MQB ='s lower maitenance?

[PUMA4kicks]

Don't hate...I get this is a VW and all that comes along with that. However, with VW simplifying the components on a lot of their cars these days (including more streamlined platforms) I figured in some way this should influence the ownership experience for the better? Not here to get crucified...just putting a thought out there and seeing if anyone has some quality feedback (Jamie)?

[VR6Now]

There's insufficent information to begin to speculate the impact of MQB on maintenance or reliability. Simplification does not insure lower maintenance. Also, theory doesn't necesarily match up with reality.

[GoFaster]

The EA888 gasoline engines have chain driven camshafts, and the TDI and 1.4 TSI engines are supposed to have a "lifetime" timing belt ... which I don't believe for a moment. The new TDI fixes a couple of known issues with the current TDI.

Poll early VR6 owners how that timing chain worked out. At least on the EA888, the timing chain is in its proper place on the front of the engine, instead of between the engine and transmission.

But as the post above suggests, there's no way to predict the real world implications. The scheduled maintenance isn't as great a concern as the unpredicted things that may go wrong.

My 2006 Mk5 TDI has had less regular maintenance and has had fewer things go wrong than my 1996 Passat TDI did.

[PUMA4kicks]

i get that the information isn't there because this platform outside of the new A3 hatch (not sold here) is unproven. I guess what I was attempting to do was glean information from what we do know about the platform and VW's recent renewed efforts at making "better" cars. I've spoken to a handful of VW mechanics that say the newer cars are much better as far as reliability and a lot easier to work on than past models (i.e. MKVI Jetta B7 Passat). I was looking at an FR-S yesterday and ran into a former Audi owner who could have scared me away with his experience owning an MK1 TT and a 8P A3 talking about expensive ass routine servicing and clunky DSG after putting miles on the A3 and TT. At this price point VW has gotta know people don't want cars that need this kind of attention and pricey servicing (i guess that's why the three years of "free" servicing exists, lol)

[mtb_jeremy]

I have always been dissappointed with VW not putting any effort into making routine maintenance items like oil changes easier to do. I have a friend with a Yaris and he can do an oil change without needing to get his car off the ground. The drain plug can be accessed from the front of the car when it is on the ground. My MkIV requires lifting (as do 2.0t engine cars), but worse on my car is that the oil filter has several firm hoses running right in front of it, so it is a pain to remove the filter and oil ends up all over these other parts each time.

Seems like the focus VW has on cost end with only looking at what it will take to assemble the car on the assembly line.

[Boosted2003!]

I have always been dissappointed with VW not putting any effort into making routine maintenance items like oil changes easier to do. I have a friend with a Yaris and he can do an oil change without needing to get his car off the ground. The drain plug can be accessed from the front of the car when it is on the ground. My MkIV requires lifting (as do 2.0t engine cars), but worse on my car is that the oil filter has several firm hoses running right in front of it, so it is a pain to remove the filter and oil ends up all over these other parts each time.

Seems like the focus VW has on cost end with only looking at what it will take to assemble the car on the assembly line.

A yaris is like 4X4 status compared to a golf.

[heimbachae]

lower maintenance = shorter life of your car

[dmorrow]

lower maintenance = shorter life of your car

Like if they can figure out how to make changing the oil simpler or bushings last longer or shocks last longer? Anything they make last longer, have fewer parts, and/or make them easier to change may reduce the maintenance. I'm glad your not in charge.

[heimbachae]

Like if they can figure out how to make changing the oil simpler or bushings last longer or shocks last longer? Anything they make last longer, have fewer parts, and/or make them easier to change may reduce the maintenance. I'm glad your not in charge.

what I'm saying, in a nutshell, is if you don't take care of your car it won't last as long. new cars are going to have new components and will fail in ways the engineers in their nice clean labs wouldn't think of. it's ultimately a combination of driver and (hopefully) good components that determine the life of a car.

I'm a good driver and have kept up on maintenance and STILL my car keeps breaking down. it's faulty NEW components that keep breaking. we hope for a grand new car that will never break but I'm not gonna hold my breath.

[randomkoreanguy]

German cars are notorious for being over engineered and therein I think lies the crux of the problem. Greater complexity results in a higher probability of unforeseen issues, problems, gremlins, or other inconveniences. Shared parts (via the MQB platform architecture) will, at first, only guarantee that the problems will be spread out over a much larger number of cars until they work out all the various bugs. But innovation and new tech will always lead to reduced reliability. I find that the companies who enjoy higher reliability ratings also tend to be extremely conservative (in general) when it comes to change within their models. I mean, a base model Corolla still has a 4 speed automatic. I'm sure it's exceptionally reliable, but that's because it's extremely old technology. So, in a nutshell, I wouldn't get your hopes up for improved reliability. The shared architecture is a move to improve cost for VWAG, and any other benefits that pop up are merely bonus side effects.

[dmorrow]

German cars are notorious for being over engineered and therein I think lies the crux of the problem. Greater complexity results in a higher probability of unforeseen issues, problems, gremlins, or other inconveniences. Shared parts (via the MQB platform architecture) will, at first, only guarantee that the problems will be spread out over a much larger number of cars until they work out all the various bugs. But innovation and new tech will always lead to reduced reliability. I find that the companies who enjoy higher reliability ratings also tend to be extremely conservative (in general) when it comes to change within their models. I mean, a base model Corolla still has a 4 speed automatic. I'm sure it's exceptionally reliable, but that's because it's extremely old technology. So, in a nutshell, I wouldn't get your hopes up for improved reliability. The shared architecture is a move to improve cost for VWAG, and any other benefits that pop up are merely bonus side effects.

I agree with what you are saying but would add that if they improve the testing and engineering of this platform that is possible they will have fewer problems than in the past. I would also assume that with fewer platforms being developed that more resources can (and should) be devoted to designing and testing it. If they end up with a problem on the MQB then with it being used on many cars the problems will be far more expensive to deal with.

Besides being just conservative the Japanese have gotten a reputation for coming out with new models that have been well engineered and tested. Used to be (maybe still) you didn't want a first year German or U.S. car but I never heard of that with Honda or Toyota.

[randomkoreanguy]

I agree with what you are saying but would add that if they improve the testing and engineering of this platform that is possible they will have fewer problems than in the past. I would also assume that with fewer platforms being developed that more resources can (and should) be devoted to designing and testing it. If they end up with a problem on the MQB then with it being used on many cars the problems will be far more expensive to deal with.

Besides being just conservative the Japanese have gotten a reputation for coming out with new models that have been well engineered and tested. Used to be (maybe still) you didn't want a first year German or U.S. car but I never heard of that with Honda or Toyota.

I would hope that would be the case, but you never know what the actual agenda might be when it comes to a large corporation. It does indeed make sense for it to undergo more intensive testing, if only to avoid a nightmare recall scenario like the one Toyota experienced (a few years back).

I think with the reliability issues, it still seems to apply to a number of US and German auto manufacturers. From what I've seen, first year models are a bit risky yet. I think it's the greater complexity and wider range of features which probably make it more difficult to predict exactly how a given part or system might fail, especially if the percentage chance of failure is low enough that it might not show up on a test vehicle, but high enough that it starts to appear on real world customer cars (which are produced in far greater quantities than test vehicles).