Reliabilty and Durability

Hi,

I've been Volvo-, Saab- and VW-centric for a long time. Bearing in mind that durability is not necessarily the same as reliability, I've found that those cars really are more durable than many. They also handle well with reasonable or good fuel economy. In my frustration over finding a wagon big enough to put a recumbent bike in the back of that has manual shift, I've widened my search to other well-regarded brands. I've discovered that a M5 meets my criteria and appears to be a pretty well-made vehicle. It's a leading candidate, vs. a used Volvo V70 or Saab 9-5 wagon - both of which are rare with manual shift and the new ones are out of my price range or are no longer offered with a stick.

Here's my question: are there any other convertees from Euro brands, or folks who own both, that can speak to the comparative reliablility and durability of Mazdas in general? My desired longevity is 200K miles or 350K km with only normal maintenance. (I accept that I'd have to replace suspension parts, clutch and cooling systems by that age.)

I see plenty of older Mazdas out on the road, definitely not rust buckets like Hondas were back in the days but not quite the durability of a Volvo or Saab. It will be fairly relabile though, 200k miles may be pushing it a little but hey maintain it well, don't drive it too hard, it should be all good. I would naturally push you towards the 5, they are great cars, but Volvos and Saabs are also great cars.

Why do you need to stick with a V70? You should be able to find a late 90s 800 series wagon for a decent price.

1997 Volvo 850 AWD manual, looks beautiful:
http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/van/cto/1585264235.html

BTW if I were to get a Volvo V70, this would be mine right here *drool*:
http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/nvn/ctd/1625278374.html

DKaz said:

Why do you need to stick with a V70? You should be able to find a late 90s 800 series wagon for a decent price.

Click to expand...

1-2 mpg better, better in the snow, and I prefer it. Also the better half wants newer (read: post-2000) and I'm looking for <<100K mi. Needle in a haystack.

I appreciate the input on longevity.

Good discussion...and separating reliability from durability is an interesting aspect.

I've always thought Volvos and Saabs lasted so long b/c of Volvo and Saab owners: these cars weren't ever really "cheap" brand new, and generally received pretty good maintenance/care from their owners who bought them to keep awhile. My Volvo experience is from *long* ago, a 70's 164 that I bought in the 80's with 150,000 mi on the clock; sold it at 225,000 and still going. That said, it did seem to need a "little something" fixed a couple times a year, which at the time I chalked up to...well, it was old and stuff wears out finally.

I bought a Miata off-lease in 1999 with 35k, it's now at 150k miles and is hanging in there. No complaints on reliability either...its tiny, sealed, trunk-mounted battery doesn't last long here in the midwest, it's needed a starter and clutch slave cylinder, exhaust replacement, and the usual brake pads, tires, and such. Pretty durable for such a light car, IMHO. Original clutch, doesn't use oil, drives great.

We bought my son's 1999 626 with 119k miles...he drove it, neglected and abused, for part of 5 more years, to 190k miles, then gave it to a friend vs. invest $600 or so in CV joint replacements. I gave it a lot of credit for lasting that long.

We just bought a 5 with long-term in mind...it fits our dog-hobby stuff and we're planning for him to be around a while. Some on this board are 100k plus at this point, generally with 2006 models that seem to have had some initial teething problems (suspension bushings, door sliders, electric power steering pump mostly, from what I read). The 5's MZR engine is widely used and nothing new at this point, so there should be good data from across Mazdadom as to the long-term prospects. We've owned ours for a whole month, but in poking around a bit, nothing seems particularly cheap or flimsy other than the mouse-fur carpeting (which our CX-7 had also).

For grins, I just did a Autotrader search for Mazda sedans (just a quick way to eliminate pickup trucks), any year, with a minimum of 100,000 miles...got 1300+ hits, most of these between 100 and 200k miles. Likely some good stories among these, and so certainly some are enjoying long(er) lives.

Agreed. I've only had my V70 for 3 months now, but left behind an Accord wagon. That thing was nice and all, but req maint. was a PITA for a Japanese car. I expect the V70 T5M will be just as "needy" whereas, I expect my 5 to be alot like my old Subie. We got it @ 99K miles, kept it 10 years, literally spent less than $6000 over 10 years on maintenance, and sold it off with tight rings and a smooth shifting tranny.
I HAVE taken the 5 to the dealer many many times in the last year, but its an '06 and my strategy is to have everything anyone on the forums mentions taken care of under warranty so I can get a good 5+ years without anything big needing repair. The '07s are better, and '08-'09 are fantastic compared to the '06 reliability-wise.

You're right, the V70 is no longer offered with manual transmission. Between about '03 and '06 I drove a '93 940 Turbo, was looking at the V70s with manual transmission and the third row of seats, but it was just too expensive. Around $30,000, though Volvo would give me a couple tickets to Sweden to pick it up (then they would ship it to the states). I know that for a year or two after third row seats were no longer offered in the US, you could still get them if you ordered the car for pickup in Sweden. May be the same for the manual transmission.

Anyway, my Volvo was fun to drive and I could put a ton of stuff into it, but it would break down about twice a year. Yes, it was easy to work on (especially with the boards at www.brickboard.com), but it would take a week for the part to come in so that I could fix it. Had it from 130,000 miles to 160,000 miles.

I also used to drive a '95 Toyota Camry, had that one from 140,000 miles to 160,000 miles. Never broke down, that thing was a great car, I only sold it because I bought the Mazda5 and I had a better second car, a '99 Honda Accord which I bought new in late '98. Never had any mechanical trouble with the Accord, other than door lock issues.

canalligators said:

Hi,


Here's my question: are there any other convertees from Euro brands, or folks who own both, that can speak to the comparative reliablility and durability of Mazdas in general? My desired longevity is 200K miles or 350K km with only normal maintenance. (I accept that I'd have to replace suspension parts, clutch and cooling systems by that age.)

Click to expand...

I am one of these covertees you are looking for: I have been driving Volvos for over 20 years, including 15 years of driving nothing, but Volvos. This changed six years ago when we replaced a 15 years old 240 with a Mazda MPV. This followed by a complete switch last December as Mazda5 replaced a 13 years old 850 wagon.

While none of our Mazdas has made it to 200K miles yet (and I do not know whether they ever will(boom07)), I can conduct a comparison based on 6 years and 80K miles of the MPV ownership (our 5 is still too young to draw any conclusions). First things first: Mazdas are more reliable and cheaper to fix than Volvos. Are they as durable? - I am not sure - so far Volvos seem to age much more gracefully: A typical Vovlo repair involves replacing an old worn out part with a new one and results in a car running like new. Even though the MPV did not seem to ask for too many new parts during 80K miles of our life together (we did have to put in new ignition coils and brakes), it has stopped feeling young long time ago. While it had an excuse (6 years and 80K miles is no joke), twice as old Volvo 850 with almost 200K miles on the clock seemed like a much better automobile until the day we sold it. Yet, all of our Volvos (including tank-like 240s) went through O2 sensors, CV boots, motor mounts and bolt joints as if there was no tomorrow. While behaving better so far, Mazda has not been problem free either: In addition to constantly loosing hardware that holds panels together (850 had a weak link too - the rear gate) MPV seems to develop little annoying, yet ignorable problems: a burned out main cruise control light (the CC itself still works), overdrive that does not seem to want to disengage (a broken wire inside the steering column), moody power locks, IAC valve, etc. I would not even start comparing the quality of interior materials - Volvo is much more upscale (and expensive) car and it is not trying to hide it. Also, old Volvos seemed to be much friendlier to a DIYers: Back-to-back I had to replace a heater core in our 850 and a burned out headlight in the MPV. While there is no question that the first procedure was much more complicated, it was also more enjoyable. I still hope that my kids did not hear the words that I mumbled while fixing the Mazda's headlight...

If my post suggests that I have a buyer's remorse - let me reassure you that I do not. I do enjoy my new 5 and while I do realize that it is not a Volvo, I also hope that it will serve me well for a long time. I might have to replace it after 7 years (not 15), but I am sure it will be cheaper to run and need much less frequent attention that a Volvo would. And, so far, I enjoy driving the 5 at least as much as enjoyed driving the old 850 that it replaced.(lol2)