To Keep, Or Not To Keep...

[CurranShelter]

So, the garage reckons that my trusty 'rolla is starting to show its age (hardly ancient at 11 yrs, and 80-something on the clock... just a baby, I can hear some of you say). It has just had its 2nd back box replacement, the rest of the (original) exhaust looking very corroded, and further observations include:
- notable corrosion to the chassis, brake pipes and rear springs
- steering column top bearing slightly worn
- o/s and n/s/f wishbone rear bushes deteriorated, starting to unbond (I admit - not sure how big a deal that is).

Oh and brake discs and pads getting very low. And recently, an ominous creaking noise going over bumps and humps. And a tendency to judder when negotiating slopes from cold. And the radio is unpredictably part-time. Is that the distant tinkling I hear of money tumbling down the drain?

Now, most of me says that's all normal and I can hardly complain that it's just starting to require some new bits after 11 years and otherwise faultless performance to date (having required only new rubber, a couple of bulbs and those pesky rear silencers to keep it going) so why would I even think about getting rid now.

But on the other hand, for someone who wants reliable, low-maintenance motoring, might it be time to think about saying goodbye? I can't decide. Honest John says modern cars are only built to last about 7 years, but I can only think he's talking about Renaults and Vauxhalls, not Toyotas. After all, the bodywork is fine, the engine's still sweet, the gearbox smooth and a pleasure to use, the drive as sure-footed as ever, and I still arrive at work feeling unflustered (until I get through the door, that is). And it still feels a solid, well-engineered vehicle, possibly even someone else's dream 2nd hand purchase.

Then on the other hand... there's a chance I could end up spending more than it's worth just to keep it going for another year or two. So do I put the cash towards a replacement, which - let's face it - is an inevitability at some point? And if so, what can I trust as much as I've trusted this car?

So if you've read this far (well done) and you'll forgive the rambling, I'd really welcome your opinions... how concerned should I be about those problems listed? (I'm no mechanic, that's for sure.) What is a realistic lifespan (without undue levels of maintenance) based on the experience of other members?

And is the Auris a worthy successor? Actually I'll ask that one in the Auris forum. :)

Thoughts?

[oldcodger]

Don't think anything you list is unusual in itself, normal wear and tear, though some of the underbody rustproofing could have been improved by Toyota.

On my 56 plate 1.6 I did notice the early signs of corrorison on the rear brake pipes where they are exposed , just before the flexibles but the rest are generally well protected; perhaps something that should be addressed soon; would think a splice repair might be possible rather than a complete long line, though perhaps some garages will only do the latter ?

a tendency to judder when negotiating slopes from cold

Not quiet sure what you mean there, letting the clutch out in low gear giving judder ?

Might be the clutch which can be done for below £300 if you shop around.

All the other stuff, brakes, suspension parts are run of the mill for any garage or competant diyer.

As you say you are not a diyer mechanic so seems you are faced with some large bills; I'm not into garage prices but suggest is over £1000 to have all that lot put right ...?

Time for a change or new corolla / auris ? have a few test drives of it and some of its competitors, think you will like the improvments....

[FROSTYBALLS]

We tend to replace our cars every three/four years. Replaced my 2006 Corolla 1.4 with an Auris 1.33 in 2009, and haven't regretted it. Now on my second Auris 1.33 (late 2012).

[CurranShelter]

Thanks oldcodger, yes the judder is when letting the clutch out in low gear, but only every now and then (from cold - seems fine after things warm up).

And thanks frostyballs, good to know you're happy with the Auris (especially 1.33 which doesn't seem to get a good press generally), I will be heading over to the Auris forum to get some more feedback so maybe see you there!

[alan333]

So, for change from a grand you could put your old 'rolla back in tip-top nick, and would almost definitely get another few years from her. And you wouldn't need to spend it all in one go if you didn't want. Total cost one grand, over however many years you get from her before you need to spend again.

How many grand would the replacement lose in the first year alone? - two, three? And that's without any repairs (if needed).

It's not necessarily whether the repair cost is more than the car is worth... it's how much it could save you by not having to buy a replacement.

BTW I haven't read the honest john report but if it's similar to a report I read recently, it says that the average car age is 7 years, not the average lifespan, which means there could be as many 14 year old cars on the roads as brand new ones, or lots of 5 and 9 year old ones etc. Certainly around here there are plenty cars around older than 58 plates.

Don't get me wrong tho - having a new(er) car is great...but it costs.

[CurranShelter]

That's pretty much what made me hesitant about calling it quits now. But I'm still a bit nervous that I could spent that grand or so over the next year and then find the bills keep on coming (quite honestly I'm not knowlegeable enough to know what could and is likely to go wrong or wear out from this point in its life). Yes I can save money now by not forking out for a replacement, but the replacement will need to happen sooner or later, so to my simplistic brain it becomes a question of whether I risk ending up purchasing say one more car than was strictly necessary over my lifetime.

The replacement would be 2nd hand, so I'd hope it wouldn't lose as much as 3k in the first year, but can't say I've got any firm figures on it.

As for Honest John, here are a few quotes:

"Basically all new cars are built to last 7 years. If they last longer, that's a bonus." (2009)
"Cars are generally built to last just 7 years from new and anything beyond that is a bonus." (2011)
"Nothing is built to last longer than 7 years anyway because a 'reasonable life' without major problems is deemed to be 6 years. At least Kia warrants its Sportage for a full 7 years." (2015)

Good job the housing industry doesn't take the same attitude.

Anyway, I appreciate your points - always good to get some balance on the subject and definitely food for thought.

[oldcodger]

No one can really say how long a car will last without needing major repairs, its all down to how its used/ looked after and sometimes just luck !

However a lot of what you say needs doing are nornal wear and tear items.

You might what to clarify / inspect / get quotes for doing the work you mentioned in your first post, either by , I assume , your regular garage, Toyota ? or the high street outfits.

You have had the back box replaced but as for "the rest of the (original) exhaust looking very corroded," well most of mine does and has done for years.

steering column top bearing slightly worn should be a fixed price job.

brake discs and pads getting very low a very regular job so a price for 4 new discs and pads is well known.

o/s and n/s/f wishbone rear bushes deteriorated typically simpler to replace the complete wishbone that comes with new rubber joints , around £70 each for the part.

brake pipes , must be done as soon as imho , parts not expensive as such , its a time and labour expense.

notable corrosion to the chassis and rear springs Are you by the coast ? as said earlier I found some corrosion but not anything bad. The rear springs and dampers could be replaced or cleaned up, but its what the "chassis" is like that needs clarifying, could really be just minor rust that needs treating / spraying or major problems that need welding.

The Clutch , perhaps the last job unless it gets significantly worse.

As always, do get a second opinion, your garage , MOT inspection ? might just be trying things on a bit.

[CurranShelter]

oldcodger, thanks for the info, much appreciated.

Previously I've used my nearest Toyota dealer for servicing - not that close by and not cheap, but then they do give me a loan car and valet mine before handing it back. I'm selective about what work I let them do though, as sometimes their premium on parts etc is acceptable, and sometimes it's just too much.

Anyway, on this occasion I was short of time and it was just an interim service, so I used the place a few minutes down the road (small independent local chain). They reported a small hole in the exhaust flange which I'd not noticed before that, but soon grew and resulted in the back box replacement (glad it was that side of the flange). They also raised several of the other points, and said the brakes needed doing.

I then had the MOT (and exhaust replacement) done a month or so later at a branch of F1 Autocentres, who I've used previously for tyres, air con and the like, and have been pretty good (and competitive). They had already checked the brakes a couple of months before the service and said they were very low but I could get some more wear out of them, and they didn't raise the brakes as an issue during the MOT. Nor did they mention the suspension bushes. This made me wonder if they were being a bit too lax, or whether the other place was being too eager. Maybe sharp practice, maybe just different professional opinions. But then the other place didn't mention the corroded springs (not near the coast btw) whereas F1's MOT report did.

So I suppose I could try and get a second/third opinion on the stuff that both have raised, but I just wonder, if I point out a potential problem and ask if it needs sorting, is a garage really likely to say "no, you keep your money mate, it's fine"? Well I suppose that's effectively what F1 Autocentres did when they checked the brakes...

[oldcodger]

Its a difficult one, as if you are not into doing your own inspections, then you are reliant on others.

However that can be as confusing as you have found; mind you are not alone, I use the councils MOT test centres and on occassion got an advisory about some parts showing wear or rusty, but I considered neither a problem and did not do anything about them, on next years test, and the same examiner, he passed them straight though without any problem ..

The brake pipe corrosion and suspension joints should be a keynote of any mot test and would be surprised if they had missed such problems during a mot test; however reading some of the motoring mags just last week, an official survey shows that a decent percentage of tests result in cars being let though when faulty and equally sound cars being failed needlessly !!

All I could suggest, is if you have someone who knows a bit about cars that can look at yours to see if those points do need work, or more likey, take the car to your prefered garage and , when the car is up on the lift, ask them to take you under there and point out the defective items.

Good luck..

[CurranShelter]

Yep, basically I need to figure out who I can trust. Wish I had the time to get clued up enough to do it myself (I reckon I'd probably enjoy it). :/

Very sensible point about asking to be shown the problems - I suppose any garage that isn't willing to do that is worth steering clear of (assuming they don't have some overly sensitive health & safety policy). F1 were fine with me going under the ramp to see the back box so I should do the same and ask them if we can check out the brake pipes and springs at least.