Yes, those were the days! I remember during my college days going to the drive-in theatre and my 48 Chevy stovebolt 6 stalled righ at the wicket! We pushed the car aside, and I removed the carb jets, blew them out, started again and we were on our way watch a Rock Hudson & Doris day movie. I do remember women’s lingerie being very complicated in those days!
Jeremy R Hoyt:
You should recheck your history. Honda did not come up with uni-body construction. In 1915 (yes 1915) a company called Ruler Automobile company released 3000 vehicles called the Ruler Frameless that were unibody constructed. This concept had been talked about since 1905 or so but nobody could figure out how to make it work. These cars were the first unibody construction.
Just for a bit of extra history a guy named Seldon patented a front wheel drive car with a 3 cylinder engine in 1877. You also mentioned fuel injection which dates back to 1910.
~Michael
Dartman, you are right; Honda did not pioneer his design. The Nash Rambler and its sister cars in 1956 had “unit body & frame” construction, which was rattle proof, but drummed badly. Also, my 1965 Doge Dart had unit body, as did all Chrysler Products after 1957, I believe, long before Honda even built cars!
You should try reading my post word for word. I didn’t say that Honda invented the idea. All I said was Honda made it work on a large scale and that Chrysler got the idea from Honda. Of the two companies, Honda made the idea work to their advantage first. Besides, taking an idea and making it workable, even if it wasn’t your idea in the first place, is a noteworthy accomplishment.
I am sure that a lot of the technologies that we consider modern were invented long ago. However, they were not successfully implemented on a large scale until recently. Just look at biodiesel as an example.
I don’t claim to be an automotive historian. I am simply an enthusiast who appreciates many of the modern technologies that make today’s cars more reliable than their counterparts of the past.
If you have to read between the lines to find an error, you have not found an error. I don’t care how long ago these ideas were patented. I care about when they were successfully implemented.
So Honda was building and importing cars in the US in the 60’s?
Want me to read your post word for word?
Quote “Remember, not everyone switched from using bolts to connect the frame to the body, for example. First Honda did it.”
“First Honda did it” I don’t think there are any lines to read between. Honda did not invent or mainstream unibody construction.
I would also like to see the information regarding Chrysler buying a Civic and tearing it down.
~Michael
“Pretty soon we will have no control over the speed or direction of the cars we drive. We will be forced to input a destination and a computer will only start the vehicle after you are buckled in a secured fashion for the time and it will drive the vehicle”
Every day I see idiots who would be less of a danger if their car drove itself. Then they could yak on the cell phone, eat lunch, put on makeup, practice the trumpet, etc.
Anyone who drives a bus for a living would certainly be happy to get into a sports car once in a while.
"I would also like to see the information regarding Chrysler buying a Civic and tearing it down.
Actually, car makers do this type of thing all the time in order to see why the competition’s vehicle is superior in certain aspects. There was a fair amount of coverage of GM buying and tearing down a number of Civics when they were designing the Saturn years ago, in an effort to produce a car of equal quality. Unfortunately, they didn’t get it exactly right.
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.
I don’t know about other cars, but my Accord has fairly large buttons, and those buttons have little bumps on them, different numbers and patterns of bumps on each one. So, I can tell which button is which by feel. Of course it also has a great big knob in the middle of the dash that controls the radio volume, which I prefer to the button on the steering wheel, but neither requires me to look away from the road. Some cars designers do seem to “get it.”
Can you do it with gloves on?
Knobs! Yes! I like knobs!
Thank you for responding. It has been so many years since we studied this practice in my marketing class that I wasn’t sure where to find the information.
Dartman, please get a grip. The method of welding body pieces to the frame is not the same as unibody construction. Unibody construction is defined as “A manufacturing process where sheet metal body parts are combined with stress-bearing elements to form the body and chassis as a single piece, as opposed to attaching body parts to a frame.”* Unibody construction means that the body and frame are the SAME UNIT! If they are welded together, they are separate pieces that have been attached.
Someone doesn’t know how to play well with others.
There are many new technology in cars today that are far better then cars 30 years ago.
Electronic Ignition vs Points. I’ll take Electronic Ignition anyday…100 times more reliable.
Fuel Injection vs Carburator…Easier way to get better performance AND better gasmileage.
Pretty much ANY electronic device…especially if they are replacing a mechanical device. Yes they are more complicated…but they FAR MORE RELIABLE.
You do realize that unibody construction consists of a number of pieces that have been welded together, right?
Unibody is nothing new.
I could disconnect my battery and alternator, and drive my car indefinitely (once it’s started). I once drove from IA to CO with a failed alternator and nearly dead battery. Try doing that in one of these rolling video games.
Try doing it with a 1953 Studebaker, or any gas engine car from the 1950s or 60s. It’s not going to make it either. Diesel engines are hardly on point.
With gloves on? Why on Earth would I need gloves? My heater works just fine. 
Not knocking, uh, knobs . . . so to speak.
Diesel engines are always on point, and you can’t do that with a modern diesel either. A fully mechanical diesel is about the simplest engine design available, so it’s obviously the best. (-;
KISS, always!
Yes, but in unibody construction the frame and the body are undistinguishable. The body is the frame and the frame is the body. In the method that I am talking about, you can see where they are attached to each other but they are not one and the same.
Yes, you are like the fifth person to point out that it is nothing new. I acknowledge that. Thank all of you.
And that’s better because??? Please tell me how many times in your life that you really needed to do that??? I’d rather have a radio as a feature over that.