“I’ve seen some relatively small 4s with turbos last well over 100,000 miles with proper maintenance”
100,000 miles? That’s all you get? That’s NOTHING in today’s market.
100,000 miles - to me - is a “disposable car”.
Unless the new direct-injection engines can deliver 250,000+ miles (based on routine maintenence), they aren’t suitable for service, in my opinion.
100,000 miles is what OLD-technology cars got back in the fifties, if you were lucky.
My first new car was a 1979 Honda Accord (carbureted). It went 170,000 before I sold it, and bought my second, a....
1986 Honda Accord (carbureted). It went 192,000 before I sold it, and bought my third, a...
1993 Acura Integra (fuel injected). It went 300,000 before I sold it, never needed an engine rebuild, and still used hardly any oil when I let it go.
Unless GM can build a car with consumer expectations of that kind of longevity, they’re just building a 2009 version of the Vega....
- John
I agree with that. I’m at 218,000 on my 15 year-old Honda Civic.
- 91 Integra, we got 341,000 miles, no drive train or body problems ever, other than timing chain (belt). Great Great auto.
You are absolutely right about 100k. And turbo-charging, from my experience, is a long term insidious problem.
My vote for diesel.
I'm trying to get over something that was trained into me. My dad has gone through more cars in a single year than some do in a lifetime.
I'm trying to unlearn that. So, to me 100,000 miles is a lot (given that I pack on between 7,500 and 8,500 a year - it would be around twelve years for me to see 100,000 miles (in my old days, that would be 5 or so vehicles).
So, from my perspective, that was a lot.
I'll agree that 100,000 is throw-away mileage, the jeep I just bought has 200,000 on it and seems to only need a computer (ran fine when it worked, no smoke).
what would you recommend for a starter honda now? Daughter in the market and is looking at a Nissan Murano.