Depends.  I would certainly check the items that you can.  And I would
replace hoses and belts and fluids to say the least.

That sure doesn't bode well for NAPA parts.

Depends.  If it's a manual transmission car, you don't really need a
starter because you can pushstart in a pinch.  If you have a good solid
battery you can go a long way when your alternator has died.  

I would, however, find out what parts tend to fail early on the car you
are driving so you can keep an eye on them.  If you know your particular
water pump tends to leak, check the water pump for leaks every time you
change your oil.
--scott

Yikes.  If you've got that kind of money... you can probably afford a
new car that doesn't need all new parts.

What works for me is:
Check the fluids and tire pressures weekly or every fill up.
Change the oil every three months.
While you're doing the above two things, take a few minutes and eyeball
things like rad hoses and belts.  Crawl under the car and look at stuff.
 Check for worn steering parts, etc..
Make a maintenance schedule and stick to it.
After a while, you'll know what needs to be done "soon" before it fails
on your car.

A lot of people I know replace their batteries every 5 years on a PM
type basis because it seems batteries "just die" now.

Some parts in some cars just last forever.
Wife's 90 Beretta - 240,000km.  Alternator #3.  Water pump #2.  Original
starter, radiator, fuel injectors.  Transmission #2, both axles have
been replaced, but the wheel bearings are original.  Even the digital
dash is going strong after 17 years, but the door panels and seatbelts
are crapped out.  Starts in -30 (Manitoba) without being plugged in.
This thing may be a turd, but it's a reliable turd.  IIRC the rear drums
have never been turned... and only two sets of rear shoes?

I'd be curious as to who has the oldest "daily driver" with original
parts... who's got a 20 year old radiator out there?

My buddy's 86 Celebrity finally died at 300,000km with the original rad
and starter on it... rust and a spun bearing on the 2.8...

Ray

Indeed, belts, hoses, all fluids changed.  As far as pumps, electrical,
shocks, tires, etc., up to you.  I think if they are working well, use
them, replacing is money used for no real reason other than personal
peace of mind, but generally, you can tell when a starter is ready to
go, or an alternator/battery, etc.  Those usually give fair warning
they are going.

Granted a 20 year old ride is long in the tooth, component-wise, but
because it's that old, just use it as is.  After all, you likely didn't
pay very much for it, and unless you plan long drives, just run it.
consider it a disposable.

On 12/15/06 9:14 AM, in article
568-4582BBE4-565@storefull-3232.bay.webtv.net, "J J" <Lauren__C@webtv.net>
wrote:

Reminds me of a friend of mine who came into an absolutely mint 15 year old
Buick with under 40,000 miles.  Looked perfect and ran perfect.  No leaks,
everything worked, mileage was right, no problems at all.  You couldn't tell
any difference cosmetically or mechanically from the day it came off the
showroom floor.

The local government announced the start of emissions testing and another
acquaintance advised this guy, sight unseen, that there was no way a car
that old would ever pass the inspection.  He panics, and rather than get a
test inspection to see if anything is out of order, he takes it to the local
Buick dealer and instructs them to do a complete engine overhaul at a cost
of several thousand dollars "just to be sure there are no problems".

After this preventative work, the car now wouldn't run at all and poured oil
all over everything whenever the engine could be coaxed to life.  Repeated
trips back to the dealer fixed nothing.  The car was trashed.  He finally
gave up in frustration and junked it.  Really sad, especially since given
its condition, it almost certainly would have passed the emissions test with
flying colors.

The old adage "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies here.

That being said, you still want to check everything to make sure it all
works. Especially check the rubber parts like belts, hoses, seals, etc., to
make sure they are not hardened and crumbling from age.  It is reasonable to
replace the belts and hoses just as a matter of course on a car this old.
You didn't mention what make/model of car this is, but if it has a timing
belt, that is one thing you do want to preventatively replace immediately.

He's right.

Why did you buy a car that old if you are worried about potentially being
stranded on the side of the road?  I think you will save a lot of money and
aggravation if you just fix what's broken on the car and add the roadside
assistance option to your insurance policy.

About the only parts I would ever replace strictly for "preventative"
reasons are things like belts, hoses, timing belts, AND a
timing-belt-driven water pump (because you're already 90% of the way in
there when you do the timing belt itself). Never a starter or alternator
that is functioning normally.

Parts that have been working for years rarely up and fail with no
warning. Its NEW parts that sometimes suffer "infant mortality" and quit
with no warning at all. Wait for the warning signs, then replace AS SOON
AS warning signs appear. People get in trouble by ignoring the warning
signs of impending failure.