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.
So, I was a little bit bored ... and did a bit of used cars market share analysis to see which manufacturer makes the most durable car based on the prevalence on the used car market.
Logic: Cars that are poorly made and don't last long will heed quickly to a junkyard. Hence, their presence on the used car market will be reduced, especially if one looks at cars that are 10+ years old. Their respective used car market share will be lower than their corresponding market share they had when new. On the other hand, durable cars will remain on the used car market for decades, because their owners find it worthy to keep them running instead of replacing with a newer vehicle.
Methodology: I looked how many cars from each manufacturer are listed on today's used car market. I grouped the cars into 5-years-long slots. I calculated the respective used car market share by manufacturer and time slot during which the cars were produced. Then I looked up the respective new car market share for each manufacturer during that corresponding 5-year slot. Finally, I divided current used car market share by the corresponding new market share to calculate a "used car prevalence index". 100% means that the current used market share is equal to the corresponding new car market share during the respective 5-year time slot. So, for example, if manufacturer X had a 15% new car market share between 1999 and 2003, and their cars represent 15% of today's used car market share of the same vintage, it means that their cars have "average" durability, and the number of used cars correlates closely to the number of cars originally sold new. An index above 100% means that there are more used cars from that particular manufacturer than what one would expect based on how many were originally sold new. An index below 100% means than more cars made it to the junkyard than what would expect based on new car sales from the respective period.
Source: I used cars.com market listings. The sample used per each time period was higher than 1000 vehicles, so it should be statistically meaningful.
Conclusions:
Both GM and Ford have below average durability index. The number of 10+, 15+, 20+ and 25+ years old Fords and GMs is less than what one expect based on how many they sold during the corresponding years. No surprise there.
Toyota has about average durability index among the large manufacturers. The index varies between 83% and 139%, close to what one would expect based on how much market share Toyota had during the study years.
BMW and Mercedes are the clean winners. Their "survivability" on the used car market is outstanding. People hold to and buy old BMWs and Mercedes like no other car. Obviously the advantages of owning an old BMW and Mercedes outweigh any disadvantages by a huge margin. No surprise there - you get what you pay for.
Note: I skipped Stellantis (Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep) because the different brands changed hands several times during the study period. Hence, it's hard to compare these brands from different periods because they were owned by different companies, with different philosophies. I also skipped brands that didn't have much presence on the US market more than 15 years ago, so the sample size is hardly statistically representative.
Being a family of former VW owners and then switching to Toyota/Lexus products in the mid 90's, throughout the 2000's I find this hard to believe. Do you have a link you can share to the data?
What about cars that are still in the original owners hands? These cars would not show up in the used car market.
That is correct. However, not many new car buyers hold to their cars for more than 10-15 years. So the impact on the overall market numbers is relatively small.
Being a family of former VW owners and then switching to Toyota/Lexus products in the mid 90's, throughout the 2000's I find this hard to believe. Do you have a link you can share to the data?
There is no single source of data (table). You need to go to cars.com and filter the data by year and manufacturer. You need to extract the number of cars from a specific brand and time period. As some manufacturers have more than one brand, you need to aggregate the data from individual manufacturer. cars.com allows you to filter data by brand, but not manufacturer. So, for example, GM includes data from Buick, Cadillac, Chevy and GMC. This is why I excluded Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep because of the multiple changes in ownership. Takes about 1-1.5 hours to get the data points for the brands and time slots I selected. If you want to go more granular (more brands and more time slots), it will take proportionally longer. Once you have the individual numbers (cars by brand / manufacturer / model year, Excel is your friend.
There is no single source of data (table). You need to go to cars.com and filter the data by year and manufacturer. You need to extract the number of cars from a specific brand and time period. As some manufacturers have more than one brand, you need to aggregate the data from individual manufacturer. cars.com allows you to filter data by brand, but not manufacturer. So, for example, GM includes data from Buick, Cadillac, Chevy and GMC. This is why I excluded Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep because of the multiple changes in ownership. Takes about 1-1.5 hours to get the data points for the brands and time slots I selected. If you want to go more granular (more brands and more time slots), it will take proportionally longer. Once you have the individual numbers (cars by brand / manufacturer / model year, Excel is your friend.
Got it! That's a lot of work, don't know if I have the time for that, unfortunately
This is data in a vacuum need to see total cost of ownership. Without fail for decades Toyota comes out on top.
Cost of ownership is certainly a factor, but it's not the only reason why people hold on to cars. Other criteria like performance, comfort, safety are also important factors. These factors are worth the extra money. If cost of ownership was the only criterion, we would all be driving Corollas, and there wouldn't be a single Lexus owner.
Even more important is replacement cost. For example, if you have a 10 year old Ford Focus with a market value of $3000 and the transmission dies and the cost of replacement is $3000, there is no reason to spend that amount of money to repair the car. You'll be better off by selling the old Ford for parts, add the $3000 for a new transmission and buy a newer car. But if you have a 10 years old Lexus LX that is still worth $30k, and you need to replace the transmission for $5000, it makes sense to repair the car rather than replace it. That's why people hold longer to expensive cars (full size SUVs, for example) than cheap ones. It has little to do with cost of ownership, but is mostly driven by replacement cost. I doubt that anybody who owns a 20 years old BMW 740 and Merc 500S would be willing to replace it with a 5 year old Corolla.
Cost of ownership is certainly a factor, but it's not the only reason why people hold on to cars. Other criteria like performance, comfort, safety are also important factors. These factors are worth the extra money. If cost of ownership was the only criterion, we would all be driving Corollas, and there wouldn't be a single Lexus owner.
Even more important is replacement cost. For example, if you have a 10 year old Ford Focus with a market value of $3000 and the transmission dies and the cost of replacement is $3000, there is no reason to spend that amount of money to repair the car. You'll be better off by selling the old Ford for parts, add the $3000 for a new transmission and buy a newer car. But if you have a 10 years old Lexus LX that is still worth $30k, and you need to replace the transmission for $5000, it makes sense to repair the car rather than replace it. That's why people hold longer to expensive cars (full size SUVs, for example) than cheap ones. It has little to do with cost of ownership, but is mostly driven by replacement cost. I doubt that anybody who owns a 20 years old BMW 740 and Merc 500S would be willing to replace it with a 5 year old Corolla.
Makes sense. Thanks for compiling the data and putting it together, appreciated
GM as a whbole might rank below average, yet Buick, except for the Enclave, consistently gets high marks for reliability from both Consumer Reports and J.D. Power. In fact, Buick is often the highest-rated domestic brand, and for a couple of years, outdid Toyota.
Cost of ownership is certainly a factor, but it's not the only reason why people hold on to cars. Other criteria like performance, comfort, safety are also important factors. These factors are worth the extra money. If cost of ownership was the only criterion, we would all be driving Corollas, and there wouldn't be a single Lexus owner.
Total cost of ownership rankings are tabulated for the entire lineup, not cherry picking like you're doing. Any BMW out of warranty carries high risk and likely major expense. https://www.crsautomotive.com/what-a...hip-per-brand/
If I bought an old W140 S-class V12 I would keep it alive, many have done the same since they are worth it. No one would care about a same era Toyota, once it breaks its off to the scrapyard.
This is most of a test of how much people like the actual car vs how durable/long lasting it is, stuff that is liked more gets repairs and is allowed to continue on. Stuff that is "meh" is thrown away once used up.
I believe this logic is flawed; here's why. As a whole, expensive cars live in garages far more than inexpensive cars. Expensive cars probably are better serviced than inexpensive cars.
Expensive cars are more desirable; buyers cannot afford new but will take advantage of the used price hit.
I doubt there are many upscale German cars that are in the condition our beloved 2001 Tundra is, especially if they lived the same life. Ditto a 2001 Camry or Accord.
And I bet our 2006 TSX blows the doors of comparable year cars.
Both cars have over 210K; the Tundra has almost never seen the inside of a garage and the TSX has been in and out...
No one would care about a same era Toyota, once it breaks its off to the scrapyard.
p.
Toyota trucks and body on frame SUVs are worth keeping. The made in Japan models even more so. Land Cruiser 80 is a far more desirable vehicle to keep over that Mercedes. Mercedes G wagon is very desirable
02-22-23, 09:22 AM
Statistics - who makes the most durable cars?
