Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Typically speaking, it's best to avoid first year models, but as others have said, sometimes later year models actually lose features in the name of cost cutting.
Our 2012 Honda Civic was an experience of the opposite effect. 2012 MY was the first year of the generation, and while reliable and dependable, it was widely panned for its cheapo-looking interior. Honda moved quickly to make the dash panel a bit less cheap looking in subsequent model years.
As a general rule, yes. This statement is true, uh.. unless you're talking about GM. Then it would be every year is bad.
What such an ignorant statement to make and isn't true at all. But anyways, to answer the OP's question, usually, the latter years are better, just because automakers have had the time to get feedback from the customers on what problems have occurred in the earlier models, and obviously make improvements to the design, quality, and or engineering aspects of the car.
So YES. Especially in this day in age of high-tech everything, all those electronics need time to be worked out. Which ultimately benefits the customer.
I bought the first year the Durango was completely revamped in 2014. I've been happy with it. Sure, things have died/broken, but that happens with every vehicle. They're mechanical parts and there will always be part failures not to mention things just wear out like brakes.
"just wear out"....for whatever reason, even my brakes didn't need to be done until after 100K miles on my 2010 Passat. Other than a small diaphragm valve (made a racket), not a single part wore out or needed replaced in 111K miles. I finally did the brakes even though they still had 10% or more on them.
So I guess it's all relative. I used to sell all my vehicles (mostly minivans when family was bigger) before about 90K just because I thought they would start needing work. But I can only hope that there are more vehicles out there like my Passat.
Other than tires (at 40K+) and oil changes, there was $450 in total expenses (that valve thingy) in 7 years.
The way you say "sure, things have broken" seems to indicate you expect it. Maybe the vehicles you are buying are not as reliable as they could be?
But the key here is "no, there won't always be dead and broken parts" - at least in the first 100K plus miles...which I think is part of the point of this thread.
Not only does the manufacturer have a learning process but so do the suppliers of important components. I have found the first model year can be a standing date with the dealer who is also a victim but happy to take warranty money for less than great patches.
If possible waiting until the first major refresh will get you a well sorted vehicle.
Decontented
mail-in (last year of a run can be a mail-in)
Decontented means that content (features, options) available early in the model run is not available anymore later in the same model run (and not replaced by better/improved content).
If the last year was the "best", it wouldn't be the last year.
The last year incorporates all the fixes (re-calls) updates and improvements over the previous years models, therefore the theory is those vehicles would be the best built models of it's generation.
I don't think first/last year of car models is as good of an indicator or quality/reliability as it once was. Manufacturers are often swapping out engines, transmissions and components as they develop instead if waiting for a totally new model. And many cars have mid cycle refreshes that are thorough but really just a 4 year update in an 8 year cycle. Toyota seems to be doing this a lot lately. And with so many cars within each brand sharing components, the new car might feature equipment that's already been in production on a different vehicle for a couple of years. The new Accords are the first cars I can recently recall where they really are swapping out everything and going for all new engines and transmissions instead of existing or even modifications to a previous one.
The mid 90s Maximas where the first cars I recall be referred to as 'decontented.' Basically the previous generation had been a stellar car but was getting killed in sales because the trade rate with Japan and having features usually found in higher quality/pricier cars was forcing it into a higher cost point. They got rid of some trim and simplified design a little but one of the biggest savings was axing the independent rear suspension and a lot of reviewers immediately took them to task. The only thing saving the car was that the engine in the new model was world class at the time. The late 90s Mercedes E class was another car that was noted for being lesser to the car it replaced and it did not even have an improved engineer to hide other sins.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
