My neighbor's 2005 Honda Civic still runs perfect. Mine stopped starting after 3 years.

Bought a new Civic in 2021. Regular oil changes, always garaged. Dead battery at 38k miles. My neighbor Mike still drives his 2005 every day. 280k miles, original alternator. Makes me wonder if they build cars worse on purpose. Anyone else see this pattern with newer models?

3 comments

3 Comments

bennett.evan1mo ago

Mike's 2005 is the proof right there. My buddy has a 2007 with 300k miles and it still starts up like it's brand new. Meanwhile my 2020 needed a new alternator at 40k miles and the dashboard lights flicker sometimes for no reason. It's like they engineer these newer cars to last just past the warranty and then start falling apart. The old ones were built with simpler electronics and less plastic in the engine bay. Maybe they figured out that if they make them bulletproof nobody buys new ones every 5 years.

skyler_jackson271mo ago

I get your point @bennett.evan, and that 2007 is a beast for sure, but I honestly see it a little different. That "simpler electronics" thing cuts both ways - old cars didn't have to power all the sensors and screens and safety stuff we expect now, so of course there's less to break. My 2010 has 180k and no major issues, but my dad's 2002 needed a new transmission at 120k, so old doesn't always mean bulletproof. The alternator thing sucks though, did you check if it was a bad batch or just bad luck with yours?

paige3311mo ago

My 2004 Ford Ranger with 260k is still kicking, but I’ve put more money into that thing over the last two years than what it’s even worth. People forget that older cars had plenty of their own problems, like rusted out frames and failing fuel pumps. The difference now is that when something breaks, it costs twice as much to fix because you have to recalibrate half the computer modules. I’m not saying your buddy’s 2007 isn’t a tank, but survivorship bias is real - we don’t see the ones that got junked because they weren’t worth saving.