https://www.youtube.com/embed/wMf9jH57MkY
Rust—or “nature’s weight reduction,” some readers call it—is a problem for any vehicle, no matter what kind or how old it is.
To ensure that a car has a fighting chance against the elements, manufacturers send their cars through a series of punishing tests to evaluate what does and does not survive.
Like what you're watching? We rely on your …
Having seen the rust that our northern brothers put up with, whatever they are doing isn't working.
I'm so very glad they don't salt the roads in the mountains in california. The drive can be a slow go on snow days but my Jeep's rust has not accelerated.
It really is amazing how much newer cars hold up but they're still not perfect, especially in the rust belt. Seeing 5 year old trucks with rusty rockers and quarters worries me. I'm glad I live in the South East.
Toyman01 (Moderately Supportive Dude) said:Having seen the rust that our northern brothers put up with, whatever they are doing isn't working.
For sure Dodge/Jeep does not have access to this wizardry.
It seems like the newer stuff from the last decade is rusting faster than the stuff from the last couple decades prior. I dont have any scientific data, it just seems that way to me. I was actually wondering just the other day if the manufacturers have relaxed on the rust proofing because they are building the powertrains too well. It doesn't serve the big threes interest to have people driving their cars for 15 or 20 years before replacing them. That's just my tin foil hat theory.
Well, all I can say is that my 93k mile 2011 GTI was rusting a noticeable amount where the lower front fenders met the rocker panels by 2019, both sides. Meanwhile, my 2006 165k mile Civic is rust free, even with clearcoat peel on some area of the paint.
My takeaway is that other markets are getting better wheels on their VWs.
Anyone notice the lift at the end? Color me interested..
Edit: Doesn't look like that particular model is on their website. Still interesting.
I would think driving it on the beach at Daytona Beach or someplace like that ( 2 wheels in the water at all times) would get salt water in places you would never get in the factory test area ,
and then thru a gravel pit , maybe a Gravel Pit 500 race to get some stone chips everywhere ,
and repeat that for a month or 2 ....
since they say 12 years , will they have parts that long to replace your rusted thru parts......or order them from China !
All OEMs do this testing to some degree, Ford even uses "robot" drivers at the proving grounds for durabilty driving on surfaces too harsh for a human driver.
Can we talk about this crazy mobile "two post" lift??
Came here for combat footage of regular vehicles. Learned to read afterward.
gearheadmb said:It seems like the newer stuff from the last decade is rusting faster than the stuff from the last couple decades prior. I dont have any scientific data, it just seems that way to me. I was actually wondering just the other day if the manufacturers have relaxed on the rust proofing because they are building the powertrains too well. It doesn't serve the big threes interest to have people driving their cars for 15 or 20 years before replacing them. That's just my tin foil hat theory.
IMO, it's the opposite. Back when I was growing up in the 70s and 80s in Michigan, it was nothing to see a 2 year old car with visible surface rust, and if you made it to 5 years without holes, you were lucky. Now, you're not likely to see anything visible for at least 5 years.
But it also depends on the automaker. Just last night I pulled the fender liner on my son's 09 Volvo S40 to replace the halfshaft, and that thing is clean as a whistle inside those panels. For as much Ford DNA is in that car (and there's a lot of it), whatever they do to the panels makes them hold up a damn sight better than a Ford of that era.
buzzboy said:I'm so very glad they don't salt the roads in the mountains in california. The drive can be a slow go on snow days but my Jeep's rust has not accelerated.
It really is amazing how much newer cars hold up but they're still not perfect, especially in the rust belt. Seeing 5 year old trucks with rusty rockers and quarters worries me. I'm glad I live in the South East.
Off topic but do you live in the mountains of California or the south east or both?
Can we talk about this crazy mobile "two post" lift??
Nope? I tried.. 
In reply to crankwalk (Forum Supporter) :
I seasonally live 6 months at the NC beach and 6 months in the California mountains. I realize from the outside that made no sense at all, haha!
The worst part is new vws are some of the worst up here in the salty north. My aunt has a 18 jetta she bought new and the rockers are all bubbling already.
Tom_Spangler (Forum Supporter) said:gearheadmb said:It seems like the newer stuff from the last decade is rusting faster than the stuff from the last couple decades prior. I dont have any scientific data, it just seems that way to me. I was actually wondering just the other day if the manufacturers have relaxed on the rust proofing because they are building the powertrains too well. It doesn't serve the big threes interest to have people driving their cars for 15 or 20 years before replacing them. That's just my tin foil hat theory.
IMO, it's the opposite. Back when I was growing up in the 70s and 80s in Michigan, it was nothing to see a 2 year old car with visible surface rust, and if you made it to 5 years without holes, you were lucky. Now, you're not likely to see anything visible for at least 5 years.
But it also depends on the automaker. Just last night I pulled the fender liner on my son's 09 Volvo S40 to replace the halfshaft, and that thing is clean as a whistle inside those panels. For as much Ford DNA is in that car (and there's a lot of it), whatever they do to the panels makes them hold up a damn sight better than a Ford of that era.
I definitely agree the 70s and 80s were horrible for rust. I was talking more along the lines of 2010 and up seem to showing rust faster than the stuff built from say mid 90s to 09 did. Specifically full size trucks, just because they are easier to notice for me.
My take on this video is that VW (and all of the other mfg) are looking for advanced ways to spend less on corrosion prevention, while meeting the minimally acceptable standard.
Let's see how we can make the next unibody assembly require 10% less seam sealer.
VW had a 12 year corrosion warranty up until 2018 so that 2011 GTi should still be covered. I remember a friend getting new fenders on a really crappy Jetta before he was out of warranty, they just did some sort of test to make sure it was still original paint/fenders and that it hadn't been fixed previously due to accident damage.
Now they only do 7 years so you know what that says.
gearheadmb said:It seems like the newer stuff from the last decade is rusting faster than the stuff from the last couple decades prior. I dont have any scientific data, it just seems that way to me. I was actually wondering just the other day if the manufacturers have relaxed on the rust proofing because they are building the powertrains too well. It doesn't serve the big threes interest to have people driving their cars for 15 or 20 years before replacing them. That's just my tin foil hat theory.
I wonder if it's also a maintenance thing. I wonder how many people are religious about washing the car and spraying the underside and wheel wells multiple times during the winter.
I am curious if it might have something to do with the use of thinner metal in modern cars.
It may be that they are less likely to rust, but once they do, they rot away a lot faster.
Here's my problem with corrosion testing: it holds up just fine for a freshly made vehicle. Add in 50k of actually driving them around with rock chips and thinning clearcoat, the protection is closing in on nil. That's when corrosion really starts.
Go follow bluecollarkyle on IG or Snapchat and you'll see what I'm talking about. He is a bodyshop guy in Missouri/Nebraska or some such place and what I see is staggering for the factories just to get out of rust through warranty coverage. It's really bad.
You'll need to log in to post.
