Forty years ago I had just finished my degree and my wife and I were living in a duplex. The other half of the duplex was occupied by another young couple. The husband of this couple sold Datsuns (now called Nissan) and MG cars. He was also in the National Guard and had guard duty once a month. He would bring me the keys to his demonstrator, an MG Midget for me to drive the week-ends he had guard duty. He said that it was bad for the car to just sit and not be driven. I did my best to help him out by keeping the car busy hauling me around while he was gone. I loved driving the car–I felt that the best computer in the world–my brain–was in control.
I wish I could get in and out of a Mazda Miata. Then I would feel more in control. I lost some control on how the money is spent by getting married. When my son came along, I lost some control of my time. I even have a dog that thinks he is Alexander Haig–he believes he is in charge and I find myself doing what he wants to do. Now, my cars have taken a lot of control from me. They decide when they are going to shift, there is little feel of the road, the cruise control regulates the speed, the temperature is automatically contolled and the bluetooth system tells me to answer the phone. About the only place where I have a little bit of control any more is the lawnmower and even it stops if I let go of the handle.
Maybe it’s better this way. I’m one week away from 70 and my brain probably doesn’t function as well any more.
I’d have to say that antilock brakes and stability control are good things, as are airbags. I’ve had the stability control intervene on my newer vehicle, and while it’s disconcerting, it will also save your @$$ if you’re having an inattentive moment. And I can turn it off if I feel like driving like a 16 year old.
Arguing against the improvements in cars is like arguing against smoke alarms and ground fault interrupters. The only good that not having these features would do is that it would keep some stupid people out of the gene pool, aka. Darwin.
While I think that things like power steering, power brakes, air conditioning and heat are great for personal ease and comfort, things like self-parking and GPS are things I prefer to do without. ANYONE above the age of 16 should know how to parallel park; it’s one of the things they teach in Driver’s ED. And as for GPS, I say learn how to read a map; that was another thing taught in Driver’s ED., at least it still was back in 1978 when I took it. Of course, you’ll need to pull over and STOP to read a map, too, and for safety reasons, you should. No one should put too much trust in technology. And another thing, why do vehicles need to be rolling entertainment centers? When you’re driving, both eyes need to be on the road and, every few seconds, scanning your mirrors and dash gauges. And these days, factory-installed radios, CD players, and speakers offer PLENTY of high-quality sound; there’s no need to buy aftermarket ground-shaking car audio equipment of the kind of quality you’d use in your living room; and you should keep the volume at a reasonable level anyway, for 2 good reasons: A) that you don’t offend other people around you, and B) so you won’t be deaf by the time you’re 35-40 years old. Makes you wonder how many 20-something folks will be in need of hearing aids in the next 10 years.
I’d be willing to bet that when they got rid of hand cranks to start car engines there were a bunch of people whining about the wimps who had electric starters…
All of this “power this” and “automatic that” stuff is cool and all, but I think the market is overdue for a really basic mode of transport without all that stuff but with a cheap price.
I’ll be watching the Fiat 500 to see if it succeeds. If its quality is good I hope it does.
Triedaq, a happy 70th to you. I too wish I could still get in and out of a Miata.
Like most people I am somewhat spoiled to the comforts offered by today’s cars but honestly, if someone offered a car similar to a VW 181 with no more than the barest of essentials and excellent reliability I would be very interested. Most of my driving is at or below 45 mph and with such a vehicle there would be no need for power steering or brakes. If the temperature is too hot or too cold I stay home. Simplicity is a real asset.
Mountainbike; the Tata Nano will soon make it to our shores. It will be as basic as they come; power nothing, small engine, 1 wiper, beach chair type seats, etc. The Indian price of $3000 will increase to $5000 once all the safety and emission gear is added.
I’ve been reading about that. It might be the perfect urban assault and/or college student car vehicle once the bugs are worked out. I guess the one they’re planning to ship here will have a slightly larger engine than the one they’re selling in India to male it able to meet our basic needs.
I’m looking forward to seeing one…I think.
And I wonder what happene dt the Cherry that Malcolm Bricklin was supposed to bring here?
Malcolm Bricklin is a promotor par excellence but without the normal scruples or morals. His initial imports were very mediocre Subarus, then he conned the New Brunswick, Canada government into bankrolling his “Bricklin” sports car. When that folded he fled the country and geared up for something else. Importing Chinese cars may have been a good idea, but when several Cherry models were crash tested the results were dramatic, and Cherry would have to back to the drawing board to come up with a complete redesign.
It’s much tougher to import cars these days because of the tough standards.
Tata has very deep pockets and the engineering knowhow of Jaguar and Landrover will be used to get the models ready for US roads. More power is definitely needed as well.
I agree on all points.
I should add that the Bricklin sportscar was…shall we say…underengineered?
I’m not bemoaning the days before airbags and antilock brakes. Those are great. It’s kust the outlandish luxury interiors, wide tires and overpowered engines that bug me.
Mountainbike; I worked with a car buff who took a great interest in the Bricklin when it came out. He saw no future for the company or the car whatsoever, but bought one for $7500 as he believed it would definitely become a museum piece and a collecctor’s item.
Not sure what happened, but “underengineering” is a very kind description of the Bricklin.
Wide tires I feel are a response to the notion that good handling contributes to safety and adequate passing and merging power on today’s crowded highways does the same. Awd, towing and minivans with 7 people and loads also mean that car companies find it cheaper to put adequate power in all their models with fewer motor designs instead of specializing too much. Lowered powered cars when compared to the competition just don’t seem sell as well. When deciding which car to buy, people seem to be willing to make that 2 mpg sacrifice for 50 more hp. Over time, the hp just creeps up.
One aspect that hasn’t been mentioned in this thread is maintenance.
Anyone remember 1K oil changes? 10k points, plugs, and condensors? (My memory may be bad here!) 10K front bearing repack? If your engine lasted to 100K you did good?
In those days, owning a car also meant an investment in maintenance. There was no escaping it. Failure to do so qyuickly resulted in an expensive lesson.
Nowadays, 100K is the minimum - and you don’t have to do anything but change oil!
- and that’s where I want to go. If the only thing that needs to be done is an oil change, people tend to forget and ignore it.
“Honestly, Mr. Servicewriter, I don’t even know what that light is. Oil can? What’s that? It’s only been on for 6 months. Why isn’t my warranty going to cover the repairs?”
Oil changes every thousand miles? Nope, don’t remember that. How old are you?
Littlemouse,
It’s not so much how old I am. It’s that I got a really good history lesson from my father when I started maintaining cars. He talked about all the things that needed to be done. As a result, I’ve never had a failure due to maintenance.
He also explained how this has changed over the years. He predicted that the amount of maintenance needed would decrease over time - to the point where hardly any would be needed. He didn’t expect to see that happen - and he was wrong. He’s still here!
I feel cars are built to have a useful life of 12-15 years…With great care, some can be driven for 20 years…But that is their design life…If it turns out a part is “over-engineered” for a particular purpose, you can be SURE the manufacturer will correct that unnecessary expense in future models… This mind-set holds true for almost all “durable consumer goods”…15-20 years is durable enough…
"Oil changes every thousand miles? Nope, don’t remember that. How old are you? "
littlemouse–I am 70 years old and I remember back in the 1950s that a 1000 mile oil change was common. My dad extended the oil change interval to 2000 miles, but did have the chassis lubricated every 1000 miles. When I bought an almost new Rambler back in 1965, the owner’s manual called for an oil and filter change every 4000 miles. I thought this was too far, so I changed oil and filter every 3000 miles.
One thing to remember–back in the 1950s and before, many cars did not have an oil filter.
I remember an old billboard on the side of an old building in my city that was up as recently as 1990 I think. It advertised “Kendall, the 2,000 mile motor oil!” Oils and engines have come a long way. Some folks on ‘bobistheoilguy.com’ don’t change their oil for 10K miles or more, which I think is more of a weird hobby than a cost savings.
My mother has a 2011 Nissan Armada and that thing has everything. It took me a few days to figure out what all the buttons in the interior went to. I love this Truck!