Quote:
Originally Posted by JCE
Both of the cars look way better than serviceable - the E is the best, and looks only a couple years old, no dents or door dings, pretty much like the sig pictures below. But they are old cars, like Paul pointed out.
Never plan on being a Cadillac, Lincoln, or Avalon owner, not in anywhere near their present configuration. De-emphasizing sporty driving is not the same as eliminating sporty cars, or burying myself alive in a rolling marshmallow.
I can afford many of the new cars available from most manufacturers, but all the cars I would normally be interested I seem complex, boring, and overpriced - packed with 'features' I don't want. I may end up selling both the C and E as Paul suggested, but would probably lease something instead of buying anything I have seen so far - wouldn't want the repairs after the warranty is up. (But, if Chevy started making the '67 El Camino again...)!
|
Besides a few horror stories that we read on the internet which is more prevalent today than it was in the 124's time, do we really know if they are more unreliable? I agree that more things mean more things can potentially go wrong. My house has more POTENTIAL problems than my ancestor's who lived in caves. As an example, I head all kinds of horror stories from the old timers when I bought my W210. Today, my highest expenditure (thanks for all the salt you dump on the roads, WI) has been paintwork, worn out head and an AC failure with over 450K on the clock. I have a very low level of electronics failures as opposed to worn out part from the mileage. Yet I hear a lot of "complex is bad" from old timers who cannot and/or will not bridge the gap between what they know and what is new. Much like Fuel Injection in it's infancy vs carburetors in their geriatric and senile phase.