![]() 09/03/2016 at 14:41 • Filed to: None | ![]() | ![]() |
VAG Can’t engineer a long lasting car for shit. There. I said it. South Koreans rocking it at the moment.
![]() 09/03/2016 at 14:44 |
|
All a matter of perspective
![]() 09/03/2016 at 14:50 |
|
Excalibur!
![]() 09/03/2016 at 14:57 |
|
I just don’t think they’ve been allowed to engineer for longevity anymore. There’s no profit in it.
Garbage timing tensioners at 80k? Not our problem.
![]() 09/03/2016 at 15:02 |
|
There might even be some gain in it. Why buy a new car when the old one never breaks?
![]() 09/03/2016 at 15:23 |
|
I remember a comment Bob Lutz made about German engineering being a myth anymore the same way that the Koreans can’t build quality is a myth. Everyone, in the name of profit, has come to their middle ground.
![]() 09/03/2016 at 15:26 |
|
There is literally no upside in it for them.
![]() 09/03/2016 at 15:27 |
|
Are you saying building fun toys that disintegrate is all part of their...
...
...
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
![]() 09/03/2016 at 15:46 |
|
Fun? No. No fun here.
![]() 09/03/2016 at 16:20 |
|
I believe the term you’re looking for is ‘planned obsolescence.’
![]() 09/03/2016 at 17:14 |
|
VAG is the Hyundai of Europe.
![]() 09/03/2016 at 18:34 |
|
There are millions of people buying new cars so selling one reliable car for 1/10000 of them would still make a lot of customers even though not a single one of them would buy another one.
![]() 09/04/2016 at 22:54 |
|
Didn’t they learn this lesson when they stopped over-engineering all those Mercs, and made all that money?
They’ve learned that it’s much more profitable this way. Satisfies those who lease for 3-5 years then upgrade - ie. the very profitable return customers.