Old car myths
Some of you fellas who actually have driven cars from the 50s, 60s, etc., care to weigh in on this?
My folks, grandparents, heck even Archie Bunker romanticize how great cars in the past were, but I just don't see it. Let's ignore lack of A/C, CD players, etc., and just look at the car.
Engine: Basically the entire ignition system had to be rebuilt every 10k miles. New points, rotor, cap, wires, plugs. The carburator was a useful, but tempermental beast- though I will admit that I've never had trouble with the one on our boat- but in no way as good as fuel injection. Gas mileage was lousy, tune ups more frequent, and in general, not as reliable as a modern car. I mean, a lot of cars now say, "100,000 miles before the first tune up."
Tires: Bias ply, good for what, 10,000, 20,000 miles? No lifetime radials were available! Plus innertubes.
Body: It might sound cool to say, "Yeah, you could crash that 69 Impala into a telephone pole and hardly scratch it." But the REASON that cars crumple today isn't that they are made of junk- but rather that they are DESIGNED to crumple! Think about it, do you want the CAR to give way, or your NECK? Try punching a wall, first with your arm locked solid, and then bending at the elbow, and you'll see what I mean. Better to have the car absorb the quick deceleration by crumpling than to launch you through the windshield at 50 mph when it comes to a dead stop instantly. Plus no seat belts or airbags.
Now don't get me wrong, old cars are COOL and I'd love a 67 Mustang, 69 Chevelle, or a host of other cool Sports or Muscle cars. But I'd in no way think them SUPERIOR to modern ones. Less reliable, less safe, less comfortable.
Whaddya think?
My folks, grandparents, heck even Archie Bunker romanticize how great cars in the past were, but I just don't see it. Let's ignore lack of A/C, CD players, etc., and just look at the car.
Engine: Basically the entire ignition system had to be rebuilt every 10k miles. New points, rotor, cap, wires, plugs. The carburator was a useful, but tempermental beast- though I will admit that I've never had trouble with the one on our boat- but in no way as good as fuel injection. Gas mileage was lousy, tune ups more frequent, and in general, not as reliable as a modern car. I mean, a lot of cars now say, "100,000 miles before the first tune up."
Tires: Bias ply, good for what, 10,000, 20,000 miles? No lifetime radials were available! Plus innertubes.
Body: It might sound cool to say, "Yeah, you could crash that 69 Impala into a telephone pole and hardly scratch it." But the REASON that cars crumple today isn't that they are made of junk- but rather that they are DESIGNED to crumple! Think about it, do you want the CAR to give way, or your NECK? Try punching a wall, first with your arm locked solid, and then bending at the elbow, and you'll see what I mean. Better to have the car absorb the quick deceleration by crumpling than to launch you through the windshield at 50 mph when it comes to a dead stop instantly. Plus no seat belts or airbags.
Now don't get me wrong, old cars are COOL and I'd love a 67 Mustang, 69 Chevelle, or a host of other cool Sports or Muscle cars. But I'd in no way think them SUPERIOR to modern ones. Less reliable, less safe, less comfortable.
Whaddya think?
0
-
quote:Originally posted by ObiWan
I would take a 1960's-70's car over anything made today.
I'd take a brand spankin new Vega over a Pontiac Solstice for example.
Put the two into a head on collision...only one will drive away. Put me in the steel car please.
Just what I'm saying; one CAR will drive away, the Vega, no doubt. The Solstice driver will hit his airbag, be restrained by his seat belt, have his impact cusioned by his crumple zones, and probably get out of it with only minor injuries, whilst you will likely either smash your face against the steering wheel or go through the windshield.
Though I do agree with the previous poster, for hits under 10mph, then I would also take an older car. But even then, let's do a little math. Sorry I gotta do this in metrics, that's how I learned it. Let's say that I have a mass of 97 kilograms or 97 000 grams (I do, about 215 pounds). 10mph is 4.4 m/s. E=1/2MV2, right? Or, Energy =Mass times one half times velocity squared.
So: E=1/2(97 kg*4.4m/s^2)or E= 91,079.12 kg/m/s^2 (or joules). That means that my body suddenly has a weight of about 10 tons, in terms of kinetic energy acting on me! Or about 800,000 pounds per square inch when I impact something.
This is, of course, a theoretical maximum (and I fully admit I'm no math genius) for a car stopping dead with no transfer of energy via the friction of the seat, the strength of my arms, etc. to the car, but just shows what kind of kinetic energy your body has JUST AT A 10 MPH CRASH! Now wouldn't you rather the steel crumple and absorb that than your body??? (It also says something about moms who think they can hold on to their baby in a crash and don't need a seat).0 -
Cars up to the 73 you could actually stick your hand down inside the engine compartment to do maintenance! AND didn't have a bababooey load of "black boxes" to deal with! AND parts were mostly metal and not plastic! And you dealt with mechanics that knew something about the cars ...not mechanics that have to wait for the computer to tell them what to change, and hope that takes care of the problem!
HECK give me a 65 GTO 389 tri-power ANY day!!!0 -
Chips started the end of all the old time fun of owning a car!
"Cars today typically come with microelectronics to control everything from the mirrors to the radio aerial and the infernal combustion engine. And that trend is not going away as the industry wants to increase additional electrical functions for the sake of safety and comfort. With that comes the integration of these functions in a smaller number of chips."
Uh huh, right!
Total the number of chips carried, worn, or implanted in my littlest brother, AND the number of chips in my Chevy ... and the answer is STILL zero!
[:D]
0 -
When you seriously consider the cars, you really need to consider the eras, also.
Cars, and a lot of other stuff fill the niche and time they were designed for, and the desires of the prospective buyers.
Contrast the time periods, and you get more insight. The break point in auto design - drivetrain and styling - occurred during the first gas crises. Performance and style gave way to the need for better fuel consumption, achieved through a variety of methods: computers for engine and drivetrain management, reduction of aerodynamic drag, and other factors.
The advances in technology also have a lot to do with it. To put the computing power of a modern car into a vintage car AT THAT TIME, would require dragging along a computer the size of a house, and 20 techs to go with it. Manufacturing methods and materials also play a large part.Also, governmental interference can't be ignored.
I think that in many respects, the good old days were the good old days. We can't forget, though, that the good new days are here,now.
The truth is, though, I would sure prefer a 1957 Chrysler 300 C convertible to nearly anything offered today.
Doug0 -
A wise man, indeed![8D] 0 -
You too - to be able to recognize that.
Many people (almost everyone) overlook it.
Doug0 -
Nah - I recognise greatness when I see it - generally, though,
I just refuse to acknowledge it ... unless ... she's REALLY CUTE!0 -
it's one of those things that if i have to explain it to you!!!!!!
i would quickly buy a 69 dodge over anything made today, emergency tool box could include a basic set of wrenches, and a pair of pantyhose0 -
I always found that a small bottle of Kahlua in the toolbox was an indespensible
part of my 'night tools!'
It was always good for loosening those old stuck nuts in the dark!
... actually, still works, even today ... as old and rusty as they are!
[:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by jonk
Some of you fellas who actually have driven cars from the 50s, 60s, etc., care to weigh in on this?
My folks, grandparents, heck even Archie Bunker romanticize how great cars in the past were, but I just don't see it. Let's ignore lack of A/C, CD players, etc., and just look at the car.
Engine: Basically the entire ignition system had to be rebuilt every 10k miles. New points, rotor, cap, wires, plugs. The carburator was a useful, but tempermental beast- though I will admit that I've never had trouble with the one on our boat- but in no way as good as fuel injection. Gas mileage was lousy, tune ups more frequent, and in general, not as reliable as a modern car. I mean, a lot of cars now say, "100,000 miles before the first tune up."
Tires: Bias ply, good for what, 10,000, 20,000 miles? No lifetime radials were available! Plus innertubes.
Body: It might sound cool to say, "Yeah, you could crash that 69 Impala into a telephone pole and hardly scratch it." But the REASON that cars crumple today isn't that they are made of junk- but rather that they are DESIGNED to crumple! Think about it, do you want the CAR to give way, or your NECK? Try punching a wall, first with your arm locked solid, and then bending at the elbow, and you'll see what I mean. Better to have the car absorb the quick deceleration by crumpling than to launch you through the windshield at 50 mph when it comes to a dead stop instantly. Plus no seat belts or airbags.
Now don't get me wrong, old cars are COOL and I'd love a 67 Mustang, 69 Chevelle, or a host of other cool Sports or Muscle cars. But I'd in no way think them SUPERIOR to modern ones. Less reliable, less safe, less comfortable.
Whaddya think?
All of these points are true, and I would add the brakes were bad and the suspension worse. Still, they were the best cars built in the world at the time, except for maybe Mercedes.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Warpig883
It really pisses me off that cars don't have bench seats and the automatic shift lever on the column where it belongs. I even liked 3 on the tree!
And while we are at it put the damn dimmer switch back on the floor.
The first car I had with the dimmer on the steering column, I kept getting my foot caught in the steering wheel!
And bring back vent windows that open out.0 -
I'm not convinced about the better gas mileage. 0 -
By the way, Ford Motor Company made seat belts an "extra cost option" on their 1956 line, and on Ford labeled cars, also a padded dash and dished steering wheel. 0 -
Driving down a snowy hill in my '72 Torino, I lost it. True, were it a front wheel drive, I might not have. I proceeded to fishtail around, hit the opposite side guardrail with the passenger's side, then I overcompensated and fishtailed back, sliding along the guardrail on the side of the road I originally started on, passenger's side again, til I finally came to a stop.
Not even any chrome damage.....
Later, I was driving to classes in town, guy did a right-on-red into my front passenger's side fender.
Not a scratch.....
Were I to do either today in my 1999 Chevy Prizm, we're talking thousands of dollars in repairs. Couple of hoodlums stole the Chevy one night a few years ago, took her joyriding. Got her back, insurance took care of the bodywork and glass, but the frame's never been the same since. Not to mention I have one door that works on the outside and inside (driver's door and rear passenger's door opens on the outside, but the inside latch is broken (plastic interior latch), rear driver's side does not open at all). Fan has one speed, full blast. Interior air directional control has one adjustment setting, defrost. Plastic knobs that broke.
Apart from that, the radio/cd player works great....
Torino was purchased after my divorce by my ex-father-in-law's brother. She's still on the road, and I frequently get bitterweet reminders from my father-in-law about how his brother loves the car and what a great car it is. It's nice to know she is being loved and well-cared for.....
I'm trying to get weekend visitation.0 -
I loved the class and style the 50's and 60's cars and trucks had. Take a look at a Nascar race today, without looking at the manufactures emblem you can't tell the cars apart. I like the current tire technology, and the electronic ignition systems. I could live happily ever after with a good carb. Dave 0 -
I would take 3 new ones right now of this model....memories[:D][8D][^]
[img][/img]0 -
quote:Originally posted by He Dog
I certainly would not like to return to the days when highways were two lanes, not divided, and went through the middle of every little town along the way. The mother road is a nice legend, but actually driving 66 and other highways in those years was less fun than watching the tv show.
The problem now is that every town or city is just like every other one. From the time I was about seven til I finished high school (1958)my folks visited almost every State & several Provinces of Canada.
Every town held new delights. It was even hard to order pancakes since they had a different name for them just about everywhere you went.0 -
quote:Originally posted by zipperzap
jonk ... you missed the point ... entirely.[:0][:0][:0]
WE WERE 16-18 YEARS OLD, MY FRIEND!
Junkyards abounded in those days - parts almost FREE -
sometimes they WERE![;)][}:)][;)]
Points cost about $1.50 - plugs about 40?/ea. You
TUNED YOUR OWN cars - you'd NEVER have a shop
do it!
Time was NEVER a problem when you were that young!
Cars were FUN to work on!
Cars were SIMPLE to work on!
Gas cost us about 30? a Gal.!
The 'cheerleaders type gals' absolutely LOVED a big V8 with cutouts!
Those cars had BIG back seats![}:)]
Cops, generally, liked teenagers!
You could go out of town (about a five minute ride) after the Drive-In's
last of a DOUBLE FEATURE show and race to your heart's content. ...
and NEVER see another car/cop!
... no, my friend, it's YOU YOUNGER GUYS who have MISSED OUT!
I feel sorry for YOU!
Yep.
BTW jonk, I had a '69 SS Chevelle once. Only one I ever saw with a bench seat and auto on the column.0 -
quote:Originally posted by jimbowby
[8D]-In my jounger years (70's) I pulled the 351 Windsor out of my Pantera and replaced it with this Modified Cleveland--
--those days it was fairly cheap and easy to do it--not now--
--[:D][:D]--JIMBO
[8D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
Tune-up consisted of replacing points, plugs, rotor and cap, with new plug wires every other tune up. Adjust the carb, check the timing and set the dwell on the points. Tune-up parts cost around $10.00.
Uuuuh Doug. You forgot the condenser. [}:)]
Back in my teenage brokeazz days I thought anyone who changed out a full set of plug wires was wastefull. Filed the points before giving up on them too.
On the carbs (like Rochester B's) you could cut a replacement acelerator pump diaphram out of your shoe tongue! Or jump a battery with one wire (by touching bumpers)
Grandpa had an old T model that he would pull a tire and use a spare wheel as a winch.
Hell I know one guy who blew a hole in a piston on one of those old stovebolt 6's removed it and drove a fence post into the cylinder and drove it that way.
Try that on ya lexus. [:)]
Allen0 -
Here's a pic of my 20 year love affair!
'70 FJ40 350 [8D]0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
51 comments