To really know that for sure, it would require something that most people fear. A test. At the very least used oil testing. How much more are you going to go? At some point, you are going to need daily oil changes just to keep up with getting rid of the contamination, assuming there is that much contamination. So my car starts out at 10K oil changes., At some point, it will be 5K and soon, 3K and so on. Before we go there, has anyone done a teardown of a bunch of modern engines in a laboratory setting to see if the situation is really that apocalyptic? Maybe the problem you describe will happen at a million miles, in which case, it will either be recycled into something else but definitely not my problem. Maybe the problem of the 5th owner down the road?

 

Definitely different. If the apocalypse comes, I definitely want to be at ground zero or gone soon after. I value whatever luxury I can afford. I want every system working or it will irritate me to no end. Take my 2003 Seadoo. It isn't pretty and shiny but everything on it works or I will want it fixed or gone for something that has all stuff working. Appearance isn't important to me but non-functioning stuff will **** me off to no end so it will either be fixed or gone.

Are you sure you will have gasoline in an apocalypse, at least for long?

I buy my stuff for the gadgets. I keep old stuff on simply because I can't make an economic justification, at least to myself, that it is a good move, assuming I can afford it. So if I ride a Jetski for 2 hours a year, I wouldn't be able to buy a new one just because I want the gadgets. OTOH, I can't also buy a new one since I can get a used one with all the gadgets that is the same as the new one. So if a 21 model has the same hull, engine and toys as a 26, I won't buy a new one. I would have bought a C8 but I wasn't sure of the support for a rear engine car so when the wife had me dump the rickety POS C4, I went with a C7 since I wasn't sure if the rear engine concept will be a "one generation wonder", kinda like the C4 had the LT1 engine for a few years before the LS series came out for 2 generations.

Barring financials, I honestly can't give up the functions. That is my vice.

 

Is that proof in a jump drive next to the 100 mpg carburetor and the perpetual motion machine?

 

So what would this re-engieered engine cost? For example, say I want a pool in the backyard. I could financially afford it without a doubt. That said, I look at the maintenance and that I can use it only for 4 or 5 months of a year and that I probably wouldn't swim in it every day for a couple of hours to justify it. OTOH, if I had kids and they bring their friends over, that might be ok if they are young enough where I can get say 10 years out of it. So with the R100 engine being re-engineered, what would it have cost more than the 100K version and I can't stress this enough, who would pay for it? I have seen a lot of people carp on about how crappy Wal*Mart products that are made in China are and how they long for the good old days of solid products. To them, my question is "Why did you command Wal*Mart to sell crap by buying the crap product over the more expensive one that was solid?". People want the stars and the moon and will be willing to pay for it UNTIL THE BILL COMES DUE.

 

We can't even plug USB sticks into our PCs anymore, everything is in the "corporate" cloud.

Our suppliers have the specs. They honestly don't like them, costs them money.

You want to see something nifty, go look at a steering gear after some of the durability tests. Salt spray makes the thing pretty crusty. But it still functions.

 

We have testing, it is a physical visual eval + compression test. Its pretty obvious when you look at oil and open a valve cover on an engine with some mileage whether its been maintained or not for the last decade or two. You can easily see physical chunks of carbon glue - buildup - that would easily clog and ruin the engine if it came loose inside. The color should be a golden tan not black and smell burnt. Those are engines you don't want to buy from a junkyard. Your nose fingers and eyes are the instruments along with that compression gauge.

Gasoline is a difficult fuel to produce and extremely low quality for a combustion engine. Gasoline creates many carbon related debris issues inside an engine. Gasoline is not a desirable fuel, it is merely a cheap trash fuel for lowest cost budget driving.

The actual fuel you will use in apocalypse is alcohol, ethanol to be precise. This is also a high quality racing fuel. Once you remove the budget aspect from a vehicle to race or in a performance venue it will never use gasoline again - only alcohol style fuels.
Ethanol is 'easily' produced in the backyard - a distillery for drinking and using inside the engine as needed. It takes Sugar and Yeast, plus skills.. and... I have something for this....


Lets say you have a 1998 Corolla and a brand new 2026 Corolla. They both get about the same fuel economy. Parts are cheaper and more aftermarket are available for the 98. The 98 is also easier to work on, much simpler. Less computers. Less emission contraptions and valvetrain mechanisms and fewer moving parts and fewer controllers in general. A mechanic in the garage with basic tools can replace the entire drivetrain in a day on a 98. The 98 engine(1zz) can get a new oil pump, timing equipment, seals, without a rebuild, at 250k miles, and go another 250k miles as long as the oil is staying clean visually inside the engine parts being clean and smelling clean and PCV is maintained correctly.

I would say The 98 has a higher life expectancy due to these considerations, right off the bat.

Lets take it a step further and consider the oil change interval now impact on end of life. If you take the brand new corolla 2026 and do 8k or 10k miles oil changes, by the time it reachs roughly 120k the engine is past the point of no return, it cannot be saved, cannot be salvaged, it has turned to trash. There are many videos on youtube for you to see this happen. If you need I can find and post many. But I do not think you will have issue to find them.
It may still run to 150k or 180k maybe even 200k but its going to be so full of gunk by then it is completely disposable. Whereas the 98 which still drives on 3k mile oil changes basically can reach a million miles and even be rebuilt if needed with some basic parts (re-ring light hone and bearings using Toyota's OEM bearing increment per service manual procedure in the garage with no machine shop).
This is where you can begin to consider which one of these is 'obsolete'. The 98 with a nearly infinite lifespan(carry a spare 1zz at low cost as needed) and easy to replace parts and easy to work on drivetrain with basic tools and limited computerization - that gets the same economy as a brand new 2026 so essentially nothing is lost besides power and luxury on the car itself for sport. Or, is the 2026 obsolete by the time it reaches 150k due to poor oil change intervals and even with good oil change intervals the complexity and computer parts and integrated nature of internal components with solenoids and pumps for example direct injection - how does a diy mechanic in the garage service and replace direct injection components inside the engine. How can they be expected to replace all of the extra unwanted components that are added to such an engine over decades of service that the 98 lacks. In terms of obsolescence the brand new cars with high complexity and difficulty to service and maintenance intervals that just barely nurse it to 150k or 200k miles before its totally trashed - yeah its backwards. Completely backwards.

 

All I want to know is how long is my 2014 LT-1 going to last me? I have 72K miles on her and change the oil every 3K-5K miles with Driven HP Synthetic Street racing LS30 oil. I just had the valve springs, intake and exhaust valve seals changed and spark plugs and wires changed. I don't abuse her either. Any guesses?

 

I have a 2014 LT-1, I expect it to last into the 160,000 mile range. I'm just wondering why you replaced the valve springs, intake and exhaust valve seals? Also why do you use the LS30 oil and not the driven DI oil for the LT engine?
Up date: I guess the Driven oil for the LT-1 engine isn't good either.
From their info on their Driven DI oil.
DRIVEN DI Series Racing Oils are formulated for High-Performance Engines/Racing applications only. This engine oil will NOT MEET any current API or OEM Engine Oil Specifications. This is because we use additional levels of ZDDP, Moly and higher performing base oils and viscosity index improvers than are used in typical formulations.

Higher than normal ZDDP in modern engines:
Higher levels of ZDDP (Zinc Dialkyl Dithio-Phosphate) (typically >1,500 ppm) are generally unnecessary and potentially harmful to modern engines, as they can cause catalytic converter damage, increased deposit formation, and premature component wear. While high zinc is crucial for classic flat-tappet engines, modern engines rely on roller cams and low-friction designs that thrive on lower-zinc formulations.

 

Could die tomorrow could work 150-200k. Parts have a statistical fallout. Most fail at infancy or at end of life, but a small percentage fail at any time. This is how statistics work. There is no guarantee.

 

That’s like saying anyone could drop dead of a heart attack at any time. Technically true, but it ignores the entire point of statistical inference.

We have a population of over a million LM7/L33 engines built between 2002–2007, all produced with the same machining tolerances, metallurgy, and QC processes, there is a very tight reliability distribution. The historical data shows that well over 99% of them reach ~200k miles with normal maintenance.

This isn’t speculation - it is the same survival curve behavior seen in 89-02 SR20DET, 95-02 2JZ-gte, 95-02 RB25DET, various versions of 1zz etc.
Mass‑manufactured engines don’t have human‑level genetic variance. Their failure curve has infant mortality, a long stable plateau, and predictable end‑of‑life wear.

Anything can fail at any time, but statistically, engines like these almost never have random “heart attacks.” The outliers are well under something near 0.05%
With respect to Corvette engines, the reliability plateau is different in many year ranges because those engines sometimes use 'latest and greatest' untested designs which include unexpected flaws, causing titanium shaving in the oil and dropped valves in specific years for example. The same statistical inference guarantees that some percentage will drop a valve or finding titanium shavings is a kind of gamble for those engines, that doesn't exist for other types of engines like the LM7 or 2JZ which don't have any known replicable reliability issues for decades of historical inference/service. New designs and 'best modern technology' is prone to those type of reliability issues which goes back to what I Was saying in the 2026 Corolla example vs the 98 car with its low tech and 'figured out' simplicity design. The 2026 with any of its 'latest and greatest tech' obfuscates myriad reliability inferences of the previous years making it prone to unexpected long term flaws as with any modern untested design. Corvette engines also tend to use a more stressed out set of parts - higher lift and lighter parts/blocks which can facilitate failures not normally seen in production daily driver application intended engines like a truck block with its low lift and heavier internals and block , which maintains its shape and resists stress easily making it more robust but less powerful as-is.

When I want to ensure a reliable 500,000 miles from a vehicle at 600 to 1000rwhp I simply use a factory engine such as 2jz-gte from 1998 or a 2005 L33 5.3L And I have a set recipe I use every single time that does not alter the internals much and I can guarantee 99.5% of them will achieve that 500k miles in a daily driver application pushing 2x to 3x factory output. I've been setting up and tuning those engines for decades now. No heart attacks when you know what you are doing - it isn't a genetics issue.

 

The "yellow" valve springs used on model 2014 LT-1 engines were faulty and prone to fail. Some failed at 5K miles and others failed at 80K miles on bone stock engines. At the recommendation of Joe Cordes of Cordes High Performance shop he highly recommends this be the first thing that anybody do to their 2014 LT-1 before anything else. He installed the "blue" valve springs of 2015 engines and later, and because I have 72K miles on the car he recommended that I change the valve seals at the same time along with new spark plugs and wires. I also asked that he change the oil and he uses Driven engine oil exclusively and for my application goes with LS30 street performance oil and a Wix filter. I suppose it was peace of mind modifications for me as I use the car as a daily driver. It was $1300 well spent, in my opinion.

 

He asked if his engine will be OK. In terms of can you say to 100% the answer is it could fail tomorrow.

Within a 95% confidence I can say it will last to end of life if it survived infant failure. But that doesn't mean anything either. Yes a cursory analysis could get you from 95% confidence to 99% confidence, but why bother. Not worth worrying about or thinking about.

Obviously if you modify the car then all things go out the window.

 

The compression gauge, I trust. The eyes and fingers, absolutely not. If I buy something from a junkyard, it is for a core to hand to someone for a rebuild although, I'd usually leave it to them to find a suitable core. That way, it is their issue if it fails. I bought a C4 transmission with a 2.3 bellhousing from a Pinto and sent that to the builder since it was me wanting to mate a C4 transmission to a 2.3 Turbo engine to replace the C3 transmission that kept breaking. I get it when it is burned but anything between what it looks like fresh from the can and burned is too subjective for my liking to spend more than core money on. Junkyards have some good engines that are from a well cared for car and some from people like my friend's wife who tops up the oil only till the day it is sold. I just did my Porsche Cayenne oil at 10K. Looks darker than new but not burned. Not sure what to read from that hence the oil test.

Yes but why would I want to give up all the nice gadgets and creature comforts of a 26 for a 98? I know how lacking they were in the 90s so as long as I can afford it AND if I can get enough use of it, I definitely would not want a 98. Assuming I can pay for it, If I drove 2 hours a month, I guess I will have to keep the 98. Wife had that idea with a 99 E300 Turbodiesel at 480K. I just used it to take the dogs to the park when the AC failed and was ecstatic when the rust allowed enough water in to short electronics and we had to give it to Rawhide as a donation.

If you want it to last forever, which is sounds like you do, sure. I'm not a fan of old stuff and my parents know that when they pass, I will accept cash as an inheritance but make sure they give any family heirlooms to someone else if they want to keep it in the family.

OK. So you are saying that by my complying with Porsche to do 10K oil changes (assuming everything is working as it should), my motor is beyond redemption by 120K? And it is Porsche and lab tests vs Youtube? Sorry, but I am going with lab testing that says 10K oil changes are OK for the driving conditions. IMO, Youtube is mainly a cheap platform for people to get their 15 minutes of fame with 1 possible minute of content. If it is a scientific paper with lab testing to prove what it is saying, it would be worth reading.

Your assumption is that we are DIY mechanics who can and will rebuild an engine in our garage. My wife is capable of leading a team to run a code if your heart stops without the AED and inject drugs too. She doesn't know how to get me the right socket I need nor does she have any interest in learning how to any more than I want to do more than call 911 if you collapse in front of me. Ask me to guide you through changing a head gasket on a 89 Merkur XR4Ti and shoehorning a C4 transmission into it with custom length driveshaft and fabricating a transmission mount, I can give you the benefit of my experience. Ask me to do one in my garage? Not a chance in hell. I can't think of any of my neighbors that can say that except 1 guy who is a diesel mechanic. However, that is what your assumption is based on. That people are able AND willing to rebuild old engines and forsake the modern creature comforts. If most are, you are right. It is backwards. IMO, most are NOT, hence the order is correct.

 

Mazda's R100 cars with the rotary engine came out in ~ 1970, I owned one. Ran so smooth you could not even tell the engine was running and had loads of power for its size.

But, the side and the apex seals often failed at about 3,000 miles resulting in oil consumption and low compression requiring an engine overhaul or replacement. My 6 month old Mazda sat in pieces at the dealership for over 3 months while everyone argued who was going to pay for the repairs. Finally, Mazda and the dealership split the cost and clobbered it back together just to get rid of the problem. I sold it immediately after getting it back.

Mazda then redesigned all the seals and the new version would have easily lasted over 425,000 miles in testing which Mazda did not like. (too long or too short = bad). The engineers went back and again redesigned the seals so they would only last ~ 100,000 miles which Mazda was happier with. This last redesign had a higher cost than the first redesign but Mazda's thinking was that they did not want any one part of their cars lasting an exorbitant longer period of time than the rest of the car. Thus planned obsolesces.

After this debacle Mazda made very good rotary engines that were used in later models. They finally died out due to emissions and gas mileage.

I never forgave them for that car and have never since even look at buying a Mazda.

 

That would not be done today. If it lasted longer for the test they would look to cost save on the part and still pass. If it was the cheapest option it would be left alone.

Passing the DV tests (aka meeting requirements) and meeting cost targets is all that matters.

 

How exactly do you know this? Was there some documents someone stole or what?

 

IMO
It is common practice for companies producing parts that are too well designed to go out of business. Has been that way since money was exchanged for engineered goods. If your products last too long you cannot sell new, demand drops off. To keep demand up with any product the old products have to fail or be disposable.

During development, the longevity is improving at first. Original light bulbs and engines had poor lifetimes. Over time, their lifespans get better and better, to some peak. At that peak, is the 98-04 Corolla, 92-02 Silvia, Skyline Supra. The 02-07 Chevy trucks. Those are the peaks of developmental lifetimes, their culminating decades of engineering combined into one final peak of simplicity and maintainability capable of million mile benchmarks easily serviceable by diy enthusiast. Just as lightbulbs peaked at some point. But after that, companies couldn't sell new lightbulbs, new cars, sales drop off when your product is too long life. From those peaks, downfall, disposable, unnecessary proprietary impossible to get and service parts. Or very expensive special parts to keep selling.

You can think of it as a subscription service. In 1995 you could buy a CD-Rom of software and own it. But then you don't need to keep buying new versions when the old one works fine. Now, you can't own photoshop and similar softwares, there is a monthly sub fee instead. Special parts, limited lifetimes, disposable plastics and belt drives and conspicuously embedded components which require replacement of an entire assy... are sub fees of automotive world.

 

Do most buyers want something that lasts forever? Back in the day, my parents took pride in their products that lasted. The price you paid was that there are new technologies all day long and you don't have them. So short of me crashing the product, it lasts forever. Well, that is great. With that, it is a wonder we ever got past fire. If my parent's old fridge was still working, you'd have to be defrosting it every week, which was their ritual. It was also expensive. Today, at 5 years, I get a new washing machine because I can't afford to repair it. That said, I get new and nifty features. Apparently, people don't seem to care much for a forever item and want new features. That also stimulates inventions.

The incandescent bulb? Isn't it more expensive in the long run and short on features? We'd still have the yellow lights instead of the self aiming LED lights.

Things change geometrically. There are way more features than there were. If you wanted to stick with 95 series stuff, you could. That said, you might not get as much done since it was a basic word processor without much spell checking or grammar which people SORELY need. Also, If I decided to ditch say Word for something else, well, I own Word at and I can't return it. If I change directions today, I can cancel my subscription and change on a whim and not be crying about the money I have tied up.

 

Gradually nobody can own anything and repair anything anymore. Right to repair is a hot topic at the moment, please look it up. companies are making products that can't be fixed or require special authorization for parts, or require subscriptions to make the products continue to work. Imagine you buy a printer, fridge or washing machine and it stops working when you disconnect it from wifi or cancel your subscription or try to repair it yourself. Engines are being produced with cheap belt drives for oil pumps all of the sudden, making it increasingly difficult to service and maintain, unnecessarily so. It is corrupt and underhanded and current laws do not protect consumers because the rapid scale of technology enables new greedy methods of draining bank accounts that the world has never known previously. Anyone can argue the new tech is more 'efficient' meanwhile the engine are now disposable and or too expensive to fix with a timed life cycle.

 

You're paranoid. There is no conspiracy in the industry to make your car die after a certain time. Most new car buyers FWIW (and that's all the OEMs care about) are keeping a car 3-5 years. The original owner rarely keeps it over 5. The only buyers the OEMs are trying to "pull off" the used market are the ones buying the car after the original owner. The 3rd to X owner is not a concern. The car is sold, we made our money. Those people are NOT going to buy new car ever.

This is why automotive companies LOVE leasing, its a guaranteed line of new customers ever 24-36 months. Leasing changed the dynamic drastically. You still live in the 1970's.