Dodge/Chrysler SOHC 2.2l and 2.5l. If they were good enough for boost, they were plenty good enough to last for 200,000k
Dodge/Chrysler SOHC 2.2l and 2.5l. If they were good enough for boost, they were plenty good enough to last for 200,000k
Mazda GD MX6/626.
"GD" stands for "God DAMN this thing STILL runs?"
bastomatic wrote: Saturns would indeed make my list as well if it weren't for their unquenchable thirst for oil. I have a friend who swears by hers, and said she'd never had a problem with it. Of course, she adds a quart of oil every single tank.
Every one I've had that burned any significant amount of oil was neglected by the previous owner. Granted, that would exclude it from the list as if you want to kill it, you can. But, if maintained at all (i.e. change the oil every 3-5k) they will last longer than you'd ever want one to. My DD 98SL2 burned about 3/4 quart in my last 5k mile oil change. The wagon I just sold with ~165K on it burned about the same amount.
bastomatic wrote: Saturns would indeed make my list as well if it weren't for their unquenchable thirst for oil. I have a friend who swears by hers, and said she'd never had a problem with it. Of course, she adds a quart of oil every single tank. I'll agree with the article on RWD Volvos. If I could find a late-model low-miles 240 wagon locally, I'd be all set for life.
my cousin does the same with her saturn, it rolled 325,000 untouched miles a few weeks ago.
It is from a different era.... But they missed the aircooled Beetle....
integraguy wrote: E30? "Fool's game" to keep running? I guess if you don't approach the car for what it is...a modern classic.
He said "though having the dealership keep it in as-it-came-from-the-factory condition is said by owners with experience to be an expensive fool's game".
I couldn't agree more. Using a luxury dealer to maintain an antique car to factory condition goes beyond being a fool's game and into the territory of "crazier than an June bug".
fourth generation maximas
I love the crown vic, some models use a plastic intake which explodes if driven hard and others use crap cylinder heads which pop spark plugs. Sounds very reliable!
Toyota 1.6 liter 4afe = more reliable than gravity
Taiden wrote: Well, I think it depends on what flavor of Subaru you are looking at. If it's not 2.2 liters, I wouldn't call it a reliable Subaru.
401k kms (that is about 250k miles) on my 97 Outback with a 2.5L - runs like a top.
Streetwiseguy wrote: And, while I'm sure I'll get beaten to death over this, anybody that would put a Subaru on a list of long lasting vehicles has seen an entirely different fleet of Subarus than me.
As somebody who had a 9 year old Subaru rust so horribly that the seat belts fell out... I agree.
patgizz wrote: no slant 6 chrysler on list = no credibility.
That's because a car is more than its engine.
Engines good, rearends okay, transmissions meh, bodies dissolve while-u-wait.
Heh. I remember a thread in a different forum where I mentioned, off-handed, that my VW has 340k on it. Some wag said "Ok, that's just about broken in for a slant 6".
Well, maybe, but this poor VW turns 3500-4000rpm on the highway, and it's seen almost all highway miles. In that light, it's turned probably twice as many revs as your average Slant Six by that mileage.
benzbaron wrote: I love the crown vic, some models use a plastic intake which explodes if driven hard and others use crap cylinder heads which pop spark plugs. Sounds very reliable!
and yet cab companies and police departments bought them by the... millions.
benzbaron wrote: I love the crown vic, some models use a plastic intake which explodes if driven hard and others use crap cylinder heads which pop spark plugs. Sounds very reliable!
I don't the ones I have dealt with won't berkeleying die no matter how much you wish they would.
I suspect the "real" list would be made up almost completely of Honda and Toyota products from the early '90s. That would be boring, though. But reliability doesn't equal excitement.
You know what car is way more reliable than I wanted it to be?
Third generation Cavaliers with the 2.2. If you performed the required maintenance, it just wouldn't die no matter how much I wanted it to. I kept hoping it would have some catastrophic failure so that we could get rid of it and get a car that was more fun, but it just kept going and going.
Finally we sold it "for safety reasons" after we had a child. Between the safety factor and the aggravation that resulted since it didn't have a LATCH system, it was time to go.
HappyAndy wrote:nicksta43 wrote: I wonder how Subaru got the reputation of a long lasting vehicle then. Most of the non car people I know put them up there with Honda.Marketing? The same reason so many people think Toyotas are the best car ever made.
But Toyotas are the best car ever made.
As much as I hate the things, the Ford Ranger refused to die. Never changed for 20+ years, and you still see tons of them running around...in various states of disrepair.
You want a car that refused to die??? This thing was a bitch to kill....
Stuff breaks on RWD Volvos, but it never seems terminal, and you can usually fix them with tape and bubble gum. My 740 Turbo had about 225,000 miles on it when I bought it and 250,000 miles on it when I sold it, and I have no reason to doubt it's still going strong. The junkyard was full of them--usually with crash damage--so it was an awesome source of cheap replacement parts.
Kinda surprised they didn't lump Camry in with Accord; the 1990s Camrys are just tanks, that iron block engine is a beast, and the car is just overengineered.
Now that I think about it, I would agree with previous poster who said Cavalier. Unfortunately, try finding one older that 1995...it isn't all that easy. I see them on CL, but usually they need quite a bit of repair because of that 3rd or 4th owner who was too cheap to buy decent oil and coolant.
And as someone who owned a Ranger, yes, the 4 cylinder and 3 liter V6 engined Rangers deserve to be on a list that (apparently) bent it's "no trucks and no SUVs" rule to incliude a Jeep and 4 Runner.
Brett_Murphy wrote: You know what car is way more reliable than I wanted it to be? Third generation Cavaliers with the 2.2. If you performed the required maintenance, it just wouldn't die no matter how much I wanted it to. I kept hoping it would have some catastrophic failure so that we could get rid of it and get a car that was more fun, but it just kept going and going. Finally we sold it "for safety reasons" after we had a child. Between the safety factor and the aggravation that resulted since it didn't have a LATCH system, it was time to go.
We had one at work - it was a "pool" car - which translated means everyone drove the E36 M3 out of it and no one did any maintenance.
I checked it one day and I had to put over 2 L of oil into it. Still ran like a top the day we sold it.
Re: Ranger. My 96 died at well over 300K. Vulcan V6. Threw a rod. Minimal maintenance, used as a company truck with multiple drivers for most of it's life. Great 5 speed. Interior got a little ratty, but not bad. My son gave it to me- free. I would call that a long and fruitful life. I certainly got my moneys worth out of it.
PHeller wrote: Dodge/Chrysler SOHC 2.2l and 2.5l. If they were good enough for boost, they were plenty good enough to last for 200,000k
Problem is you had to actually do maintenance on them. Toyota, Honda and Subaru get a good rep because you can neglect them and they won't die (in most/a lot of cases. Anything American post '80 wouldn't let you get away with not checking the oil or doing a tune up ever.
My /6 truck would go 2.5 quarts low before it would start tapping. I'd fill it up and keep going. Did the same with all my 318s. The 3.9 in my dakota now seems to be similar.
ProDarwin wrote: But, if maintained at all (i.e. change the oil every 3-5k) they will last longer than you'd ever want one to.
Hahaha that's where I'm at now with my SL2. I'm bored with it, it's getting slower, more rattle-y, burns more oil, and is too small for my upright bass to fit into. But the damned thing won't die, and it gets such great mileage, why bother getting a new car?
I like that they broke the "no trucks" rule just to put the XJ Cherokee on there. Classic.
I'm surprised the 4-cylinder late-'80s to early-'90s Toyota Camry isn't on there. I think they would probably run for 100K miles without oil...
Twin_Cam wrote: I think they would probably run for 100K miles without oil...
On a related note, our Saturn did a significant portion of its Lemons race w/ a water:oil mix of like 1:1. Blown HG during testing, and ran a 14 hour race on it. You could REALLY hear the rods knocking during the last hour or two of racing. It was awesome.
You'll need to log in to post.
