Mechanical Reliability

I've decided to join the rest of you as a speedster owner. Before I purchase, would someone please give input on mechanical reliability. I would hate to put down $22K+ and have it in the shop most of the time (I'm very mechanically challenged). I'm considering the JPS or the IM speedster.
James

I think it will be one of the most efficient sums of money you'll ever spend on a car. I bought mine a year used and the only thing I have 'had to fix' was a minor wiring problem with the headlamps.My car is just a plain-Jane Vintage and even with its wartzzz, nearly all of my expenditures have been elective.

Seriously, depending on the equipment you select engine-wise, you'll be pretty much trouble free. Jim Ward lost an engine that was characteristic of the Mexican crate motor dilema... Rick Antunnes put a Briggs & Stratton lawn mower governor on his mexi-Crate engine so he won't have issues.

John Steele at JPS has the reputation of working the details a little harder than some builders, so the annoying 'little stuff' shouldn't be an issue with his cars.

Henry at IM enjoys the reputation of putting out the best-built replica according to some. His cars are more expensive but again, his attention to detail makes for a virtuallyly trouble-free car according to happy owners, check the site's registry, you'll see...unless you want it to travel to the moon like ol' GB... then the costs will rival the NASA space program too!



'nuf said, you'll be money ahead!
Enjoy,
MM

James, I concur with Paul. Engine-wise there are options galore. Generally, with the VW Beetle based drive train and suspension - you have the same VW reliability. And by buying new you have some guarantee should anything go wrong. I took a chance on buying used, so I'm involved in some tweaking of this and that, only significant problem so far is now I'm replacing a shot electric fuel pump. I would urge you to consider learning to do some mechanical tasks, either by advice here or other online resources, reading some of the abundant text resources, or getting with a knowledgeable local VW guy. You may find you enjoy it. I am no mechanical wizard, I'd never adjusted valves before, but I did just that on my car by reading how in a book - it actually ran fine (maybe a little better perhaps), didn't blow up or anything!

Good luck and welcome.

I concur with George too, he is one who has a lot of good mechanical knowledge to offer.

Using an moderate performance engine with full-flow oil filter and transaxle built properly with quality parts, a good cannister fuel filter, and K&N air filters - all of this serviced regularly and correctly and driven reasonably - a replica can be about as reliable as any other car you might buy.

Buy it with the amount of power and gearing that you will be wanting 5 years from now......

Many, many of my customers buy new engines before theirs have 2,000 miles on them, because the small engined cars are slow as dirt. Do it right now, and have a better outcome in the end..

remember it was "the peoples car" well the engine anyway.
simplicity=fun

Don't expect to buy one of these and have them be as realiable as a Honda or Toyota...they're not. Buy as new a model as you can. I agree with Jake; buy the most power you can afford. I went the 1600 to 1776 to 2110 route. I wish I'd gone from 1600 to 2110 and saved a good chunk of change.
Ron

Not meaning to take issue with anybody, but seriously four Hondas and three Acuras and tons and tons of miles and they all needed work from time to time and it was way more expensive to work on them than this VW based replica...CV boots every so many miles, replacing the timing belt and "Oh, may as well replace the water pump while we're in there..."

I think auto manufacturers have found a soft spot in our wallets and (our heads) exploit us with built-in repair needs. Granted some upper-end cars now go 100K milkes without a lick or servicing, but the original question was about reliability and I think aside from some short-cuts in wiring, the cars manufactured by our 'big three' are as reliable as any car on the road... with all the caveats to maintenance and service intervals as a given.

Did I say that last thing right? You can't ignore standard maintenance needs. There.

Buy a fun car, realize it has some all-weather short-comings but you won't be doing 'mandatory' repairs week in and week out. Unless you drive really hard, are funky operating a clutch, leave the eBrake on half the time and on and on add nauseum.
MM

My turnkey Vintage with a single carb 1776 was very reliable. It never failed to start, always drove very well. It sure seemed a lot more reliable than my beater 91 honda. Granted I abuse the Honda regularly.
-=theron

I guess a new replica would be as reliable as a new 'regular' car. Also, parts are one heck of a lot cheaper. I keep on thinking, "hey, my IM is not that reliable", but then again, it's almost 20 years old.
Ron

Although my IM is still being born, I can believe that replicas are as reliable as some of the new production vehicles. I think that one of the biggest reasons for this has to do with complexity, or lack thereof. For example, I have a new MB E500 that has constantly been in the shop for electronics problems. Everything in the car goes through a computer. Believe it or not, one day my gas cap lock would not open due to a computer failure and I had to be towed to the shop!

One offsetting factor in favor of production cars, however,with all other things being equal (including enlightened management), is the volume of production. The more you make of something, the better you (can) get at it. For example, if one vehicle has a 1%/KHour failure rate, due to some problem from a new supplier, how many cars would a replica manufacturer have to make before he sees the problem? Perhaps several years or more, whereas Toyota would see it in a few days.

I don't know how I got off on this tangent. Bottom line: Your replica is simple, and many component parts have a long established history. The VW parts certainly have had high volume exposure, courtesy of VW.It should be reliable.

Simple or complex, quality of build, components, and proper servicing remain the key issues for reliability. For example, years ago my 1967 Ferrari V12 with two distributors and four sets of points, three Weber carburetors, both mechanical AND electric fuel pumps, etc., never failed to start (even when the battery was really low) and run well in any kind of weather. I can't say that for any of the American built cars i have ever owneed.

The engine was a 4 liter detuned version of the SOHC engines that were designed and built to run at redline for 24 hours at Le Mans.

Sorry, George, but its different in today's world! Complexity is rising faster than most car companies can improve, and it is a big problem.

If a mauafacturer with established statistical control(including design, manufacture and suppliers) has a given failure rate x, guess what happens when he adds more resistors, capacitors, IC's, processors, etc, each of which has the same historic failure rate?
Failure goes up...way up!

For example, suppose a manufacturer has a 1% average failure rate (99% good) on all components going on his circuit board, and he is using 50 such parts/circuit board, the probabilty of boards working at end of the line is 0.99 raised to the 50th power, or 60.5% work ok. If he increases the complexity to 300 components per board of the same quality, the 0.99 to the 300th power is 4.9 % work OK at final test! The impact is not linear. These same calculations can be applied to field failure rates as well.

And this problem is not new. I can recall that Motorola had to shut down its Illinois TV plant back in the late seventies for this problem. Quasar(Japanese) bought them out and finally got things under control.

The bottom line is that complexity is still a major problem as technology constantly advances...full stop (just as my car did!)

The more parts ANYTHING has the more possibilities of mechanical failure......

The military ATTEMPTED to cross train me to the V 22 Osprey from the 1960 Vintage CH46 Helos.........No way, the V 22 was a real hunk of crap with too many parts to break.....Thats why the project is stalled and 40 year old aircraft are still doing the job in Iraqn everyday....

Simple, nothing beats it.

The whole Osprey project should be scrapped; it's a very big waste of the taxpayers money. Not to say the idea in theory wasn't a good one (rotor wing VTOL capabilities with fixed wing higher cruise speeds), but the execution is a nightmare. PAX NAS is right across the river from where I live - part of the US Navy Test Pilot School is there and once in a while an Osprey will fly over looking very strange indeed depending on the attitude of its propellors.

I wouldn't go up in an Osprey for a million dollars because the odds are pretty good I might not live to spend it.

OH MY GOD!!!!!
George and Jake just agreed!!!!!!!!
I think I'm.......... Yep....... I'm having a heart attack!
-=theron

Actually No.....just one correction........"VTOL" should be VSTOL Vertical short take off and landing"

Basically All Helos and the AV8B Harrier Fixed wings....

Just kidding, we did agree....Now I'm going to commit suicide.

You'll note it had nothing to do with air cooled engines...

Actually both the V22 and CH 46 use a pair of aircooled engines.....They just burn JP-5 instead of 93 octane....

LOL

Next George is gonna tell us how to rig cockpit flight controls....and set swashplate striker tabs!!LOL

And how to safety wire properly Jake! LOL

Jim

7 twists per inch for .032 wire and 6 twists for .040!!

Exactley. And when done right, a thing of beauty.

Jim