It’s been said that new cars are more reliable than the cars of yesterday. That may be so, but is it because they are built better of because they are newer? If they are built better why can’t old cars be brought up to the same standard? Old cars are certainly easier to work on, at least you can lift the hood and identify what’s under it and you don’t need a PhD in electronics. When you take a road trip with your daily driver do you pack a tool kit? So what is the most common problem that people have. Is it ignition, fuel system, electrical, engine, drive train or what? How willing are you to change from stock in order to have a reliable car?
Drove the E-Type 4,500 miles in September. Took a lot of tools and parts, but only used the duct tape.
I don’t think the Jaguar will ever be as reliable as my wife’s Toyota – but I prefer driving with the feeling that I can fix it if I have to vs blind faith in Japanese design and engineering.
My “cruiser” build spec for a '64 included electronic ignition (points), Coolcat fan, alternator (in place of generator), and modern in-tank fuel pump. I will carry a spare electronic ignition, a cheap in-line fuel pump, and a fan belt, along with associated tools on board. (Spares for the modern upgrades…go figure).
I also offloaded the ignition switch and head lights to some relays, but that’s secondary if the wiring is in good condition.
“I don’t think the Jaguar will ever be as reliable as my wife’s Toyota – but I prefer driving with the feeling that I can fix it if I have to vs blind faith in Japanese design and engineering.”
It’s all about smiles per mile 
Interesting question. I believe overall, modern cars are more reliable. First, I do not hear about many “lemons” anymore. There are some, but not as common. And we do not hear so much about bad brands, like we used to. I remember in the old days, it was common to see cars stranded along side the road. Now some of those issues could have been better minimized by better maintenance, and cars used to need more maintenance. Common issues were points, plugs, belts and coolant hoses. I remember checking for soft coolant hoses and replacing them after just a few years. Now, my 2006 with 175,000 miles still has the originals. I remember in 1966, we left Las Vegas at 2 am to cross before it got hot, both so the car would not overheat, and because we had no A/C. Now, I do not believe anyone thinks twice about crossing. Having said that, 0lder cars can be very reliable, but must be looked after more. I only occasionally take older cars on longer trips, but more for noise level, luggage space, and A/C than any other reason.
Tom
My experience is exactly like Tom’s. On long trips used to see many broken down cars along the roadside, especially in the desert. When a teen we heard rumors of cars that went 100k miles, never saw one personally. Now days you see ads for a used Corolla with 150k miles on it exclaiming “low mileage”. New cars are a LOT more safe and for the most part more comfortable. It seems cars have gotten to the point where they are all reliable and safe appliances as far as transportation, the major differentiation between them is style, luxury and electronic gizmos. Which BTW the infotainment systems seem to be the biggest complaint about new cars in general. They’re confusing, distracting (to the point of dangerous) aggravating and fail more than anything else. As far as why old cars can’t be brought up to new standards some things could but as for the rest its technology, precision and materials that didn’t exist back when these cars were new. Much of that you can’t retrofit. Good luck putting an airbag in a E-type 
pauls
Yes, to everything Messr. Spurlock sez!!
I find myself in car conversations (not where the other participants necessarily know of my background) where, almost invariably, someone willl loudly proclaim, “ CARS!! They dont make’em like they uster!”
My standard response, often to shocked and disbelieving faces, is, “Thank god, they don’t.”
Another thing. Look at the options and standard equipment on a typical luxury car of the 1950’s to 1960’s; all those things that helped make a luxury car “luxury”. Power windows, power seats, power brakes, power steering, power mirrors, fancy wheels, leather upholstery, a decent radio, reclining seats, automatic transmission, etc. Today all of most of that, and more, is standard on pretty inexpensive car models.
I am going to end up getting rid of a perfectly good running car because the sensors that monitor the anti smog crap are starting to fail. It won’t be cost effective to repair them. Note the car doesn’t run dirty it’s just the things that tell its ECU that everything is OK are failing.
So while new cars with new materials are great, the crap the manufacturers put on the car to satisfy the EPA are not. I expect there will be a great many cars junked for similar reasons or there will be an increase in “underground” driving (already here) where inspection stickers are fake and the car is not registered or insured…or inspected.
Example: wife’s Volvo has a RAD (radiator anti tamper device), can you believe it? Just tells the ECU that the radiator with anti smog coating is still in place. at 44K mi it has failed twice, at 30K and 43K miles.
As short ago as '93 I was getting 250K and 237K mi out of cars, and none of these type failures, I suspect because the standards didn’t require that such things be on the car.
And this is why I made sure my E type was pre 67 because I did not want one GD piece of federal crap on it.
Stepping off soapbox now.
Frickin’ cool duct tape, George!
Where do you buy that? I need a roll…Concours approved?
Dave
Yes…,…
Hi George,
I had to laugh at your picture as it brought back a memory from 30 or so years ago when on a club tour we ran into a tropical downpour and the six OTS E-Types present ALL ended up with duct tape just like yours!
Bob
889076
Plymouth, Mi.
Chuck Goolsbee told people it was “confusion tape.”
I agree, and yes they are also more reliable.
But there is a downside to this.
Back in the day when cars spit the dummy every now and then we paid more attention to them. If you didn’t then you risked an expensive bill or an accident.
Modern cars coddle and isolate us from the fact that driving is at the end of the day a fundamentally dangerous activity.
Remember how back in the '70s you used to see blown out tire carcasses at the side of the road? Most of us had at some point experienced or observed some kind of technical fault which pointed out that driving was a dangerous activity, and behaved accordingly while behind the wheel (or at the gas pump).
The false sense of security and control that ABS, traction control, self park etc, foster leads some people to drive as if weather, road condition, car condition, and physics has nothing to do with them - so they look down at the small screen to see what their friends are doing, rather than out the big screen to see what the environment and traffic is doing.
The well publicized Tesla self driving accident where the system failed to recognize a large white truck is case in point - some of us might miss a large white truck while parking or turning out of a side street, but these are low speed accidents, the implications of missing a large white truck on the highway at full speed are significantly more dangerous. If you’re watching a movie, reading a book, or having a snooze then you should be doing that somewhere other than on the highway, at speed.
2 Likes
I think clearly cars are more reliable now, as seems the general consensus.
The engineering involved and manufacturing standards are light years ahead of things even in the late ‘80s.
However, we’ve paid for it. Car prices have not tracked with inflation. A new minivan is like $40k. Compare the adjusted price of an E to an F-Type.
A couple of observations:
- During my road trips in the MGB, it’s the remanufactured parts that fail. The original bits have no problem at all.
- The factory spec for maintenance of a classic car is: daily checks, weekly checks, frequent lubrication. Imagine that for your daily commuter car. Working more than 20 miles from home would become totally impractical. Modern cars have come a long way.
- A modern car is a technical marvel. A “machine” with similar complexity would set you back at least half a million, yet we can all drive around for a tenth of that (or much less). Of course the laws of series size and economics count here, but yet… ain’t it wonderful?
- Statistics dictate that - the more parts in a car, the higher the chance something will break. A modern car has infinitely more parts than a classic, so it would only be logic to see a modern car garaged much more often. Yet…
A while ago the nice lady across the road backed into my daily driver - parked across the street - with her big Toyota soft roader. A nice big crease behind the door. She explained that her reversing camera was inoperative despite being returned to the dealer for repair. All I wanted her to do was to look over her shoulder - apparently too much to ask in the present age. Maybe it’s better that we move to Teslas et al - we’re evolving away from common sense and competence. Present company excepted.
Preach it, brutha Drew!
As if I don’t already sound like an old fart!
Computers are cool. With huge amounts of money and a team of specialists they can create something which does a few things that humans can do.
But the traditional way of making full featured humans is still the better way.
1 Like
Thinking of s current leader, maaaaybe on these shores, and more than a few other examples, might want to make you rethink that declarative…
