Volvo Will Reach Three Million Miles in 2013

[tankinbeans]

[quote="ClutchDisc"] It really comes down to maintenance...[\quote]
That's what I've pretty much been saying all along. I often all myself how many of the Chevy Rules/Ford Sucks or Ford Rules/Chevy Sucks because "they fall apart too easily" are only that way because they've had a car they neglected (of their disliked brand) that died, but had a well cared for car (of their preferred brand) that lasted? They decide that a car sucks and ignore it while deciding another car is worth maintaining and thus pay to repair it when it breaks.

Hopefully this makes sense.

[bk7794]

It really comes down to maintenance...[\quote]
That's what I've pretty much been saying all along. I often all myself how many of the Chevy Rules/Ford Sucks or Ford Rules/Chevy Sucks because "they fall apart too easily" are only that way because they've had a car they neglected (of their disliked brand) that died, but had a well cared for car (of their preferred brand) that lasted? They decide that a car sucks and ignore it while deciding another car is worth maintaining and thus pay to repair it when it breaks.

Hopefully this makes sense.

Each company has their strengths and weaknesses

[Rope-Pusher]

It all depends on what you are doing when that cam drive belt or chain breaks.

[potownrob]

what about the thing about fords (and probably other cars) being designed to last only 10 years??

[tankinbeans]

what about the thing about fords (and probably other cars) being designed to last only 10 years??

I think that started Mercedes. I remember reading that Mercedes realized that with their cars lasting forever nobody ever bought a new one. They started designing in flaws to make sure they had a steady stream of customers, at least as far as I know.

[Shadow]

what about the thing about fords (and probably other cars) being designed to last only 10 years??

I think that started Mercedes. I remember reading that Mercedes realized that with their cars lasting forever nobody ever bought a new one. They started designing in flaws to make sure they had a steady stream of customers, at least as far as I know.

You're kidding, right?

[watkins]

Planned obsolescence became a thing in the 50s and 60s. Not at all the same as intentional failures, but many people confuse the two.

As for Mercedes, wasn't there a German law about biodegradability that lead to some problems?

[tankinbeans]

what about the thing about fords (and probably other cars) being designed to last only 10 years??

I think that started Mercedes. I remember reading that Mercedes realized that with their cars lasting forever nobody ever bought a new one. They started designing in flaws to make sure they had a steady stream of customers, at least as far as I know.

You're kidding, right?

It's been years since I read it, and I very well could have been half dead at the time. It's at least as probable as having a car specifically designed to last 10 years. I recall hearing that build qualityon newer Mercedes doesn't hold a candle to that from the 50s.

Whether that's intentional, or a result of poor management, or any other reason is unknown to me.

[Shadow]

It's been years since I read it, and I very well could have been half dead at the time. It's at least as probable as having a car specifically designed to last 10 years. I recall hearing that build qualityon newer Mercedes doesn't hold a candle to that from the 50s.

Whether that's intentional, or a result of poor management, or any other reason is unknown to me.

That's an outrageous claim. I'd love to see something that supports it. Mercedes is no different than any other car company.....their cars from the 50s can't hold a candle to their more modern versions. Build quality has improved over the years, not the other way around. Despite the added complexity of newer cars, they are still much more reliable than a car from the 50s. Perhaps if you had a car from the 50s as your daily driver, you'd understand what I'm talking about. Have you ever adjusted points? Used a manual choke? Had to start a car with vapor lock? People today tend to take it for granted that a modern car just takes a turn of a key (or a push of a button) to start right up in any conditions without a hiccup.

That said, components on cars are not designed to last forever. Take an alternator for example--it is designed with a specific life expectancy that falls in line with reasonable expectations for the vehicle as a whole. That doesn't mean that it is somehow designed to fail from an intentional design flaw. Back when I was in tech school, I remember reading a chart that listed the life expectancy of every component on a car. It wasn't manufacturer-specific, but just a general guide. Anyway, the point is that everything is designed with a life expectancy in mind. That's not the same thing as intentionally designing flaws into something so that a car falls apart in a specific timeframe though. It wouldn't make much sense to build that alternator with a million-mile life expectancy when the average car is retired in, say, 200,000 miles, right?

[tankinbeans]

I used to read into conspiracy theories until I realized they were bull butter. I never paid heed to, nor felt the need to verify. I report only what I vaguely recollect, rightly or wrongly.

[Jastreb]

I have heard, read and seen anecdotal evidence of Mercs made in the early 2000s having build quality and reliability problems, but they are supposed to have improved since then. Intentionally designing flaws into your products goes against engineering ethics. But every vehicle is designed for a certain lifetime, even the Space Shuttle. Given the amount of bad press and reviews Mercedes got 10 years ago, I doubt they would do that to themselves intentionally.

[tankinbeans]

I have heard, read and seen anecdotal evidence of Mercs made in the early 2000s having build quality and reliability problems, but they are supposed to have improved since then. Intentionally designing flaws into your products goes against engineering ethics. But every vehicle is designed for a certain lifetime, even the Space Shuttle. Given the amount of bad press and reviews Mercedes got 10 years ago, I doubt they would do that to themselves intentionally.

Your anecdotal evidence is probably where I remember hearing it.

[Shadow]

I used to read into conspiracy theories until I realized they were bull butter. I never paid heed to, nor felt the need to verify. I report only what I vaguely recollect, rightly or wrongly.

My intention isn't to bash you (or what you remember).....I'm just trying to get you to think about it from a "logical" perspective. Think what would happen if any car company intentionally designed flaws into their cars. That would be a sure-fire way to kill the company.

[tankinbeans]

Oh. I understand what you're saying, Shadow. I didn't think you were belittling anything. It's logical that they wouldn't try to torpedo their own company. I always thought it would be strange, but what do I know? There are decisions businesses make that generally throw me for a loop.

[Shadow]

Oh. I understand what you're saying, Shadow. I didn't think you were belittling anything. It's logical that they wouldn't try to torpedo their own company. I always thought it would be strange, but what do I know? There are decisions businesses make that generally throw me for a loop.

For sure there were some (and I should probably also say "are some") bad business decisions made by auto companies. If you don't already know the story of Ford and the decision they made about recalling the Pinto, look it up when you have a chance. It's by far one of the biggest blunders of any car company.