Why Measure engine life by Miles/KM

I was just wondering if anybody knows why Cars engines lives are determined by miles/KM driven...why wouldnt it be by the hour like heavy equipment is...it just doesnt make sense....i could run my car in a garage for 6 years and never go 1 mile...is it just because the "consumer" is supposed to be stupid? Transmission life would be good to determine by miles, but shouldnt engines be measured by the hour...anybody have anything to add?

you could leave your car running in a garage for 6 years, but does anyone really do that? Most people, when they decide to turn on their car, do drive it :tongue:

It's just to tell you an average when you should do maintenance (oil change, replace parts before they go bad and leave you stranded). A 200,000 mile motor doesn't mean that it's weak or going to die (at least not most cars) but a lot of people don't believe that. It's because decades ago (early '80's and earlier) 200,000 miles was a lot for a motor to handle and would need a rebuild or to be replaced, so miles ment a lot more back then than they do now. So what I'm basically saying is that I agree that miles don't mean a damn thing really. but as far as being counted by hours, it wouldn't work. Because you could be driving around for 2 hours at 10mph or driving for 2 hours at 60mph and there's be a bigger differerence in use of the motor. And it's useful on trips and stuff to know how many miles away you've been driving to and from a location.

that is why its important to tell people you car has never been raced before (if it hasn't)
lets them know the way it was used

i could run my car in a garage for 6 years and never go 1 mile...is it just because the "consumer" is supposed to be stupid?
Are you serious. Lets pretend that kinda thing is common. You run your car in your garage every day, for a couple of hours a day. I race the shit out of my car every day, for a couple of hours a day. If both our cars had a meter for hours, vice miles. The "stupid" consumer would not know which one to choose. But since they show miles, the "stupid" consumer can make a wise decision, and pick yours to purchase, vice mine.

obviously..."running my car in my garage for 6 years and not go 1 mile" was an exageration...i was just trying to get other peoples views on the subject, not trying to be dumb, so no Im not serious. Look at it this way... 10 miles in traffic could take about 1 hour...while...10 miles going 120 blasting into VTEC would take about 5 minutes, so which would wear more on the car?

i'd say it's about the same. If that 10 miles is stop and go. Stop and go traffic can be just as bad for your car as is doing 120mph for 10 miles.

the reasonwhy heavy equipment, dirt bikes, and atvs are measured in hours is because they were designed to be ridden or used hard. where as a car was ment to be driven around its up to you how hard. so logically miles is a good way to determine but no method will ever be perfect

wouldnt it make more sense to have a revolution counter, instead of a milage or hour counter. the only reason heavy equipment has hours is bc they dont go very far, and you dont judge waht they do in miles, they might just sit and pump hydraulic fluid or something, so hours makes more sense there. but overall for any engine counting revoultions makes the most sense.

that would be a huge F***ing meter dude...well for some stuff.

yeah

obviously..."running my car in my garage for 6 years and not go 1 mile" was an exageration...i was just trying to get other peoples views on the subject, not trying to be dumb, so no Im not serious. Look at it this way... 10 miles in traffic could take about 1 hour...while...10 miles going 120 blasting into VTEC would take about 5 minutes, so which would wear more on the car?

In this example I would have to say blasting into vtec at 120 mph would be a little worse on the engine, but if engines were measrued in hours vice miles, the "stupid" consumer would again choose my car over yours because it has less hours. Is this starting to make sense?