I don't find left hand drive to be any sort of handicap, on UK roads.

I also suspect, getting hold of an Aussie-built Falcon of 60's vintage might prove to be quite costly?

 

The Aussies of Ford-land did improve on the US-designed inline six engine, however...although I'm not certain what the production costs differences would have been at the time?

To explain, the US Ford lot designed & cast the inlet manifold in unison with the cylinder head.  This leads to issues regarding inlet manifold integrity, etc....although it eliminates one major source of manifold  leaks.  How much this saved in production costs over the whole production span of the US Ford inline six I know not. {The US six was used from the 1950's right up until recently, in one form or another...To be found in Falcons, Mustangs, Broncos, Vans, pickups, and all sorts of industrial uses...and could be had in cubic capacities varying from 140 cu ins right up to 300 or 400 cu ins...although most made were of 200 cu ins, followed by 250 cu ins...The 200 cu in motor equates to 3.3 litres....although bhp at around 4000 rpm or so was [in mine] around 125 bhp. Lower bhp figures could be had as well....

But bhp isn't the name of the game when driving....its torque that matters.

When attached to a 3 speed or 4 speed [Ford] auto box, the ability to waffle off the line almost instantly is marvelous.

In my old Mustang, I've ''gone'' when most folks' left feet are still twitching on the clutch pedal.

Great at roundabouts.....I'm 'on', round, and off up the next road before others can even toot their horns at my temerity. Or realise I've pulled out ahead of them?

Old sixes are great for that......torque matters, not bhp....After all, where can I legally hit 95 mph or more on this country.....[and hope to get away with it?]?

 

I reckon the only thing quicker to 30 mph would be a Lambretta scooter?

 

 

 

Off the line any large bike. Would destroy a scooter. BTDT.

[MJI]

If roads are greasy do not under estimate 4x4s at traffic lights.

 

On my commute the extra grip from a standing start is so good at 2 roundabouts and 1 t junction.

 

Ok not quick but for getting moving very good.

[alastairq]

5 minutes ago, MJI said:

 

Off the line any large bike. Would destroy a scooter. BTDT.

Erm, not the experience of the motorcycle press back in the 1990's!

Quite the opposite, in fact.

Lambretta [or was it Vespa, I cannot besure?] was proven to be the quickest, to 30 mph, than any bike or car!

It was urban performances that were being looked at, as I recall. 

Not 1/4 mile dragstrips or open road performances..

[alastairq]

4 minutes ago, MJI said:

If roads are greasy do not under estimate 4x4s at traffic lights.

 

On my commute the extra grip from a standing start is so good at 2 roundabouts and 1 t junction.

 

Ok not quick but for getting moving very good.

 Of course, it isn't 4 wheel drive that is at work in these instances...otherwise the 4x4 would almost cease to move under wind-up, every time the steering wheel is turned!

Tyre types are the biggest contributor.

[MJI]

35 minutes ago, alastairq said:

Erm, not the experience of the motorcycle press back in the 1990's!

Quite the opposite, in fact.

Lambretta [or was it Vespa, I cannot besure?] was proven to be the quickest, to 30 mph, than any bike or car!

It was urban performances that were being looked at, as I recall. 

Not 1/4 mile dragstrips or open road performances..

 

I had a 600 for a while and the acceleration off the line was bonkers, at 30 it would be 7000rpm in first.

Had to lean forward to not wheelie.  It was rapid