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.
Guilty as charged, but I don't want to acquire known avoidable problems.
That's fair. In general:
- 3LT dash can delaminate, so 2LT is the sweet spot (1LT is fine too but little things like heated seats and HUD are in the 2LT)
- Widebody (GS and Z06) wheels can crack, fix is to replace them with forged wheels ($3k ?)
- A8 allows use of V4 more often which anectdotally may contribute to premature lifter and torque tube failure, so look for the M7's
Everything else will come down to "more complicated = more chance to fail = more expensive ot repair" and how well the specific vehicle was maintained.
For example, the magnetic shocks will likely leak and need to be replaced before 80k and costs about $4k a set with labor. Compare with conventional shocks are more robust and cost ~$1000 or so.
I have a 2017 M7. I have had no issues in which the article points out. I have had 2 problems that were fixed with my GMEPP. Tensiioner and my AC compressor was leaking. Maybe for not using the AC much. Other than that no issues. It has been a blast.
The last year of any production product is a question mark.
All the “common” parts that didn’t fit, were marred or otherwise suspect were thrown back into
the bin and a better part selected from the bin.
Eventually, all the parts will be used. Somehow or somewhere.
"parts that didn't fit" were "thrown back into the bin" 😂 that's a good one!.. I can picture that 🙄
I don't see anything that I posted that describes any reliability issues.
I commented on the parts bin being used up.
And, believe it or not, that issue exists.
When the Defense Dept. exhausted a contract for military helicopters, the Material Review Board (MRB)
engineering requests skyrocketed. A MRB reviews changes to parts that are necessary to make them fit/work in the assembly.
Each request has to be reviewed by engineers to determine feasibility and effect on the product as a whole.
The manufacturer was going to use as many if not all the parts left in the bins after years of production.
So, yes it does exist.
The subject of this entire thread is literally "RELIABILITY Chart" (emphasis added). @TheRobSJis correct - our DoD experience has very little (i.e., almost no) applicability to the issue at-hand.
Originally Posted by TheRobSJ
Whatever experience you may have in defense contractors does not apply to automobile manufacturing. Other than super low volume (handbuilt/botique) automakers, everyone else uses what is called “just-in-time” manufacturing.
You can google the definition of it if you want. But the long story short is there is no room full of unused/defective headlights or whatever at Bowling Green that goes in the final year of a Corvette generation because they’re done and retooling for the new model production.
I’ve been to quite a few auto plants in my career, and let me assure you, the parts they have on hand are barely enough to keep the line moving for maybe two days at the most.
So in regards to Corvette, no it does not exist. Stop spreading misinformation.
Originally Posted by c5arlen
"parts that didn't fit" were "thrown back into the bin" 😂 that's a good one!.. I can picture that 🙄