I have two things in my possession that are wonders of engineering. One hair trimmer and one restaurant kitchen blender/kitchen multifunction machine. Both made in 1987 in East Germany.
The blender I bought second hand, and it came with a box of original replacement parts and specifications so detailed that I believe I could probably replace the motor if it ever fails (almost 6hp! Take that, Vitamix!). It makes nut butter in no time.
The trimmer could probably be used to cut down trees.
I love these machines, and if they ever fail I don't thing I could ever replace them with anything of similar quality. They are 35 years old. The electronics in the kitchen machine still look pristine. I keep all bearings well lubed. It runs like a Swiss watch. Only very loud.
is this not the very definition of survivorship bias though?
I have things from the 80s that, obviously, have lasted a long time. But I have owned things from that era that have failed and been forgotten about.
Incidentally I bought some boots this year that are expected to last (at a minimum) 10 years, and I suspect they would, but I can't know that until 10 years from now.
Heirloom quality is probably still a thing, but only discoverable when an item actually becomes an heirloom.
The above author mentions that these machines are from Eastern Germany. As I am from Eastern Germany myself, I can tell you that we had regulations in place, that machines had to last and had to be repairable. Those regulations came into place, because we had heavily resource problems.
Funfact: Those type of regulations are heavily discussed even these times again, when I look at EU right to be repair, or the discussions specifically around John Deere and the right to be repair.
A nice trivia fact I learned is that East Germany made the world's best selling digger. There's a fun documentary (in German) that covers this. The machine from the DDR is discussed starting at 27:53
Not necessarily. I also have an East German blender, that's like 40 years old, and looks like hell, but works perfectly. I bought another one, since the old one was kinda hard to look at. It was a highly recommended somewhat upmarket type from a supposedly reputable brand.
It broke within 2 years..
I took it apart and discovered it was full of plastic gears on load bearing components which predictably got annihilated by wear and tear. The old one had metal ones.
I echo the article's sentiment that while cheap usually means bad, expensive stuff is usually indistinguishable in quality from mass-market stuff nowadays.
Probably. I don't have ten of these machines, so it is hard to make a general statement.
I mostly meant it as a comment on what the parent said; I could pay four times the price for something and have it last 35 years (which is 15x longer than the blender I had before it) I gladly would.
The fact that I can repair most of it is also a thing I miss in the things I buy today.
> is this not the very definition of survivorship bias though?
Not necessarily; it's also sufficient to consider the overall distribution of blenders and hair trimmers from the 80s that are still working compared to the distribution of items sold, which means it's also fairly easy to spot because people use their kitchen/bathroom appliances frequently and notice when exceptionally old ones still work.
If I could buy products that just work and don’t break, even if they cost 3x as much, they would pay for themselves with longer lifespans and less wasted productivity.
I replaced my 21 year old Miele washing machine recently. The solenoid-driven water intake valve broke. It wasn't a part of the machine itself, it was on the water intake tube. But the replacement part was nearly half the price of the brand new replacement Miele washing machine I ended up buying instead. The new one is slightly larger and has higher capacity, and doesn't suffer from a little design problem the original had, so I was ok with getting a new one. But yes, the original washing machine worked exactly as when it was brand new - it was just that intake valve on the tube.
Just like a quality automobile, to bring the discussion closer to the article. For example, a Tesla Model 3 might cost more than a Hyundai I10, but after three years of ownership you've not had to change the oil, fill it with gas, get the tailpipe emissions inspected, possibly see the catalytic converter stolen, etc. And the difference in maintenance only grows from there, when the plugs and timing belt and seals and transmission and other items wear.
Lots of products have more expensive buy-in buy are cheaper in the long run.
I drive another manufacturer's equivalent of the Hyundai you mention, their lowest end car that they actually quit manufacturing, and I am sure the Hyundai is in the same ballpark.
I change the oil about twice a year. Over the past eight years, that has cost me about $480.
I have changed the transmission fluid three times. That has cost me about $140.
I've changed the air filter a couple times...not very often. Let's be generous and call it $40.
Around 120k I replaced the spark plugs. They were weirdly expensive, costing about $100.
I have performed no other maintenance.
I have filled it with gas about once a week. It's a pretty small tank. I'd estimate about $6000-$8000.
Add all that up, pretend electricity is free, and I have still come out way, way, way ahead versus buying a Model 3. I've still spent less than half of what I would have on a Model 3.
I hate to sound like I'm advocating for Sunk Cost, but this helps put numbers to a feeling I've had:
The current cost-over-time of my (and apparently your) ICE car is not meaningfully high enough to want to 'upgrade' to an all-electric. Plus, when mechanical problems eventually arise, there's already a somewhat-independent parts and labor infrastructure to lean on to get it back on the road.
On a personal level, I'm also opposed to giving Elon more money, and opposed to the idea that my car may brick itself with an auto-update. I also got a promotional 0% loan on my car, have zero intention of paying that off early, and can see this car lasting until 2028 or 2030. Unless I have kids, this car should be fine for my needs until then.
Thank you for the counterpoint. I concede that my idea of what a modern motor vehicle is is outdated. I'm actually happy to see that things have improved so much.
Ehm, doesn’t Tesla have famously bad quality control in several areas, e.g. fit of body panels? EVs, as a category, need less maintenance - but Tesla’s are not an example of a trouble-free product!
Sure, the early Model 3's had body panel fit problems. I actually bought one last week, and the fit is amazing, both interior and exterior. I don't know why that point keeps coming up. For what it's worth, I used to be a tech at a Ford dealer, so I know what bad fitment looks like!
Initial news always spreads further and faster than updates. This is normal and should have been expected by the company. They took the risk of rushing and get to suffer the consequences.
Is there any car company that has not had recalls? Toyota had airbags exploding with metal fragments, killing drivers. Yet that recall is nowhere near as well-known as Tesla body panels not lining up.
How many miles are you putting on that i10?! An oil change is every 2 years or 15k km. I think it’s a bad example btw, it’s a famously reliable car (the taxi of choice in Bogota fwiw)
For some reason people in the US are obsessed with changing the oil in their vehicle.
Modern engines & oils don't need the oil changing every 3000 miles, but the folklore belief in the necessity of doing so rolls on unstoppably in the USA.
A factor is oil change shops still put a sticker on the windshield that says to come back in 3000 miles. It's of course in their interest for people to change their oil too often.
I have both, two modern cars with services all 30k km and one from the 80s with motor oil changes every 5k, gearbox oil every 10k and axles every 10k as well. Not to mention that modern gearboxes and exles tend to be greased for life.
Thanks, I updated the post. I had no idea that oil changes are now once every two years. On the wife's Subaru I still change the oil every six months, and I remember when the standard was actually every three months. She puts about 10 km on the car during those six months, we live in a hilltop village half an hour drive from a city.
Time based oil changes (as a backup to mileage) in gasoline vehicles are mostly to address oil contamination from the engine not getting hot enough to boil off fuel and combustion byproducts in the oil. It's a rough heuristic for drive type - more advanced oil life monitors know the actual drive cycles an engine is seeing and will adjust appropriately, but for a basic time-and/or-mileage schedule, it's more about picking some interval that gets the oil changed before the additive package is destroyed by combustion acids. If the car is driven only short distances and never gets a chance to fully warm up, six months is probably a reasonable interval. If it gets a monthly spin on the highway for an hour, two years is probably fine. Ideally, you'd be measuring total base and total acid levels and calculating change points based on that; this is common practice for large truck engines but for a gasoline car engine, an oil change can be cheaper than the lab tests. (I'm still in favor of having oil testing done on at least some changes, it's basically "routine bloodwork" for your car and can detect many problems early.)
Another upshot of this is that with rarely driven vehicles, you might as well use the cheapest oil which meets appropriate specs, because your oil changes are driven by additive depletion and oil contamination rather than breakdown of the oil itself.
> Another upshot of this is that with rarely driven vehicles, you might as well use
> the cheapest oil which meets appropriate specs, because your oil changes are driven
> by additive depletion and oil contamination rather than breakdown of the oil itself.
The Ferrari gets the cheap stuff, the Kia gets the good stuff. I love how some things are so unintuitive.
I just ordered an oil testing kit from Blackstone. Thank you for the idea.
What? Oil change every three month? WTF is wrong with the US industry?
The very same cars in Europe will have an oil change every 2 years or so. My Volvo S60 Model 2000 has an oil change every 3 years.
There must be something that you get sold on by marketing that is so wrong. BTW. Also a Tesla has oil in their gearbox, even if it is just a single gear integrated into the single unit combined with motor and inverter. For a Model S it is recommend to replace it every 12.5k miles, which is exactly the very same recommendation as with other car model.
Without meaning to argue that it is necessary, it persists because it just isn't that big a cost. Gas isn't the largest cost of ownership and 5,000 miles of cheap US gas is still ~10x the cost of an oil change.
> For a Model S it is recommend to replace it every 12.5k miles
There was a recommendation to change the gear oil previously, but newer versions of the S removed those. Even then I seem to recall it was way longer than 12,500 miles.
Your vehicle should generally be serviced on an as-needed basis. However, Tesla recommends the following maintenance items and intervals, as applicable to your vehicle, to ensure continued reliability and efficiency of your Model S.
Brake fluid health check every 2 years (replace if necessary).
A/C desiccant bag replacement every 3 years.
Cabin air filter replacement every 3 years.
Clean and lubricate brake calipers every year or 12,500 miles (20,000 km) if in an area where roads are salted during winter
Rotate tires every 6,250 miles (10,000 km) or if tread depth difference is 2/32 in (1.5 mm) or greater, whichever comes first
Seeing as how the recommended cleaning and lubrication of the brakes is 12,500mi, I'm wondering if you heard that and got confused about the lubrication needs. As mentioned in their manual, this is really only recommended for places where they salt the roads in the winter. Since the brakes don't get used as much its even worse than a regular car with the corrosion. If you're not in a high road salt area, its not a problem.
The recommended service interval on other EVs also have extremely extended oil change intervals. The service life of the Mach E's gear oil is 150,000mi and the coolant change is at 200,000mi.
I'm not in the US, but I have lived there and I did learn that frequency there. Like I mentioned in another thread, I worked as a service technician at Ford and that was the recommendation then (1990s).
As for the Model S fluid change, thank you for mentioning it, I did not know that. I believe that there is no fluid change interval defined on the Model 3, which I just recently bought.
There are many gasoline vehicles that specify no fluid changes for certain parts, infamously, transmissions. Longer lasting synthetic fluids allow them to advertise lower maintenance costs, but they still do wear out. They’d rather the transmission wears out after 150k miles anyway.
Don't get me started on transmissions! A failing transmission the month after a Model 3 test drive / joy ride is what really pushed me into making the jump to electric.
Thank you for the advice, I will research the service intervals on the Tesla.
Because everybody drives differently, mileage and time based recommendations aren't the best. Some places will offer to test your used motor oil during a change and will tell you if you waited too long or changed it to early.
The i10 is a rather low end car, but the upgrade could be worth it. Finland gas prices are 8.464 USD/gallon right now. That’s unusually high but assuming 200k miles at say 35 mpg that adds up to 48,000 USD in gas over the lifetime of the vehicle.
Not that electricity is free or that we have long term cost data, but I suspect the EV / plug in hybrid premium is a very easy choice in Finland.
The average car life in Finland seems to be 15.6 years (let's round that to 16, helping the case for EVs).
The average distance traveled by Finnish cars, based on 2018 data, is about 13600km per year (let's make that 14000km per year, also helping the case for EVs).
That works out to 224k km over the lifetime of a car. That's only 140k miles.
Regarding your 35mpg (was 30mpg before the edit), that's 6.7l per 100km (7.8 before edit), let's make that 7l per 100km (and 8 before edit), further helping the case for EVs.
But in reality a small car such as the i10 probably uses more like 5-5.5l per 100km (40-45mpg).
Then the gas price is super high due to the Covid economic bounceback coupled with the supply chain issues plus the latest conflict.
I'd say your numbers are too optimistic plus they're for the entire lifetime of the car. The average owner probably has the car for half that duration, at best. So they don't really care about the entire lifetime.
Still, things seem to be getting closer than 10 years ago, for example.
The really bad thing is the upfront price. There's no comparable EV in the i10 price range, which is a very cheap car (we're talking about a car around €12k).
Finland imports a lot of used cars but: “An average car in the fleet 12.6 years of age” that suggest the car actually lasts to ~25.2 years. It’s not that simple because again they are importing and exporting used cars.
there is now! I'm seeing the Dacia Spring appear everywhere - probably because it starts at only 13k in France including the ecobonus (I think base price is 16-17k). This is an absolute game-changer
I've got a 10 year warranty on the battery pack. And at the rate that independent battery servicing is expanding, there is a very good chance that independent pack refurbishment or replacement will be affordable by March 2032.
In any case, the wife's 1996 Hyundai was worth more to the breaking yard than it was to the second hand market when it's transmission failed in summer of 1997. So even if the battery pack fails immediately after the warranty period and that totals the car, I've still come out ahead in total cost of ownership.
