18-08-2021, 11:22 AM
I've said it many times before - most people buy new cars on PCP deals, and get a new one every few years. Last time I saw a figure for that, it was around 90%. And once you're on the PCP wagon, most people stay on it because they've got used to paying out their £2-400 a month, and rather like the idea of a new car on their drive, complete with a fresh warranty.
So 90% of car owners simply don't care about long-term reliability. Therefore, why should manufacturers? From a commercial point of view, over-engineering is as bad as under-engineering, especially in such a competitive market. Once upon a time, products had to be over-engineered because manufactures aiming for reasonable reliability didn't have an alternative - now they've got amazing tools that can predict the lifespan of individual components with good accuracy, so they know what economies they can make without causing too much reputational damage.
So would 90% of the car-leasing public be put off buying a new car with an engine that eats plastic timing chain guides after 80,000 miles? Even if the chain is at the rear of the engine (very common today)? Of course not! For the cast majority of buyers, it's a complete non-issue, and won't put them off. So where's the incentive for the manufacturer to do better?
The world has changed, and while we might not like it, we can't do anything about it. But we can change our thinking. Just because 1980s diesel engines would do 300,000 miles, why on earth would we assume a modern one will do the same? Today, with decades of experience, everything is right on the limit. So buying younger cars and keeping them for shorter periods of time is just the way it is, sadly. PCP is just a clever way of enabling that. And profitable, too. Today, cars are just a vehicle to sell finance - pun intended - as that's where the real profit is.
Alternatively, find a well-loved car from about 25 years ago, when many manufacturers were peaking. There's lots of data about failure modes, so with the right research - plus a fair bit of luck, admittedly - a rust-free example might last another decade or more if looked after. And maintenance will be a lot easier. Obviously there might be issues getting into some town centres, and that will get worse as time passes...
Of course, as far as passenger cars are concerned the internal combustion engine is already exiting stage-left. Diesel got a head start there, thanks to VAG, Mercedes, et al. Good riddance IMHO - was never a fan of diesel cars. At some point in the future we'll look back at ICE and marvel at the incredible complexity needed to make them work. No wonder they were a bit unreliable...
So 90% of car owners simply don't care about long-term reliability. Therefore, why should manufacturers? From a commercial point of view, over-engineering is as bad as under-engineering, especially in such a competitive market. Once upon a time, products had to be over-engineered because manufactures aiming for reasonable reliability didn't have an alternative - now they've got amazing tools that can predict the lifespan of individual components with good accuracy, so they know what economies they can make without causing too much reputational damage.
So would 90% of the car-leasing public be put off buying a new car with an engine that eats plastic timing chain guides after 80,000 miles? Even if the chain is at the rear of the engine (very common today)? Of course not! For the cast majority of buyers, it's a complete non-issue, and won't put them off. So where's the incentive for the manufacturer to do better?
The world has changed, and while we might not like it, we can't do anything about it. But we can change our thinking. Just because 1980s diesel engines would do 300,000 miles, why on earth would we assume a modern one will do the same? Today, with decades of experience, everything is right on the limit. So buying younger cars and keeping them for shorter periods of time is just the way it is, sadly. PCP is just a clever way of enabling that. And profitable, too. Today, cars are just a vehicle to sell finance - pun intended - as that's where the real profit is.
Alternatively, find a well-loved car from about 25 years ago, when many manufacturers were peaking. There's lots of data about failure modes, so with the right research - plus a fair bit of luck, admittedly - a rust-free example might last another decade or more if looked after. And maintenance will be a lot easier. Obviously there might be issues getting into some town centres, and that will get worse as time passes...
Of course, as far as passenger cars are concerned the internal combustion engine is already exiting stage-left. Diesel got a head start there, thanks to VAG, Mercedes, et al. Good riddance IMHO - was never a fan of diesel cars. At some point in the future we'll look back at ICE and marvel at the incredible complexity needed to make them work. No wonder they were a bit unreliable...
