“How about that Rusty Wallace on the band wagon for extended warranty? he sold out.”
It must be contagious. Did he catch it from Carroll Shelby? He hawks Z-Max.
He could tell his wife that the removal of the computer is highly illegal and, therefore, she shouldn’t tell anybody, even her closest friends or he will be sent to prison.
It is interesting to see the various comments on this subject. Let me add this. It is probably best she dosen’t know about how todays planes and spacecraft also depend on microprocessors and allow them to keep working like they do as that may cause more worry. On the plus side though these aren’t IBM PC computers we are talking about that are prone to software and hard drive crashes.
To put things into perspective, I have experienced a lot more break downs with cars before processors were put in them than after they were put in. I have to be honest though and admit that I had a ECU fail on me once after I changed out the alternator. I had to replace a driver transistor in the ECU that blew out and controlled the fuel pump circuit when I started the car up after the change out. I wasn’t on the road then so that may not count as a true break down.
“It is probably best she dosen’t know about how todays planes and spacecraft also depend on microprocessors and allow them to keep working like they do as that may cause more worry”
That is an excellent point.
For that matter it is best that the OP’s wife does not know that the utility company uses computers to distribute both electricity and gas, and the phone companies–both local and long-distance–use computers to route calls.
Here’s another possible solution, since the OP’s wife apparently thinks that computers are the work of the devil:
Whatever type of car you buy, set up a ring of candles around it at night, sprinkle it with Holy Water, and recite some prayers in order to perform an exorcism on the car. She just might buy into it.
My recommendation is to buy your wife a King Midget. Be sure to get the stripped down model that has a recoil starter like a lawnmower engine. Electric starting was optional.
The King Midget gets away from all kinds of problems I have read about on this board. You won’t have problems replacing the heater core–just be certain that if you have a puppy and you take him with you in the King Midget that he doesn’t chew up the lap robe. You won’t have radiator problems because the engine was air cooled. The engine on the King Midget could either be a Kohler or Wiconsin one cylinder engine. The spark plug was easy to reach and replace. I would recommend carrying a box ifyour standard Champion J-8 spark plugs with you just in case the spark plug quits firing. You won’t fight power windows–the King Midget had side curtains. If you get the stripped down model, you won’t have battery or alternator problems. Keep several 6 volt hot shot fence charger batteries around to power the headlights. The wipers were operated by a hand crank–very reliable. However, don’t strain or break an arm or you can’t drive in the rain.
The next step up would be to a Studebaker Scotsman. You will have to worry about a radiator and buy 6 times as many spark plugs at tune-up time. There is a heater core in the box that hangs under the dashboard, but it is easily removed for a core replacement. The car has crank operated roll-up windows in the front. These aren’t as trouble free as the side curtains, because the window crank might break. The back windows were fixed in place, so there shouldn’t be any problem there. The carburetor retained a manual choke, so you shouldn’t have the problesm one has with the automatic chokes on other cars of this time period. The standard equipment wiper motor was vacuum powered–much simpler than an electric motor. They were also interval wipers–the only interval that the wipers worked were when you let up on the accelerator and the vacuum increased.
Despite the simplicity of the King Midget and Studebaker Scotsman, I’ll bet that the maintenance and repair costs are actually lower on the computerized Toyota Corolla of today. I would never have wanted a King Midget for transportation, but I actually liked the simplicity of the Studebaker Scotsman. However, it can’t hold a candle to today’s cars for reliability and comfort.
Other possibilities would be a Kaiser “Henry J”, circa '52 or '53, or a Hudson Jet, circa '53 or '54.
Both of them are very basic, particularly the Henry J.
The only major worries would be the acceleration, brakes and handling that cannot compare with those qualities on modern cars. Also, they do not necessarily start reliably, and like all non-computerized carbureted cars, they need extensive warm-up in the winter in order to prevent stalling. And, of course, they do not have any safety-related equipment, and they lack “crumple zones” to help absorb impact.
Like the Scotsman and the King Midget, reliability will be fairly poor, owing to the original designs, coupled with the age of the vehicles at this point, but if you want to avoid computers, the Henry J and the Jet are two good candidates for purchase. (Oh–and be sure to locate a mechanic over the age of 50 in order to have someone who can actually work on the carburetor and the distributor points.)
One interesting thing in the early 1960’s is that a 4 year old Volkswagen and a 4 year old Cadillac with about the same mileage on the odometer and similar condition would bring about the same money as used cars, even though the Cadillac cost more than three times what the VW cost new. The simplicity of the VW and the ease of servicing outweighed the Cadillac features as a used car.
Even in earlier time periods, I’m not certain that simplicity translated into reliability. I had a bottom of the line 1965 Rambler Classic. It had no options except for a radio and heater. I had a synchonizer go bad in the manual transmission and the transmission had to be rebuilt. The car had an enclosed driveshaft, so to remove the transmission, the rear axle had to be dropped. I was going to graduate school in a small college town and the service station that took care of my car knew of only one really good expert on manual transmissions. I took the car to him and he told me that automatic transmissions were really more reliable. Even the shift linkage for the column shifter was balky. I had the knobs come off the window cranks, and while easily repaired, I’ve never had a power window fail. I had to remove the radio (strictly AM) from the dashboard and spend $12 to have a transistor replaced. I’ve never had a problem with the sound systems on my later cars. I don’t think I would trade a heating system that brings in fresh air from outside the car to a recirculating box heater under the dashboard. Except for the 1990 Ford Aerostar that I owned, I’ve had very little problems with the air conditioning systems on the other vehicles I’ve owned–even going back to the 1971 Maverick. I’ve never had a computer fail on a car. My son did have one go out on his wife’s 1995 Mustang about 4 years ago, but he was able to locate a replacement in a salvage yard and his brother-in-law got it going again. The only vehicle that seemed to have great reliabilty back then was the school bus that I rode to school. It was on a 1946 Chevrolet chassis and it never seemed to have a problem. We kept hoping for a breakdown on the way to school, but it never happened. (I think this was due to the diligence of the owner-operator in keeping up his bus. Other classmates who rode on newer buses would be late due to mechanical problems).
I think today’s cars, if properly maintained, are much more reliable than cars of previous decades.
In case the OP is interested, here are pictures of the cars Tiredaq mentioned.
Hope you don’t mind but I’ll pop in with a bit more information that might help your wife accept a car with computer. Here is a link to one of the many 200,000 mile clubs on the internet. Self descriptive.
http://discussions.consumerreports.org/n/pfx/forum.aspx?webtag=cr-2kmileclub
An additional tactic is to narrow down prospects (all of which I assume will have computers unless you go 3 decades back. Then just call and see how much it would cost to replace a computer. Hopefully it won’t be anything close to the high prices cited in the television commercials for extended warranties.
Here is a story with hope. A man (rocketman)who post here on Car Talk just started this thread http://community.cartalk.com/posts/list/2127853.page
Have a Great Day,
Jim
Thank you for posting the pictures. I thought that the Studebaker Scotsman really had nice lines and wasn’t spoiled by having a chrome slapped on. In this time period, a lot of my friends who owned cars were stripping off the chrome and “leading” in the holes. This wasn’t necessary on the Scotsman. When I was in high school in the late 1950’s, I couldn’t believe how much more tasteful a 1958 Studebaker Scotsman was than a 1958 Ford or a 1958 Edsel. The Scotsman didn’t offer very many options–just overdrive, electric wipers, anti-slip differential and a right hand sunvisor. Radios weren’t available through the factory or the dealer. If a person wanted a readio, he had to have an aftermarket radio installed.
I’m not sure I believe electronics are inherently more reliable than mechanical systems, in an automotive application. The combination of vibration, rust/corrosion, and body-grounding seem to result in electric failures (particularly “power” options) in many cars prior to 10 years’ service. If you count a blown fuse as a “failure,” then electronic parts fail quite often.
What I do agree with is that ECU systems are pretty bulletproof. Much of the reason for that is that the EPA requires it to be so. Also, it might fail, but it won’t “wear out” due to lack of moving parts.
If you do get a car that predates computers, I’d go back a bit further and get one that predates emission controls. The big impetus for computers in cars was that “mechanical feedback” emission controls did a rather lousy job of controlling emissions, with a high loss of performance to boot.
One good example of a hold out against electronics. When VW started putting fuel injection in their Type 3’s (called AFC and around 69 or so) many people would ask for a conversion back to dual carbs. This fuel injection was not more reliable than a carburetor.
This is the infamous,drive under high voltage wires or come up against someone on a CB or drive next to a airport and your car goes wacky F.I. set-up. Never did believe that stuff but others swear by it.
If you count a blown fuse as a “failure,” then electronic parts fail quite often.
I consider a blown fuse a failure, but a fuse is an electrical component, not an electronic component. A fuse transmits electrical power, not electronic signals.
I consider a blown fuse a failure, but a fuse is an electrical component, not an electronic component. A fuse transmits electrical power, not electronic signals.
Fair enough, I was getting sloppy with terminology. I think the “brains” of a car are, for whatever reason, more reliable than the power accesories. Full disclosure: I had an ECU fail on my '95 Nissan 200SX. When a mechanic buddy and I were unable to fix the fault (including ECU swap), we had to junk the car. (Shame…with what I now know, I suspect the problem was a faulty ground.)
I guess that’s my problem w/ electronic equipment: when a mechanical system fails, it does so in a straight-forward manner that lends itself to logical deduction as to the problem. With electronics, it’s generally throw-away (if you’re lucky).
I will say I’d take “solid-state” ignition any day over breakers+mechanical advance!
Amen!-Kevin
I guess that’s my problem w/ electronic equipment: when a mechanical system fails, it does so in a straight-forward manner that lends itself to logical deduction as to the problem. With electronics, it’s generally throw-away (if you’re lucky).
The reason mechanical problems in a car are more straight-forward is because they are far far less complicated. The more complicated the system the harder it is to diagnose. Simple as that.
I agree with your earlier point about electronics in a harsh environment being very destructive on electronic components…HOWEVER…Any GOOD manufacturer will take that into account. My first 10 years of my engineer career I was working for DOD manufacturers. I can’t get into specifics…but suffice to say the electronics we were working with was in far far far worse environments then the worse automotive engine environment…Off the shelve electronics had some problems in these environments…but our rugged and mil-spec electronics held up nicely. As a engineer you design your component for the environment it’ll be working in.
That’s the way the racing business works. The money is not made in winnings, the money is made in selling the winnning name for product endorsements.
Extended warrantys and Z-max are just an extension of the business.
iI have the perfect solution, you and the wife build your own car witout any electronics. But first get a timemachine to be able to get the necessary parts!