In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Old car myths
jonk
Member Posts: 10,121
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?
Comments
No way for big brother to remotely deactivate your transportation either.
I will always have an old car parked around.
My 1973 Impala Custom was one of the best cars I ever owned. It had a 454 in it. Sure, it ran on glass tires, and the rear tires lasted maybe 500 miles, but I was 16 and it had a 454.
It was comfy as hell. You could steer the car with your pinky, even when not moving on the pavement. It had power seats that could recline in just about any position, the seat actually went back far enough to be comfortable for my long legs, and the seats were plush.
On the old cars I was always replacing starters, voltage regulators, shocks, alternators, fuel pumps, carb kits, points, plugs.
Now I just drive and change the oil and filters. Don't have to work on anything anymore. Kind of takes the fun out of it.
The styling sux on new cars. They have no character.
A lot of folks nowadays are taking the old cars and adding modern equipment to them. Upgraded brakes, suspension, tires, ignition, and fuel delivery systems. I daydream daily about building a '71 Dart with a fuel injected small block, big brakes, and a chassis that sticks to the road like cat guts.
I miss chrome bumpers, vent windows, and vinyl bench seats.[:(]
Good topic. The main thing is that cars built prior to 1973 had character and style. Cars nowadays lack character bigtime. They really all look the same. Boring.
A lot of folks nowadays are taking the old cars and adding modern equipment to them. Upgraded brakes, suspension, tires, ignition, and fuel delivery systems. I daydream daily about building a '71 Dart with a fuel injected small block, big brakes, and a chassis that sticks to the road like cat guts.
I miss chrome bumpers, vent windows, and vinyl bench seats.[:(]
Before or after you left a layer of skin on them after a long drive in the summer heat with shorts on?
And while we are at it put the damn dimmer switch back on the floor.
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!
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!
My 74 Corvette was the last year for points.. I still have my dwell meter.. points set 28-32 [:D]
Nowadays, you need a PhD in engineering.[8D]
changing parts often, kept the car economy in operation. we were self sufficient and other countries envied us and copied us.
it all changed when the gas crisis hit in the 70's. others got better at making things last because the other countries saw the market and attacked it and won.
we became followers ever since.
its that simple.
and what good is a safe car? all it did was lure younger fools to go faster based on a false sense of security, which trumped the safety features and people still die anyway. todays accidents are more violent. more people died back in the old days because the medical field was lacking. today, they can patch you up faster and better. which adds to the false sense of security that if you crash....'no sweat, emt will save me.'
its one of biggest gambles and biggest lies people fall for every day driving.
Former Member U.S. Navy Shooting Team
Former NSSA All American
Navy Distinguished Pistol Shot
MO, CT, VA.
Drives like a truck.
Neither Hardtop nor Soft-top really keep the rain out.
People really were shorter 50 years ago.
A two-speed auto was never a good idea, even with 245 HP.
Oh, and it drives like a truck.
On the other hand, there will never be a car that looks like.
Taking it out on the open road just feels good.
When you open the hood, you can actually understand what is going on.
It also takes a person back to the mythical perfect world that was Ike's America.
Knowing what I know now, I would not have bought it, but I doubt I ever get rid of it.
Brad Steele
30 cents for gas, full service, pumped for you!
I remember 19 cents a gallon backin 1963.
Ex-wifes 57 Buick Roadmaster could take down small telephone poles at ground level and never dent the car.[:p][:p]
Try that with your new Lexus SC450.
Former Member U.S. Navy Shooting Team
Former NSSA All American
Navy Distinguished Pistol Shot
MO, CT, VA.
true. Best thing that ever happened to it was that it
(mercifully) caught fire at a gas station and burned to
the ground. Never did like them, either.[xx(][xx(][xx(]
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.
... but, thanks for the compliment![:D]
A car with 75K miles was considered to be on its last leg. Engines and auto trannys did not last like they do today. Generators and batterys on pre 1950's cars were a nightmare!
Gas economy was good on the standard transmission cars! They had no emission controls to bog down the engines. The cars were heavy guage steel back then but were not treated well and would rust out when roads were salted in the midwest.
I remember the 1940's cars with fondness. The classic lines of the 1932 Fords, the old caddys, LaSales, and many others.
... yeah, but with a core exchange, you'd get a rebuilt (better than new)
down at Pep Boys for $15![8D]
Today's engine and drive train technology have dramatically improved. You don't have to have a wildly radical sounding engine to have a quick car, but having said that, a radically sounding engine is still the best sound around. You can't beat the sound of an old muscle car idling at 1000-1500 RPM and firing with the valves open until a quick hit of the throttle.
Sadly, I think my Lexus would actually give my cherished old Z/28 (stock version) a run for the money.
If you can't feel the music; it's only pink noise!
Gas cost .018 when I was a kid,
Damn!!!! You are older than I thought. Don
As for maintenance, he and I would do oil & filter changes every 1,000 miles for about $3.00, except on the trip, and tune-ups every 7,500. 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.
It drove nicely and handled nearly as well as the torsion bar suspended Chryslers. The car was jet black with a white top and had really elaborate(and pretty) hub caps - came from the factory with fender skirts - something else most of you probably can't identify.
Today, I would rather have it than about 95 percent of the cars on the road.
Doug
--those days it was fairly cheap and easy to do it--not now--
--[:D][:D]--JIMBO
FJ-40 Landcrusher and swapped in a 350 fourbolt main Chevy - before I was finished
she was a regular firebreathing Blazer, Bronco and RamCharger Eater. She had full time
headers, 4 barrel offroad 650 cfm on top of an Offey intake. Left the high compression
heads on ... and STILL got a wholloping 13 Mpg![:D]
... THEM were the 'daze,' my friend! ... thought they'd NEVER end!
They did.
[:(]
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.
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).
HECK give me a 65 GTO 389 tri-power ANY day!!!
"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]
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.
Doug
Many people (almost everyone) overlook it.
Doug
I just refuse to acknowledge it ... unless ... she's REALLY CUTE!
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 pantyhose
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]
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.