VW vs. The Rest

It's a valid topic.

I love old Volkswagens but my next car is going to be a Mazda. Even
though Ford is the parent company, they're still excellent cars. They
have the reliability of Toyota with the fun-to-drive and styling
uniqueness of VW.

While Toyota makes un undeniably good car, they seem to lack that
special something. Except for the Supra. The Camry is the number one
selling car in the US, by the way.

Hondas are excellent cars but too common and not as reliable as some
might say.

Volkswagens warm my heart and tickle my soul. Every one I've ever
driven has been fun to drive and all of them are beautiful. Plus the
old ones are pretty easy to maintain and repair. Can anyone here
argue with that?

Well I have done the second timing belt on my TDI which now has
205,000 miles on it. I think it has been fairly reliable. I have not
had to replace the bearings in the transmisson like I did on the
Toyota. I did replace the alternator clutch and the EGR. Other than
those two items and some bulbs, the car has been pretty good. I do
think I need a new catalytic converter but the Toyota with more miles
and 14 years older is still on its first converter. Still on the first
clutch on the VW. Replaced the clutch once on the truck. Did a timing
chain on the truck. Removed the head to have it welded after a big
chunk corroded out of it leaking antifreeze. I guess in the big
picture the VW has been just as reliable as the Toyota. I personally
do not have anything negative about the VWs but I might be biased
owning 6 VWs over 31 years but 2 Toyotas over 23 years.

On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 18:23:41 -0700 (PDT), Ears
> wrote:

>It's a valid topic.
>
>I love old Volkswagens but my next car is going to be a Mazda. Even
>though Ford is the parent company, they're still excellent cars. They
>have the reliability of Toyota with the fun-to-drive and styling
>uniqueness of VW.
>
>While Toyota makes un undeniably good car, they seem to lack that
>special something. Except for the Supra. The Camry is the number one
>selling car in the US, by the way.
>
>Hondas are excellent cars but too common and not as reliable as some
>might say.
>
>Volkswagens warm my heart and tickle my soul. Every one I've ever
>driven has been fun to drive and all of them are beautiful. Plus the
>old ones are pretty easy to maintain and repair. Can anyone here
>argue with that?

On Oct 25, 5:08*pm, Jim Behning
> wrote:
> Well I have done the second timing belt on my TDI which now has
> 205,000 miles on it. I think it has been fairly reliable. I have not
> had to replace the bearings in the transmisson like I did on the
> Toyota. I did replace the alternator clutch and the EGR. Other than
> those two items and some bulbs, the car has been pretty good. I do
> think I need a new catalytic converter but the Toyota with more miles
> and 14 years older is still on its first converter. Still on the first
> clutch on the VW. Replaced the clutch once on the truck. Did a timing
> chain on the truck. Removed the head to have it welded after a big
> chunk corroded out of it leaking antifreeze. I guess in the big
> picture the VW has been just as reliable as the Toyota. I personally
> do not have anything negative about the VWs but I might be biased
> owning 6 VWs over 31 years but 2 Toyotas over 23 years.

Hmmmm... average 6.19 years per VW, 11.5 years per Toyota.

Apart from all that, I define Euro Cars (and we have three of them:
Volvo, Saab, VW) as not being "user-friendly" in terms of maintenance.
They are fussy and sensitive to neglect, require scrupulous attention,
care and feeding - but if so-pampered have a nearly indefinite service-
life.

It is a funny thing - even a piece of Detroit or Korean Iron will do
pretty much the same thing with pretty much the same sort of care. But
that sort of care is antithetical to our "modern" throw-away society
and more-so with individuals who over-buy cars (and everything else)
so that their monthly payments wipe out their ability to maintain
properly. And car manufacturers understand this and so give "Free" (it
isn't) maintenance packages, increase intervals between oil-changes
and so forth.

Things are slowly changing for the better (in all opinions except car
makers) this way as the probably permanently revised world economy
will have people keeping their cars past the end of the payment book.
Accordingly more attention *will* be paid to care-and-feeding in pure
self-defense.

Keep in mind that a car that is paid-for and averages 20mpg is
massively cheaper than a new $25,000 car that gets 40mpg.

At typical rates, that car will cost ~$535/month for five (5) years.
Assume that it wil require NO owner-paid maintenance for that entire
five years. Assume the median price of gasoline at $4/gallon for those
five years. Assume 40mpg overall and assume 15,000 driven miles per
year. Assume a five (5) year loan at industry standard interest
rates.

Cost for that vehicle (Gas & Payment ONLY) will be $7920/year. At the
end of five years, you will have a five year old car with 75,000 miles
on it and nothing in your pocket.

For the existing vehicle: Assume $2000 annually for maintenance.
Assume 20mpg overall and 15,000 driven miles per year.

Cost for that vehicle (Gas and Maintenance) will be $5,000 per year.
Note that even if the maintenance doubles, the existing car is a
better investment - as at the end of the payment book the new car is
pretty much worthless in trade but still perfectly serviceable, as is
the used car - which cannot get any less valuable after a certain
point.

Invest the $2,970 savings/year at-interest (say.... 2.5%) for those
same five years. You will have $15,800.37 at the end of that five
years. And you will still have a car with no car payment. Even if that
car has 150,000 miles on it.

And we are not even addressing the higher cost of insurance for a new
car (and required collision insurance if one chooses to live on the
edge).

It is this sort of math that gives car makers and dealers fits.

Now, I would not drive around the block in a vehicle not equipped with
air-bags, anti-lock brakes and other very basic safety items and
devices, nor would I let anyone in the family do so. My job requires
that I have an AWD vehicle with decent ground-clearance and minimal
(but frequent) off-road/very rough road capacity. But after those
sorts of basic requirements a 4 year old car is as good as a 7 year
old car is as good as a 9 year old car. And as they are all paid-for
and all operate in the mid-20s+ average mpg overall, I am not "Hot for
a Hybrid" at this time.

And this sort of attitude that increases the frequency of those fits.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

The first VW 66 beetle had flapping fenders, holes in floorboard
dropped exhaust valve. Good project for high school kid. Sold that a
year later. Second was a 67 beetle. I had that for 7 or 8 years and
added a 100,000 miles to it. Maybe a 150,000 miles. The 66 Squareback
was a high school buddy's car that brother bought. Then Dad bought.
Then another brother bought. I just did body work and paint along with
mechanicals. 80 Rabbit lasted 9 years before I totalled it. 84 gti
last 9 years before I sold it. 78 Toyota lasted 12 years before it
rusted out. It was totalled twice before I bought it. Still have the
bought new 87 Toyota. Still have the new 2003 Jetta. Forgot the 70
Nova for $100 I used one winter. Different brother used it for another
10 years.

So the $10,000 Toyota at average of 20 mpg and 20 years with a few
thousand dollars in maintenance. The $20,000 Jetta coming up on 6
years, 47 mpg, two timing belts at $350 each and a set of rear brakes.
So the only debate now would be getting rid of the tin can Toyota for
one with air bags. But driving less than 3,000 miles a year with that
vehicle there is little sense in getting something newer with air bags
unless of course I get in a crash then I might miss the air bags. So
far only the Toyota and the Jetta have been new cars. Cost per year
for the new vehicles is not so bad when you try to keep them 10 years
or more.

The cars not bought new were kind of expensive ranging from $100 up to
a few thousand for the 80 Rabbit. Most were less than $500 before
restore or repair projects started. You add paint, struts, shocks,
clutches, valve jobs, ... and it adds up to less than new car
expenses.

What was the point? Oh yeah, cars can last longer than some expect.
Keeping up an older can can often be less expensive than a new car.
Toyotas are not really any better/cheaper to maintain than my VWs.
Nearly 6 year old Jetta now has 204,000 miles on it. I hope it makes
it to 500,000 miles but I really hope I can work from home more so I
do not rack up so many miles.

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 05:46:58 -0700 (PDT), "
> wrote:

>On Oct 25, 5:08*pm, Jim Behning
> wrote:
>> Well I have done the second timing belt on my TDI which now has
>> 205,000 miles on it. I think it has been fairly reliable. I have not
>> had to replace the bearings in the transmisson like I did on the
>> Toyota. I did replace the alternator clutch and the EGR. Other than
>> those two items and some bulbs, the car has been pretty good. I do
>> think I need a new catalytic converter but the Toyota with more miles
>> and 14 years older is still on its first converter. Still on the first
>> clutch on the VW. Replaced the clutch once on the truck. Did a timing
>> chain on the truck. Removed the head to have it welded after a big
>> chunk corroded out of it leaking antifreeze. I guess in the big
>> picture the VW has been just as reliable as the Toyota. I personally
>> do not have anything negative about the VWs but I might be biased
>> owning 6 VWs over 31 years but 2 Toyotas over 23 years.
>
>Hmmmm... average 6.19 years per VW, 11.5 years per Toyota.
>
>Apart from all that, I define Euro Cars (and we have three of them:
>Volvo, Saab, VW) as not being "user-friendly" in terms of maintenance.
>They are fussy and sensitive to neglect, require scrupulous attention,
>care and feeding - but if so-pampered have a nearly indefinite service-
>life.
>
>It is a funny thing - even a piece of Detroit or Korean Iron will do
>pretty much the same thing with pretty much the same sort of care. But
>that sort of care is antithetical to our "modern" throw-away society
>and more-so with individuals who over-buy cars (and everything else)
>so that their monthly payments wipe out their ability to maintain
>properly. And car manufacturers understand this and so give "Free" (it
>isn't) maintenance packages, increase intervals between oil-changes
>and so forth.
>
>Things are slowly changing for the better (in all opinions except car
>makers) this way as the probably permanently revised world economy
>will have people keeping their cars past the end of the payment book.
>Accordingly more attention *will* be paid to care-and-feeding in pure
>self-defense.
>
>Keep in mind that a car that is paid-for and averages 20mpg is
>massively cheaper than a new $25,000 car that gets 40mpg.
>
>At typical rates, that car will cost ~$535/month for five (5) years.
>Assume that it wil require NO owner-paid maintenance for that entire
>five years. Assume the median price of gasoline at $4/gallon for those
>five years. Assume 40mpg overall and assume 15,000 driven miles per
>year. Assume a five (5) year loan at industry standard interest
>rates.
>
>Cost for that vehicle (Gas & Payment ONLY) will be $7920/year. At the
>end of five years, you will have a five year old car with 75,000 miles
>on it and nothing in your pocket.
>
>For the existing vehicle: Assume $2000 annually for maintenance.
>Assume 20mpg overall and 15,000 driven miles per year.
>
>Cost for that vehicle (Gas and Maintenance) will be $5,000 per year.
>Note that even if the maintenance doubles, the existing car is a
>better investment - as at the end of the payment book the new car is
>pretty much worthless in trade but still perfectly serviceable, as is
>the used car - which cannot get any less valuable after a certain
>point.
>
>Invest the $2,970 savings/year at-interest (say.... 2.5%) for those
>same five years. You will have $15,800.37 at the end of that five
>years. And you will still have a car with no car payment. Even if that
>car has 150,000 miles on it.
>
>And we are not even addressing the higher cost of insurance for a new
>car (and required collision insurance if one chooses to live on the
>edge).
>
>It is this sort of math that gives car makers and dealers fits.
>
>Now, I would not drive around the block in a vehicle not equipped with
>air-bags, anti-lock brakes and other very basic safety items and
>devices, nor would I let anyone in the family do so. My job requires
>that I have an AWD vehicle with decent ground-clearance and minimal
>(but frequent) off-road/very rough road capacity. But after those
>sorts of basic requirements a 4 year old car is as good as a 7 year
>old car is as good as a 9 year old car. And as they are all paid-for
>and all operate in the mid-20s+ average mpg overall, I am not "Hot for
>a Hybrid" at this time.
>
>And this sort of attitude that increases the frequency of those fits.
>
>Peter Wieck
>Melrose Park, PA