Is there Such a Thing as TOO MANY miles?

[that dude who did that thing]

The cars you want thread got me looking at some great old vehicles. I'm not actually shopping, more like window shopping. The old cars I like (and that are actually available on a regular basis) tend to be ones that actually got driven a great deal. Which makes me wonder whether there is simply a point at which a vehilce has too many miles to be a reasonable candidate for restoration? Can a 25-45 year old car with 200,000 miles really be restored to daily driver condition (or at least every weekend condition) without replacing ALL of the major systems, including the engine?

Just curious about opinions from those who have owned/restored old cars.

Though I know I'm going to get lots of opinions from folks who have never done so, as well as a shitload of smartass comments from halfwits. But, hey, prove me wrong, please.

[Svengali]

[Benny Profane]

Problem with well used old cars is rust and corrosion everywhere. The engine can be fine, suspension and drive train, too, because a lot of internal and external oil and grease has kept things nice, but, all other parts of the car just rot.

I had to trash an old Golf that I liked and was still running well because the window seals all rotted away at the same time and the car filled with puddles in the summer parked outside. Stuff like that.
I live in the Northeast, and drive to Vermont a ton. Toxic for cars, even today.

[iceman]

I'd say it's almost totally case-by-case as long as rust isn't an issue. Focus on southern climates, and in particular dry southern climates, and pretty much anything is possible.

[Plainview]

It all depends on how the car was maintained during it's lifetime. It doesn't matter if a car has a million miles on it if major stuff has already been replaced and it was well cared for. An engine that runs well, doesn't burn oil and has good compression & leakdown figures obviously still has a lot of life left in it, regardless of mileage.

I'm only familiar with American cars from the timeframe you're talking about but when it comes to 40 yo American cars I wouldn't hesitate to drive one daily *if* it has been well maintained and is in good condition. The most expensive things to replace on such cars are engines, transmissions, and body/interior. A rust-free American car (this will be the hardest thing to find) with a good running engine and functioning transmission from the '60s and '70s is very easy to work on and maintain and for most of them replacement parts for stuff like suspsension is very cheap. Interior and body parts can be nearly impossible to find in good condition and are expensive to have restored if it wasn't a popular car to begin with (i.e., it has good current aftermarket support). Even cars that were basically the same under the skin can vary wildly in how easy it is to obtain body, interior, & engine stuff. The best example of this I can think of are the various GM A-body models produced as Chevy Chevelle/Malibu, Buick Skylark, Olds Cutlass/442, and Pontiac Tempest/LeMans/GTO. They're all the same platform and share frames & suspensions so those parts are readily available and cheap but each body & trim package was unique and the engines were specific to the manufacturers until the mid '70s so some are readily available and some are quite rare.

That's just an example, but the bottom line is - how readily available are replacement parts and in what condition is the car when you buy it? The number on the odometer doesn't really tell you a whole lot when talking about cars that old.

[Bromontana]

[BmillsSkier]

I've been running into the same question since finding that E30 online. How many miles are too many miles. Good thing is that I keep in mind that it's not a daily driver, and that knowing little more than the basic shit about car restoration, any work will be done by a professional. That and I'm not looking at anything that isn't completely unsupported in the aftermarket parts department.

All that being said, I still have big reservations about anything over 100k miles and therefore have to resign to spending more $$$ up front for a lower mile example.

Little borrow, little give. Just like golf.

[hutash]

Depends are the car, a MB diesel can go forever. 300,000 on a gas MB is no big deal if maintained well. If it is an American car, not so much, but an American rebuilt engine can be relatively cheap.

Also depends on how many times it has been rolled.

[old goat]

[jon gaper]

It will have a newer odometer

[schuss]

It depends on the vehicle and construction quality, the maintenance and the terrain it's on. After a certain amount of abuse, the frame will start to fatigue in certain spots and things like rivets will start to move a little. 300k highway miles - likely not happening on a quality car. 300k regularly on rough roads? It's going to lose something. This is why most full restorations take the bodies completely off and rework the frame (note - not really available to do on unibodies) as needed.
It's not that it can't be driven, but it will be looser and flexier than the original article.

[RShea]

Cuba is proving that the age of the vehicle is not an issue with all the old 1950's Chevys and other classics they keep on their roads running- as long as the weather is such that rust is not an enemy. Electrical issues can be troublesome to track down and resolve as the wiring does get old and cause problems. Once the frame rust sets in then it is not worth the efforts of replacing engine, transmission, etc. - all of which can be done if you want to keep it running.

My Dad had a Buick that had 350,000 miles on it last month. Inspection would have been new shocks and spring broken, Rust setting in and probably engine work or rebuild (overheating- probably head gasket at a min.) It had a few transmission problems and at least one trip in for a replacement transmission while he owned it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Cuba...w=1440&bih=799 Every one of those cars are models that are older than I am and many others on this forum for that matter.

[capulin overdrive]

Not for me, I keep a bunch of old junk running at work.

Sure as hell don't want to work on something on my own time.

[liv2ski]

It depends on the vehicle and construction quality, the maintenance and the terrain it's on. After a certain amount of abuse, the frame will start to fatigue in certain spots and things like rivets will start to move a little. 300k highway miles - likely can happen on a quality car. 300k regularly on rough roads? It's going to lose something. This is why most full restorations take the bodies completely off and rework the frame (note - not really available to do on unibodies) as needed.
It's not that it can't be driven, but it will be looser and flexier than the original article.

Fixed one sentence for ya and totally agree. My mom had a Mazda she loved and she had spent bucks on new everything for it before a truck totaled it and the insurance company didn't pay her anything for a 30 year old car. So if you fix something up, make sure it is properly insured.
Volvo would give you a new Volvo if your old one made it to 1 million miles. Not sure if they still do that. I have a car I love with 150k on it and I can easily imagine driving it another 100k. Beyond that???? We will see.

[that dude who did that thing]

So, I get the point about engine build quality (e.g., that a MB diesel may well go forever, while an older detroit four-banger probably won't).

But what about fair-to-middling detroit blocks? Just as an example, I've always wanted a 1980's Jeep Grand Wagoneer. In today's market, if they are anywhere near 100k miles, and in fair to good condition, they cost $20k, but if they are closer to or above 200k miles, they cost $5k or less. That $15k difference, it seems to me, leaves an awful lot of cash to rebuild an engine, replace suspension and steering components, and even install a whole new brake system. On the other hand, if it was that easy, everyone would do it, right?

[Bromontana]

My dad bought a Wagoneer new around 88. First month we headed down to Florida to catch up with his college buddy and get some beach days in. That piece of shit overheated just about once per gas tank and was returned after the trip. Good luck!

[old goat]

We had a 1st gen 4runner with 250K on it, although I lost track of how many head gaskets it went through--we gave it to charity after the last one went. With about 200K it was hit by a Budget truck driven by a Budget driver. Fairly minor body damage but they declared it totaled, gave us 2K and let us keep the truck, which we left bashed up and drove for 3 or 4 more years. I guess that covered one of the head gaskets.

[Millsie]

So, I get the point about engine build quality (e.g., that a MB diesel may well go forever, while an older detroit four-banger probably won't).

But what about fair-to-middling detroit blocks? Just as an example, I've always wanted a 1980's Jeep Grand Wagoneer. In today's market, if they are anywhere near 100k miles, and in fair to good condition, they cost $20k, but if they are closer to or above 200k miles, they cost $5k or less. That $15k difference, it seems to me, leaves an awful lot of cash to rebuild an engine, replace suspension and steering components, and even install a whole new brake system. On the other hand, if it was that easy, everyone would do it, right?

I have a 99 Tahoe with 206,000 miles on it. The seals on the engine are shot. Putting in a new one for less than $5000. The engine going in has tighter tolerence than those coming off the line in Detroit. Rear doors have some rust but can find those easily enough.

[hutash]

The problem with many middle aged cars is not the drive train, but all the other shit that starts to go wrong and is a pain in the ass to constantly fix. A/C, electric anything, especially windows, plastic crap everywhere, loose panels and rattles, et al. Not too mention all the smog crap you have to deal with, catalytic converters, MAS sensors, etc. If I am going to restore something I would do late 60's or mealier, maybe a few things from the early 70's. Back when shit was built simple and well, metal dashboards, crank windows, nor smog, a carburetor, shit that is easy to deal with or rebuild.

[glademaster]

You need something with a lower center of gravity than a Grand Wagoneer.

So, I get the point about engine build quality (e.g., that a MB diesel may well go forever, while an older detroit four-banger probably won't).

But what about fair-to-middling detroit blocks? Just as an example, I've always wanted a 1980's Jeep Grand Wagoneer. In today's market, if they are anywhere near 100k miles, and in fair to good condition, they cost $20k, but if they are closer to or above 200k miles, they cost $5k or less. That $15k difference, it seems to me, leaves an awful lot of cash to rebuild an engine, replace suspension and steering components, and even install a whole new brake system. On the other hand, if it was that easy, everyone would do it, right?

[Plainview]

The problem with many middle aged cars is not the drive train, but all the other shit that starts to go wrong and is a pain in the ass to constantly fix. A/C, electric anything, especially windows, plastic crap everywhere, loose panels and rattles, et al. Not too mention all the smog crap you have to deal with, catalytic converters, MAS sensors, etc. If I am going to restore something I would do late 60's or mealier, maybe a few things from the early 70's. Back when shit was built simple and well, metal dashboards, crank windows, nor smog, a carburetor, shit that is easy to deal with or rebuild.

I'm with Hutash. Cars have been a hobby of mine since I was a kid, thus my familiarity with old American iron. American cars from the '60s were surprisingly well built and VERY simple. The QC went in the toilet in the '70s. The biggest problem with '60s and early '70s American cars is they were not rust proofed at all and they all rust out. Replacement panels are available for many of the more popular cars from that era but the quality of the panels varies widely and installing/repairing rusty bodies is extremely expensive or time consuming depending on whether you pay someone to do it or do it yourself.

Once the '80s rolled around electronics and smog controls got really complex. These systems were still in their infancy so you ended up with garbage kluges like electronically controlled carburetors and mixtures of electronic sensors all over the place which controlled vacuum switches. I'd rather work on a modern car (from 2000 and newer) than anything from the mid '80s - at least now everything is electronic and usually pretty cleanly laid out.

That said, around here nothing older than 25 years is subject to emission inspections so when I rebuilt my '84 Toyota 4x4 I ditched ALL of the emission control crap except the PCV valve which is beneficial to overall engine operation and the fuel evaporation lines which are required for the fuel delivery system to work properly. Engine compartment is nice and clean now.

[RShea]

It also all depends on whether you try and do the work yourself, can accept either little things or major things like driving around with no Air Conditioning (because the parts plus labor is more than the book value of a older car), or the car was from a time when AC was an option and not always standard. Things like power windows/power door locks, Power antenna, remotes, outside temperature gauge, etc. etc. were things that were not on vehicles from older generation classic vehicles. 80's, 90's etc. these could be had as options or were included on higher end vehicles, but really are not required by some.

Working engine, working transmission (and clutch etc. if manual), working steering and suspension, tires, etc. that are required for safe operation of a car, vs working heater, or other things that may or may not be important for some areas of climates. It is really not very safe trying to operate a vehicle without at least a working window defroster as one example in the middle of a winter snow storm.

[XXX-er]

You get up north and the cold weather adds an extra degree of abuse on a vehical, gravel rash from the road, broken windshields, broken headlights, broken plastic stuff from flying rocks in the cold ect

IME its best to get rid of a car or truck BEFORE the cost per km gets too high, for my 90 4-runer I should have sold it at < 300,000 kms before a bunch of shit broke, I have seen a lot of those for sale with 275,000 kms ... an ex salesmans vehical I bet

if you can sell before tires/ timing belt/ front end parts / shock and other shit needs replacing you can save a bunch of coin and drive something newer

[that dude who did that thing]

XXX-er, that kind of misses the point. I don't want to drive something newer. SOmetimes, I think car designers do something really awesome, and I want what they've done, even though the market has moved on and decided "newer is better." I can afford a fairly expensive new carj, but what I want is a particular car that is no longer made. That's the point at which I began to wonder if there is an outer mileage limit at which something cannot be saved.

[XXX-er]

I would often see used 4-runers at 270K which is 170,000 miles, The 4-runer is a pretty good example of a desirable & reliable SUV, I hardly spent any $ on repairs between 200000 and 300000 kms BUT if i had dumped my 4runer at 275K i could have saved 4000$ on repairs, keep in mind a 4-runer with 325K was only worth 6k on a trade in

SO my answer to you would be it depends on how much $$$ do you wana thro at the problem ... how big are yer pockets are?

right now I drive a 2010 ranger since new which is a fairly new truck but a >30 yr old design, only 19K new, it never breaks and its only slightly more evolved than a stone axe