Engine Reliability Data 2

[Panther140]

Does anybody know of a way for a consumer to gauge the endurance life of an engine before purchasing a vehicle equipped with it? My dream is to go to a vehicle dealership and be presented with data from unbiased endurance tests on an array of vehicles and their components. I want to know how many hours an engine is designed to last at a given duty cycle as well as the standard deviation in time before they fail on endurance tests. Instead, the salesperson tells me to "check out that sweet infotainment system" and then they fumble through a brochure before trying to convince me that I should get a crossover SUV.

The way that I have currently been gauging the engine's durability is by looking at generators that are equipped with the same engine that is in the vehicle that I'm considering. If I can't find a generator with the engine that a vehicle is equipped with, then I am far less likely to consider buying it (Toyota 1MZ-FE being an example of an exception).

That method doesn't work as well when vehicles like the 3.5L ecoboost come into question. I like the idea of a v6 turbocharged half-ton, but I also know that this platform is vulnerable to higher deviations from expected endurance.

Think about how many engineers there are in the U.S. Why are companies not marketing to engineers by giving them cold-hard data?



"Formal education is a weapon, whose effect depends on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed." ~ Joseph Stalin

 

[BrianPetersen]

That sort of information is highly proprietary.

Limiting your search to vehicles that only have their engines also used in generators severely limits your choices. It also doesn't consider other components that are equally mission-critical, but which aren't found in generators - like the transmission, suspension, brakes, etc.

In any case ... Is the engine really the limiting factor, most of the time? Most cars nowadays, in my part of the world, go to the scrap heap with functional engines but either rusted-out bodyshells, or with some other major component failure, or with an accumulation of smaller failures that would cost more to repair than the car is worth ... or, fully functional and not rusted out, but unwanted. Who wants a mint-condition Chevy Cavalier? The car gets traded in on a new one, but it's worthless even if it's all there and working.

On the vehicle-specific internet forums that I'm a member of, the most common causes of engine failures aren't "lifetime" related, but rather neglect or abuse related ... or failure to follow instructions in the operating or maintenance manuals.

I've taken a couple of cars past 400,000 km and the engine itself was still fine.

 

[SwinnyGG]

It's easier than you think, look at the warranty.

You can rest assured that the warranty lengths offered are based on certain estimates made by the company with regard to how long they will last. There's a reason that VW powertrain warranties are 60,000 miles and not 80,000, for example.

As far as marketing to engineers- I've seen estimates that there's about 2.5 million of us out there. That's less that 1% of the population. Good marketing teams don't design campaigns that make 1% of the target market happy and alienate the other 99%.

 

[VEBill]

I don't know if they still do this, but long ago I've read about the 50,000 mile durability testing. Where teams of drivers went round and round a track at extreme speeds to put 50,000 miles on the odometer as quickly as possible - for a new design. So that's 50,000 miles of durability, but at very high speeds.

I presume that they must have stopped long enough to change the oil and tires once in a while.

In some case I recall that they might have set some speed records along the way (e.g. distance over 24 hours, etc.).

 

[dgallup]

I don't think you can read anything into the length of a warranty. A lot of newer, less respected companies give longer warranties to help with peoples apprehensions about buying their products. Does that mean they will actually last longer? Who knows? Most engines live many times longer than the warranties. If you want to have a good idea of an engines durability, look for something that has been around for a long time. Then there is plenty of real world experience. Nissan VQ, Chevy LS3 and lots of other engines practically last forever it you treat them right.

Marketing is never going to sell to Engineers, we ask too many questions and the marketeers don't know the answers.

----------------------------------------

The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.

 

[BrianPetersen]

"100,000 miles at 100 miles per hour" - was a Mercury promo for the then-new Comet back in 1964.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uz3JdH28N3I

This type of test run won't catch issues from cold starting, idling, etc.

 

[btrueblood]

Consumer Reports is the only organization I know of that tries to compile and publish reliability data on any and all available vehicles in the US market. Of course, it is rearward looking, and may have certain biases built in, because of the consumer reporting methods used. But at least they make an attempt.

 

[RossABQ]

There are car/truck related forums for every marque, and they are a wealth of information. Naturally, an owner is more likely to post his problems than to post that he has not had any problems. There are usually at least a couple dealer techs participating who see hundreds of cars a month, know the issues early, and also know the fixes. In the example of the EcoBoost'd F150's, there are probably 20 large forums for those.

 

[Panther140]

I think consumer reports generally does a good job. There are some anomalies in their rankings, but for the most part it jives with what I've observed.

"Formal education is a weapon, whose effect depends on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed." ~ Joseph Stalin

 

[PackardV8]

Agree, engine durability is the least of worries. The mechanical powerplant will usually still be going when the luxo-infotainment-bling-electro-gubbins have all gone dark and/or fallen off or are NLA.

The "100,000 mile at 100 miles per hour" is the easiest kind of test. As most here know, wear takes place on cold starts and short trips. Once everything is at operating temperature, wear usually virtually ceases.

A bit OT, but vehicle owners, their expectations and their maintenance skills vary with the bell curve. I visit a variety of car/truck/hobby fora. The least technically aware are usually the luxury owners and Cadillac totally absolutely unconscious. Conversely, Ford Super Duty truck owners fora members tend to know granular detail of design, operation and maintenance. Those who participate in "squirrel car" fora tend to be at the extremes; either an engineer or a know-nothing-fan-boy.

Buying a used car tells much about how they're owned and used. There's no hope of finding a good used low miles Subaru. Those are typically run long and hard, repaired and run til there's nothing left. Conversely, used low miles meticulously maintained mint condition Porsche are dirt common. However, that's changing with Porsche SUVs; many are now everyday beaters and trust me, if you can't afford a new one, you can't afford a used Cayenne.

jack vines

 

[turbomotor]

I enjoyed your post because it brings out some interesting discussion. I agree with most of the posts in that the information you seek will be available primarily as anecdotes. In fact, I will provide my own anecdote: I have a 2002 Honda Civic that I bought new as a commuter car. I have done minimal maintenance (change oil every 10k miles, brakes and tires when required, cam timing belt every 100k miles). Except the aforementioned, nothing gets serviced unless it fails. The car has 312,000 miles on the odometer. (For you metric guys, that is more than half a gigameter.) The engine runs great, but the car is falling apart around the engine. The CV joints have a lot of lash. The suspension groans and creaks. The body has a lot of southern california freeway rash. Fortunately, the original clutch still works fine, as I hate servicing clutches. Are there other cars that would do better? Maybe, but we also may be getting into details that involve a distribution of vehicle serviceability/reliability/durability traits that vary significantly within the same brand/model. (Based on day of assembly or distribution factors that we would just list as random.) I think the best you can do is reduce the risk of durability disappointment by purchasing a car that has a good (anecdotally based) reputation. If you do discover good statistical data, please inform all.

 

[SwinnyGG]

If you truly want to buy the most reliable/defect free vehicle possible:

1) Don't EVER buy a car in the first year of production, or the first year after a facelift.

2) Don't EVER buy a car in the last year of production, or the last year before a facelift.

3) Don't EVER buy a car built in a factory that has retooled or relocated within the last year.

3) Try to buy a car built in the middle of the day on a Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, if possible.

As far as engines go, discovering build date and time is harder, but less important because engine plants are more automated for critical tasks.

 

[romke]

how long a engine will stay fit for use will heavily depend on its actual use - and thus mileage will vary. on average smaller cars will now easily exceed 300.000 km with decent maintenance and larger cars may last longer. the fact that the same engine is used for other applications like generators is no indication of a long life expectancy. it merely shows that the engine manufacturer has found another outlet for his engines - and in most of alternative applications those engines are derated quite a bit to be able to support the more "industrial" type of use.

usually engines last longer then other parts of the car. most people change their car because they think it is no longer "fashionable", "too old looking", needs more repairs then they like or are afraid reliability will diminish in future or they can get a good trade in. whatever the reason to buy a different car, the end of life of the engine usually is not the reason.

warranty to a large extend is marketing driven. apart from legal requirements warranty periods are decided upon the view whether a longer warranty may lead to selling more cars in a given time frame or not - whereas the cost of the "warranty" should be borne by the individual mark up for each car. it is a statistical game - if you sell a lot of cars with a mark up of say $20 the total amount of money received will hopefully be sufficient to pay for the few occasions where warranty needs to be given. there is no such thing as a free lunch....

 

[SwinnyGG]

I can tell you unequivocally that warranty periods are based partially (a big part) on empirical, methodically gathered test data generated over a period of years. I've been one of the people that gathers and interprets that data and makes recommendations.

Obviously there is a marketing component- but if it was based solely or mostly on marketing every car would have a million mile powertrain warranty.

Longer warranties sell more cars. It's not like there's some segment where a shorter warranty is appealing. Warranties that aren't at the top of the curve as far as length or coverage are where they are for a reason- the analysis has been done, and the engineers or the big wig felt that a longer warranty would be a financial drain on the company.

I would agree 100% that an engine's use in a genset has very little to do with the soundness of the engineering that went into it.

 

[Screwman1]

I know for a fact that the use of a particular engine in a gen set has little to do with reliability and much more to do with availability and cost. Trying to source generator engines is a major problem and several of the larger companies will pretty much take what they can get and then adapt it as required to work in the application and I have seen that a lot of that type of adaptive engineering is not very well done compared to the level of work put into the engine by the OEM.

 

[Tmoose]

So Chrysler engines statistically last lifetime/60,000 X as long as Toyotaa engines ?

http://toyota.custhelp.com/app/answ...-coverage-do-i-have-on-my-new-toyota-vehicle?

https://www.chrysler.com/en/lifetime_powertrain_warranty/faq.html

 

[SwinnyGG]

So Chrysler engines statistically last lifetime/60,000 X as long as Toyotaa engines ?

http://toyota.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id...

https://www.chrysler.com/en/lifetime_powertrain_wa...

Certainly not.

But read the fine print on the 'lifetime' warranty- it applies only to the first registered owner.

What percentage of owners of Chrysler product keep their vehicles past 60,000 miles? 70,000? 100,000?

I can guarantee you that Chrylser knows those numbers, and that their estimates of what a lifetime warranty would cost them were a huge part of the decision to offer one.

 

[3DDave]

It's that duty cycle part that's the problem. Variations in vehicle weight and local terrain will greatly affect the loads that are put on various parts.

So far as I've ever noticed, it is the surrounding support equipment that are limited life. From shenanigans like Ford using sleeved plugs with inappropriate seals to prevent carbon-seizing to poor quality harness designs on GM trucks. Sure, there are some standouts like when Dodge set the exhaust manifold too close to the head causing thermal expansion related head gasket leaks or the Toyota sludge issue, but these may not show up in steady-state or accelerated testing (somewhat sure if they had, Chrysler/Dodge and Toyota would have noticed and fixed the problem instead of deciding to burn the crap out of some customers.)

Were it possible, it would be best to see what engines are coming through rebuild companies.

 

[Panther140]

but these may not show up in steady-state or accelerated testing (somewhat sure if they had, Chrysler/Dodge and Toyota would have noticed and fixed the problem instead of deciding to burn the crap out of some customers.)

I bet they showed up, but could they fix the issue on budget on time? Usually I see the issues like that one being ignored willfully, then downplayed by people trying to protect their own ass, then their boss downplays his inaccurately low estimate of how big of an issue it is, then they launch the product without fixing it. All the while, there was a test technician and engineer who knew about it all along.

To anybody in here working in upper management of a manufacturer, do skip-level meetings with your lab techs and test engineers before a product launches. They actually observe every issue and have nothing to lose by giving you an honest answer. Or just ignore them long enough to make them stop caring. Might help quarterly profits until the warranty returns come back and your customers abandon you.

I've seen this scenario a few times in person. A product consistently starts showing catastrophic infant failures despite there not being any design changes from what was normally a reliable product, then people assume its a fluke and conveniently ignore the fact that its a consistent failure. Then the issue gets so badly that somebody finally decides to investigate whether or not the product is being heat treated properly... Then it turns out that its not being heat treated properly. Now there are a few hundred units of this very expensive product that will quickly become conversation pieces for their outrageously young and dramatic failure.

"Formal education is a weapon, whose effect depends on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed." ~ Joseph Stalin

 

[SwinnyGG]

Usually I see the issues like that one being ignored willfully, then downplayed by people trying to protect their own ass, then their boss downplays his inaccurately low estimate of how big of an issue it is, then they launch the product without fixing it. All the while, there was a test technician and engineer who knew about it all along.

This is the point of view of someone with real powertrain design experience ha ha