Is keeping your vehicle stock one of the major keys to long-term reliability? Are majority of vehicles at their pinnacle with factory specifications?
No and No
>>13928261
Some systems can be upgraded on most cars with literally no downsides.
Example - upgrading the cooling system with a larger radiator made from better materials.
>>13928261
>bog standard UK DC2 in Champ white
Someone will pay £10,000 for this and ruin it
>>13928261
>Is keeping your vehicle stock one of the major keys to long-term reliability?
Depends on what you change, but the most important thing is proper maintenance.
>Are majority of vehicles at their pinnacle with factory specifications?
If you mean in terms of performance, no. Only a minority of "track specials" can attempt to make that claim
>>13928280
Not even in reliability, either. Manufactures cut corners to keep costs low. Unless you're buying a Lambo or something key components can always be upgraded for reliability.
>>13928271
cooling upgrades are basically mandatory on some cars
brap brap
OP reporting in, thanks for the feedback.
Anyone else have this weird quirk of only buying vehicles that are kept in stock form?
>>13928261
>reliability
>stock
No matter what components are on your car, they have the possibility to go bad. I've seen stock bearings and calipers go bad in less than 30k miles, and fluid fittings stripped from the factory. Everything's relative.
>>13928309
I don't mind power or suspension upgrades if they're shown to be done correctly, but if the body or interior has been messed with to do so, or in general I'll walk away.
>>13928261
Depends on the part to be replaced with aftermarket one. E.g. EGR delete is most often done to increase engine life without expecting any power gains above stock.
>>13928261
No, unless you buy shitty/cheap parts or try to squeeze way too much power out of the motor.
And no.
>>13928382
Ah yeah, forgot about EGR delete. Damn, I love me some diesel.
>>13928382
>>13928391
Deleting emissions off of diesels improves reliability a shit-ton. EGR DPF SCR etc..
Not legal in a lot of places though..
>>13928309
I don't mind common, recommended modifications. Shirt shifter, upgraded clutch, lower rear end gears, and exhaust for free? Sign me up.
>>13928271
this. I can't see a downside to a free flowing exhaust asides from maybe noise either.
Also, the more you modify your car the more maintenance you should do on it.
All I've got on my car is intake/exhaust and I still change my oil every 3000 km's because the new filter lets in more dirt.
I too, am a fan of teggies myself
>>13928309
I'd really only buy stock unless my options were severely limited. If a car has any modifications at all it means the owner beat the car up, I don't care if you say "muh maintenance" but that car saw hard launches occasionally at the very least, and you don't know what kind of shitty driver they were or how much they didn't know about mechanical sympathy. I'd never lend my car to someone who's irresponsible, so why would I buy my car from someone like that?
I'd rather own a car owned by some boomer who only drove it on weekends.
>tfw own a based model
>>13928261
>Is keeping your vehicle stock one of the major keys to long-term reliability?
Yes.
>Are majority of vehicles at their pinnacle with factory specifications?
Eh. Debatable. I would say it depends on what you're looking for.
>>13928825
only drove it on the weekends and only changed the oil every few thanksgivings.
