The real cost of new car fuel economy

[Mr. Paul]

I recently was in the market for a new car. It seems that many auto makers have changed to smaller engines, turbo-chargers, and CVT transmissions in order to get an extra couple of miles per gallon. I do not like this trend because;

1. Even though the mpg is better, you pay more for premium so the cost to operate is more.

2. Turbos add more heat and complexity to the system and probably will cost more to maintain.

3. My mechanic says the CVT transmissions are not as reliable as the previous types. So a rebuild/replace is likely down   the road.

In short, the cost to own and maintain these new vehicles is FAR HIGHER than the older ones. As for us, we purchased a well maintained low mileage 2012 with a 6-speed tranny and a 87 octane fuel-injected V-6. Like many things, seems like the older ones are better. 

[CROSSBOLT]

Stig always said you were a pretty bright guy! No commas, Mr. Paul!

Karl
 

[Mr. Paul]

Stig always said you were a pretty bright guy! No commas, Mr. Paul!

Karl

Good one Karl! No commas indeed! 

[ole two wheels]

I completely understand your thinking Mr. Paul. Give me a new Ford or Chevy from the 60's and life would be much better. However the EPA and other government agencies have decided to save us, even if they have to kill us to do so. I can remember when a small 4 cylinder engine was doing good to wring out 100 BHP. Now a 4 cylinder IL can be made to produce well over 500 ponies. Of course that's with the addition of  double OHC, 4 Valves, and VVT and a turbo charger.All though the difference is much as the difference between the Mayflower and the Interprise. The later is much more precision built with computer controlled milling machines and SPT control limitations, but they won't last as long, because 1. they cram way to much into those small cylinders and 2. those kinds of engine are used mostly by young folk who want to go fast, at any cost. They have V6's capable of putting out over 700 hp. Remarkable. They all require premium fuel. Some race engines use 110 and 120 ave gas.
Such as NASCAR.   Old is better, but new is what sells. Speed cost, the question is how fast do you want to go? (Not that fast, right---me neither.

[Mr. Paul]

I completely understand your thinking Mr. Paul. Give me a new Ford or Chevy from the 60's and life would be much better. However the EPA and other government agencies have decided to save us, even if they have to kill us to do so. I can remember when a small 4 cylinder engine was doing good to wring out 100 BHP. Now a 4 cylinder IL can be made to produce well over 500 ponies. Of course that's with the addition of  double OHC, 4 Valves, and VVT and a turbo charger.All though the difference is much as the difference between the Mayflower and the Interprise. The later is much more precision built with computer controlled milling machines and SPT control limitations, but they won't last as long, because 1. they cram way to much into those small cylinders and 2. those kinds of engine are used mostly by young folk who want to go fast, at any cost. They have V6's capable of putting out over 700 hp. Remarkable. They all require premium fuel. Some race engines use 110 and 120 ave gas.
Such as NASCAR.   Old is better, but new is what sells. Speed cost, the question is how fast do you want to go? (Not that fast, right---me neither.

Its more fun to go fast in a slow vehicle than to go slow in a fast one!

[ole two wheels]

Yelp, I'm with you.

[Forbes1964]

I work at FORD.
1. While premium is “recommended “ for MAXIMUM power, it’s not required. And the loss in power is minimal. In fact, most don’t notice much difference. I’d say that 95% of the owners use regular which is acceptable by Ford. Almost every engine built in the last 20 years is equipped with a knock sensor. So for the most part, spark knock is a thing of the past unless premium is REQUIRED, and the customer uses regular. But as stated earlier, premium is not required for most engines. Turbo or not.

2. Turbos are more complex and add more heat. But the engines have oil coolers. And smart oil life meters which indicate the oil change intervals based on YOUR driving conditions. Most customers require an oil change around 6000 miles. The new turbos are light years ahead of the trouble prone turbos of the 70’s and 80,s. We’ve already seen some with over 100,000 trouble free miles . I expect them to greatly exceed that.
3.While some manufacturers are moving towards cvt’s Ford does NOT use them and has not since their disaster in some of their 2003-2006 models. They do have a trouble prone dual clutch automatic. But they don’t use it in ANY of their turbocharged vehicles . But rather they use a beefed up version of their transmissions used in the base engines. So far, very reliable.

4 . Maintenance costs are NO DIFFERENT unless they break down which is rare as far as the engines and transmissions.

Trans fluid changes at 100k , NO external fuel filter. , hoses commonly last for well over 100k. Belt service interval is 100k . Most still look good even then. . Coolant 150k. Spark plugs 100k . No plug wires.

Truth be told, we mechanics are not making the money we used to make because the cars simply are more reliable than in the past. AND there is hardly any maintenance required.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Forbes1964]

As for emissions, I simply love the low emissions. We can have several cars inside the shop running at the same time with the shop doors closed in winter. And we will LITERALLY have to be reminded to turn the shop exhaust fans on because we simply don’t smell ANY exhaust fumes. NOR do we feel ill.

Regulations seem to be a pain unless you see the benefits like we do. Being able to BREATHE while working on a running vehicle inside a building is a beautiful thing. [emoji3][emoji3]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mr. Paul]

I work at FORD.
1. While premium is “recommended “ for MAXIMUM power, it’s not required. And the loss in power is minimal. In fact, most don’t notice much difference. I’d say that 95% of the owners use regular which is acceptable by Ford. Almost every engine built in the last 20 years is equipped with a knock sensor. So for the most part, spark knock is a thing of the past unless premium is REQUIRED, and the customer uses regular. But as stated earlier, premium is not required for most engines. Turbo or not.

2. Turbos are more complex and add more heat. But the engines have oil coolers. And smart oil life meters which indicate the oil change intervals based on YOUR driving conditions. Most customers require an oil change around 6000 miles. The new turbos are light years ahead of the trouble prone turbos of the 70’s and 80,s. We’ve already seen some with over 100,000 trouble free miles . I expect them to greatly exceed that.
3.While some manufacturers are moving towards cvt’s Ford does NOT use them and has not since their disaster in some of their 2003-2006 models. They do have a trouble prone dual clutch automatic. But they don’t use it in ANY of their turbocharged vehicles . But rather they use a beefed up version of their transmissions used in the base engines. So far, very reliable.

4 . Maintenance costs are NO DIFFERENT unless they break down which is rare as far as the engines and transmissions.

Trans fluid changes at 100k , NO external fuel filter. , hoses commonly last for well over 100k. Belt service interval is 100k . Most still look good even then. . Coolant 150k. Spark plugs 100k . No plug wires.

Truth be told, we mechanics are not making the money we used to make because the cars simply are more reliable than in the past. AND there is hardly any maintenance required.



Thanks for the input Forbes! Glad to hear at least Ford has held off on the CVT transmissions. You in a way illustrated my point. Dual clutch=excessive complexity=increased unreliability. There seems to be a point with these systems that the increase in performance is offset by the decrease in reliability. I have purchased a year and model car that has all of the advantages you have stated but there is no turbo to fail, there are no CVT issues, and there is no requirement for premium fuel. I guess what I am saying is that from an engineering perspective, given the same quality, that the more systems that are involved there are more opportunities for costs and failure. Sometimes the latest is not always the greatest. It seems as if the auto makers are being forced to using smaller, harder working engines and less reliable transmissions in order to meet the newest CAFE standards.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ole two wheels]

In response to your post, Forbes, concerning Fords and their use of the CVT transmissions. FYI: The Ford Fusion for the years 2018 and 2019 are and will be available with a CVT transmission as well as a 6 speed automatic and the Ford C-Max, same years, will only come with a CVT transmission. ( Information supplied by Motor Trend, Sept. 2017, Vol. 69, No. 9)
I have owned three Infixiti cars and all three would throw a VVT code if run on even one tank of regular gasoline. I now own a 2014 Nissan Altima with the 2.5L IL four that will run on regular.
These vehicles were driven by my wife and she chose the Nissan as her preferred choice. I am a Ford guy. My wife and I was raised in Ford families. I have a 2005 150 XLT that has been bullet proof from day one, except for the spark plug issue
My 2014 Altima with Pure Drive CVT calls for an CVT oil analysis at 60,000 miles and if no contamination is found, then no further service is require. Ever. CTV lifespan approximates that of the engine. So Nissan says. We'll see.

[gregspeople250]

Please, cars from the '60's and '70's were prehistoric compared to what we have today.

[Mr. Paul]

Please, cars from the '60's and '70's were prehistoric compared to what we have today.

I was trying to point out that it seems that the 2017 automobile line will generally prove to be less reliable and more costly to own than recent years of the same models.  I was disappointed to come to the conclusion that the new car I wanted would not be as good as one a couple or few years old. However, there were some fine cars produced in the 60s and 70s. But they were of their own era.

[Forbes1964]

Mr. Paul. With all due respect, I'm a mechanic at a Ford dealership. The ONLY vehicles that EVER had a true cvt were the now discontinued Ford 500 all wheel drive. And the Ford Freestyle . They WERE JUNK. They only made the cvt for a few years then went with the 6 speed across the board. The "cvt" you mention is ONLY available in the HYBRID editions of those vehicles. The fusion NEVER had a cvt with the conventional or Turbo engines. By the way, that cvt operates in a different manner than other cvts. And it is actually more reliable than a conventional transmission evidenced by the fact that Ford warranties it for 100,000 MILES as opposed to 60,000 miles for the others. (other manufacturers have similar warranties). But the ONLY transmission available in the turbo or conventional fusions are the 6 speed automatics. I admit that I was very skeptical of the more complex engines and transmissions. But the proof is in the pudding. They simply don't break down as much as older vehicles. It's common to go 100,000 miles with ZERO engine or transmission problems. MOST PROBLEMS today are electrical. And many engine and transmission drivability issues are repaired with a simple software update.

[Forbes1964]

The dual clutch automatic is actually a  manual transmission made to operate automatically. It has no hydraulics, It's all mechanical. The problems with it stem from the fact that the clutch (made just like a manual transmission clutch) is faulty. But Ford wisely limits those transmissions to only the Fiesta and the Focus. I admit that I was VERY skeptical of the Turbos at first. But now I'm a believer. Yes, there is more to break. But the truth is that they don't break as often. However I FULLY admit that if they DO break, repairs are much more expensive. I concede that. But I'm simply amazed at the reliability of MOST modern vehicles conventional Or turbo. And as I stated earlier. Premium fuel is NOT required for the Ford turbo vehicles. But it's recommended if you want to get the last drop of power out of them. I really don't know of ANY of our customers who use premium fuel in their Turbo equipped Fusions, Escapes, Explorers or Tauruses. It's simply not needed . That's why its only a recommendation vs a requirement. With the Ford f150, the sales of the Turbo engines exceed that of the v8. Many of our customers were VERY skeptical at first. But those who buy one Turbo equipped truck usually buy another.  But I recommend avoiding ANY new engine in it's first year of production because that's when they have the growing pains.

[Iahawk]

I think we sometimes get nostalgic when thinking about the older cars (I know I do)...but have you looked at the maintenance schedule for the oldies? I have the site saved on a diff computer...but it links to all the Chevy owners manuals from the 40's through the 60's...wow, did they require a lot of service! Like every 1000 or few thousand miles on a ton of different things...oil, wheel bearing grease, coolant changes twice yearly..the service requirements compared to modern cars were ridiculous!

My father and grandfather owned a large Chevy dealership in the 50's and the service dept was crazy busy. Now I know why.