But which would you have more fun driving, the new fwd Impala, or the old Chevy/Chrysler?
When I began this thread, I was simply reminiscing about the past cars that I have been associated with. After seeing all the associated chatter that followed, it became evident that there are still a lot of folks at this web site that also remembered and revered cars of the past. I enjoyed reading the differing views, whether from the idealistic youth obsessed with modern computer controlled systems or from the nostalgic older (not old) folks that remember and appreciate honest-to-goodness mechanical ingenuity that was so commonplace in the cars of the 40?s and 50?s. And yes, I agree that today’s cars are perhaps more efficient, longer lasting, and safer. But certainly not more fun to drive.
It?s a good thing no one got into the discussion about hidden gas filler caps during the 50?s. 
To the gentleman(?)who vented about Chinese, don’t you mean Japanese?
Ahem, I started working on microprocessors in January 1974. So, I guess I am a computer geek.
My 2002 Toyota Sienna is by far the finest vehicle I have ever owned in my life. It always starts. The heat gauge never moves once its warmed up, unlike my 1989 Caravan that liked to overheat and warp the heads. Around 133,500 miles so far, I suspect it is probably broken in now.
I even like the computer stuff, being a geek myself. Any problem and the scanner gives a clue right away. At least I think so, because the one or two problems I’ve had it did. That isn’t much experience, which is good.
I climb in that sucker, head across country, and know I will drive around 700 miles before bedtime, with virtually no problems. And, get 24 mpg at 70 mph, or higher at lower speeds.
Yeah, some old cars were fun to drive, like the 1936 Chevrolet, but one paid for it in repairs and frustration.
I wouldn’t go back to the old stuff for anything, unless I were forced to.
I’ll bet you would like to have that '36 Chevy back again. You would probably be grinning so great when driving it, your ears would be touching at the back of your head.
In spite of the ridicule directed at them by some, curb feelers were pretty popular back in the day and actually served a pretty good purpose.
A while back a pair of old curb feelers on eBay went for 60+ dollars.
(Note to self: Next trip to the old car salvage, wander through there and buy all of them for resale.)
Modern cars are just like the old ones; they have both good and bad points.
The good is that they’re quieter, safer, smoother, more mild-mannered, etc.
The bad is that when they screw up on the road there’s usually no repair possible unless you’re very mechanically minded. It’s call AAA and wait for the hook.
The other bad point is repair costs; much higher on late model stuff as compared to old.
I’d forgotten all about the curb feelers. These were a useful item if you had a useless item–namely wide white sidewall tires. Scouring the curb marks off these whitewall tires was not fun.
I remember the pages and pages of automobile accessories like the curb feelers in the Sears and Montgomery Ward catalogs. Some accessories were quite useful. I had to order a turning signal kit for my first car–a 1947 Pontiac. Turning signals were not standard equipment. For my next car, a 1955 Pontiac, I ordered a mechanically operated windshield washer kit. It’s great that modern cars come standard with items that I had to buy and install from a catalog. On the other hand, I do miss the vent windows, an oil pressure and ammeter gauge that my old cars had.
A recently deceased uncle of mine was a big Chrysler New Yorker fan and he owned those cars from the early 50s until the 90s. Every one of them had curb feelers on them. He had purchased several sets of them back in the 50s, always removed them when trading in the car, and reinstalled them on the next one.
With the front door open we could hear him pull up when he visited. Definitely effective on tire preservation though.
Remember when most cars did not have A/C and Sears, Montgomery Ward, Firestone, etc. would install add-on A/C units for 129 dollars, total price?
I had one of those old underdash evaporator units and that thing brought a 150 bucks on eBay a couple of years ago, go figure.
Maybe something else I should be scrounging at the old car salvage since that particular one only cost me 10 bucks in the first place.
Maybe I had better check out using e-bay. Several years ago when we were preparing my wife’s parents’ house for sale, she came across a wierd looking contraption in the attic. It turned out to be an after-market radio from Western Auto. The dial plate with the volume and tuning controls was mechanically linked through cables to the main unit. We figured out that when my wife’s father returned from WW II, he purchased a 1941 Chevrolet. It didn’t have a radio, so he bought one from Western Auto and then removed it when he traded the car. I’ve kept the radio around not knowing what to do with it. If people spend $60 for a pair of curb feelers, the radio should be worth something. Thanks for the idea.
That could also be the result of being scared sh!tl@ss not enjoyment. Everyone waxes nostalgic about the old cars we used to own and by human nature forget just how bad they really were. The good old times! I get the opportunity to drive some of those really old cars occasionally and even my old muscle cars that were kept original. Steering wasn’t nearly as precise (being generous now) and the brakes stunk back then! You had to be on top of it, not like today’s cars. Anyway, they’re great for the casual weekend nostalgic trip to the car show/burger joint but for everyday driving I’ll take my new car hands down.
Actually, it is a pretty good question. Of course my initial reaction was that new cars a horribly over-complex, and that this technology crossed the line into complete silliness about 25 years ago. I think the real answer is a little more complex. I think it depends what you mean by “better.”
Although I personally will not drive a “modern” car, they do have some advantages. The primary advantage is that they are dirt cheap on a cost per mile basis. They have managed to throw enough technology at these things to make them considerably more efficient and have them last “long enough” that the average consumer things they are getting a good deal. Of course, these two are related. Computer based gizmos have become very cheap and powerful. At this point it is cheap to add lots of complexity for a small gain in efficiency, minimize the mechanical parts (more expensive and more likely to wear out), and price the vehicle to be disposable (instead of repairable).
Based on the “disposable” concept, it only makes sense to design them around the initial (automated) assemble without much regard for future repair maintenance. To support this concept, you simply have to design the critical parts to outlive the warrantee period and design a minimal “maintenance” schedule that assumes a design life of only about 10 years. This design concept allows you to build cheap but reliable vehicles that will simply be thrown away in 10 years. Couple that with plenty of marketing that everyone “needs” a new car every few years and expensive repair costs, and the manufactures get exactly what they want. The auto market is now just like the consumer electronics market, you pay a premium for the latest gimmick, it does what it supposed to do for a few years before it fails; you determine it’s not really worth fixing and there is a newer/better gimmick anyway, so you throw it away and buy the next piece of junk. It’s just what the consumer reports crowd wants, a series of cheap (but gee-whiz) toys that last just long enough for you to get bored and want a new toy. They have certainly figured out their market.
So to answer the question, I think new auto technology is really better, if you are in the auto manufacturing business.
If by “better” you mean more reliable, yes, new auto technology is better.
Remember, not everyone switched from using bolts to connect the frame to the body, for example. First Honda did it. Then Chrysler bought a Civic to find out why they were selling so much better than their cars. Chrysler engineers disected the Civic and found that its body was welded to the frame and that this was better, so they adopted the practice. The same goes for electronic fuel injection and many other technological advances. They were not forced upon us. One company developed the technology, showing that it was beneficial. Then the competitors adopted the same technology, with varying levels of success of course. If developing the technology hadn’t given the first company a competitive advantage, the other companies would not have adopted it. The marketplace has spoken.
“I done being a mechanic”
I done reading post. Fire baaaaaaaad!
Yup, the public got just what they asked for…
I would live to go for a cruise in a 1936 Chevy on a Sunday afternoon. But I would want something more reliable for daily commuting.
My grandmother had that kind of after-market air conditioner installed on her van. It required routine repair and even then never worked very well.
Agree that the 55 Chevy with the high reving V8 and HD suspension was a blast to drive, except for the 5.5 turns lock to lock numb steering. The Chrysler 300 in the mid 50s was a hairy chested beast and a real performer, but limited by the bias ply tires. Those cars did not isolate the driver from the road. A friend of mine flies Boeing 737s, but he has the most fun in a Cessna on the weekend.
My opinion…and this entire thread will really only be opinions…
Much of the new technology is better. Multiport injection, disc brakes, air bags, much better manufacturing technologies that result in less rotting and longer lasting cars. And let us not forget radial tires.
Much of the new technology is not. A lot of the repair struggles people now deal with are the result of transverse mounted engines with half shafts (with CV joints). Timing belts were another poor idea, especially on transverse engines.
Some of the new technology isn’t better or worse, just different. The EVAP system really isn’t a big problem, it just “is”.
Some of the new technology is, IMHO, really bad, especially that that interferes with the braking system to use it for purposes other than braking, such as ABS and stability systems.
And, ergonomics…unless you can dump $40K you really cannot get a good seat anymore. The ergonomics engineers hav designed them out of hard sculpted hard foam to force you into the shape that their “Ergonomics 101” course says we should be.
The new audio/video technology is abysmal. In an effort to streamline dashboards and consoles, lots of the designs now have sequential pushbuttons where knobs used to be. I used to be able to reach over and set thing son my radio and my environmental systems without taking my eyes of the road. Now I have to take my eyes off the road to look to see what button I’m pushing and look at some display to see where it’s set. Blah! Our B-52 airplanes had every knob a different shape, That was so that a piot could tell what he was grabbing. And they were shaped such that the pilot could tell by feel where they were set. So he could be looking at his HSI while setting some relevent control. Cars should be designed like that.
The newer cars are much smoother, safer, etc. but personally speaking, I prefer the older ones. A 1962 Chevy quits on the side of the road and anyone with even a small percentage of mechanical ability can get it going again pretty quickly unless it’s a catastrophic engine or transmission problem. A 2002 Chevy quitting on the side of the road usually means call AAA and check the bank account total.
I can think of no better example of new car idiocy than the number of commercials over the last few years in which car makers would tout the number of cup holders the vehicle has. Some are now advertising heated and cooled cup holders.
It’s pretty sad when garbage like this is used to put someone in debt on a new car and the large number of people who will buy into it. COOL! Now my coffee stays warm on the drive to work. Whoop-de-doo.
Wait until the complaints start popping up on this forum. “The cup holder don’t keep my coffee so warm anymore. What’s up with that?”
WHAT! 500 bucks to fix the cup holder heating/cooling control module? I’m bein’ robbed!
Some of those old ideas are still around. For example, Subaru still has the hill holder feature on their manual transmission cars, at least the last time I looked about 5 years ago. Rebuildable shocks are probably available from a racing supply, but for most day-to-day use the cost of a rebuild is going to be more than a new shock because skilled labor is not cheap. I know there are rebuildable shocks still available for motorcycles, again mostly for the racers, but some of the BMW crowd like them for long distance touring.
There are modern cars with rear heater cores (and AC coils), mostly vans, but some of the larger luxury cars too. Jeep may still have bolt-on body panels on some models, but fashion seems to dictate seamless bodies these days, so bolt-ons don’t work out so well.
The good stuff has been kept, mostly. I remember when I bought my 1989 Nissan Maxima. It really did not have anything that wasn’t available on 1950s or 1960s cars, except for electronic fuel injection, but they had put it all together in such a nice package. Power windows, AC, cruise control, power seats and lots of other stuff was all available back in the day it’s just about 10 times more reliable now. The removable hood thing, eh, sounds OK but doesn’t sound like it was too popular since it disappeared long before modern technology started to make major inroads into cars.
As for the gimicky folding shifter, take a look at some of the folding seat options in minivans. Some of those disappear into the floor to give the 3rd row passengers a ballroom dance floor. Not exactly the same, but similar intent and a purely mechanical solution, too.