User deleted post
Thats something you must take into consideration when buying such an old car,of course. My car is of 1998, Audi A3 1.8 petrol. It had a bit over 100K kilometres, sitting in my friends backyard for more than five years. The price, and the money I have immediately spent on silicone hoses,valve cover and oil pan gaskets,brakes and hoses,bushings,air intake,PCV,breather hoses....was the same. But the most difficult to get are interior plastic parts. Still,I like that car,its fun to drive,and now I can say its also reliable.
User deleted comment
1mo
Its AGN Engine,just with variable lenght intake. Same engine as in VW Golf or Octavia. No oil consumption. But yes, I have 4+1 audio:))
You forgot the wiring.
Except new circuits for audio amp, ambient & door lights,USB chargers and a digital voltmeter, I did not had to touch any wires yet.
As someone who replaced every door and window seal, the front seats, all of the vacuum hoses, the head gasket, the oil pan gasket, radiator cover+fan+hoses, and the the crank window handles because the plastic/rubber broke down in my 80's car, I have no clue what you are talking about...
That car ended up being sold when the glue holding the windshield in place was breaking down so water was getting trapped between the A-pillar and the glass so the A-pillar rusted a pinhole leak and started filling with rain water. None of that was visible until the rust worked through to the other side of the A-pillar as the chrome trim that covered the windshield seal hid the problem. Old cars will find surprising ways to fail you.
Was this, perchance, one of the infamous cars that should never have been invested in from the 1980's? Like the Ford Tempo (the main car I've seen turn every family from poor people into destitute poor people) or something?
Nope. Tough as nails super reliable 1st gen 4Runner. Great car that had the original engine, transmission, removable bed cover, and the entire body+frame (minus that one A-pillar) still in great shape. You can't expect plastic+rubber to last over 30 years in any car regardless of make or model which was the other commenters point. Especially because I still daily drove it when it was over 30 years old and it sat in the Texas heat and sunshine for the majority of it's life.
Not sure what years were first-gen, but yeah - for as famous as Toyota drivelines were in the 1980's, their metal corrosion resistance was below every other car maker I saw except for one - Yugo.
Toyota made, and still makes, just about the best in the business, but in the 1980's the safer reliability bet would have been Honda for both drivetrain and corrosion resistance IMHO.
But you make a great point here. Without that perspective of having known all that, a lot of people could invest in poor-decision vehicles from the 1980's. Other than a GM pickup truck that I would put a newer drivetrain in, certain Hondas might be my only choice from the 1980's to invest time and money in as a daily driver. But then everyone knew Hondas were the go-to then and throughout the decades, so those cars all got huge miles put on them and were driven into the dirt.
Perhaps the only reason a 1980's vehicle would only have 50k miles on it, as OP suggests, was that it was a piece of junk from the get-go, or it was a family heirloom of sorts.
83-89 I think. Generally I thought it was good corrosion wise. Everyone that I saw not turned into a mudder/offroader was still in good shape. Mine was 2/3 South and 1/3 rust belt and the decade+ in the salt never did too much despite me washing my cars at most once a year. I just assume there was a paint defect of some sort behind the window seal that gave the water a foothold to make that pinhole leak because it otherwise held up great.
But yeah. I wouldn't daily drive anything from the 80's if my life or livelihood required me to be on time everytime because even a Honda from then will need some shop time.
nervously thinking about my 32-year-old truck from Texas that I drive daily
doesn't know what an A-pillar is
A-pillar is from the hood to the roof. With mine rusted out and having no airbags, I was a medium accident away from being killed.
And if you haven't had your dashboard crack from the heat or the foam runner in your seats start to disintegrate and put out a puff of dust every time you sit on them, you are probably fine.
My dashboard is cracked to pieces. My seat has holes in the vinyl, but the foam is mostly ok.
After looking at the picture, my A-pillar is fine. Although the floor is rusting through.
An A-pillar is the front most window pillar. So the column to the roof where your windshield and front doors meet. If you have a sedan you have a B-pillar where the front doors and the rear meet… etc.
Ugh. When I close my eyes I can still see the inside of the rear brake drums of the Tempo I tried to keep on the road in the 90s. The parts were cheap but you were buying them ALL THE TIME.
I absolutely agree. Belts, hoses, water-pump, among other things. As long as it was a reliable make and model then, it easily could be a reliable car now - but that person better have tools, six weekends to change it all out, and the drive to do so.
I bought an early 2000's vehicle with over 200k miles; exterior beat but very little rust, interior used and needed a new seat cushion, but the vehicle was never beat up and usually driven quite slowly. Changed out the water pump, steering pump, steering fluid cooler, all the main cooling hoses, plus some engine control modules and sensors. I'd now take it on a cross-country trip if I had the time.
Yeah it’s the rubber consumables that are always shit or on the verge of going to shit on low mileage old cars. The harsher the weather the car lived its life in the worser off it is.
It will not be reliable. Low mileage for that age means that it wasn’t driven enough. Things go bad in the engine when they’re not lubricated regularly, like seals, rubber parts. Plastics and rubber deteriorate over time too.
It isn’t. Age is far more important than mileage. My 2007 has 400,000 on it and other than the rockers getting a bit soft, it’s been dead reliable and unproblematic. I had a 1989 in 2012 with 150,000 on it that was a completely unreliable piece of shit. That said, if you have a newer vehicle to rely on and an older vehicle as a tinker project, it can still be fun and you can make something of it.
To be fair 150k miles is a lot for a 80s car.
It was 150,000km. And it was still a pain.
Yikes
Yeah. If you want a bit of an older car, I would definitely go early ‘90s over anything ‘80s. Especially like a ‘90s Civic or Accord, a Dodge Stealth, Ford Probe, Camaro, something like that. They were built better than the ‘80s stuff and the aftermarket for them is huge. And there’s huge forum followings for the majority of problems you’re going to find
Yeah wish i could change the title but i’m not sure i’d want to drive anything before the 90s, at least not frequently. Maybe besides a GM g body.
Just sold my 83 Malibu wagon. I’ve owned several gbodies and other 70s 80s cars. You will always be doing some maintenance or repairs. These cars are old and were just not built to last as well as today’s cars. I enjoy fixing my own cars so I’m fine with the work and maintenance needed. But it was never a reliable daily.
Ford Probe 3-banger lol
My buddy got one for $2k and drove it a couple years. What a piece of junk. Still had some fun in it but would never recommend one.
That's still suggesting that it sat for some time, which brings all the same problems.
Depends on the car. My 1982 Volvo 240 had pretty low mileage at 150,000 but on those things 3 to 400,000 mi is not unusual, and 1 million miles is not unheard of.
My 1989 with 400,000 somehow is still running. The truck was maintained too well though. I wonder when that’ll die on me
Same experience. Age is a killer with how much plastic and rubber is in modern cars.
I have a 98 4runner and Im replacing basically all the rubber seals one by one at this point.
No, virtually every hose, belt, seal, and grease bearing and joints would have dried out or rotted. People forgot that 30 years ago, most cars didn't last 100k miles. Even a cheap new car will get 100k of life out of them.
50 or 60 years ago, maybe they were built to 100k. In the 90s though, many lasted longer, I still daily a 92 truck, and would still be driving a 92 car if if hadn't been stolen, both way over 200k miles. Yeah I replaced belts, seals and bushings, but that has nothing to do with when it was made that stuff wears out on new stuff over time too. If anything those parts lasted longer on old vehicles because many had built in grease zerks.
30 years ago was 1994. Most cars then lasted well over 100,000 miles.
In 2010 I drove a 1974 Plymouth scamp as my first car. It only broke down twice. A water pump and a starter. Not bad considering its age and the way I abused it
What's your point? Your car was an outlier for its model and era.
I had several other cars of similar age that ran reliably for quite some time. I didn't have issues with dry cracked rad hoses or anything like that. Generally the only thing that needed replacing due to the age of the rubber was fan belts and that's easy as hell. There were also plenty of junkers and a lot of the difference was due to the way they were stored and maintained.
Even now I ride a 30 year old motorcycle and it doesn't have many age related issues. I changed the timing belts and the fluids, everything works perfectly
The most important is who was a owner and if The car was used and maintained. Low milage car that just set for 35 Years will be horible becous you would nead to change half of The engine parts and bushings.
But in general most reliable cars ever Made wer Made in erly days of automatization, late ‘80s to early 2ks Most reliable cars would be The ones that had let’s say stable and regular 5k miles a year and regular service intervals. That car is must buy. But aleso a lott of cars from those Years can go whel over 500k miles with no major problems, so if you find a 200k example for cheap and can find someone to repair it, that is gold
Why would you need to change half the engine parts for a car that has just been sitting? Just change the oil and maybe coolant and its fine lol
That is what a person would naturaly think. But in The engine, especialy old ones There Are bunch of rubber seals and ciper gascets that must be used to work or can degrade with The time. On Audi and Porsche engines from ‘80s for example most seals have a 100kkm or 8 year replacement period. And There Are a lott of parts that after some time dna no longer perform due to cemical decomposition
... Audi and Porsche two of the least reliable to buy. I've got a 1993 Honda Accord with 350,000 miles. It has survived FOUR teenage drivers who didn't know how to do proper maintenance. All original seals, engine, and transmission.
That is a propper car. OP asked about old low milage cars, i told The truth. But i beleve people buy old cars for feeling and handeling, not reliability. That is why I have my ‘86 Porsche.
Getting parts could be a bit of a pinch. Try finding parts for a neon. Or a Fuego. Or a Saturn.
Yeah my dad has a saturn, finding cars can be tough.
there is no way to accurately answer that question as a reddit user. Have it checked out by a mechanic.
No, but we can accurately refute the premise of the question. Old cars aren’t reliable. Period.
well, see that's just nonsense and why reddit users should be ignored when it comes to car questions.
Million mile Lexus?
what is "possible" and what is "likely" are two totally different concepts.
Well, you said period, so I refuted it. Not saying it's likely, but there's definitely some reliable old cars
The question is about reliability TODAY, not when it was produced. A 40 year old car, regardless of how well it was maintained is going to be predictably less reliable than a properly built modern car TODAY. That’s not a controversial statement.
I'd trust my 99 Lexus more than most new Euro cars (but not all, and I'm bias)
My 30 year old LTD with 44k (sold with over 160k) miles was one of my most reliable vehicles, the only one more reliable was my 28 year old 98k mile Lexus LS400 (which was sold at ~150k with no issues other than ones caused by an accident), and my 18 year old 150k mile Tahoe (which is currently 23 y/o with 255k) is right about on par with the LTD, but has needed more age-related repairs and received more upgrades than the LTD did. All 3 were/still are far more reliable than any of my new/newer cars have been.
I own a 2002 vette that had 13k miles when I bought it three years ago and I’m up to 19k now.
I expected every other comment on seals and hoses to be true but I’ve done nothing but replace the fluids since there wasn’t records for that besides oil.
At this point I’ve done routine maintenance only, mind you this car was probably in a garage for 75% of its life.
I mean, you've only put 6k miles on it lol.
Being in a garage is key. I had a low mileage Peugeot 505 from when it was 20 to 30 years old, changed a couple of hoses but it was 90% original rubber. Same for a 1995 Renault Twingo I have now. I am lucky to have garage parking for my cars. There's always a few commenters who say "all the seals will fail" but I think a lot of this is opinion based on rumor founded in myth.
Bought mine 1 year ago 17,000 miles. I drove it 15,000 in one year. i love this car. I replaced all lights, fluids and tires. Only problem has been blinkers and fuel gage. The fix is in the works.
My 00 LS400 has been modern enough for me with 250k miles. I had to put a ton of work into suspension. All on engine was p/s pump, alternator, and timing belt service. Other than that, hasn't left me stranded yet. Still, any car that old will need suspension work if it hasn't had it already.
Surprisingly, there's only been one suspension part I've had to replace on my 99 LS400. Power steering has a seep, but no other issues
Yea I'm very picky with my suspension. I rotate a set of winter/summer tires for it, and i can't deal with any clunks/rattles when i drive. But yea, my rack has a seep but not enough to have to top it off all the time.
I'm gonna probably replace power steering components cause it's noisy, but it's not a huge seep, only needs to be topped off like once a year. I can't hear the few rattles I have over my radio and custom exhaust
What exhaust did you go with? I had a Borla on my previous ride, and i really liked it because it had a nice semi-quiet rumble at idle and really screamed on the pedal.
Fully custom cat back, true dual with an H pipe and glass packs, double wall tailpipes https://youtu.be/CyXlJj5FAwQ?si=_-xqUt0hA9zzesCC
Basically silent at idle, but pretty great when you get on it
Man that sounds amazing. I'll have to see if my lexus shop knows anybody that could do this setup for me. Thanks man!
User deleted comment
1mo
Miss my 91 420sel
A world of difference in some 1996-1999 options, from some 80s stuff in this discussion.
I've bought a 96 and 97 suburban both with bad transmissions, replaced the transmissions, and drove them both for years.
Depends. Is it a sought after well built car with a following? Older VWs/Audi, Nissan, Acura/Honda, Subaru, etc can be well worth the money. They're easy to work on, have a ton of aftermarket part options, are cheap to operate, and really reliable unless you get stupid with them. Some of the older Sentras ran a N/A version of the SR20DET. That engine can handle a lot of abuse and make a lot of power, so a mild one will last forever.
I'd you have basic hand tools, a space to work, and a fee weekend to look over everything/refresh rubber components I'd do it. Especially for something cool.
The thing nobody here will say is yes it’s old but also very easy to work on than newer cars. Cost waaaaaaay less also. Why I drive 25+ year old cars. You can actually work on them and get parts. People act like since it’s old and low miles all the belts and hoses are not worth replacing. That’s chump change.
If you accept that a certain amount of preventative maintenance beyond your normal oil changes and chassis lube must be done on a time basis rather than a mileage basis, they can be perfectly reliable.
Taking care of leaks that develop from bad rubber for one; it might be necessary to replace the steering hoses, transmission lines and even brake lines if its a 30 year old car and all those things are original.
But once those things are taken care of, they can be perfectly reliable.
Check with @vantageautocillection on Insta. They sell all sorts of low mileage older cars. I think they're worth some money too.
I'd almost think a well maintained older car with more mileage would be better. The more miles it has the parts have been replaced and the more likely it is to not be all dried up. This is just a theory though.
That makes sense. I have a 08 mustang and i’ve had to get a lot of the original parts replaced at just 123k miles
I drove an 87 comanche with 114k for a few years. At times it was my daily, always had a backup though. I was always a bit worried about it, carried a bunch of tools just in case. However it only broke down on me once, the oil pressure sending unit sprung a leak directly on the exhaust.
The previous owner replaced all the vacuum tubes which ran the engine controls. It was an old renix engine so a lot of sensors required vacuum to run properly. One time I forgot to plug back in a vac tube and it wouldn’t even start.
I now have a 98 wrangler, it’s not unreliable, there’s a couple ticks like sometimes if I stall it won’t restart until I prime the pump a few times.
Low mileage on an older car is likely worse then say 200,000 as low means it sat for awhile and seals have likely dried up.
I know but that isn’t always the case. If i could see a maintenance history it could probably give me an idea on if the car was sitting or not cause they should be getting oil changes at least twice a year
I mean there’s always exceptions to the rules but like I said. I’d rather see an older car with normal mileage vs crazy low miles as at least the normal mileage car has been driven enough to likely prevent the seals from dry rotting.
Itt: "omg run. Have you ever seen the bill from a new radiator hose?!"
Pretty much. Whenever older cars are brought up all people talk about are the hoses.
Good luck finding parts. You’ll have to replace quite a few.
Guess it depends on the car. Something like a mustang or corvette can’t be too bad.
What car is it that you have in mind? If it's an 80''s Hyundai the seller should probably donate it to the fire department, or park it in a field and use it for target practice. If it's an 80's V8 Mustang there are parts for those things everywhere you look, and they run like possessed beasts with a little care and maintenance.
Garaged, driven monthly.... Might not be much hassle at all.
1996+ Buick 3800 powered car for instance, we got one 2000 model a couple winters ago, I preventatively did coolant hoses including one that's a needed upgrade on these. Nothing else rubber on it has been a concern, but being garaged is a good part of that.
In general, older cars are not suitable daily drivers. It's funny because right now my 84' Pontiac is my daily because my 07' Jeep is having too many issues. I've had the 84' for a year and put 4K on it, at roughly 65k miles. It's usually a nice day car, but unless you're in a situation like myself, I wouldn't make it a primary. Older cars are for fun, not practicality.
Low mileage on old cars is a bad thing. A lot of parts wear out when sitting, engines wear more when not ran as long (when not gotten up to temperature. Ex. I live near DC. Tons of cars here are super low mileage, but they usually need more work than the average and even high mileage cars from nearby Maryland and Virginia. The higher mileage cars are also more likely to get preventative maintenance and age related repairs done because most people don't understand that age is something that kills parts alongside mileage), and cars that sit are more likely to attract mold and rodents (the majority of people with low mileage cars aren't collectors keeping them in climate controlled storage. It's either sitting in a driveway, a backyard, or a normal garage).
And this is combined with the fact that most people will pay a premium for low mileage, so they usually make for terrible value unless you get a deal where someone just wants it gone asap.
And I've dailyed early-mid 90s cars myself, but mine were high mileage (200k+). If you're mechanically inclined, high mileage cars are an underrated option. They're already proven and more likely to have been maintained. You may need to overhaul the suspension, but $500 on Rockauto and a weekend of work to make your beater ride like new again is a small price to pay vs a car note.
Depends what it is and how cheap you can get it for.
30 years is into the "modern reliability era" so I call it...but its kind of hit or miss with makes and models.
The other thing is like other people said are plastic parts deteriorating.
If its a make and model that is known to be reliable and its just been sitting around...but you can get it for cheap you can have someone go through it and replace everything.
Depends on vehicle
99 Silverado will run to 500K if treated right
Not very. My current car, 86 Toyota pickup with 65000 miles is a unicorn. I bought it from a gentleman who took very good care of it but it has a lot of bumps and scrapes and bumper damage
mileage is only more important than age when it's 5-7 years old. Once that age hits, things just go bad from being old. Hoses, suspension parts, belts, etc.
My car is a 2008, so a bit younger. I think I'll hit 70,000 miles in the next few months.
It's just not good. I've put thousands of dollars into it in the last 18 months and it still needs more work to be "nice." Rust doesn't care, rot doesn't care. All the rubber bits will need to be replaced if they're original, or you'll have creaking suspension. Parts availability will be difficult.
Drivability concerns will be harder because modern techs aren't used to old cars - OBD2 wasn't mandated until 1996, if I remember right, so there's nowhere to plug in their standard scanner and pull a code. Even if there's a port for a scanner, it's a different plug and a different protocol.
A lot of cars from that era will have a carburetor and I doubt many mechanics under 50 would know what to do with that.
Most of the good manufacturers had ways to pull codes since about 90, without a scanner. For example, Honda Accords starting in 1991 have a diagnostic port in the passenger side footwell that you short between the positive and negative with the car off and while shorted switch it to on. It will then blink the check engine light to the corresponding code
Yes, but how many 35-year-old mechanics have any idea how to do that? Or any comfort with doing that?
I get that there are repair databases with this info in it, but the common reaction to not being able to plug in their OBD2 scanner isn't going to be "let me go read Alldata for an hour" it's "wtf, anyone know about this shit?"
Ya, and anyone who has ever worked on an old Honda knows about the trick. And it's not sketch it's literally the official way to do it and comes up as the first result when googling how to read code from old Honda.
I didn't say it was sketch.
Mechanics already know how to do stuff on cars that they see everyday and cars that work just like them.
Unless you find a "vintage Honda shop" (I'm guessing such a thing might exist in California) that's not a common thing and they're not going to know it right away.
So you're either waiting while they figure it out, or you're at their mercy trying to figure out your car without actually knowing what they're doing.
A lot of people buy cars then take it to Pep Boyz or whatever. Unless you get lucky and there's an old Honda fan in the shop, you're SOL.
uh... no, these are not BMW's. any car guy worth his salt knows how to fix 90s hondas better than your supposed 35 yo mechanic that somehow doesn't know old hondas.
I'd be more surprised if a 35-year-old mechanic does know how to pull codes on a 1990 honda than by one not knowing.
They were born approximately the same year as the car. Most 90 Hondas had rusted off the road by the time they were turning wrenches.
Older vehicles mostly were easier to maintain. There were fewer electronics(,like Ford f150 taillights that short out the CAN bus and keep the heater from working if moisture gets in the tail light) that are almost impossible for the average person to diagnose and fix. Cheaper too, that tail light cost 5000 bucks to fix.
The best idea is figure out how to DIY it. You will be needing to replace most of the rubber parts, they wear by time, not miles. It is far cheaper to fix it yourself, if you do it correctly. Take my 2000 F250, rear brakes cost me 300 bucks for parts. I am way sure taking it to a brake shop would have cost 3 times that. YouTube is a wealth of knowledge on car repairs any more. Just search for your car and problem, it should be there.
New cars have lots of flash and bling electronics that are golly gosh cool but cost much money to fix.
I'm a cheap bastard and want stuff I can fix myself. Been doing it for over 50 years now.
Good luck!
It depends on car to car basis.
My 92 BMW has been nothing but reliable for the past 15 years of ownership.
My 2006 Grande Punto has been nothing but trouble for the past 3 years I´ve owned it. It has half the mileage of my BMW.
lol those are the best cars, yeah fix the seals but other than that, they are more reliable than current cars!
Oh idk, about 7
I wouldn't depend on any car from 1974 - 1996. That's the beginning of the smog era through OBD1. I definitely wouldn't count on anything OBD1. It's a nightmare. I quit the auto business for a decade because of dealing with that crap.
96 on is all OBD2. Much more user friendly. I drive old cars, usually with high mileage. No matter how strong the drive train is, I'm always replacing something. Currently, my VW needs a voltage regulator, again. It really needs a complete alternator, but I'm cheap. I can replace the worn brushes and voltage regulator 15 times for the price of an alternator, lol.
That’s a huge 15 year swing in car design, reliability, etc. I’d say mid 90’s with low mileage would be ok, but not anything before 1994. And only Japanese, not European or American.
It really depends on where it came from regionally (south, or West Coast states, salt free, better on rubber) Ownership history is always important, getting an older car with records if possible is best. Older Japanese cars tend to weather better from my experience.
6 years ago I bought a 2000 toyota RAV4 from Florida with 60k miles and so far have done the timing belt, main seal and oil seal, a radiator, engine mounts and an Idle Control valve clean. Im at 110k miles with zero maintenance since. I have to do the valve cover gasket at some point but thats pretty much it. At some point ill get into the brakes since I havent touched them, brake lines could probably use some love.
Cost of ownership has been pennies compared to cars Ive financed in the past.
Also, this isnt my first older car. I had a 98 Bmw M3 that I added 70k miles to with nearly zero issues, an 89 RX7 Turbo that I added 50k miles to with nearly zero issues and a billion mods. I had an Old Subaru that was alright until a trans gasket blew at 60k miles.
There are some parts of a car that age with mileage. There are other parts of a car that age with time. With a car that old, you're going to have all kinds of issues with parts that age by time.
Basically anything made of rubber or plastic is going to need to be replaced. There are also issues that can crop up in a car that hasn't run in a long time (as would be the case of a 30 year old car with only 50k on it). You'd need to do all fluids, belts, bushings and likely all the mounts as well. Be on the lookout for bad gas and bad tired.
Then there's the interior. In general, cars of that era had a lot of plastic in the interior. That plastic does not handle sunlight very well over 30 years. It'll warp, crack, shrink and deform. But the real problem is that many of these problems won't become visible until the car is running and vibrating for a bit, you'll see the cracks start to form in the interior plastics because they used to be just stressed and weakened but now that the car is running that stress and weakness is showing as cracks and warps.
Also, parts attached with clues (such as the fabric on the roof interior) will start to give way and sag.
If it's simple enough and parts are plentiful, no problem. As long as you can do the work yourself...
It seems like the general consensus is that the car would suck. I drive a 2006 Elantra with maybe 100k miles and she works quite well. I've put around 75k miles on it in the last 6-7 years. The only issue was a blown radiator, but I neglected to check the fluids regularly and it was dry. I'm guessing I got the opposite of a lemon, but point is that it is possible to get lucky. I definitely would steer away from an older car if I could a newer one for not much more.
I daily drive a 24 year old Volvo V70 with now 70k miles and it's been perfectly reliable. It does cost a grand or two a year to keep on the road though. Lifetime annual maintenance costs are at $900/year, last 10 years at $1400/year and last 5 years at $1900/year. Stuff just starts to wear out and needs replacing, but most of the stuff on my V70 has only been replaced once at lasted 15-20 years on the original and I expect the replacement to go another 15-20 years. I'm anticipating 5 years of sub $1k/year maintenance after the last 5 years of almost all the big ticket items aging out (timing belt, heater core, fuel pump, alternator, power steering pump, etc)
It depends entirely on the vehicle and it's history.
If you found a Saturn SL that was decently maintained from the late '90s? That thing would be a gem.
You definitely need to be handy with older cars, though, as little things tend to break here and there pretty regularly. Really cheap and easy to fix yourself usually, but getting mechanic to do everything would be more expensive.
very reliable mechanicly wise. not so much in seals and such, (rubber, plastic, etc.) may even run into some electrical issues, usually aint too bad. USUALLY
I mean I drive an 01 Camaro and 95 Camaro yes I’ve put couple hundred into them over the last few years but never anything major and nothing I couldn’t do my self. If your mechanical inclined it won’t be a bad deal idk I don’t trust newer cars seems they have just many problems as older cars at this point I rather throw couple hundred bucks a year at it then have a car payment on something that may break down anyways and still have to pay to fix it plus car payment but that’s just my opinion. For reference my parents have had two newer cars since owning mine and they been in the shop more for stupid little shit then my Camaros.guess also depends on the cars but mid 90s to early 2000s there was some really reliable cars just do your research. Guess I should also add my 95 is sitting right under 200k miles and the 01 is about to hit 160k. My girl delivers pizza in the 95 still runs like a champ.
I have a 55,000mi 1987 Chevy S10 and here’s what I’ve done to it. Note, it is also my “nice vehicle” since it’s a family heirloom lmao so I really don’t drive it all that often
Tires, rear shocks, fuel pump, gas tank, rear rubber fuel lines, throttle body, spark plugs, wires, rotor cap, checked the brakes, oil change, valve cover gasket, alternator, serpentine belt, exhaust system + new catalytic converter, P/S rear wheel seal and axle bearing, changed the rear fluid + pot cover (bc it was ugly) and now I have to do seal, inner and outer wheel bearing on the front driver’s side before it eats the spindle. The ECM took a shit I BELIEVE because it was historically in an accident on that side combined with age and crappy electronics that I think a solder joint broke or maybe a cap went out or smth. Never bothered to repair the old one. Got a ECM out of a junkyard stickshift Sonoma and put my eeprom back in it.
Quality of life improvements: Door seals, window seals, new window retainer clips, greased the window regulator. It sounded like a wind tunnel before.
I’ve driven it 80mph on the highway, put a tonne of shit on it when it’s only rated for 1000lbs max, rode it across a big ass bridge with a tonne of shit in it… so when I do drive it, I beat the fuck out of it.
If you have money to dump into the rubber components, a little bit of mechanical know-how, and you buy something cheap and American that WAS good when it came out you will be FINE. If you pay attention to what the thing is telling you and react accordingly you will be FINE. My dad has a 1968 mopar with 660,000 miles on it and he doesn’t take care of anything so he’s put a couple motors into it and it’s rusting to pieces. The car got retired 3 years ago.
Literally just take care of your shit and don’t be lazy and you’ll be fine.
My current car is a 2002 Impala that I got at 170,000 that was abused and with normal maintenance and repairs on my part I just took it on a 1400mi road trip into the mountains and it got 27.8mpg at 210,000. TAKE CARE OF YOUR SHIT
(2016) I had a 99 Ford Contour/Mondeo I purchased w/ 42k miles on it. I put 218k additional miles on it before it snapped the timing belt & seized the engine. (2023) It was very reliable & needed less maintenance than my 2013 Grand Caravan.
I have a 1986 Camaro that has been very reliable. Currently has just under 80k. It will have the occasional hiccup but ultimately it's been very reliable. But I'll recommend late 90s to early 00s cars for reliability though.
Also I should mention I'm a career mechanic and can fix issues easily myself which may give me a different viewpoint
It depends, I've owned a few low mileage early 90 Nissans and they were all amazing. No leaks to speak of. I loved them
Level of care>age>mileage, generally speaking. I mostly own and drive 80's cars because that's what I like, but you have to learn to live with old car stuff. Anything made of rubber or plastic has degraded by now, even if it's still functional. Plus cars just weren't made to the same standards of comfort, fit, and finish, that they are today. Materials and manufacturing has come a long way. So they aren't necessarily unreliable, but there's lots of small things to keep up with. I wouldn't recommend it for anybody that doesn't work on their own stuff.
I would think you’ll be spending a lot of time and effort and money to replace seals and hoses. Cars of that time range are not meant to run on E10 gasoline. The ethanol will eat away at the seals and hoses with time. It’s murder on small engine parts.
85-95? Garbage. Just don't. (Short of a few very special cars). Most cars of from the mid 70's to the mid 90's are just trash.
95-99? Expect a lot of minor repairs. Anything rubber. If it's been outside, anything plastic. Also rust. Anywhere. Everywhere. You'll never know. Lubricants may have outright failed. And unless you know the details of those miles...
Was it lovingly cared for and rarely driven? Or was it driven hard for five years and then untouched for 20?
IMHO, 20 years is as long a lifespan as you can really run a car without special and unusual care. At that age, it's just gonna really be end of life for most cars, even with low miles.
In addition to what everyone else has said, anything before 2000 or so is a nightmare for safety if you’re in an accident. It gets worse the farther back you go. At a certain point you will literally pre-date airbags.
It entirely depends on how it was stored.
I had to replace all the rubber vacuum lines and rubber bushings in my ‘98 BMW 328 E36 after it sat in a field for years while her military owner was shipped out overseas. And if you plan on unclipping or unbolting anything made of plastic, be prepared to replace it when it shatters like glass. Expect that all mounts, seals and gaskets are on borrowed time too. My mom’s 2003 Truck has half the mileage it should, but because it sat for so long, just about every thing made of rubber or plastic has the wear of a vehicle with 3x the mileage. Cars hate not being driven.
Not saying they’re unreliable. My Bimmer has been rock solid from day one. But old cars need attention too, despite the mileage, and especially when they haven’t been driven much. Time is unkind.
Mileage isn’t the only thing that ages a car. Time also ages a car. Time accelerates aging especially more if the car is from a snowy area where they salt the roads, or you live in a place with salt on the roads.
So if you buy a 1985-1999 car with low miles, but was not maintained, or it sat for a long time, here’s what to expect!
You’ll be replacing everything that is made out of rubber, and I mean everything. Rubber hoses, seals, gaskets, you name it. Made out of rubber? Just replace it even if it’s not leaking, because ones you start driving it and it goes through heat cycles, it will start leaking.
You’ll be replacing all kinds of vacuum activated parts and vacuum hoses, especially inside the dash, which is not fun or cheap to have it worked on.
Transmission will probably need to be rebuilt, or have new solenoids put in if it hasn’t been done already.
Might need new tires, if it’s old.
Gotta change all the fluids, brake fluid and all.
Replace brake hoses, inspect the brake lines, and brake components.
Lots of electronics on the car will probably have issues.
If it has AC, you’ll probably have to replace the entire AC system to get it working right and to get it to keep working without any fuss.
Ask me how I know!
I have a 2001 Chevy truck, which I bought with only 103k original miles in 2023. Low miles for a 2001, but time has taken its toll! I bought it for $3500.
Do not expect to buy a 20+ year old car with “low miles” and expect to not constantly find issues and constantly fix and replace things.
If you’re buying an old car, it definitely helps to be somewhat mechanically inclined, and to know how to at least do basic wrenching.
What I did with my 2001 Chevy truck is I just spent almost a month right after I bought it, and spent almost $2000 in parts to just replace everything that needs to be replaced. But now I have a reliable truck which I drive all over the south east US all the time with zero issues.
That is a huge range. Late 90s? Probably ok if maintained. Late 80? Unless it's a popular car you're never finding parts.
Back in early 2014 I purchased a 1999 Corvette that had ~36,000 miles on it which is the lowest mileage "new-used" car I've ever purchased. It's pretty common to be able to purchase contemporary Corvettes with relatively low mileage on them because every owner thinks they have something worth money, when in reality the heavy proliferation of really low mileage cars has kept values down.
Regardless, one thing I didn't anticipate even at 15 years of age with such a low mileage vehicle was lack of more detailed maintenance. You can go for some time without oil changes as long as you do it roughly every 5,000 miles. However other items such as rubber bushings, coolant (in this case, DexCool), oil and refrigerant in A/C lines, etc, had been used much less. Since these components did not move and lubricate everything properly they had exceeded their service life well before mileage. Not long after purchasing I had to replace all the radiator hoses, the radiator, various inlet and outlet lines, all the rubber components for sway bars and main suspension points, and many of the seals for the doors and the top have got hard from not being used. I did all my own work which saved on labor costs. Engine-wise the car has been fantastic, as the LS1 is an exceptionally robust engine. I've now put more miles on the car over a decade of owning it than it started with.
On the other end of the spectrum back in late 2006 I purchased my fourth Pontiac Fiero, a 1986 Fiero GT that at the time had 245,000 miles on it. While it drove just fine I immediately had to put ~$1,000 just in parts into the car. It needed new rear brakes (leaking calipers), new shift cables, was leaking a good bit of oil and coolant so it needed a full engine re-seal, and I had to go through engine and transmission mounts. Again I did my own work which negated labor costs. All in all it was another car I managed to put roughly 40,000 miles on before I sold it (to get into the Corvette).
My worst car ever was old and had "low mileage" it sat in a driveway mostly
Half the times it wouldn't even crank
Even your timing belt can degrade from age.
It’s gonna be death by a thousand cuts. The major mechanical part will be in great shape. You will spend a lot of time replacing rubber and plastic parts. Things like shocks and struts the gas may have leaked out years ago and no one even noticed. The electrical wiring may be brittle especially if it was kept outside. It’s a lot of surprises.
I know people talk a lot about rubber bushings and seals going... But honestly I had a 30 year old junker transam that sat in a field for years before being put back on the road.
Other than one rear bushing, I didn't have any rubber issues for the 4 years I owned it. Rust and a bad transmission is what sent the car to the grave.
I wouldn't feel to sketched out getting a low mileage 90s car, provided it was somewhat regularly ran and is common enough parts are not too hard to find. 80's is starting to push it, that's 40 years old now.
All of the rubber parts will be degraded and there are a LOT of rubber parts in a modern car.
You really need to love the car, as small consumables (seals, fluids etc) will start to add up.
You also have to weigh the safety of driving around in such an old car.
One small accident that you might walk away from in a 2010+ safe vehicle might put you in the hospital for months and leave you disabled for life in a < 1999 car.
All of the buy a 1990 Toyota Camry and drive it for 2,000,000 miles folks don’t tend to weigh this critical part.
I had a recent concussion that really scared me over 60 days, in the early days I had To take loads of PTO as I was unable to work for more than 15 mins at a time and 3 hours total a day.
That type of thing renames things for ya, even after you fully recover.
Only if you hit a jackpot. My dad gave me his 27 years old toyota which have only 67k KMS in it. It was bit bad, had to change the bush or something in the rear drums and had to replace the AC compressor. Other than that, it's a mint condition car, drives like a "A CAR". And yeah that's about it. Never broke down, never overheated, never had any major issues. But the minor issues are much more frequent than newer cars.
Seals, bushings, bearing seals, rubber caps, hoses, belts and timing chain/belt will need replacing. These are very cheap to buy and very expensive in labour, so if you can do it yourself, you'll be fine.
Cars before the oil crisis in the mid seventies did not have any emission controls and were much more simple. Anyone can maintain those, especially the American ones.
Depends, old American or Japanese is fine, old European... RUN
It varies wildly with the car. Like if it's a Lancia Beta versus a Honda Civic.
As Joe Biden would say…”Don’t”
I think late 90's cars were designed to be more reliable, they were simpler, and the parts were cheaper. However, it's still an old car, so things are gonna break.
Many vehicles did not get modern safety feature’s like air bags until the late 90’s - so there’s that to consider.
Probably way more reliable than newer ones.
You think for example a car from 1995 with 50k miles would be more reliable than a 2015 with 150k? Obviously depends on the car haha
Back in my days everything was better haha
Ah gotcha 😂 been wanting to find the lowest miles car i can find under 10k, but obviously low mileage cars under 10k are gonna be older, which is fine cause i don’t like modern cars very much. Don’t think i want anything before 1985 tho. Also i am aware that sometimes low miles old cars sat so that’s something i’ll look out for.
Also no offense brah i like old cars over new ones but i wouldn’t say everything was better 😅
Nah
Not a chance. You’ll be replacing all sorts of seals and rubber hoses etc.