Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: If airplanes are built to last 30 to 20 years, why not cars? [View all]lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)95. Cars are, for the most part, fairly rugged devices.
And the wear bits are designed to be replaceable.
I would make an exception for the mechanical/electrical parts.
Short of physical damage to the body or undercarriage from impact (and appropriate lubrication) the basic machine should function for a very long time.
Seriously, if you want a car to last for 300,000 miles;
1) pick one with a minimum of electro-crap
2) perform routine maintenance
3) don't hit things
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
111 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
if people cared for their cars like the care airliners get, cars would last longer nt
msongs
Jun 2013
#1
If you maintain your car as frequently as airplanes are maintained 30 years should be no problem...
PoliticAverse
Jun 2013
#2
IIRC, "planned obsolescence" does not describe useful life of a car/appliance...
Eleanors38
Jun 2013
#33
Depends, American cars up until say the '80's or so weren't built to last
Spider Jerusalem
Jun 2013
#46
And if we forced them to extend this out by 30 years think of the money that would be saved
RB TexLa
Jun 2013
#10
All of what you say is true, but maintenance was simple and replacement parts were always available
Nimajneb Nilknarf
Jun 2013
#37
As one who is interested in preservation of things, that looks to me like a "project"
Nimajneb Nilknarf
Jun 2013
#26
i'm guessing when you take things like maintenance into account the cost will end up
JI7
Jun 2013
#17
If we had cars that were designed and sold to last for 50 to 40 years we could move to where
RB TexLa
Jun 2013
#22
how much less would your SS benefits be if they were based solely on your own contributions?
CreekDog
Jun 2013
#40
I know, I know, I will be stealing the food off your beloved children's tables
RB TexLa
Jun 2013
#41
I know, and since I don't have children your children will have to pay for everything for me. The
RB TexLa
Jun 2013
#50
You wouldn't have to have every upgrade. And if governments tried to force too many they would be
RB TexLa
Jun 2013
#38
I work in Great Lakes freighting. There are a lot of older vessels on the lake
Godhumor
Jun 2013
#53
I drive a 1972 Chevy Blazer. It's probably good for ANOTHER 40 years. n/t
cherokeeprogressive
Jun 2013
#51
Some parts of the world do. Parts of Europe, car avg age is 15 years old and climbing.
flvegan
Jun 2013
#52
If you maintained your car as well as airplanes are *required* to be maintained,
The Velveteen Ocelot
Jun 2013
#55
Table 1-26: Average Age of Automobiles and Trucks in Operation in the United States
FarCenter
Jun 2013
#58
You can, like airplanes and ships, you just have to be willing to put in the money and time
Godhumor
Jun 2013
#69
many drivers are frightening enough on the road...imagine texting at 30,000 feet!
NRaleighLiberal
Jun 2013
#71
Lots of older commercial aircraft are rugged and last but expensive to maintain and operate
Populist_Prole
Jun 2013
#72
Were it not for the electromechanical parts, modern cars would last a very long time.
lumberjack_jeff
Jun 2013
#98