Are car life cycles becoming too short?

VolvoMan

After seeing cars like the new Astra and the Mk VI Golf, it leads me to wonder is this the reason why car manufacturers are in such deep trouble right now? I mean, the new Astra's predecessor was only launched in 2004, and the same goes for the Golf (although I am aware that the Mk VI is very much the same car as the Mk5). I am also seeing replacements for cars that are not too old such as the Merc CLS, the BMW X3 and 1 Series.

Didn't cars not so long ago usually have life cycles of 8-10 years? It seems ridiculous replacing these cars that are still perfectly modern with newer models that are barely any more technologically advanced, and it makes very little financial sense to me.

JimmyCrackCorn!

people want better fuel efficiancy or so we are told.

This has lead to more complex injection systems and emission controls.

Where as high end cars of the past are comparable to modern echo barges its not true in all cases. In fact i think you have the rose tinted glasses on.;)

TomMc

You are right VM, especially when you consider that todays cars (especially the ones from more mainstream manufacturers) have a longer (mechanical) lifespan than they would have had in the 80's or 90's.

Of the people who buy brand new cars in more recent times, a very high percentage would change every 2 - 3 years. (Buying new plates as much as new cars and keeping up with the neighbours etc). And people probably need something fresher or a facelift at least to coax them along. So it is obviously a decision geared towards greater consumption. The motor manufacturers want to increase volumes more and more. All the various niche vehicles testify to that. MPV's and the like reinventing the family car to stimulate demand. Also females would play a far more greater role in buying decisions now than they did years ago (where family cars concerned). And we know how women like the latest fashions.

If a lot of a vehicles underpinnings are carried over or can be shared with others, it is obviously better for them to change more often if it generates enough increased demand. The good thing is that it makes used cars even more affordable for those of us who don't need to buy new. Although it would hit residuals on all cars to varying degrees.

BadCharlie

It depends on what people buy into.
Cars will last for a very long time before you would need to replace them. But today's people want to trade in cars every few years. Companies come out with new models all the time & your right the old model are still perfect.

daveharnett

It's a good point. Anyone who works in manufacturing will tell you never to buy a product in the first 12 months of production - that's when most of the bugs get found and corrected. Generally a model's quality improves drastically over it's lifetime.

At the rate we are going, new models will be coming online before manufacturers have had time to get the old models right.

bazz26

Well if you were buying a TV in the morning would you buy a non HD LCD that was on the market for a last 4 years or would you go for the latest just launched similarly priced TV from a different manufacturer? Same goes for a PC or laptop.

Cars are exactly the same these days, technology changes so fast that even a 4 year product life cycle is an eternaty. Even a facelift that attempts to give an aging model a new lease of life has it's limitations.

zilog_jones

I don't think car technology is moving that fast. What drastic changes have there been in the past 5 years or so?

Rowley Birkin QC

Fair enough points about technological advances and whatnot but in the last 10-15 years reg plate snobbery was making it so very easy for car companies to churn out new and face lifted models and see them fly off the shelves.

That said, it works out very well for what I would consider to be the typical* Motors regular who, at the very least, know their way around a Haynes manual and is happy to leave the Smythe-Jones down the road buy a nice shiny new motor and know that it will be available in a few years at fraction of the cost and with plenty of similar models gone to scrapyard heaven providing cheap(er) parts.

*I know it's a massive assumption/generalisation.

ShadowHearth

bazz26 wrote: »

Well if you were buying a TV in the morning would you buy a non HD LCD that was on the market for a last 4 years or would you go for the latest just launched similarly priced TV from a different manufacturer? Same goes for a PC or laptop.

Cars are exactly the same these days, technology changes so fast that even a 4 year product life cycle is an eternaty. Even a facelift that attempts to give an aging model a new lease of life has it's limitations.

I would not agree on that. Simple thing is: PRICE tag. I would go for brand new TV, becouse there is hugr difference in 4 years old TV and modern one.

But Theres not much difference in 4 years old car. It just looks facelifted. Alot of new models are using same engines as 4 years old cars. Its more cosmetic thing with in mine opinion.

I would like to talk about ather thing. About quality and lifespam of cars after 2000+++ year. All the older cars were biuld to last, and had huge quality level. and all the new cars are just turning in to pile of crap after warranty time is over.

Its just not profitable for them to do a long lasting car. Its better sell new car every 3 years...

zilog_jones

From what I've seen regarding number plate snobbery, those who partake in it don't seem to care how the car looks at all and will happily buy a new car two or three years later that has slightly different headlights or even one that hasn't changed at all. Talk about boring...

I would like to talk about ather thing. About quality and lifespam of cars after 2000+++ year. All the older cars were biuld to last, and had huge quality level. and all the new cars are just turning in to pile of crap after warranty time is over.

At least cars these days have much better rust-proofing. Most 10 year old cars are still relatively rust-free (except for Hyundais ) - that certainly wouldn't have been the case 10 years ago. The main reason why every Toyota ever made isn't still on the road is because they rust.

Zube

zilog_jones wrote: »

What drastic changes have there been in the past 5 years or so?

Positives:

Air bags/NCAP results.
Twin-clutch gearboxes.
CO2 (or mpg in old money).
100 bhp/litre diesel engines.

ABS only became compulsory in the EU in what, 2003?

Bluetooth/Ipod connections/satnav/MP3 CD players are all getting more common, and are better when designed in rather than fitted aftermarket.

Negative: Increasingly, no spare wheel, and nowhere to keep one.

ShadowHearth

zilog_jones wrote: »

From what I've seen regarding number plate snobbery, those who partake in it don't seem to care how the car looks at all and will happily buy a new car two or three years later that has slightly different headlights or even one that hasn't changed at all. Talk about boring...


At least cars these days have much better rust-proofing. Most 10 year old cars are still relatively rust-free (except for Hyundais ) - that certainly wouldn't have been the case 10 years ago. The main reason why every Toyota ever made isn't still on the road is because they rust.

Well, i am origanaly from lithuania, and we have very heavy winters, and our goverment ( bunch of a**holes) forces to use salt and chemicals on roads, so car can be eaten alive in 2-3 winters. Trust me, i know about rust .

But i can tell you that people back there dont have money to change cars like gloves. Theres loads of audis 100 or 80. Old mercs, VW golf and passats. And they are all ranging from 85' to 95'. And trust me moust of them alive and kicking! I would not even afraid to say that alot of those old cars are in better techincal condition then alot of 2000+ cars in here. No offence.

Its just the way of looking after car aswell. But even you think about it, the only major problem was rust? So they learned how to deal with rust, but all of the ather aspects just went to crap...

Btw, there was a good point said before, when they had new model back then, they had time to work on it and deal with moust of buggs on cars. Now they dont even finish polishing one model, when you see new one just coming out after 2 years...

Luke Crowley

I agree with VolvoMan. Cars like the Peugeot 307 and VW Golf Mark V had plenty of shelf life left in them, I reckon. (On the other hand, though, some models just kept on going when they should have been killed off years before. Nissan Almera, anyone?). At least the manufacturers haven't gone completely overboard this time - in the US in the '50's, every major manufacturer released a facelifted model every 12 months.

Drummerboy08

Zube wrote: »

ABS only became compulsory in the EU in what, 2003?

Wasnt 03 anyhow. My 04 Focus doesnt have ABS. It was a factory option.

Manufacturers would prefer not to spend millions on research and development of new cars, but, if they didnt, you, Joe Soap from the Public would be complaining of how old your brand new Ford Focus looks already.

L1011

The car I drive was introduced in 2003 and has no announced replacement yet; some firms don't go for insane refresh cycles...

Zube

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

Wasnt 03 anyhow.

OK, there's a massive improvement that happened in the last 5 years then.