5 ms·

The hardest part of buying used is that it's so hard to find people who have taken care of their cars. If someone has gone 20-30% over the recommended oil chang

The hardest part of buying used is that it's so hard to find people who have taken care of their cars. If someone has gone 20-30% over the recommended oil change interval, you'll end up paying for that a lot on the tail end. This isn't to mention the many, many people I know who barely put any miles on their car, but change the oil based on mileage (instead of time), putting a ton of hard miles of short trips on the car. If they sell them, it looks like a great low-mileage car! Some people have all the documentation of correct interval service for the car, but it's becoming rarer these days as cars just tend to work until they fail catastrophically, instead of years ago when they would sputter and fault in a gradual way before dying by the side of the road.

_3u10 5y ago
It depends on what kind of car you buy, an Audi that’s gone 30% over service interval is much different than a Toyota 30% over. Also, this is why you should buy high end cars (from a reliable brand) from affluent areas, they are devalued because no one wants them there, and they are well maintained because rich people tend to just take it to the dealer, who will religiously follow the service interval.
- itslennysfault 5y ago
  Is the claim on this that the Audi can't go 30% over, but the Toyota can? or the other way around. The nicest car I've ever owned is an Acura. Others include Ford, Hyundai, and Honda, and I've been pretty bad at routine maintenance, but I've never had any mechanical issues as a result. Are premium car brands really so fragile? If so why would you recommend buying them if they're less durable? Seems like a rip off to me.
  - leetcrew 5y ago
    > Are premium car brands really so fragile? yes and no. german cars tend to have tighter tolerances than your typical economy sedan. they can be very reliable if maintained properly, but they can't take as much neglect as a Corolla. the tradeoff is that, subjectively, they are often more pleasant to drive. bmw would be an exception, being notorious for using plastic parts designed to last only the duration of the first lease.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    > Is the claim on this that the Audi can't go 30% over, but the Toyota can? or the other way around. Yes, but that is kind of an irrelevant claim. There's wildly different engineering and service recommendation ethos between Europe and Japan and it shows. He could have just as easily said Volvo and Nissan and been just as correct but that's not a batting practice pitch over home plate for HN's biases the way <luxury German brand> and <toyota/honda> is.
    - _3u10 5y ago
      Can you point me to a luxury German brand that is as reliable as a Toyota/Lexus or Honda/Acura? Here's some facts to dispell the myth that Toyota/Lexus reliability is HN bias. https://www.kbb.com/car-news/consumer-reports-lexus-makes-the-most-reliable-cars-lincoln-the-least/ https://www.kbb.com/car-news/consumer-reports-lexus-makes-th...
      - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
        "Ze Germans" aren't "reliable" by western metrics because that's not something their engineering culture strives for. You're comparing apples to oranges using a scale derived for grapefruit and acting like it's some big accomplishment that the orange wins. If Toyota was trying to build better driving machines than Audi, build to the bottom dollar like Chrysler or cram in new tech gimmicks like Kia they would score similarly in those qualities and in reliability because the tradeoffs are necessarily similiar. All engineers have the same technology and supply chains at their disposal and the same laws of physics to constrain them. The reason Toyota's vehicles are reliable is because they make cars for people who want to pay top dollar for reliable. The reason Audi makes cars that drive great is because they make cars for people who want to pay top dollar for great driving. At the end of the day it's just going to boil down to you a value judgement about which qualities are important.
        _3u10 5y ago
        The context of the discussion was reliable used cars. If you buy a used Audi you are going to have a lot of problems. That’s what my comment addresses. The driving experience is not that good when the shocks are blown to shit, bearings are spun, or the timing chain inevitably fails and the pistons drive the valves through the head. Also, my 4Runner will smoke most Audis, it has 385,000 kms on it, and I change the oil once or twice a year. I bet most Audis the age and mileage of my 4Runner would start spinning bearings during a spirited drive, and my G35 just runs circles around them. If you’re an idiot buy an Audi, if you’re looking for reliability buy a Toyota if you want a great sports car buy a Corvette. The only reason to buy an Audi is if you’re nostalgic for the Quattro days of rally. I guess if you want to drive an iPhone they aren’t bad. Audis are basically fat, slow and unreliable. (Yes they make some decent cars if you want to pay Z06 prices for Mustang performance with 6.0 powerstroke reliability. Btw I’m German, I have a bit of an idea what the engineering culture is like. It’s basically an engineering circle jerk, anyone can make a big unreliable engine that produces less power in more space than a $300 pushrod LS.
  - _3u10 5y ago
    The claim is that Toyota is much more reliable. Yes, they are very fragile, especially if you use them as the "ultimate driving machine" or are expecting "Being Ahead through Technology", if you drive your kids to soccer and follow the maintenance religiously they should last until your lease is up, or you exceed the mileage limit on your lease. https://www.kbb.com/car-news/consumer-reports-lexus-makes-the-most-reliable-cars-lincoln-the-least/ https://www.kbb.com/car-news/consumer-reports-lexus-makes-th... BMW should just rebrand to the Ultimate Leasing Machine, as they are very cost effective due to for some reason people wanting used BMW's out of warranty.
slingnow 5y ago
This idea that going 20% over the recommended oil change interval will cause you to "pay a lot on the tail end" seems dubious. Could you quantify what you think this will cost a person? What exactly is the "tail end", anyways?
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
There are plenty of people who take care of their cars. Their old cars are in the CPO section of used car lots and priced accordingly. Short of actually being able to look at a vehicle and assess its condition directly there is no free lunch. Any "signal" you can use will also be used by everyone else and the dealers will price it in.
rlpb 5y ago
I thought it was widely known/accepted that the US car industry has vastly reduced/unnecessary stated oil change intervals?
itslennysfault 5y ago
This is just not true. Cars are waaay more durable than your assumption. I've never had an issue buying used (2-4 years old) cars from dealers. They've always been essentially like new. On top of that I have failed to do routine maintenance as scheduled. I usually do oil changes about every 10k because you really don't need to do it as often as they say. That said... I've now had 3 cars that I bought around 30,000 miles and put over 100k miles on without any major maintenance. Just tires, brakes filters, and fluids. Maybe some weird one off thing, for example a little plastic gear in my steering system on my 2010 Hyundai recently broke and cost $500 to replace (@ 140,000 miles on the odo).
- warmwaffles 5y ago
  > Cars are waaay more durable than your assumption. Truth. I bought a 2003 Ford Excursion in 2020. Parts are easy to find and are very compatible with F250s etc... It's all about resourcefulness. Not to mention I get to save a boat load of money in a used vehicle, I don't have to worry about damaging it too much. Scratch it a little with a tree branch, no problem, I don't care.

_3u10 5y ago

It depends on what kind of car you buy, an Audi that’s gone 30% over service interval is much different than a Toyota 30% over. Also, this is why you should buy high end cars (from a reliable brand) from affluent areas, they are devalued because no one wants them there, and they are well maintained because rich people tend to just take it to the dealer, who will religiously follow the service interval.

itslennysfault 5y ago
Is the claim on this that the Audi can't go 30% over, but the Toyota can? or the other way around. The nicest car I've ever owned is an Acura. Others include Ford, Hyundai, and Honda, and I've been pretty bad at routine maintenance, but I've never had any mechanical issues as a result. Are premium car brands really so fragile? If so why would you recommend buying them if they're less durable? Seems like a rip off to me.
- leetcrew 5y ago
  > Are premium car brands really so fragile? yes and no. german cars tend to have tighter tolerances than your typical economy sedan. they can be very reliable if maintained properly, but they can't take as much neglect as a Corolla. the tradeoff is that, subjectively, they are often more pleasant to drive. bmw would be an exception, being notorious for using plastic parts designed to last only the duration of the first lease.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  > Is the claim on this that the Audi can't go 30% over, but the Toyota can? or the other way around. Yes, but that is kind of an irrelevant claim. There's wildly different engineering and service recommendation ethos between Europe and Japan and it shows. He could have just as easily said Volvo and Nissan and been just as correct but that's not a batting practice pitch over home plate for HN's biases the way <luxury German brand> and <toyota/honda> is.
  - _3u10 5y ago
    Can you point me to a luxury German brand that is as reliable as a Toyota/Lexus or Honda/Acura? Here's some facts to dispell the myth that Toyota/Lexus reliability is HN bias. https://www.kbb.com/car-news/consumer-reports-lexus-makes-the-most-reliable-cars-lincoln-the-least/ https://www.kbb.com/car-news/consumer-reports-lexus-makes-th...
    - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
      "Ze Germans" aren't "reliable" by western metrics because that's not something their engineering culture strives for. You're comparing apples to oranges using a scale derived for grapefruit and acting like it's some big accomplishment that the orange wins. If Toyota was trying to build better driving machines than Audi, build to the bottom dollar like Chrysler or cram in new tech gimmicks like Kia they would score similarly in those qualities and in reliability because the tradeoffs are necessarily similiar. All engineers have the same technology and supply chains at their disposal and the same laws of physics to constrain them. The reason Toyota's vehicles are reliable is because they make cars for people who want to pay top dollar for reliable. The reason Audi makes cars that drive great is because they make cars for people who want to pay top dollar for great driving. At the end of the day it's just going to boil down to you a value judgement about which qualities are important.
      - _3u10 5y ago
        The context of the discussion was reliable used cars. If you buy a used Audi you are going to have a lot of problems. That’s what my comment addresses. The driving experience is not that good when the shocks are blown to shit, bearings are spun, or the timing chain inevitably fails and the pistons drive the valves through the head. Also, my 4Runner will smoke most Audis, it has 385,000 kms on it, and I change the oil once or twice a year. I bet most Audis the age and mileage of my 4Runner would start spinning bearings during a spirited drive, and my G35 just runs circles around them. If you’re an idiot buy an Audi, if you’re looking for reliability buy a Toyota if you want a great sports car buy a Corvette. The only reason to buy an Audi is if you’re nostalgic for the Quattro days of rally. I guess if you want to drive an iPhone they aren’t bad. Audis are basically fat, slow and unreliable. (Yes they make some decent cars if you want to pay Z06 prices for Mustang performance with 6.0 powerstroke reliability. Btw I’m German, I have a bit of an idea what the engineering culture is like. It’s basically an engineering circle jerk, anyone can make a big unreliable engine that produces less power in more space than a $300 pushrod LS.
- _3u10 5y ago
  The claim is that Toyota is much more reliable. Yes, they are very fragile, especially if you use them as the "ultimate driving machine" or are expecting "Being Ahead through Technology", if you drive your kids to soccer and follow the maintenance religiously they should last until your lease is up, or you exceed the mileage limit on your lease. https://www.kbb.com/car-news/consumer-reports-lexus-makes-the-most-reliable-cars-lincoln-the-least/ https://www.kbb.com/car-news/consumer-reports-lexus-makes-th... BMW should just rebrand to the Ultimate Leasing Machine, as they are very cost effective due to for some reason people wanting used BMW's out of warranty.

slingnow 5y ago

This idea that going 20% over the recommended oil change interval will cause you to "pay a lot on the tail end" seems dubious. Could you quantify what you think this will cost a person? What exactly is the "tail end", anyways?

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

There are plenty of people who take care of their cars. Their old cars are in the CPO section of used car lots and priced accordingly. Short of actually being able to look at a vehicle and assess its condition directly there is no free lunch. Any "signal" you can use will also be used by everyone else and the dealers will price it in.

rlpb 5y ago

I thought it was widely known/accepted that the US car industry has vastly reduced/unnecessary stated oil change intervals?

itslennysfault 5y ago

This is just not true. Cars are waaay more durable than your assumption. I've never had an issue buying used (2-4 years old) cars from dealers. They've always been essentially like new. On top of that I have failed to do routine maintenance as scheduled. I usually do oil changes about every 10k because you really don't need to do it as often as they say. That said... I've now had 3 cars that I bought around 30,000 miles and put over 100k miles on without any major maintenance. Just tires, brakes filters, and fluids. Maybe some weird one off thing, for example a little plastic gear in my steering system on my 2010 Hyundai recently broke and cost $500 to replace (@ 140,000 miles on the odo).

warmwaffles 5y ago
> Cars are waaay more durable than your assumption. Truth. I bought a 2003 Ford Excursion in 2020. Parts are easy to find and are very compatible with F250s etc... It's all about resourcefulness. Not to mention I get to save a boat load of money in a used vehicle, I don't have to worry about damaging it too much. Scratch it a little with a tree branch, no problem, I don't care.