When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
My second new car was a 1969 Volvo 164. The 6-cylinder engine had pistons replaced twice under OEM warranty before it was a year old and had timing gears break twice in the ten years I kept it, plus many other failures. I called that Volvo the Black Lemon. I learned a lot about auto repair in those ten years. With that in mind, I bought the extended warranty when I replaced the Volvo with my third new car, a 1979 Honda Accord with manual transmission. I suppose you could say I got lucky, because the transmission failed, and the extended warranty paid for the repair. The repair bill was larger than the warranty cost. But I have never bought an extended warranty on any vehicle since that one and have never since had a repair bill that would have been covered by such a warranty.
My second new car was a 1969 Volvo 164. The 6-cylinder engine had pistons replaced twice under OEM warranty before it was a year old and had timing gears break twice in the ten years I kept it, plus many other failures. I called that Volvo the Black Lemon. I learned a lot about auto repair in those ten years. With that in mind, I bought the extended warranty when I replaced the Volvo with my third new car, a 1979 Honda Accord with manual transmission. I suppose you could say I got lucky, because the transmission failed, and the extended warranty paid for the repair. The repair bill was larger than the warranty cost. But I have never bought an extended warranty on any vehicle since that one and have never since had a repair bill that would have been covered by such a warranty.
It's also worth mentioning that such catastrophic failures, somewhat commonplace then, are much more rare now in new cars today.
We nostalgically remember that they were better built in the old days, but I recall the 1970s midsize Buick that was one of my first cars. It was "old"—which, in that era, was four years of age. It already had the start of rust-through in two places. Its finicky carburetor screws had drifted out of adjustment such that the car's box-stock base engine idled roughly. Its steering wheel rim had snapped and had a 1/8" canyon from heating-cooling cycles. It suffered random failures of components like the windshield washer pump and a wheel bearing. And overall I loved it because, by the standards of the time, it was so reliable. Our expectations are a great deal higher these days.
It's also worth mentioning that such catastrophic failures, somewhat commonplace then, are much more rare now in new cars today.
We nostalgically remember that they were better built in the old days, but I recall the 1970s midsize Buick that was one of my first cars. It was "old"—which, in that era, was four years of age. It already had the start of rust-through in two places. Its finicky carburetor screws had drifted out of adjustment such that the car's box-stock base engine idled roughly. Its steering wheel rim had snapped and had a 1/8" canyon from heating-cooling cycles. It suffered random failures of components like the windshield washer pump and a wheel bearing. And overall I loved it because, by the standards of the time, it was so reliable. Our expectations are a great deal higher these days.
True, that. I remember an old Mercury Comet (in the US a Ford Falcon?). 4 door, 289. Thing was a bit of a sleeper...would go like stink but you couldn't keep ball joints in it...(was not originally intended for a V8 engine) and there was a very personal, intimate relationship with bondo and polyester fibreglass to cover rust holes. That was about the time we stopped getting our gasoline for $0.50/gallon. A car reaching 100,000 miles? Almost unheard of.
After returning home to Montreal from a road trip to Alberta and back. Killed lots of grasshoppers that week.
Last edited by Tootsall; Apr 12, 2025 at 10:05 AM.
True, that. I remember an old Mercury Comet (in the US a Ford Falcon?). ...
Back in those days in the US, a Mercury Comet was just a rebadged Ford Falcon with a spiffed up interior. Ford Motor Co. was most likely doing the same rebadging practice in Canada.
From the Wikipedia article on the Mercury Comet:
The Comet was initially based on the compact Ford Falcon, then on the intermediate Ford Fairlane, and finally on the compact Ford Maverick. Early Comets received better-grade interior trim than concurrent Falcons, and a slightly longer wheelbase.
True, that. I remember an old Mercury Comet (in the US a Ford Falcon?). 4 door, 289. Thing was a bit of a sleeper...would go like stink but you couldn't keep ball joints in it...(was not originally intended for a V8 engine) and there was a very personal, intimate relationship with bondo and polyester fibreglass to cover rust holes. That was about the time we stopped getting our gasoline for $0.50/gallon. A car reaching 100,000 miles? Almost unheard of.
After returning home to Montreal from a road trip to Alberta and back. Killed lots of grasshoppers that week.
Interesting observation. I replaced my 2009 Passat with a 4 cylinder turbo last year for an ES 350 UL. Never a squeak or creak and ran her for 155,000 miles. In fact it was better screwed together and more solid than my partner’s E 350 Mercedes. The last few years of ownership I had to replace a lot of fungible items but never had a catastrophic failure.
