Mike, I agree with you except for the weight. Cars in the '50s through '60s got pretty heavy. Plastics, unibodies, and smaller engines and powertrains (transverse w/transaxles vs. the old longitudinal trannys with driveshafts and differentials with solid rear axles) have, I think, made cars lighter.
I agree. There has been a concerted effort to make all cars lighter. It may not be apparent when a new Camry or Ford intermediate weighs as much or nearly as the comparable model, but the are so much bigger that the weight savings and more efficient motors and trans have cars getting mileage far superior with more room to boot. Aerodynamics are important. Subtle valances under the grill, show huge benefits in aerodynamics. So, it isn’t just the obvious overall shape, but subtle changes as well that really add up, year by year.
I have been reading about direct injection used in some cars now, where the fuel is injected into the chamber instead of the intake manifold. The differences are staggering. A Toyota truck getting 30 mpg highway and running a more efficient 3.5 instead of the " old" 4 liter and still have more hp and torque. This I like to see instead of turbocharging. It’s intriguing the technology going into gas motors; just to delay the inevitable. EVs.
Back in the 1950s, many people wanted a heavier car under the impression that a heavier car held the road better than a lighter car. What I found interesting is that the 1951 Cadillac got better gas mileage under most conditions than a 1951 Chevrolet equipped with the PowerGlide automatic transmission.
Mike, I agree with you except for the weight. Cars in the '50s through '60s got pretty heavy.
50’s yes…60’s not all were heavier. But the point I was making…cars today that are heavier…then cars of the 60’s…are faster…much better mpg…several order of magnitudes less pollution. I owned a 67 Malibu SS with a 327 V8. It was LIGHTER then my wifes Lexus ES350. Yes my 66 Fleetwood was a beast…and with the 429 V8 I was lucky to get 10mpg.
@ Mike,oh I see a"Caddy",wonder what kind of mileage a 500 or 472 cid Caddy got?
I remember back in the 60’s reading about Lincoln working on a 501 cid engine ,I guess cooler heads prevailed,a trip down memory lane brings back memories of high octane gas and huge engines( if memory serves me correctly a 283 cid SB carried a 10:1 compression ratio) well all I can say is I’m grateful for the “Clean Air act” but do believe its gone far enough and dont forget how light these early pickups were,had a 440 Fury once upon a time{very hard on the pinion shaft}seems she returned around 8 mpg_ didnt mind when gas was less then 50 cents a gallon-Kevin
"mccune These old sleds were real gas hogs! In the summer of 1964 I drove a Buick Riviera with a 455 engine from Detroit to San Francisco. I averaged 13.5 mpg on interstate and open highway driving.
When the 70s arrived with those poor emission controls, the mileage dropped even further. One of my co-workers had a 1970s big block Chevy wagon. It got 8 mpg city and 13 highway!!
The '64 Chevy Nova I drove back in the '70s only weighed 2400 lb if I remember correctly or that’s what was stated on the title, maybe it was 2600 lb., it was a while back. At that time, Texas had license plate fees that went by vehicle weight catagories and this car’s plates were $12.30/year, the lowest catagory except for motorcycle plates which were $5.30/year.
I think the 2008 Yaris I drive today weighs about the same. Of course, the Nova didn’t meet today’s crash and safety standards.
There is only two sure fire ways to increase economy of nearly any car. Pump the tires up and drive below 55 mph.
Wonder how much those pre-ww2 era cars weighed
A 1941 4 door Chevy stovebolt 6 with standard transmission (no automatic available) weighed just under 3000 lbs curb weitht with half a tank of gas or so.
It’s not that far back you have to go, either.
My 1994 F150 grosses out at 3900 empty and 1/4 tank of fuel. GVWR is 6100. I could legally haul a ton, if I maintained my '94-era weight as well as my truck has!
(Back in the day, they INCREASED GVWR of “1/2 tons” over 6000 to gain more favorable tax and emission status. Wonder exactly how heavy a MY 2014 must become to haul a legal ton?)
I get “safety,” but how safe do we really need things to be? Diminishing returns kicked in a long time ago… I didn’t feel unduly jeaopardized back in the '90s, nor do I today!
(Back in the day, they INCREASED GVWR of "1/2 tons" over 6000 to gain more favorable tax and emission status. Wonder exactly how heavy a MY 2014 must become to haul a legal ton?)
So that’s why pickups have gotten so huge lately, to cheat the CAFE and EPA standards for small trucks.
Today’s behemoths dwarf the typical farmer’s pickup truck of the 1950’s and '60’s, which rode on car tires and were usually powered by a six cylinder engine and usually had a “three on the tree” manual transmission, vinyl bench seat, rubber floor mats, and maybe a heater.
Joe, I agree with you. All federal regulatory agencies grow, prosper, and become more powerful by continuing to create new, more invasive regulations. NHTSA and the EPA have, IMHO, become far too invasive and bloated, and both have passed their “point of no return”. We now have the EPA issuing regulations on things that are not even addressed in the Clean Air And Waters Act, often doing more harm than good, and we have safety regulations that mandate systems that drive up the cost of cars and in some cases compromise safety under certain conditions.
I maintain that regulatory agencies are created to implement compliance regulations pursuant to legislation, but they quickly become bloated and become independent of the legislation, making their own “law” by mandate without going through the vetting of the legislative process.
Oh, yeah, I almost forgot to mention the TSA as an example of an out of control agency. Shame on me!
@TSM,agree,what can we do about it? we will probaly never be able to vote them out of office,too many “checks” and not enough balances in this"republic"-Kevin
Kevin, I truly wish I had an answer. It would probably take 12 to 16 years of having both houses of congress in addition to an administration that all believed in minimal government to even begin to make meaningful change, and even then we’d probably have to outlaw lobbyists.
IMHO this clearly isn’t the government the founders envisioned. Even King George III, the tyrant from whom we fought for independence, would be humbled.
@TSM,can we get rid of Lobbyists? Lobbyists are almost conflict of interest IMO,when will politics ever start being about just, fair govt again,rather then greed?-Kevin
Lobbyists turned congress into the best politicians you can buy.
Eddy Murphy made an excellent movie called “The Distinguished Gentleman”, a sort of irreverent, but more accurate version of the Jimmy Stewart movie “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.”
I worked for a New York based company once that had many goverment contracts. One of the engineers made a bet he could spend an entire week in Washington without spending a cent on food or drink. At any time of day or night there is a hospitality suite somewhere in Washington paid for by lobbyists. He won handily and could have spent a month and gained weight.
Thanks Mike! That one left me laughing! It says it all.
Most of the lobbyists would disappear if the feds stopped giving out our money to special interest groups. Like THAT will ever happen!
The BIG lobbyists are paid Corporate lobbyists. Big Oil alone spends close to $200m annually.
Get rid of ALL lobbyists. And curb their spending to almost nothing.
But as MB pointed out…This will never happen…Congress isn’t going to stop their gravy-train.