|
|
|
Every car was built to be reliable when it was new. I've got a few cars to choose from, but most get used all year round. (Or did, pre covid). Don't want to jinx it, but I've not needed a tow truck since 2006. My newest car ever owned is now 31 years old. Anything from the 80s or 90s will still be reliable if maintained. But if using everyday, get something with decent parts availability. Edit: ironically I have a beetle and a VW bay window. I find them fine as everyday vehicles until it gets cold! Something a similar age but water cooled is a much better bet with regard to heating and demisting systems. Even if being used daily, cars will always fare better kept undercover when not out and about. AGREED.
|
|
|
|
|
goldnrust
West Midlands
Minimalist
Posts: 1,872
|
|
|
Ultimately it will come down to finding a decent survivor, with 5 years of truly “trouble free motoring” ahead. To me “Trouble Free motoring” wold be not needing welding etc. Servicing, maintenance, wear and tear does not fall into the definition above. That’s the challenge with an older daily isn’t it. I would happily drive a 90s daily, I’ve had lots over the last decade along with the more compromised 80s and 70s dailies. With a 90s era car I don’t think you’re giving up much comfort, practicality and general reliability compared to a modern. Unlike an older car, you’ll have a decent heating and ventilation system, decent brakes, fuel injection that starts every morning 1st time etc. But... the problem for me is that you’re talking about a car that’s now 25+ years old and that means it’s seen 25 winters of salty roads and stuff, and potentially 25 years of neglectful owners. So when you have a fairly minor issue, say you need to change a track rod end, then you go underneath and find it’s seized to the tie rod. No problem just replace them both, so you take off the under tray to access the rack and all of the bolts holding the under tray on shear. And while you’re under there you spot a anti roll bar bush needs doing, but the head on the bolt holding it in is rounded... and so on. None of these are major issues on their own but they make every bit of ‘normal’ maintenance much much harder. Finding an older cars that’s been looked after and isn’t going to throw up those kind of small problems that snowball is going to be the key to joy in an older daily I think. My 97 Alfa GTV was a good daily. 2.0TS engine was peppy and enthusiastic and much cheaper to run than the v6. It was engaging to drive, comfy and looked cool. Yes you need to change the cam belts every 4 years/36k miles, and the rear suspension buses wear. But rust isn’t an issue and you get an interesting and unusual 90s coupe. They can still be had fairly cheap (v6s go for a bunch more). As ever finding one that had been looked after is the key... Edit: This was mine.
|
|
Last Edit: May 8, 2021 9:34:04 GMT by goldnrust
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimately it will come down to finding a decent survivor, with 5 years of truly “trouble free motoring” ahead. To me “Trouble Free motoring” wold be not needing welding etc. Servicing, maintenance, wear and tear does not fall into the definition above. That’s the challenge with an older daily isn’t it. I would happily drive a 90s daily, I’ve had lots over the last decade along with the more compromised 80s and 70s dailies. With a 90s era car I don’t think you’re giving up much comfort, practicality and general reliability compared to a modern. Unlike an older car, you’ll have a decent heating and ventilation system, decent brakes, fuel injection that starts every morning 1st time etc. But... the problem for me is that you’re talking about a car that’s now 25+ years old and that means it’s seen 25 winters of salty roads and stuff, and potentially 25 years of neglectful owners. So when you have a fairly minor issue, say you need to change a track rod end, then you go underneath and find it’s seized to the tie rod. No problem just replace them both, so you take off the under tray to access the rack and all of the bolts holding the under tray on shear. And while you’re under there you spot a anti roll bar bush needs doing, but the head on the bolt holding it in is rounded... and so on. None of these are major issues on their own but they make every bit of ‘normal’ maintenance much much harder. Finding an older cars that’s been looked after and isn’t going to throw up those kind of small problems that snowball is going to be the key to joy in an older daily I think. My 97 Alfa GTV was a good daily. 2.0TS engine was peppy and enthusiastic and much cheaper to run than the v6. It was engaging to drive, comfy and looked cool. Yes you need to change the cam belts every 4 years/36k miles, and the rear suspension buses wear. But rust isn’t an issue and you get an interesting and unusual 90s coupe. They can still be had fairly cheap (v6s go for a bunch more). As ever finding one that had been looked after is the key... Absolutely. You mention engaging. My Prozac 1.4 Berlingo was a lot more fun to drive (yes, it is a different kettle of fish) than the 193 bhp V6 that is the S10. Different cars, different ambitions. My dad used say that he preferred the bread and butter models for sheer driving pleasure. I think I got lucky here, forum.retro-rides.org/thread/211832/grizz-s10-rumblegrizzkin-plate-cameBut they do exist, one just needs to be a bit more vigilant in your search. And of course, remember that there is always the potential for unexpected heartbreak in every one of these cars, but so can a new Ferrari F XXXX
|
|
Last Edit: May 8, 2021 9:16:58 GMT by grizz
|
|
Dez
Club Retro Rides Member
And I won't sit down. And I won't shut up. And most of all I will not grow up.
Posts: 11,710
Club RR Member Number: 34
|
|
|
I agree that the ideas older cars are ‘not up to the job’ of daily driving is rubbish. I’ve had this as a daily driver for 3-1/2 years, it does everything I need it to and I’ve been all over the country in it, often using it as a work van. Can swallow huge loads (fnaar), is comfortable, has all mod cons like wipers, a good heater and a stereo. It even charges my phone. In the time I’ve had it I’ve done some very basic servicing when I first got it, replaced most of the brake consumables, rebuilt the carb and replaced a wheel bearing and a starter motor. That was it until it shat a bearing in the gearbox a month or so back so I swapped another box in, the old one will rebuild though, it was just noisy. It needs the bottom of the rear 1/4 welding really, but it needed doing when I bought it and is non structural so it er, hasn’t happened. I’ve had post 2000 cars that have required more to keep them in use. The other thing is the falcon is comically simple, so nothing is difficult or expensive to fix. With places Like rockauto supplying parts, it’s as easy and quick as ordering parts from gsf. Once you get out of the mindset of ‘needing’ a modern car, and if you pick the car carefully, you don’t have to be a masochist to daily a proper classic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimately it will come down to finding a decent survivor, with 5 years of truly “trouble free motoring” ahead. To me “Trouble Free motoring” wold be not needing welding etc. Servicing, maintenance, wear and tear does not fall into the definition above. That’s the challenge with an older daily isn’t it. I would happily drive a 90s daily, I’ve had lots over the last decade along with the more compromised 80s and 70s dailies. With a 90s era car I don’t think you’re giving up much comfort, practicality and general reliability compared to a modern. Unlike an older car, you’ll have a decent heating and ventilation system, decent brakes, fuel injection that starts every morning 1st time etc. But... the problem for me is that you’re talking about a car that’s now 25+ years old and that means it’s seen 25 winters of salty roads and stuff, and potentially 25 years of neglectful owners. So when you have a fairly minor issue, say you need to change a track rod end, then you go underneath and find it’s seized to the tie rod. No problem just replace them both, so you take off the under tray to access the rack and all of the bolts holding the under tray on shear. And while you’re under there you spot a anti roll bar bush needs doing, but the head on the bolt holding it in is rounded... and so on. None of these are major issues on their own but they make every bit of ‘normal’ maintenance much much harder. Finding an older cars that’s been looked after and isn’t going to throw up those kind of small problems that snowball is going to be the key to joy in an older daily I think. My 97 Alfa GTV was a good daily. 2.0TS engine was peppy and enthusiastic and much cheaper to run than the v6. It was engaging to drive, comfy and looked cool. Yes you need to change the cam belts every 4 years/36k miles, and the rear suspension buses wear. But rust isn’t an issue and you get an interesting and unusual 90s coupe. They can still be had fairly cheap (v6s go for a bunch more). As ever finding one that had been looked after is the key... Edit: This was mine. I’m not clued up on these at all, but an Alfa & rust isn’t an issue? Is that true? I’ve always liked the look of these.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is all well and good for you mechanically minded folk to tell people, driving a car from the 1950's is fine for me and it'll be fine for you.
Thing is for most people it isn't, heaters need to work, it needs to be easy enough to drive in modern traffic conditions for people that aren't obsessively in to cars but do fancy some interesting to drive, it needs to be easy to service and cost effective to repair.
Sure when someone has been bitten by the bug maybe they will be into dailying a 38 Hudson, or a Herald, or Ferrari 308, or something that needs a bit more care and attention that is a bit less forgiving. Right now I'm thinking "hey don't buy that new Fiesta on HP, buy this Alfa GTV* instead, it is cheaper, more fun and just as useable"
*maybe
|
|
Last Edit: May 8, 2021 11:00:19 GMT by HoTWire
|
|
tofufi
South West
Posts: 1,449
|
|
|
It is all well and good for you mechanically minded folk to tell people, driving a car from the 1950's is fine for me and it'll be fine for you. In fact I knew that would be an opinion shared in this thread, thus: Now before people get all hardcore with "I used to drive a convertible TR7, it broke down every day, twice when it snowed and I loved it" Thing is for most people it isn't, heaters need to work, it needs to be easy enough to drive in modern traffic conditions for people that aren't obsessively in to cars but do fancy some interesting to drive, it needs to be easy to service and cost effective to repair. What I'm saying was that even old stuff doesn't need that much maintenance. I've used my '64 Morris minor as a semi-daily for the last 4-5 years. In that time, the only thing I've had to do other than routine maintenance is to replace the master cylinder. Oh, and a pair of gearbox mounts. The heating is adequate, and it implausibly keeps working. It's easy enough to drive too, although I don't often do long runs as the seats aren't great for comfort. Even more, it was cosmetically rough when I got it, and moderately rougher now
|
|
Last Edit: May 8, 2021 11:03:14 GMT by tofufi
|
|
|
|
|
What I'm saying was that even old stuff doesn't need that much maintenance. Absolutely, I ran my 79 Sunny for at least three years without an oil change (!!). Equally I would not tell someone that fancied a bit of retro action to buy one as a daily driver. It is a great car, will go fine in modern traffic, is reliable, sort of confortable etc. However it is a long long way from modern cars. It would be a great second retro, after someone has taken the plunge and driven a 90's Volvo or Saab or something for a while. Maintenance is certainly an important piece of the puzzle for all the reasons goldnrust pointed out too. However I also think there is a culture shock going to something from the 60's and 70's from a modern car, which is eased if you have something in between. So I guess I should have expressed the desire for a middle ground. I know someone who dailies and Austin seven, even through winter, but I'm not about to suggest my wife tries that
|
|
|
|
Dez
Club Retro Rides Member
And I won't sit down. And I won't shut up. And most of all I will not grow up.
Posts: 11,710
Club RR Member Number: 34
|
|
|
You coming from the massive assumption that old cars don’t meet the set criteria that are somehow fulfilled sometime in the late 80s/early 90s, which is the part I have issue with. I’ve had more 80s/90s cars that fail on those points somehow than earlier ones, usually by over complicated systems failing and being impossible to get parts for.
I’d agree aircooled VWs fall down massively on heating and demising, but Mine has a great heater cos it’s water cooled with the motor in the right place. Two miles from home on a cold engine and you’re toasty. It demists in less than a minute and doesn’t mist up again. The brakes are sharp as is the handling. It’s actually the comfiest car I own as the suspension was designed with unmetalled roads still in mind, so it takes today’s pothole riddled surfaces with ease. This is a totally stock 1963 car except it’s mildly lowered.
There are so simple there’s pretty much nothing on them to break. All parts are easily and cheaply a available as I have said. I can get falcon parts as easily as Land Rover or mini ones. As stated I’ve done a really very small amount of preventative maintenance, like literally a couple of hours a year, and it never fails to proceed, even on the coldest days on in the worst weather. If something does go wrong it’s always really obvious what it is, even to the layman. I find 80s/90s stuff fine when it works, then a utter nightmare if it doesn’t, as they have added complexity but no onboard diagnostics, as they’re pre ODB2 so the systems are generally obsolete. bosch K-jet is a prime example. Works lovely when it’s good, utter pain in the posterior is you have issues.
My acid test is give the keys to the Mrs. She’s not a car person as such and isn’t in any way an enthusiast or mechanically minded, but finds old cars fun to drive. If she can drive it then most people could. Her complaints on the falcon where poor rear visibility (panel van) and she’d never driven a column change before. After 20 mins rattling up and down the gears she was fine with it. She didn’t mention anything else on the car as an issue at all, her cars being a Lupo and an Mx5 for comparison, both of which fall squarely into the category you’re angling for.
What I’m saying is I don’t think there’s anywhere as near as much of a difference between cars from that period as you think. If you went a bit earlier and a bit later in comparison then maybe, but I don’t think the driver experience changed that hugely from the 60s until the very end of the 90s in my eyes.
|
|
Last Edit: May 8, 2021 11:14:45 GMT by Dez
|
|
|
|
|
My acid test is give the keys to the Mrs. She’s not a car person as such and isn’t in any way an enthusiast or mechanically minded, but finds old cars fun to drive. If she can drive it then most people could. Her complaints on the falcon where poor rear visibility (panel van) and she’d never driven a column change before. After 20 mins rattling up and down the gears she was fine with it. This is a good test, and your reasoning is sound in the rest of the post. So I guess rather than approaching and saying "older cars can be better than 90's etc." maybe what to look for in a 50's, 60's, 70's car that means you can drive it every day. Are there some manufacturers that are better. A lot of people get in to older cars via cultish aircooled VWs and that is a terrible idea because they are uniformly awful cars in my experience (and I'd still have another at some point because they are cool things). 70's Japanese stuff can be uninspiring to drive, and tricky to find parts for. Heralds and the like seem to fair better, but in my experience of them can be a bit ... agricultural ... for creature comforts. To give a music analogy, it is like someone saying "hey I like Metallica and I'd like to get into a bit more metal", and then suggesting they listen to Darkthrone or Bathory. Those are fine when you're acclimatised to them, but you are just going to put people off if that is the route you go for a first experience.
|
|
Last Edit: May 8, 2021 11:17:21 GMT by HoTWire
|
|
|
Paul Y
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,948
|
|
|
Reliable classic motor for £15k? 996 Boxster Caymen. 996 didn’t realise how expensive they had got over the last 2 years! £15k will get you a tiptronic convertible. Good boxster out there for £5k. Excellent Boxster a available for £15k! One needing work and mods are sub £3k Early Caymen available at this money. Caymen would be my shout as they are really nice to drive and I don’t like convertibles. Or tiptronic. All the mod cons. It’s a Porsche. Yes, RMS but at this age it will have been done or won’t need it. It’s a Porsche. Blah blah blah. P.
|
|
|
|
thooms
Part of things
Posts: 96
|
|
|
Most important thing I find with older cars is that you need to be in tune with what it's trying to tell you, which means you can catch stuff before it becomes a real issue (though there are of course always exceptions!). If I was looking for a sensible semi-modern daily car, I'd go for a Saab 9000 or an early 9-5. Comfy, fast (with potential to be much more so!), cheap to buy and contrary to popular belief, still good parts availability. I daily the Panda at the moment (Saab is in storage at the moment, but I happily daily that too) - does 50mpg and will sit at an indicated 80 on the motorway without too much sweat. As tofufi says, they were built to be reliable when new, and anything built within the last 35ish years that's reasonably well looked after should (in theory) be tough / reliable enough for daily use. The Saab is a fair bit juicier, though will still comfortably do ~33-35mpg on a long run. It's also sublime to drive, very comfy and makes all the right noises at the right moments. 100% recommended as a daily, but they're getting rather old now and while some parts are gradually getting harder to find (for instance things like headlight reflectors - which tend to oxidise - are now unobtanium), parts availability is generally still good.
|
|
1991 Saab 900S Aero 1992 Fiat Panda 1000CLX 1981 Fiat 238 / Laika MP6
|
|
|
jamesd1972
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 2,818
Club RR Member Number: 40
|
|
|
I'd be starting with what has parts and specialized back up and going from there, old British, Merc, VW, Volvo ? = generally available parts = easy to look after. Front engine RWD = fundamentally more reliable. I love the engineering in old Honda's and Toyota's that keeps them going but not sure about parts and back up. So your first shout was a good one, saloon better value I suspect but estate massive. Enjoy the search. James
|
|
|
|
goldnrust
West Midlands
Minimalist
Posts: 1,872
|
|
|
I’m not clued up on these at all, but an Alfa & rust isn’t an issue? Is that true? I’ve always liked the look of these. AFAIK Alfa Romeo started zinc coating their body shells in the 90s to get past their reputation for rust, and as such the 916 Spider/GTV, along with the 156, 147 and newer models don't suffer from body shell rust. That's not to say there can't be rust issues with things like subframes but I think that's actually been more a problem with the newer cars (159 especially). The GTV is a pretty solid and reliable car, as long as you're ready for the short cam belt service interval and expecting that it might need a couple of suspension bushes. Oh and the rear heated window wiring that on some models was undersized and could melt/catch fire (pretty sure all have been fixed by now)... wouldn't be a proper Alfa without some electrical fun would it! There's good buyers guides, forums and stuff out there if you're seriously interested. www.alfaworkshop.co.uk/alfa_romeo_gtv.shtml
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regarding Alfas & ferrous oxide, I can't comment on the Spider / GTV (which I really like), but a relative recently disposed of his 147 due to rust. Can't remember if it was subframe or bodyshell, but it had certainly needed the rear of both sills welding several years previously... My acid test is give the keys to the Mrs. She’s not a car person as such and isn’t in any way an enthusiast or mechanically minded, but finds old cars fun to drive. If she can drive it then most people could. Her complaints on the falcon where poor rear visibility (panel van) and she’d never driven a column change before. After 20 mins rattling up and down the gears she was fine with it. This is a good test, and your reasoning is sound in the rest of the post. So I guess rather than approaching and saying "older cars can be better than 90's etc." maybe what to look for in a 50's, 60's, 70's car that means you can drive it every day. Are there some manufacturers that are better. A lot of people get in to older cars via cultish aircooled VWs and that is a terrible idea because they are uniformly awful cars in my experience (and I'd still have another at some point because they are cool things). 70's Japanese stuff can be uninspiring to drive, and tricky to find parts for. Heralds and the like seem to fair better, but in my experience of them can be a bit ... agricultural ... for creature comforts. To give a music analogy, it is like someone saying "hey I like Metallica and I'd like to get into a bit more metal", and then suggesting they listen to Darkthrone or Bathory. Those are fine when you're acclimatised to them, but you are just going to put people off if that is the route you go for a first experience. Volvo Amazons pass that test. Mine was initially my father & stepmother's only car in the '90s, and Mrs H would often drive the Amazon, usually whilst I was fixing her modern.. My step mother has no interest at all in old cars, but she had a healthy respect for the Amazon. She reckoned that the heater kicked in quicker than the 850 they got to replace it (when passed on to me), and when that 850 threw a rod in the outside lane of a motorway, she was quoted as saying, whilst they were waiting on the hard shoulder for the tow truck, that 'the old Volvo would never have done that'. As it was, my father's idea of enthusiast cars are prewar ones, but he bought the Amazon in 1994 as he needed cheap transport at the time and wanted something interesting but useable & dependable. It proved to be all that, and his views on it are still that it is an extremely useful and practical workhorse. He was even thinking of getting another a few years ago to use to get to and from the railway station, but twin carb & overdrive ones (even saloons) were more than he wanted to spend. I used it daily from 2002 until 2016. It is still drivable, but off the road as it needs work to pass the MOT. It could have been bodged quickly, but I want to fix it properly & invisibly, whilst also sorting out and restoring the entire enginebay. The only concerns I would have about putting it back into daily use is that the motorised tinfoil box I currently commute in uses half the fuel. The Amazon is actually faster in a straight line.
|
|
Last Edit: May 8, 2021 17:22:36 GMT by Paul H
|
|
|
|
|
The way I look at it is like this, if you can afford a Golf R on HP or whatever, you can afford to spend the same money keeping up whatever old car you want. I'd think if you bought whatever car you like with the initial deposit money you'd need for a golf R then made sure you spent the monthly pcp cost on parts for the old car, you'd have a "new" and well fettled car after a year. (nothing wrong with a golf R, thats just how I view spending money on my cars)
I've dailied all sorts over the last decade on a 50mile unchanged round trip from a 1300 Triumph toledo to the current 1995 GS300. Just buy what you like and don't just fix it when it breaks, preempt and you can drive anything if you start with a good enough base.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Surprised no one has said W124 chassis; estate, coupe, convertible, sedan covers all the bases and they will cover a lot of miles needing little. Have to pick the right one since there are some astoundingly bad ones but that’s true of everything even new. I put 40k on this one in 2018 iirc before I got a company vehicle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There’s so much out there for £1500 Late 90s Early 2000s cars that the new generation of “I’ve got to have new” brigade won’t consider I’ve also daily driven many cars on the cusp of classic/retro status And not broken down or incurred any major mechanical failures, I’ve had various 90s Mercedes , a Jaguar xj6 three mgf , the escort estate and a used my lads 95 fiesta daily for a few months oh and a 190E was good fun I’ve absolutely no interest in finance or loans , and have no interest in keeping up with next door....who incidentally can’t afford to pay for a service on there Audi and baulked at my boys price of £90 for a mini service There’s so many cars out there to drive and enjoy and play around with Mercedes , Volvo , Bmw, Jaguar, early mondeo, late model escorts, mx5 ,mgf and Saab’s to name just a few
|
|
Last Edit: May 8, 2021 19:17:28 GMT by Mercdan68
Fraud owners club member 1999 Jaguar s type 1993 ford escort
|
|
stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 14,812
Club RR Member Number: 174
|
|
|
I don't think it's a question that can be answered as it seems to be pretty much pot luck whether the specific car is good or not. As a case in point there's a guy who brings his Pinto Sierra into work fairly often for repairs. It's properly tidy, well looked after with servicing etc. Gets towed in by the AA at least twice a year because its broken down. Another guy has a Sierra that is always about 30 seconds from the scrapyard, engine has had the Pinto cam death rattle since before I worked there, gets the absolute bare minimum to get it through a MOT. It's broken down once in the 20 odd years the guy has owned it.
I guess my point is you can't recommend a specific brand or model of car because its hit and miss
|
|
|
|
|