So over this last weekend, my younger brother was in town visiting. Over the course of the weekend we visited the garage and the 95 4Runner project in the garage. Currently I am swapping the timing belt and the front of the motor is off.

The question was 'how new of car is too new for you to work on?'.

I found this as an interesting question because my much newer G37 is more of a delight to work on. His question was based on the opinion that there is much more technology in new cars that must make them harder to work on.

My answer - pointing out the miles of vacuum hose on the Toyota - that I prefer the newer cars as sensors and ECUs are easier to diagnose and repair than R&R of vacuum lines every time you need to remove something.

Where does everyone else stand on this? I think we are pretty spoiled in being able to read bad sensors through ODBII readers, not nearly as much vacuum line, with the downside being lots of wires in some applications.

So what do you think? new vs old?

It's not so much a new vs old thing for me, it's a doability thing, as well to a lesser degree a pleasure thing.

Anything with a computer and/or fuel injection is too new for me, unless it is a brake job or some easy maintenance item. There are 9 carbs on cars in my garage.

I think for me the deciding factor is not how new it is, its whether I have own or have access to the tools I need to do the job.

One thing I love about living in rust country is that newer cars are almost ALWAYS easier to work on. I do NOT miss out on having to work on 70s and 80s cars on a daily basis. Hoses and brackets and crap everywhere, and service information was guarded like the recipe for Coke so good luck trying to diagnose anything without access to the Secret Knowledge.

I don't like driving new cars, but working on them is pleasant.

The 2017s are starting to show up on the lots so I guess I will work on as new as 2017

I used to avoid 'modern' stuff because I was raised that way - my dad disliked working on the '89 E150 and '88 F350 because they were so "new" - but the combination of internet documentation of just about any problem and the generally improved reliability of modern cars means I now own 4 fuel injected things with ECUs and have not been unable to fix anything yet. The hardest thing to conquer is still a seized bolt. About the only increased difficulty in my life is the existence of O2 sensors.

Disclaimer: I have not owned a modern german car nor anything with electronic suspension. I'm only up to the ~2000s in my world.

Different era cars have different difficulties. It seems to me that old cars (like 60s-70s) were hard to work on because stuff didn't fit real well and tolerances were looser. Even when I'd buy new parts for the 69 F100 or 70 Impala I had, they wouldn't bolt right on. They had to be wobbled just right or coerced or something to get all the bolts in. And then there's the rust issue, even down south.

Later cars, like late 80s early 90s were the worst point for diagnostic work and figuring out what the berkeley was actually wrong - rudimentary emission electronics and miles of vacuum hose.

About the time they figured out how to make fuel injection (mid-late 90s) cars were hard to work on because they got smaller in general and there was a lot of crap crammed into a tiny space. Component size was still fairly high and there just wasn't enough room to turn a wrench. My 97 V8 Explorer fits that bill. It's not bad..once you get enough E36 M3 apart to get at whatever you have to fix.

Newer cars seem to be getting easier. Diagnostic systems will generally tell you pretty accurately what's wrong. Component size and number has decreased so there's more space to work and layouts seem better thought out for service. Computer designs help tolerances to be very tight so everything fits up like it should.

The easiest cars I've ever worked on? My 2005 Mustang GT and the 2014 Mazda 6 we have. When I raised the hood on the Mustang during the test drive and could see past the engine to the pavement on both sides I knew it was going to be a long and happy relationship.

It just depends on how its put together and packaged. The cars that I try hardest to avoid are eighties cars with miles of vacuum hose. They're worse now then they were back then because all the rubber and plastic is brittle.

With the right tools and technology most of today's cars aren't bad to work on, and old school wrenching skills are still useful to fill in the sometimes large gaps in the modern tech.

No such thing. The only advantage of older cars is that you could usually fix any fuel system problems on the roadside with a screwdriver, while today you need to carry spare parts and a code reader.

and lots of modern cars are all crushed together so you can't get to the parts you need to change ... like something simple like spark plug changes .. on a transverse mounted V6 ... or the back plugs on a Ford 4.6 or 5.4 ... multiple jointed arms (human arms that is) and extensions to the sockets and ratchets

I remember being able to climb up into the engine bay of my mid '60's Chevy PU and then work on the engine ... plenty of room to work on it ... straight 6 ... those aren't available any more ... if there's any open space, something will be put in there

GameboyRMH wrote: No such thing. The only advantage of older cars is that you could usually fix any fuel system problems on the roadside with a screwdriver, while today you need to carry spare parts and a code reader.

The advantage today is that you don't NEED to be able to fix it on the side of the road

I fear it's going to be in the late 2000's because of proprietary software. My 2009 Escalade just had the driver door master switch have a seizure. Easy to replace but it stores the VIN so it needs to be coded to the truck to work. GM has locked up the software to where I can't find a good DIY option. I was surprised because for my 2006 BMW I was able to go online and for $100 get software and a cable to get deep into systems I have no business touching. I never thought that GM would be more difficult and less documented than BMW. Live and learn.

GameboyRMH wrote: No such thing. The only advantage of older cars is that you could usually fix any fuel system problems on the roadside with a screwdriver, while today you need to carry spare parts and a code reader.

yes, but usually the fuel systems are pretty fool proof. just use good fuel and change the filter on some sort of regular basis and they will pump fuel forever.

To be exact, the only fuel related issues I have had with any FI car... bad fuel pumps.. something you can fix with a screwdriver

I ain't skeered of nuttin'.... 'less it's German. then oh hell naw.

I think a lot of older shade tree mechanics use that line as an excuse to not work on their stuff anymore.

I got that response when I was doing the plugs on the PT cruiser. "Look at that, he had to take half the intake off to get at 'em!"

Never mind that it took like 45 seconds and the whole thing was o ringed together so easily that it was child's play.

Really depends on the car. I wouldn't touch a FWD 2.7 Chrylser, but a 3800 GM FWD is not a big deal.

Newish doesn't bother me.

So far, my 06 mazda6 has been the easiest car I've worked on.

Gearheadotaku wrote: Really depends on the car. I wouldn't touch a FWD 2.7 Chrylser, but a 3800 GM FWD is not a big deal.

so a plug on a Ford Windstar 3/8 sideways mounted engine is no big deal ? how do you get to the rear bank of plugs ... keep in mind that that I'm at home ... no lift, gravel parking lot, so your roller won't work, 45° for the predicted high ...

no big deal ???

YOU DA MAN

Yeah. My 3.8 Grand Caravan lived with a 5 plug change. That final plug just was not happening.

As to era? I'd say it has more to do with the vehicle/make. Toyota has always seemed easier to wrench on than Chrysler products. OBD2 is definitely a big help.

glueguy wrote: I fear it's going to be in the late 2000's because of proprietary software. My 2009 Escalade just had the driver door master switch have a seizure. Easy to replace but it stores the VIN so it needs to be coded to the truck to work.

That may well be very true. The DMCA and DRMs may well do in all home repairs on equipment. Just look at the noise going on in the farming circles regarding Deere on this one.

Deere is holding very tightly to this one, claiming no one owns a modern Deere tractor, they are licencees. Deere retains exclusive ownership and control of the tractor.

Fascinating how Deere and others have managed to include things under that. A hydraulic hose for example (as I recall). How the heck do you code for a hydraulic hose?

There was a very zesty article just a few months back in one of the farming journals about the fun a gent had trying to replace a blown hydraulic hose on his new Deere. In the end, he couldn't. The tractor would not run with the non-Deere hose. He never did figure out how the tractor knew. Worse, it couldn't be installed by him. It had to be a dealer servicing to authorize the repair and have the tractor operate.

So a repair that normally would cost just a few dollars and take but 10 minutes now cost him upward of a thousand dollars and several days. Not only the cost of the hose, but the job couldn't be field served. The tractor had to be picked up and transported to the dealership for repairs.

This will expand, I've no doubt.

From my perspective, my fun cars are getting newer, thanks rust. I do hate working on my daily drivers beyond little things. If I depend on it for my work/livelihood it needs to be newer and relatively problem free. Therefore it dosent need much work. So I'm rambling but it's a Circular argument. Yes I would work on my daily, but I don't want to and really don't need to. Does any of this make sense. Why was I up at midnight, 2 and 4 and 5 am. Ohh yeah teething. Thanks little man. Now get off my lawn.

foxtrapper wrote:

glueguy wrote: I fear it's going to be in the late 2000's because of proprietary software. My 2009 Escalade just had the driver door master switch have a seizure. Easy to replace but it stores the VIN so it needs to be coded to the truck to work.

That may well be very true. The DMCA and DRMs may well do in all home repairs on equipment. Just look at the noise going on in the farming circles regarding Deere on this one. Deere is holding very tightly to this one, claiming no one owns a modern Deere tractor, they are licencees. Deere retains exclusive ownership and control of the tractor. Fascinating how Deere and others have managed to include things under that. A hydraulic hose for example (as I recall). How the heck do you code for a hydraulic hose? There was a very zesty article just a few months back in one of the farming journals about the fun a gent had trying to replace a blown hydraulic hose on his new Deere. In the end, he couldn't. The tractor would not run with the non-Deere hose. He never did figure out how the tractor knew. Worse, it couldn't be installed by him. It had to be a dealer servicing to authorize the repair and have the tractor operate. So a repair that normally would cost just a few dollars and take but 10 minutes now cost him upward of a thousand dollars and several days. Not only the cost of the hose, but the job couldn't be field served. The tractor had to be picked up and transported to the dealership for repairs. This will expand, I've no doubt.

does Deere see $$ walking out the door and going to competitors ?

or is there a conspericy to go this way from all the farm tractor manufactures ?

I actually hope that other companies will benefit from Deere's decision

foxtrapper wrote:

glueguy wrote: I fear it's going to be in the late 2000's because of proprietary software. My 2009 Escalade just had the driver door master switch have a seizure. Easy to replace but it stores the VIN so it needs to be coded to the truck to work.

That may well be very true. The DMCA and DRMs may well do in all home repairs on equipment. Just look at the noise going on in the farming circles regarding Deere on this one. Deere is holding very tightly to this one, claiming no one owns a modern Deere tractor, they are licencees. Deere retains exclusive ownership and control of the tractor. Fascinating how Deere and others have managed to include things under that. A hydraulic hose for example (as I recall). How the heck do you code for a hydraulic hose? There was a very zesty article just a few months back in one of the farming journals about the fun a gent had trying to replace a blown hydraulic hose on his new Deere. In the end, he couldn't. The tractor would not run with the non-Deere hose. He never did figure out how the tractor knew. Worse, it couldn't be installed by him. It had to be a dealer servicing to authorize the repair and have the tractor operate. So a repair that normally would cost just a few dollars and take but 10 minutes now cost him upward of a thousand dollars and several days. Not only the cost of the hose, but the job couldn't be field served. The tractor had to be picked up and transported to the dealership for repairs. This will expand, I've no doubt.

I remember some noise about legislation to curb such behavior... I don't know if has happened.

^Yep it's being curbed right now:

https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/mod-away-fellow-enthusiasts/107118/page1/

As for how the tractor detected that a hose was changed...I can think of 4 possible ways:

1. A chip in the hose. In this case there would be obvious electrical connectors.

2. A certain amount of electrical resistance in the hose that marks it as "genuine". All this would need is a wire embedded in the hose, it would otherwise appear normal. Apple did something like this on their charging cords in the past. There would need to be electrical connections from the hose ends to one of the tractor's computers however.

3. A magnet embedded in the hose end...this would require a reed switch near it, which could be easily hidden.

4. A simple pressure switch & secret reset code. If the hydraulic system loses all pressure, it knows that someone worked on the system and requires a dealer to enter a secret code to let the tractor work again.

If it ran with the Deere hose reinstalled after removing it, it has to be 1/2/3