I was born in 1965, entering the world at more or less the same time as the Porsche 911 and Ford Mustang. I learned to tune engines with a timing light and my ear. I look back nostalgically on the days when I could lift a hood and identify most of the parts within. Given the modern car’s complexity, it’s difficult for me to agree that this is the “golden age of motoring.” While I’m not comfortable with this chronological appellation, the argument can still be made that there’s never been a better time to be on the road.
According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), American motorists are safer than ever before. Between 1975 and 2005, the IIHS reports that deaths per 100,000 vehicles declined by 29%. In the same period, motor vehicle deaths among children under 13 sank from 3643 to 1519– despite the addition of millions of people driving millions of cars on American roads.
This safety increase comes from a number of improvements. Driving laws have become more restrictive, especially in the neighborhood of children’s car seats and adults who thought it was OK to have “one more for the road.” Cars have also become more robust. Passive restraints, extra brake lights, meatier bumpers and other assorted suggestions from the both the market and the federal government may have (gasp) worked. The legislation hasn’t always been welcome-– GM, Ford and Chrysler tag-teamed every major safety regulation-– but the results speak for themselves (without relying on a ghost whisperer or medium).
Although it doesn’t always feel that way, we’re driving better cars. Their strength, complexity, efficiency and reliabilty has increased at every level, from tire technology to engine management to the roof’s structural strength. An average car now has as much computer power as the whole country enjoyed in 1965. On-board number crunchers monitor dozens of mission critical dynamic metrics and make near-instantaneous "decisions" based on the data: modulating brakes, acceleration, fuel mixture, valve timing and all kinds of other things I don’t know about because, again, I don’t recognize anything under the hood.
Despite (or because of) this complexity, Americans are holding onto their cars longer. In 1975, the Federal Highway Administration reported that the median age of an American automobile was 5.4 years. By 2003, U.S. car owners held onto their car for an average of 8.6 years. (Light trucks follow a similar trend.) There are dozens of factors contributing to the growning length of this man/machine relationship. Obviously, a new car's acquisition cost is factor number one. But the trend also suggests the cost of ownership has declined significantly. Simply put, new cars aren’t rusting and busting as quickly as their “me era” ancestors.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is another source of good news. The EPA reports that adjusted average passenger car fuel economy has risen from 13.1mpg in 1975 to 21mpg in 2006. At the same time, average horsepower has climbed from 137hp to 219hp. Zero to 60 times have dropped from a languid 14.1 seconds to a none-too-slothlike 9.7 seconds. The nation, on average is clocking 0 to 60 times within a second of the original Porsche 911.
So cars are safer and faster while attaining greater fuel efficiency and reliability. Do we thank wondrously beneficent car companies or the wisdom and courage of the United States Congress? If neither of those choices seem more plausible than car fairies, consider choice itself. The sheer number of products available to the American consumer has risen dramatically. In 1975, the Transportation Research Board assessed all the cars and light trucks for sale in the U.S. They looked at 125 models. In 2006, there are 412 different kinds of cars and trucks in need of a warm, dry garage.
There is, literally, lots more choice. In terms of market efficiency, more choice is always more better. Choice leads to competition, which stimulates product improvements and innovations. The market forces the changes that people desire: faster, cheaper, safer, cleaner. The feds applied pressure and car-makers have bent, but it’s the market that’s created the dramatric upward curve in automotive safety, performance, environmental friendliness and price.
Of course, none of this is bound to impress nostalgic pistonheads, myself included. I find it impossible to gaze at a ‘60’s Jaguar E-type or Plymouth Barracuda and not smile, sigh, nod and lust. Thankfully, the best [noisy, smelly, inefficient and unsafe] cars of the past remain with us, dutifully pampered and preserved. They’ll be fine. Meanwhile, it's not easy seeing past the soap shaped blandness that makes up the majority of vehicles on today’s road and concede the obvious fact that cars have never been better. As much as I hate to admit it, the dull but worthy cars of the present also deserve a large dollop of praise. Done.
Part of the reason cars are lasting longer has less to do with robust engineering (though that plays a big part) and a lot to do with galvanized metal. When I was a kid back in the seventies, I can recall our new family cars (VW, Datsun, Chevrolet) forming rust bubbles within a year of purchase, such were the joys of ungalvanized metal in a salt’n’slush winter broth. A friend’s father had to put a swatch of plywood in his car just to prevent his foot going through the floorplan, such was the corrosion.
Cars have improved dramatically in just the past 5 years. A lot can be contributed to CAD/CAM/CAE computer systems and robotics as well as intense global competition. Advancements in chemistry and material sciences have also been amazing. If Manny Mullet can cook crystal meth then imagine what Chemistry PhDs can do.
Great article. great perspective.
Almost anyone with a meagre tool kit can refurbish an MGB. To refurbish a T-type MG one needs to be a talented carpenter. Modern cars are much "improved" so long as nothing in the electronic department goes wrong. When it does, the number of technician hours required for diagnosis and repair can easily reach between ten and fifteen. Imagine how much time will be involved in diagnosis for the self park system on the new Lexus. Or a malfunctioning BMW iDrive system. It's in the electronics department that the major failures will prove to be too expensive to repair, shortening the life of the car. Unless you happen to be Jay Leno, rebuilding a classic car in the future will be left to the very rich to accomplish. Imagine trying to rebuild a Bugatti Veyron 20 years from now. If you own a classic car, or one with the potential to become so, hold on to it – it may be the last of its era. Right now, as I see every day, there are many cars out there driving around with air bag and ABS lights permanently illuminated, because the third owner, slinging hash at the local diner, cannot afford the repairs.
Can someone please tell me when there was a “YOU era” …?
As for the air bag and ABS idiot lights being permanently lit up, due to the unnecessary complexity involved in simply pulling a bulb (as a result of overengineering) I have found that a strategically placed piece of electricians tape fixes the problem easily and cheaply. ;P
Mike, like a lot of TTAC articles you’re hitting a lot more nails than you would expect from a single slam of the hammer.
When I first started out in the auction business I would perform several salvage auctions every week in metro-Atlanta. In the course of a week I would usually see over a thousand vehicles that were crushed to one degree or another.
A couple of quick thoughts…
1) Weight: One of the greatest myths in the customer side of the car business is that weight really matters. I wish the folks who drove the GM and Toyota minivans of the late 1980’s to early 1990’s realized that their ‘safe family vans’ were really overweight deathtraps. The same holds true for the conversion vans and several of the top-heavy SUV’s of that era (the Trooper in particular comes to mind.)
2) Regulations and Insurance: You are free to disagree with me, but I think the REAL safety benefits that came to consumers were promoted through government design and safety mandates as well as the influence of insurance companies. Virtually all manufacturers, with the exception of a few select European ones, have fought these regulations. Seat Belts, Airbags, ABS, Restraint Systems, and yes… even stability control have been seen primarily as ‘added cost’ for most manufacturers. The Japanese are actually even more guilty of this.
For example, how many Camry’s offered ABS in the Southeastern U.S. from 1992 – 1995. The answer to that is 0. How many offered a spray on carpet protector for several hundreds of dollars? Every Single One.
An interesting aside you can pruchase a late 1980’s Mercedes-Benz 300TE Wagon, or a very well maintained 1989 Volvo 740 GLE Turbo wagon for $3000 these days. Both vehicles offer a similar level of safety to many of the vehicles that are available today. I would also argue that they’re better driver’s cars as well as compared with what the market place has offered between then and now.
Nice writeup. Now I want to know how much better are today’s cars over their mid 1980s or early 1990s counterparts? Not nearly as drastic a change as 1975.
I got a clue about cars during this time; my definition of the “good old days.” Electronics were relatively simple and easy to diagnose, cars were lighter, safer, fuel efficient and horsepower was getting back to 1960s standards.
The mid-1980s ushered many improvements to technology, performance, manufacturing, etc. Hmm, that might make a good article too. :-)
Now being born in 65 certainly doesn’t make you a techno-phob, so I don’t mean to imply that, but my friends and I have a much simpler time working on modern cars (WRX’s, RSX’s) where a laptop will diagnose many ills, then we do on my friends classic 911. We still haven’t managed to balance the dual triple barrelled zenith carburettors. I don’t think cars are inaccessible to the amateur mechanic today, just the way we do things is different.
I lust over cars from every era, and they all have there strengths (and weaknesses). However, in terms of choice for the consumer, quality, performance, durability, styles and style, I really do believe this is a golden age in motoring.
Many thanks for a clear-headed, well-reasoned piece that doesn’t romanticize the earlier, clearly inferior products. My 356 Porsche’s battery eventually ended up dragging along the ground after having fallen throught the rusted-out floor pan (held by nothing but the two wires). Years ago, my father had a ritual with his new cars: back to the dealer after the first 1000 miles to fix all the things that weren’t right. My 2006 Audi A-4 Avant with 19,000 miles (a car that is considered only average in reliability) hasn’t had a single thing go wrong yet. How we take these improvements for granted, no?
The Toyota Camry may be the epitome of generic bland motoring, but the V6 model will outrun a Trans-Am of 20 years ago and a Corvette of 25 years ago!
Engines last longer because of improved materials, manufacturing methods, and especially oil. A Popular Science article in 1981 chronicled the tough new “SF” standard for oil. The current standard is “SL”.
Used to be that 100k miles was a significant accomplishment. Today, I’d consider any engine that didn’t last 150k to be junk.
Another thing is we can build 400+ HP engines that have a smooth idle, excellent streetability, and still turn in over 20 MPG on the highway. Furthermore, they emit only a few % of the pollutants that engines from the 60s did.
Unforntunately, most automakers had to be dragged along kicking and screaming, and it took about 20 years for them to get it all figured out, but the results have been well worth the wait!
I think Sajeev is onto something… I think there was an inflexion point sometime in the 1990’s when safety/durability equipment and features stopped benefiting consumers so much, and started protecting manufacturers from liability or responsibility of any kind.
The best way of describing this is to describe the point at which electronic nannies started interfering with usage of the product. While they can of course be argued to be beneficial to average consumers, I believe they were mainly to protect manufacturers from perceived future liability risks. In those cases, the quality improvement to consumers is more debatable.
It’s definitely a gray area as many consumers hold the belief more gadgets are better, that every extra layer of protection is an undeniable improvement, in short that these were the result of customer demand.
Several sticking points come to mind:
(1) the positive effects of basic active safety technologies such as ABS remains very debatable, except in the realm of insurance-funded advocacy groups. These are now being implemented in lieu of evaluating driver limitations.
(2) reliability/durability improvements touted in advertisements are often contradicted by dealers eager for 3k mile service appointments, and many (most?) problem areas (both recalls and customer initiated) now involve ancillaries to the basic automotive systems – airbags, computer, wiring, electronic glitches.
(3) Fundamentals of physics remain unaltered, vehicles are generally made bigger, more top heavy and more powerful despite no changes in speed limits or driving regulations. While this can be attributed to competitive pressures, it does draw a line in the sand as to true safety motivations of companies (all of them, some more than others) vs maximizing sales.
(4) Features such as rearview cameras, Nav systems/Onstar, satellite radio, miscellaneous electronic gadgets are usually extra options save for higher-priced offerings, and remain among the most profitable factory extras at purchase.
(5) Diagnosing electronic problems pushes more service into the dealer’s realm, outside the reach of the vast majority of consumers and even independent repair shops. Intentional or not, it’s an appealing consequence of pushing higher end, often proprietary technology.
In general, I think this is probably more an unintentional overcompensation from the spartan (late) 70’s, although I’m sure that anyone with behind the scenes knowledge could prove that otherwise.
Everyone can agree that making cars safer is a good thing. But the implication that cars must be dull to be safe is clearly unwarranted. Why not make great looking cars with power, that handle and brake well, have beautiful and comfortable interiors, AND are safe, too? I want it all, and I want it now!
(Gets in Quattroporte and drives away :)
By any measure, this is the golden age of motoring. The choice available to motorists – from sporty roadsters (that don’t leak or rust) to muscle cars (that stop and corner as well as accelerate) to family cars that put most luxury cars of even 15 years ago to shame. And all this fun is safer and more economical than ever.
But all things are relative and people will always find something to criticize. So when the fake chrome rubs of our arm rest we are sufficiently indignant to swear to choose a different brand of car next time around. Its human nature – we calibrate our judgment according to the available choices. If all women looked like models we would still designate the lesser attractive ones as ugly.
Even once every econo box can hit sixty in less than 5 seconds, and handle like a 911 we will find things to criticize and, most likely, luxury and sport car makers marketing folk will still convince us that their product is worth the extra $20K.
I think Sajeev is onto something… I think there was an inflexion point sometime in the 1990’s when safety/durability equipment and features stopped benefiting consumers so much, and started protecting manufacturers from liability or responsibility of any kind.
Yes, that’s my point of discussion. Since the 1990s we’ve gained:
1. More airbags: most everyone agrees this is a good thing.
2. More forward gears: keeping a car in its powerband for more performance and less need to keep your foot in the throttle. Good, but I still don’t see why top gear isn’t taller for highway use: imagine if all cars had a Corvette-like power to fuel economy ratio!
3. More gadgets: widespread use of Navigation is good, ditto HID lights. And having power everything standard is pretty neat. But the fact that cars actually need backup sensors/cameras point to poor visibility and overweight sheetmetal (SUVs aren’t the only guilty party here).
4. Active handling: Good, but sometimes (Camry) used as a crutch for poor chassis dynamics. And I still think it needs to be easily defeatable for people like me who don’t mind risking their paintjob for automotive enjoyment.
5. Variable Valve Timing: good, but its often a crutch. Free revving engines are nice, but you lose torque in the process and fuel economy suffers. Premium fuel often becomes necessary. Witness the G35’s fuel economy compared to a variety of low-octane V8s in the same price range.
6. More interior space: do we really need sedans that look like minivans?
7. Big Brother: modern day engine computers (anything after 1995, IIRC) data log way too much information about one’s driving habits. Vehicle speed, steering angle, etc can all be used against you in court.
Well these are simply points for discussion, nothing more. :-)
If today’s cars are so hard to work on, then why is modding so much more popular than it has been in decades, perhaps ever? (Yes, I know, because of the Internet. But many people are still getting under the hoods of today’s cars.)
Sajeev: VVT actually improves low-end torque by enabling valve timing and lift to be optimized for 2+ points rather than just one. Some engines without VVT just feel like they have better low-end torque because their top ends are so weak.
VVT also has nothing to do with whether premium fuel is required. That’s entirely a factor of the compression ratio.
That’s true Michael, but VVT is often used to make a smaller displacement motor have the same peak power as a larger engine, at the expense of low end grunt and (sometimes) fuel economy. From a Honda Civic to the Lexus LS460, that’s how it is executed. Compare the peak torque figures of a MB S550 to a Lexus LS460.
I’m not saying VVT is a bad idea, it’s a wonderful idea. But many times in practice there is no replacement for displacement.
Just drove an LS 460 yesterday, noted no shortage of torque. No doubt the Civic Si mill is another story…
But the fault here isn’t VVT, it’s lack of displacement. Also, when the torque curve doesn’t flag off at higher rpm, low rpm torque can feel lower than it is. I don’t know the specifics, but subtle changes in the torque curve can yield major changes in perception. In my experience, BMW and Toyota are masters at torque curve tuning, while Ford is clueless in this area and Honda could also do better.
Two great articles early on in one day!
Merry Christmas!
Hal.
I wish people would quit moaning about the complexity of todays electronics and the inability or inaffordability of repairing them or replacing them – especially as a vehicle reaches it’s golden years. In recent years I have driven older Saturns and Nissans that have required electronic repairs. I have sucessfully serviced these vehicles with practically no knowledge of automotive electronics. How you ask ? On the web, you can find practically any information on any model simply by simply doing a search. If it was a fairly popular model, there is a discussion group. Chances are, your problem has already been identified. Also, the “idiot light” in most cases will direct you to the cause of the problem. OBD2 scans are performed free of charge at many auto parts stores. Replacement parts ? Junk yards are loaded with practically free (at least compared to dealer cost) sensors, air flow meters and computers. Just buy a Haynes repair manual and a cheap digital meter and dig in. It’s amazing how many guys can rebuild a small block Chevy but they cant measure a sensor’s DC voltage.
Actually, just checked the specs.
Mercedes gets 391 foot-pounds out of 5.5 liters, with the peak at 2,800 rpm.
Lexus gets 367 out of 4.6 liters, at 4,100. So the difference is far smaller than the difference in displacement. The secret: direct injection (in this case combined with conventional port injection).
Without seeing the entire curve, it’s not possible to judge from these numbers how much peakier the Lexus mill is. The Lexus engine could kick out 366 foot-pounds at 2,800, though the reality is probably somewhere around 340 give or take 15.
I own several vintage automobiles, including a ’74 Beetle and a ’72 914 – the former is carbureted and the latter has early Bosch D-Jet EFI. I also earn my living right now rebuilding late model import and domestic engines with modern digital EFI and the whole host that Mr. Martineck has trouble identifying under the hood.
As a mechanic I have to say that I might always love my vintage cars where fuel, air, spark are the order of the day. But dealing day-in, day-out with modern cars I have come to greatly appreciate modern OBD-II compliant computers (the older OBD-I systems are generally a pain in the ass). When you’re pushing a deadline it’s much easier to have the car tell you what’s wrong with it using a $100 scan tool than to poke around trying to figure it out. After you’ve built your dozenth engine you also tire of timing up distributors and you begin to love anything with a modern computer timed coil pack setup.
As for all of that crap you can’t identify under the hood? Little of it is engine related, and 99% of it is emissions related and it is the bane of mechanics everywhere. EGR systems and their ilk have made working in an engine bay a far more cramped proposition than it ever has before and these systems are mostly there to suck power out of your engine. The situation is starting to improve as manufacturers release more modern engine designs that don’t require quite as many bolt-on band aids to meet emissions requirements. The early 90s models were perhaps the worst of the lot in this regard as most manufacturers had just throttle body or multipoint injected their old carbureted engines and were now being told they had to crank down the emissions even further. A whole nest of complicated exhaust pipe and breather apparatuses were added to most engines at the time, and they suck, suck, suck.
Don’t even get me started on Nissan’s one-year-only Electronically Controlled Carburetor (1986).
Actually the S550 makes 391 lb-ft @ 2,800 – 4,800 rpm. The torque peak is over a full 2000rpm of powerband. That’s diesel truck style grunt.
I drove the S550 and the LS back to back. The difference in the quality of the powerband was stunning. The MB launched hard and never gave up (2,800 rpm) and the Lexus revved to match it (4100). While its cool for an Integra to rev to make power, the sheer grunt of the MB helped it feel more luxurious than the always revving Lexus.
Great posts Guys !!!
Give me low-end torque or give me death. Nothing is more soul-stirring than effortless acceleration and throw in a proper exhaust note rumble and its perfect.
The next great thing will be direct fuel injection and camless engines.
http://www.valeo.com/automotive-supplier/Jahia/lang/en/pid/1317
When will cars come standard with a USB port so one can plug in a laptop to not only adjust driver preference but to tweak engine tuning and obtain diagnostics info. Kind of a web server in the car.
Nostalgia is fun and all, but really, modernity and electronics are truly wondrous. When I was 9 years old my dad bought his first new car, a 1962 Chevrolet Impala convertible. Absolutely beautiful, but by the time we got rid of it in 1969 it had a whopping 80,000 miles on it, poured blue smoke out of the back like a freight train and the entire lower half of the car was completely rusted out. It also drove like a truck and had the stopping distance of a battleship. If you hit anything hard, everybody died.
I have no desire to go back to my 386 computer, my ’82 Honda Firehawk, much less my wife’s old ’67 Dart. Admittedly, opening up the hood of a modern car is (unless you own a Ferrari) pretty much a waste of time to show your neighbors, but even the crappiest cars go 150,000 miles without burping these days. I really do believe this is the true golden age of the automobile. Remember when a sub 10 second 0-60 time was noteworthy?
opening up the hood of a modern car is (unless you own a Ferrari) pretty much a waste of time to show your neighbors
Open the hood of the new Lexus LS460… There is nothing to see.
With modern day engines developed with the latest CAD/CAM technology and modern day lubricants, obtaining 500K miles should be easy.
Imagine a wireless 802.11 system in your car. You could web browse to it while it is parked in the garage and load music to it and upgrade the firmware and check tire pressure and receive status email from it and and and……
Luther:
I agree–what counts is effortless acceleration. And in my case, I don’t need blinding speed and it matters little whether the car can exceed 60 mph. It’s the feeling that the car isn’t working hard or straining at any point within the normal and occasionally urgent speed range, merging requirements, and road grades, of my urban/suburban world, that matters most.
When it comes to speed and handling… Top Gear drove an old Aston Martin (DB5 I think) around their track, and it didn’t do any better than their reasonably priced car (Suzuki Aerio, badged Liana there).
A friend of mine and I were driving one day in his new Subie STi, one of the most ferocious cars I have ever been in. It was summer, the air was on, the cabin was cool and calm and quiet, so we could talk in a normal tone of voice.
We came upon a used classic car place – the kind of place that had the rusted remains of great cars all over the place, and some nicer ones for sale. We got out of the Subie and looked longingly at the wonderful Buicks, Caddys, Dodges, Chevys and others from the 60s and 70s, in various states of disrepair.
It occurred to me that when I owned these cars, they were almost never air conditioned, they didn’t have seat belts, the steering was iffy at best, the suspensions were awful, the brakes were faith based. I owned a 442 Olds that lost any steering ability when you stepped on the gas. It was frightening, even to my then immortal teenage mind.
These cars needed constant tune ups, constant tire replacement, and endless preening.
We got back in the Subie, turned the air back on, stepped on the gas, and in a few completely controlled seconds were up to speed and chatting about all the “wonderful old cars”. In the STi, the sensation of acceleration comes from the scenery passing quickly and you being pushed back in the seat, not from being unable to steer any more.
I also remember all the fancy designed cars, the tail fins, the impossibly long fenders, the HUGE engines. The chrome, ah the chrome! I had an olds 88 that had the hugest chrome bumper ever!
Yes, cars are better now, thank god.
But it was nice being young and not knowing any better.
I agree–what counts is effortless acceleration.
I dont get why some people prefer a neurotic chihuahua in front of them with a wailing calf behind them (Honda). (A neurotic doberman behind me (Porsche) is OK though).
Ill take a long stroke V8 everytime.
Great post, well done.
What, exactly, makes for a “Golden Age?” In many cases, I think romance and nostalgia have more to do with any “Golden Age” memories than the actual vehicles. To be sure there are great cars back there, from any given time in the age of the automobile. But there were plenty that were awful, too, from the same model year and even the same manufacturer.
What I like in modern cars is that they do seem to be more durable, which I like given my propensity to keep a favored chariot longer than average. I like that I can, within reason, do things I didn’t dare attempt in cars of the ’60s and ’70s. I love the higher level of comfort, handling, safety, etc.
They are immeasurably more complex, but electronics aside, you can still tweak suspensions, do a lot of work yourself and have a helluva good time doing it. And as someone has pointed out, ODB II and other systems do make diagnosis much easier. Times change. And we all do, too. My current stable ranges from ’96 to ’03 and I’m happy with all of them. And much as I have fond memories of cars since put out to pasture, I wouldn’t go back, except maybe to have one or two of them as a temporary portal to different places and times.
Interesting article, and I tend to be a champion of markets as the author is, yet the data doesn’t actually support the story’s main conclusion that “it’s the market that’s created the dramatric upward curve in automotive safety, performance, environmental friendliness and price. ”
Absent goverment regulations there is little chance that the improvements in safety and the reduced environmental impact per vehicle would have happened. Just look at the vehicles sold in the developing countries with few regulations.
Also, the salutory effects of choice are a diminish returns games. For all practical purposes, Japan has far fewer models on sale in it’s home market than does the US. Even so, the Japanese home market has an overall superior ecological footprint as compared to the US market. Choice and competetion are important drivers of progress, but they don’t get the lion’s share of the credit for the improved safety and reduced ecological impact of today’s vehicles as compared to 1965. Both regulation and a more informed buyer have a great deal more to do with this progress than does the number of models offered for sale.
Now I am going out to the garage to play with my 1966 Jaguar, which has more soul than anything I could buy today :).
I was born in ’66. Galvanized steel is the second best advancement to come along since the ’70s. The first is electronic fuel injection. Today’s cars start all the time, which they did not when I was learning to drive in the early ’80s in Wisconsin. Remember how bad a ’70s mid-size GM smelled until it warmed up in the winter? And they didn’t run any better either.
My ’98 VW GTi can top 140 mph and gets about 25 mpg (the way I drive it), and has power everything and leather seats to boot. It needs minimal maintenance, and if something does go wrong I just plug my laptop in. How can THIS not be the golden age of motoring?
Almost forgot, radial tires, disc brakes, and synthetic oil! We don’t know how good we have it!
Must admit I haven’t had the benefit of driving these cars back-to-back. I first drove the big Benz last spring, and haven’t driven it again since then. I do recall the 5.5 being a huge improvement over the old 5.0.
The difference might be that I enjoy hearing these engines work a little, as long as they sound good and never feel strained. Which is true of both engines.
412 different cars and trucks? yeah, but if you take out what’s badge engineered, it’s more like 6.
I find it impossible to gaze at a ‘60’s Jaguar E-type or Plymouth Barracuda and not smile, sigh, nod and lust. Thankfully, the best [noisy, smelly, inefficient and unsafe] cars of the past remain with us, dutifully pampered and preserved. They’ll be fine.
Well, I happen to have a 1965 E-type. It is a family heirloom of sorts. One thing about old cars though, the worst thing you can do to them is park them. If you don’t drive them, they die.
The problem with driving them is all the people on the road, safely ensconced in their multi-airbagged, climate-controlled, DVD-equipped, overweight 5000lb, Family Truckster… paying more attention to their cell phone than what is happening on the road around them.
Look again at the brake lights of an E-type Jaguar. Now imagine the cell-phone yakking soccer mom in her Yukon behind me. I’ve had to run stop signs to avoid being plowed into.
Look at the height and usual poor arrangement of mirrors on the average SUV or Pickup. Now look at the height and overall size of an E-type. I’ve been backed into by pickups and SUVs now twice. I’ve had many near-hits in parking lots (once I had to hurl an object into the rear window of an SUV to get the attention of the driver, obliviously backing into my car.
I love to drive my Dad’s old Jag, but man, it is a tough world out there! =
–chuck
“I’ve been backed into by pickups and SUVs now twice. I’ve had many near-hits in parking lots (once I had to hurl an object into the rear window of an SUV to get the attention … ”
I absolutely cannot wait for fuel to get expensive enough so that people will not drive those monster trucks as everyday errand mobiles. The busy mom in her monster truck has nearly run me down in parking lots more times than I care to think about.
Professional users of trucks for the most part know what they are doing and are careful about it. The fashion buyers seem to be the scarry ones!
What you obviously need to do is rig up an external blank-firing gun for when the horn isn’t loud enough.
Just like when your’e sailing, when driving, your’e doing best when keeping so far from all other boats and cars as possible.
“high speed and old metal is a lethal combination” wrote a C&D or R&T writer in the 70’s, when talking about kids driving the (then) hand me down muscle cars of the 60’s.
the irony of flying in Commerical Aviation jets today, many of which date back to the sixties, does not escape me. but that is just too much CA money going into too many congressional pockets.
You’d have to drag me kicking and screaming, even if offered a 66 Shelby Cobra 427, to get me back to the bad old days.
The best Porsche 911 ever made rolled off the line yesterday, the greatest one rolls off the line tommorrow. Stay right here, for these are the good old days. 49 years young today and the cars just keep getting better.
More complicated because of computers, eh? It’s worlds easier to tune my 350z by plugging in a laptop and changing a few numbers than it is to tune those damn Zenith-Stromberg carbs on my dad’s 1973 Triumph TR6. The former took all of 5 minutes, and we did it to pick up a few horsepower after installing some aftermarket goodies. The latter, we’ve been doing constantly for TWELVE YEARS, and we do it because otherwise the car WON’T START. If you think carbs are better, you’re a few french fries short of a happy meal.
cheezeweggie: In recent years I have driven older Saturns and Nissans that have required electronic repairs. I have sucessfully serviced these vehicles with practically no knowledge of automotive electronics.
I wish you’d been around a few years ago when my old ’93 Saturn had electronic problems. It would die on me while driving. Fortunately, I could usually start it up again, and it would be fine until the next incident. It took 5 trips in and out of the dealer for them to repair it, by trial and error. One time one of the techs spent an hour with me, driving the car up and down waiting for it to die. It didn’t. Instead, it died as I was leaving the dealer. They had no diagnostic equipment that could tell them exactly what the matter was, and they claimed it didn’t exist.
chuckgoolsbee:
Look at the height and usual poor arrangement of mirrors on the average SUV or Pickup. Now look at the height and overall size of an E-type. I’ve been backed into by pickups and SUVs now twice.
A couple of weeks ago I was relacing in one of Cambridge’s finest coffee houses, luckily parked right in front, when I noticed a big ol Suburban backing slowly towards my car. To my horror, she kept coming, and I finally got up, ran out, and had to bang on her window to get her attention.
There were some cars of very high quality in the so-called olden days. The Valiant/Dart slant sixes of the 1960s through ’72 could go for years, were smooth, and had pretty good power to economy. The Peugeot 404 which my parents owned handled extremely well for that era, with precise steering, and took New England’s pothole littered roads with aplomb.
Nonetheless, the average car today is far more responsive and durable than the average car of that era. The parental ’57 Chevy was a POS, bad handling, bad steering, no power (it was a six, but still…) and was falling apart well before 100k.
There is a sad paradox about cars and driving then and now. In those days, twisties were plentiful, and roads were far less crowded than today.
In ’52, my father drove the family studebaker from Boston to Seattle while my mother and my older brother flew to our family’s new home. (I wasn’t around yet.) In his rush to get out there my father had planned to drive from Denver to Seattle in a day. He did manage to make it to the Wash State border, a distance of probably around 1000+ miles. He crossed at least two mountain ranges, probably praying for the engine not to overheat on the way up, and for the brakes on the way down, and probably fighting with the steering wheel the whole way.
I would love to make such a trip in a modern car.
At the Wash State border, which he reached in time for dinner, he asked about driving conditions to Seattle (another 250-300 miles). They told him that the roads were like what he’d been on, pretty bad. He began shaking, and decided to get a motel room.
David,
It takes exactly 26 hours to drive from Denver to Seattle, if you stick to the Interstates (minus a cut on a US highway, mostly divided, through Price, UT), allowing reasonable speeds – meaning you occasionally break the law, and stops for meals. I know because I’ve done it many, many times.
–chuck
In response to the talk about Carbs vs. FI.
One of the things that I’ve always liked about carbed motors is the fact that when you start them, they come up more gracefully than FI mills, what I mean by this is that the engine comes on gradually, accelerating itself up from whatever the starter speed is over a couple seconds, instead of “Turn over Starter, Bam!, It’s running!” with FI
I don’t really know _why_ I like the behavior, there seems to be something less hurried about it, or something. I don’t know how to describe it.
Give me ‘turn in over and Bam, it’s running’ anytime.
Todays engine management and VVT are far superior to the carbs and compromises of the past.
I agree that today’s more advanced technology does produce a far superior automotive product, but sometimes car companies elect to go overboard with it as they emphasize marketing over FUN-ction.
They will put expensive and heavy ABS components in a car and offer it as standard equipment, but they will not put front disc rotors that are massive enough to prevent warpage after 10k miles.
This stupidity is further propagated by some automotive journalists. Edmonds.com wrote about a long term test of the Honda Accord, dismissing the warped rotors as the fault of the number of miles driven in a short period of time. Nonsense! If enough people (and journalists) complain about this then the car companies will fix this. Instead, we get more of the same.
(I am starting to believe that auto manufacturers do not listen to customers. They listen to automotive journalists.)
Also, why is a six speed manual tranny better than a five speed? Race cars go from 0 to 200 MPH with six or seven forward gears, so if I am gonna go 75 MPH on the interstate then why would I want to row through six gears? Sometimes less is more; four forward gears would be ideal for me. And if you prefer auto trannies, then waz up with the Lexus eight speed? We are now going back to the future, the ’70’s era of kitchen blenders with 14 different speeds (the beige button was the “speed doubler”.) I don’t get this “more speeds is more” thing.
Thank you Allen, for pointing out that some – maybe all – of the new Honda Accords develop warped rotors after 10,000 miles of use. That's news; and something Edmunds.com shouldn't have tried to gloss over. Which brings to mind a point. Braking systems are much better than they were on cars of the 1950s and '60s, for the most part. Some cars – Chevrolet's Corvette from 1965 on (as I recall) and Volvo from 1966 on (with the onset of the 140 series) came complete with four-wheel disc brakes. The rear brakes could admittedly still lock up. However, you didn't have the brakes completely go out on you – as happened to me one rainy night, after my 1965 VW Beetle (which I owned as a student in the late Seventies) had gone through several deep rain puddles. That's when I found out what a "bootleg turn" was, by grasping on the hand brake, out of desperation, and doing a 180 in front of a line of cars – fortunately, stopped at the bottom of the hill I was coming down from (at a five-way stop). I have to wonder how many children and dogs, cats too, died in the Fifties and Sixties because Detroit kept selling cars with ever bigger engines, but brakes that were hardly adequate to the task. I do believe these are the "good old days," maybe the final ones, for using the automobile, at least in the city. As the American population grows, and politicians (such as Seattle's mayor) keep allowing developers to creat more density, the roadways become so problematic, that it is oftentimes easier to either just walk some place or, sadly, take the bus. I had two cars at my disposal, on December 11, and needed to get to downtown Seattle from north Seattle, in time to meet some people for a dinner presentation. Since the rush hour traffic was upon us, and wind and rain was coming down like a Biblical epic, I walked a quarter of a mile and caught an "express" bus to the inner city. I got there in about 20 minutes, from the time the bus came and without giving the finger or swearing at another motorist. A fellow journo drove from his home, 15 miles east of Seattle; and it took him an hour and 45 minutes. I don't have that kind of patience anymore; and how many of us, in a Corvette, 911 or Lotus Elise (when we have 'em) do?