Hammer Time: Miles Don't Matter

"Steven Lang" (StevenLang) 03/24/2015 at 09:26 • Filed to: None

5

13

100,000... 200,000... 250,000...

In a world where all things are equal, these numbers wouldn't matter at all.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

A lot of folks ignore two critical things when it comes to a used car.

1) Mileage doesn't always equal age.

2) Mileage never equals condition.

At the dealer auctions, I have seen cars with only 30,000 miles that were as downright ugly as a cranky and heavily drunk Mel Gibson at a Bar Mitzvah.

I have also seen cars with over 350,000 miles that were nearly rolling pieces of perfection. A 2001 Camry with over 385,000 miles at one of the sales I recently visited went for nearly $2000.

It looked amazing.

But was it? Did the engine and transmission that propelled that car have many more miles ahead?

I don't know, and that to me is a frustrating thing. Those miles really don't add up to an informed decision. Even for a car buying professional. But you know what would?

Engine hours.

Take this turbocharged diesel engine for example. The 1.9 Liter Volkswagen engine you see here also happens to be have an engine life.

It's estimated life? It could be 25,000 hours. Or maybe 15,000 miles. One thing is for sure though. You won't find the answer in your owner's manual.

Nearly all cars these days don't give any indication of engine life. There are a few that do display current engine hours on the dashboard along with the odometer. Police cars and !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! can be equipped to measure engine hours along with an odometer rating. Highway patrol cars in particular spend endless hours idling about, and all this use does wear on the vehicle over time.

A conventional vehicle that sits in traffic for several hundred hours a year will usually have more wear than a car that simply keeps going at a steady highway speed. Idling causes stress. As does neglect and abuse.

Matt Farah's soon-to-be Million Mile Lexus (not seen here) may be a testament to the prior owner's care and Toyota's brilliant over-engineering of the Lexus LS400. But if that car were able to calculate engine hours, I really do wonder what that final number would be?

Would that Lexus offer a number that is truly in the stratosphere of engine hours? Or would it be less than an even older Lexus that has perhaps spent more time in stop-and-go traffic?

What says you? Do you think engine hours would be useful information for a car buyer? Should there maybe be a similar measurement of longevity for transmissions? Could the technology of today maybe even go so far as to give car owners an "estimated life left" percentage that wouldn't be a legal minefield or a numerical boondoggle?

I think it would do wonders to appraising and selling a used car. What says you?

Lee Wilcox > Steven Lang 03/24/2015 at 09:55

0

I think my 4runner might be the poster child for this. It turned 196k on my first tank of gas and was at 201 when the speedometer cable broke. Now at almost 202 with a fresh cable and the only sign of wear and tear on this beast is a resistance to shifting into first gear when the weather is cold. Since I live in the south I have (and will) ignore that. First owner according to the dealer was an old buy who lived in a rural setting with lots of 2 lane blacktop.

I may end up replacing the trannie or even the engine but think I prefer that to another (mis)adventure buying a replacement. I have put over 300k on multiple trucks and this seems much newer than that. You do bring up something that makes me curious but sometimes ignorance is bliss.

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > Steven Lang 03/24/2015 at 10:10

2

I learned the hard way that mileage can be a good thing. My second and third cars were early 90's Hondas that were driven by little old ladies to church and the grocery store. I thought that that was a good thing. Nope. Turns out that the little old lady probably never even got it into the operating temperature or took them above 3000. They were the most unreliable pieces of shit I've ever owned. My 220k mile MR2 and 180k mile Hyundai? Unkillable.

themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles > Steven Lang 03/24/2015 at 10:12

2

It all depends on the engine design as a whole - rotaries NEED to be driven at the higher RPMs to keep everything lubricated correctly because there is a hint of 2-stroke nature to them. They need that extra temperature to expand the metal and close those seals. An RX-7 driven at low RPMs for low miles will always be in worse shape in my mind than an RX-7 that regularly got moved up and down the rev range regularly. Truck V8 motors from the Big 3 typically do very well with idling and low RPM use, even when towing. Half a million miles or more is common. But an Envoy used by someone who bombed around town and made the trans shift erratically while they do the classic "stomp on gas then stomp on brakes"? That engine will be lucky to see 250k. Again, lots of low RPM hours are preferred to fewer high rev hours. The opposite of the rotary.

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > Lee Wilcox 03/24/2015 at 10:14

3

You should change the ATF a few times. Don't do a flush. That dislodges shit and will probably cause failure Change it, run it a thousand miles or so, and change it again so gunk and metal shavings work their way out naturally. You should be able to get plenty of life out of it that way. A well cared for auto can be just as reliable as a manual. The problem is that no one cares for them.

Michael Karesh > Steven Lang 03/24/2015 at 10:55

1

The two metrics I think would be most useful:

1. Number of cold starts.

2. Number of acceleration-deceleration cycles.

JimJamJollop > Steven Lang 03/24/2015 at 11:09

0

Very good question. For boats and planes, it's the primary measure of wear. Even my '07 Rhino tracks them along side the mileage. All this leads me to wonder why, with the plethora of information, gadgetry and reporting on board modern vehicles, this information isn't also available. Or maybe it's just buried somewhere deep in the depths of My Ford Touch I've not found, or below the option to disable traction control in the V12 BMW 760 ... ah, yes, about that, cough ...

HammerheadFistpunch > Steven Lang 03/24/2015 at 11:28

1

Hours work well for engines that run a most of their time at a fixed, or limited rpm zone and/or have semi regular operating environments. Boats use house because of this, industrial machines, trucks, etc. I think cars there is too much variability for this to be viable. Some people install hour meters, but I don't see the point. The truth is there is only one way to know if an engine/trans/car will last the course...wait until it does. I mean there are lots of good indicators that can predict failure rates, or likelihood, but there are SOO many variables in play...from the assembly floor to now... to predict how THIS car will fair.

Battles > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie 03/24/2015 at 11:48

1

I can totally relate to this. I used a 1200cc not-quite-sportsbike for a three mile each way commute and the service techs always remarked at the sludgy oil. They begged me to leave home earlier and go the long way to work each day for the sake of the bike.

Battles > themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles 03/24/2015 at 11:51

0

I've read lots similar to the above as the basis for the argument for having Crown Vic or London Taxi style taxis (big bodies, big engines, both under-stressed) instead of high-tech, small but efficient cars as taxis. They're more economical on a shorter timeline but only if the technology continues to work as designed.
A big body on frame car with a big lazy engine will never win an economy competition but it will still be operating within specs after 300k, even with sketchy maintenance.

duurtlang > Steven Lang 03/24/2015 at 12:11

2

Imagine 2 scenarios with (when new) identical cars. All cars are maintained similarly.

Car used for a 10 mile commute (one way) through a congested city, 5 days a week. Also used for little other trips through the congested city, average 5 miles a day, 7 days a week. Total: 135 miles a week, 70,200 miles after 10 years

Car used for a 50 mile commute (one way), open highway only, 4 days a week. 400 miles a week, 208,000 miles after 10 years.

Which car would you rather take? I'd pick 2., without a single doubt. Mileage isn't all that relevant.

TFSIVTEC drivesavolvo > Michael Karesh 03/24/2015 at 12:52

0

A retired coast guard captain taught me that engine hours is a useless metric, he said that total gallons of fuel used provides a much better idea of usage. Think about it, you have two identical used cars with even mileage, the one that used more fuel has been put under higher engine load and will have more wear as result.

Lee Wilcox > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie 03/25/2015 at 19:25

0

I wasn't clear and I acknowledge that you are right. This is an MT and I think it's likely that the synchro is about gone.

WesBarton89 - The Way to Santa Fe > Steven Lang 03/30/2015 at 18:22

1

A bit late seeing this, but what the heck, I'll reply.

My car has almost 251,000 miles on it. It's a 2000 Infiniti I30. I bought last month with almost 249,700 miles on it. By this point, we've put 1,000 miles on it. It's only been inspected for a couple weeks now. I paid $800 for this car, and to be honest, the mileage didn't worry me too much, because the car looked to be (and truly is) in excellent condition. So far, all we've had to replace were, the muffler, CV boot, tie rod end, lower control arm bushing, brakes, master cylinder, and it had an alignment, and an oil change as well. I don't know what kind of driving has been done on it, but I do know that in early 2013, it had 240k or so at that point, so obviously it was driven a lot.

I don't think I've ever driven such a well-sorted car, at least not in some time. I will always vouch for a high mileage car, if the condition appears to be acceptable. I mean, if it has 200k on it, and is covered in rust, runs awful, and shifts bad, well, that's worrisome, but not directly related to the mileage.

I don't know what my engine hours are, or what the life should be, but it's clear that it still has a lot of life left in it. I don't have any problem with buying a car with over 200k. Heck, I'm on my third right now! (That would be a 2002 Durango with 222k on the body, though the engine only has about 50-some thousand on it, and my first was a 1998 Mazda Millenia S with 201k when I bought it, and it ran like a dream).

You make great points, sir.