It seem like cars haven't changed all that much in terms of styling, and it seems like cars have changed very little since 2013. Most cars look just like last years' model, and things they claim to be "new" are not really "new" since it the same as last years' model.
Old cars vs New cars
- Thread starter maytag85
- Start date
Help Support :
twintubdexter
Well-known member
must have been a bad batch of popcorn...
<span style="font-size: 14pt; color: #008000;">Some old cars waiting for the double feature to start. The Salton Sea is not all that far from the Palm Springs area. Occasionally the summer breeze brings the fragrance of algae and thousands of rotting fish to my back yard. Let's move the picnic indoors.</span>
<span style="font-size: 14pt; color: #008000;">Some old cars waiting for the double feature to start. The Salton Sea is not all that far from the Palm Springs area. Occasionally the summer breeze brings the fragrance of algae and thousands of rotting fish to my back yard. Let's move the picnic indoors.</span>
I want my Hardtop--my FOUR-DOOR Hardtop!
-- Dave
-- Dave
car love
I keep reading in various sources that young people, particularly millenials, are bypassing car ownership these days. Obviously, that's only in areas where there is alternative means of getting about, but I do think that the love affair Americans have with cars is ending. I won't go into how boring or look-alike or motivated by ever-more electronic toys--you all know that anyway.
You know what I don't understand? Why have people willingly given up color choices? I went to the Benz website recently to check out their sedans and there are only a few colors there, mostly variations of silver and brown. We generally have only a few choices of interior colors: Mouse-fur gray, mouse-fur brown, gray/black or some approximation of beige. Where are the blues, the greens, the reds?
Eddie, I owned the '66 LeMans version of your '67 Skylark. It was amazing to drive, that same 2-speed auto, the Pontiac 326 instead of the Buick 340. It was just the right size. I owned a '72 Buick Skylark convertible, the last year, in a deep green with matching interior and white top. I sure with I had it back!
It used to be typical for Cadillac, for example, to offer 10-20 upholstery colors and combinations even on the DeVilles. These creepy little Cadillacs now look like something a high school kid drew in study hall. That, or ugly 'sport' utilities that are disguised Chevy suburbans.
I like the safety of my modern car. But gone are the days when we used to eagerly take a Saturday and go hit all the local car dealers to look at the new models every fall.
I keep reading in various sources that young people, particularly millenials, are bypassing car ownership these days. Obviously, that's only in areas where there is alternative means of getting about, but I do think that the love affair Americans have with cars is ending. I won't go into how boring or look-alike or motivated by ever-more electronic toys--you all know that anyway.
You know what I don't understand? Why have people willingly given up color choices? I went to the Benz website recently to check out their sedans and there are only a few colors there, mostly variations of silver and brown. We generally have only a few choices of interior colors: Mouse-fur gray, mouse-fur brown, gray/black or some approximation of beige. Where are the blues, the greens, the reds?
Eddie, I owned the '66 LeMans version of your '67 Skylark. It was amazing to drive, that same 2-speed auto, the Pontiac 326 instead of the Buick 340. It was just the right size. I owned a '72 Buick Skylark convertible, the last year, in a deep green with matching interior and white top. I sure with I had it back!
It used to be typical for Cadillac, for example, to offer 10-20 upholstery colors and combinations even on the DeVilles. These creepy little Cadillacs now look like something a high school kid drew in study hall. That, or ugly 'sport' utilities that are disguised Chevy suburbans.
I like the safety of my modern car. But gone are the days when we used to eagerly take a Saturday and go hit all the local car dealers to look at the new models every fall.
lordkenmore
Well-known member
Limited color choices are not a new thing. There was, of course, that line about the Model T: "Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black."
Past that, though, it seems like color choices have been limited for years. I don't recall any car I knew much about since the 1980s that had more than a small selection of color choices. It's always amazed me seeing lists of colors for 1960s US cars which were longer and had more variety than the case in recent history.
I have wondered if part of the limited choices isn't a move to make things easier for the car maker, particularly one assembling a car across the world. Limited colors mean fewer variations for the car maker to deal with.
Past that, though, it seems like color choices have been limited for years. I don't recall any car I knew much about since the 1980s that had more than a small selection of color choices. It's always amazed me seeing lists of colors for 1960s US cars which were longer and had more variety than the case in recent history.
I have wondered if part of the limited choices isn't a move to make things easier for the car maker, particularly one assembling a car across the world. Limited colors mean fewer variations for the car maker to deal with.
It seems like a lot of millienials lease cars, instead of owning a car. I may have been born in 1999, wich makes me a millienial, but I have like the style of vintage cars. It almost seems like I was born in the wrong generation. My first car is a 1986 Chevy Camaro Z28, and I plan on keeping that car for as long as I can. All millienials care about, is having all the electronic crap that you don't need in a car, and they complain about how older cars don't have a lot of technology. Millienials are spoiled, and they think they are entitled to have everything. I can go on and on on why I don't like my generation!
Being an industrial designer and working with destructive tests so many years, I definitely prefer newer cars because of safety.Some models are interesting, because the little Philippe Starck near me loves "weird" looking cars.
I am probably the only person in the world that loves the cosmetic design in some Citroen, Renaults, Nissan Juke, Fiat 500, Mini, Ford Ka, Fiat Mobi, Fiat Panoramica (considered the ugliest car ever made)
On the other hand i hate some american designs like the 90's Ford Taurus (upside down soup plate) and Ford Escort (absolutely nothing to do with the European/Brazilian Escort)
I loved the design on Chevrolet HHR and SSR, but i owned a HHR and it was the worst crap I've ever had. When i bought it brand new, the driver window wasn't working. Think of leaving the dealer with a brand new car that was already "fixed". Anyway, the next day i left the dealer with my brand new car with the fixed window and before the first block there was a speet bump and the window simply fell. 5 minutes after leaving the dealer "with my brand new car that already had a window fixed", i was back to the dealer with "a brand new car that had the windows fixed but it broke and the car was full of glass everywhere" Add to that 23 visits to the dealer, a total of 4.5 months driving a lender car out of the 6 months I owned that crap. People was already thinking i worked at the Chevrolet dealer because i was there "clocking in" almost every day. Until I threatened to sue the dealer and they accepted the return and refunded me the money. Chevrolet never again in my life.
I am the kind of 8 or 80 guy. I love cars that are tiny (like the Smart, Mini or Ford Ka) or huge cars, like the Ford Expedition I dream about having someday.
And even loving strange looking designs, please, don't ever remind me that Chrysler car which name that has two letters should never be mentioned. If I could I would beat the designers that created the PT cruiser with "Havainanas" sandals.
Oh, and I also love the "old" new beetle. But i didn't fall in love with the "new" new beetle design.
If i would drive a classic car? like 1950s, 60s or 70s, no f-word present continuous way! As Ralph Nader said once, they're unsafe at any speed! My husband's life and my life are much more important than style. Some models are amazingly beautiful, but they all are designed to keep the car nearly intact but full of dead bodies in a crash.
I am probably the only person in the world that loves the cosmetic design in some Citroen, Renaults, Nissan Juke, Fiat 500, Mini, Ford Ka, Fiat Mobi, Fiat Panoramica (considered the ugliest car ever made)
On the other hand i hate some american designs like the 90's Ford Taurus (upside down soup plate) and Ford Escort (absolutely nothing to do with the European/Brazilian Escort)
I loved the design on Chevrolet HHR and SSR, but i owned a HHR and it was the worst crap I've ever had. When i bought it brand new, the driver window wasn't working. Think of leaving the dealer with a brand new car that was already "fixed". Anyway, the next day i left the dealer with my brand new car with the fixed window and before the first block there was a speet bump and the window simply fell. 5 minutes after leaving the dealer "with my brand new car that already had a window fixed", i was back to the dealer with "a brand new car that had the windows fixed but it broke and the car was full of glass everywhere" Add to that 23 visits to the dealer, a total of 4.5 months driving a lender car out of the 6 months I owned that crap. People was already thinking i worked at the Chevrolet dealer because i was there "clocking in" almost every day. Until I threatened to sue the dealer and they accepted the return and refunded me the money. Chevrolet never again in my life.
I am the kind of 8 or 80 guy. I love cars that are tiny (like the Smart, Mini or Ford Ka) or huge cars, like the Ford Expedition I dream about having someday.
And even loving strange looking designs, please, don't ever remind me that Chrysler car which name that has two letters should never be mentioned. If I could I would beat the designers that created the PT cruiser with "Havainanas" sandals.
Oh, and I also love the "old" new beetle. But i didn't fall in love with the "new" new beetle design.
If i would drive a classic car? like 1950s, 60s or 70s, no f-word present continuous way! As Ralph Nader said once, they're unsafe at any speed! My husband's life and my life are much more important than style. Some models are amazingly beautiful, but they all are designed to keep the car nearly intact but full of dead bodies in a crash.
Where I once thought "a great a car is not complete without a power seat", I have gone to abhor the thing--it's slow to move, and while I've gotten used to my wife needing it forward (she is real short) I really dislike the thing being up above the floor, so I have to wait during that power adjustment for it to come down...
I miss the days of a manual seat (which her car has--but the Chevy Cruz puts the latch way under the side closest to the console, so you have to be sitting in it, because it's so hard to reach, but I need to move the seat first just to get in!)...
I've seen power seats in cars, of which the people who drove, that probably don't need them (one couple I knew had one, but only "he" was the only driver, until "she" learned, got her license, then wrecked their car, hence afterwards, gave up driving, and retired from work, so then she no longer needed a car, all the while there was a difference in height, but her reason for driving became when "he" fell into ill health and then died)...
Now, a CRUISE CONTROL! --That is something cars old and new NEED to have--I see old cars that often have everything but THEM (surprisingly my wife's Cruz, a NEW car doesn't') and maybe a sun/moonroof, and to me, that can make a car relatively underivable (I wonder how you can enjoy driving something even that vintage without!)... So I hate driving my wife's for that reason...
-- Dave
I miss the days of a manual seat (which her car has--but the Chevy Cruz puts the latch way under the side closest to the console, so you have to be sitting in it, because it's so hard to reach, but I need to move the seat first just to get in!)...
I've seen power seats in cars, of which the people who drove, that probably don't need them (one couple I knew had one, but only "he" was the only driver, until "she" learned, got her license, then wrecked their car, hence afterwards, gave up driving, and retired from work, so then she no longer needed a car, all the while there was a difference in height, but her reason for driving became when "he" fell into ill health and then died)...
Now, a CRUISE CONTROL! --That is something cars old and new NEED to have--I see old cars that often have everything but THEM (surprisingly my wife's Cruz, a NEW car doesn't') and maybe a sun/moonroof, and to me, that can make a car relatively underivable (I wonder how you can enjoy driving something even that vintage without!)... So I hate driving my wife's for that reason...
-- Dave
And yes, one other thing about power seats: Even the reclining is done for you--I have to do my non-driving reclining there, in the fully non-powered passenger seat of my Chrysler 200, or enjoy it in either driver or passenger side of my wife's Cruz; only good thing about her car, perfect to recline-relax in...
Also what's with the need for lumbar support? Seems as though that shows up in a lot of new cars, though sometimes I welcome the back-rake adjustment, though new cars are just as obsessed w/ height adjustment on their seats, too (see my pre. post)...
-- Dave
Also what's with the need for lumbar support? Seems as though that shows up in a lot of new cars, though sometimes I welcome the back-rake adjustment, though new cars are just as obsessed w/ height adjustment on their seats, too (see my pre. post)...
-- Dave
Have a bad back and you'll apprectiate that lumbar support.. I had it in my 84 Volvo. My Forester also has it thankfully, and it's powered. However, rarely does anyone drive my car so the drivers seat is seldom moved. It's also got a giant sunroof which I seldom open.. I can live without a sunroof. The must haves for me were power windows , locks and air conditioning.. pretty much standard today. I really really really like the adaptive cruise control on the Subaru.. it's well worth it. I only wished it had the rain sensing wipers that my little Mazda had..
norgeway
Well-known member
One of the most beautiful cars I ever got to drve
Was a 1978 Chrysler New Yorker Brougham, White, with a red vinyl top, White leather seats, red dash, carpet and door panels, and every button in the book, it was the most comfortable thing I ever sat down in and the best riding too, You absolutely didn't feel anything , WONDERFUL!A good friend was a mechanic and several times I got to take cars back to there owners and this was one of them, I also got to drive a 55 Desoto Fireflite Sportsman with factory air,and several other great cars, The Desoto was a local doctors car that he drove from 55 until the 90s when he quit driving, It had EVERY option that Chrysler offered, he also had a 64 Imperial and a 78 New Yorker like the white one but his was burgundy inside and out, New stuff is so boring..LOL
Was a 1978 Chrysler New Yorker Brougham, White, with a red vinyl top, White leather seats, red dash, carpet and door panels, and every button in the book, it was the most comfortable thing I ever sat down in and the best riding too, You absolutely didn't feel anything , WONDERFUL!A good friend was a mechanic and several times I got to take cars back to there owners and this was one of them, I also got to drive a 55 Desoto Fireflite Sportsman with factory air,and several other great cars, The Desoto was a local doctors car that he drove from 55 until the 90s when he quit driving, It had EVERY option that Chrysler offered, he also had a 64 Imperial and a 78 New Yorker like the white one but his was burgundy inside and out, New stuff is so boring..LOL
My friend Dennis had a new 75 NY Brougham coupe back in the day (all black exterior and leather interior) . It was gorgeous.
lordkenmore
Well-known member
Cruise control
has never been an item on my "must have" list. A relative commented that once I had it I'd find it indispensable or something like that. Maybe if I ever had it. (Most of my cars were too low end to have cruise control. The last two cars' cruise control systems were broken.) But I look at the nature of the traffic where I live, and think cruise control is pointless. There is no set it on 60, and zoom for hours and hours with no interruption here... And I don't take road trips to places where traffic moves better.
has never been an item on my "must have" list. A relative commented that once I had it I'd find it indispensable or something like that. Maybe if I ever had it. (Most of my cars were too low end to have cruise control. The last two cars' cruise control systems were broken.) But I look at the nature of the traffic where I live, and think cruise control is pointless. There is no set it on 60, and zoom for hours and hours with no interruption here... And I don't take road trips to places where traffic moves better.
gusherb
Well-known member
The only time I get to use cruise control anymore is in the western states. So I find it mostly useless. What I DO find useful would be adaptive cruise control, that I could use all day long on the expressways around here.
All of my cars have had cruise control and I couldn't do without it. I use it every time I am in the car. The cruise control on my Lincoln MKC can be set to be either adaptive or regular. I like the adaptive cruise control but I find that the gap it leaves with the car in front is too big even when I have it set at the closest setting....in very heavy traffic, other cars are always cutting in front which just causes my car to slow down even more....very annoying to me. I usually end up putting my foot on the accelerator thereby overriding the adaptive cruise control, so that I can lessen the gap.
Gary
Gary
philr
Well-known member
I like vehicles that are old enough so I don't have to deal with depreciation so I never had a car that was less then 10 years old. Currently, I don't have a vehicle that's even close to be just 10 years old! I never sold a vehicle for less than I bought it. I did give away a few to friends but I won't count that as I didn't sell these!
I used to drive my 1960s cars daily but the first one I got back in October of 1992 (a few months before I was old enough to drive!) was the same age as my current daily driver which is a 1993 Toyota. And with over 239,000 miles, my Toyota has more than twice the mileage that any of my 1960s and 1970s cars ever had.
There are more safety features in my 1975 Buick Electra than there are in my 1993 Toyota pickup but I can't afford to drive the old Buicks daily so I mostly drive my newer vehicles with less safety features!
I still have my 1965 Wildcat and 1967 Riviera taking most of the space in my garage (along with another 1966 GM product, I'll let you guess what it is as it's visible on the picture below!) so I have to leave my drivers outside and my Electra is stored in my appliance storage.
I used to drive my 1960s cars daily but the first one I got back in October of 1992 (a few months before I was old enough to drive!) was the same age as my current daily driver which is a 1993 Toyota. And with over 239,000 miles, my Toyota has more than twice the mileage that any of my 1960s and 1970s cars ever had.
There are more safety features in my 1975 Buick Electra than there are in my 1993 Toyota pickup but I can't afford to drive the old Buicks daily so I mostly drive my newer vehicles with less safety features!
I still have my 1965 Wildcat and 1967 Riviera taking most of the space in my garage (along with another 1966 GM product, I'll let you guess what it is as it's visible on the picture below!) so I have to leave my drivers outside and my Electra is stored in my appliance storage.
More safety-features on that '75 Buick? Well, I bet it's not those frameless panes of glass... --Nor the lack of pillars between those four doors, but like I said, I want my hard-top, four-doors, and all!
No roll-bar, either...
-- Dave
No roll-bar, either...
-- Dave
philr
Well-known member
Dave, It does have 5 mph bumpers that all cars had back then, door beams and dual stage air bags with more advanced technology than most late 1990s cars had (and certainly better than my current 1993 Toyota pickup that doesn't even have a driver side airbag!).
I was in an accident with a strong side impact with my former 1968 Buick 4 door hardtop and while the car wasn't fixable, the side glass shattered and the rear door, the roof and quarter panel were seriously bent but the center post didn't even move and the front door still opened and closed perfectly. I wasn't so lucky with another similar 1993 Toyota that I had (but this time, it was a frontal collision)
This link below shows pictures of 1970s GM cars with airbags. I also added a few from my car. Fortunately, I didn't have to test them yet but apparently, they did save a few lives. I uploaded the pictures from the pickup in which I had an accident that left me with a few problems and pictures of 1970s cars with similar or worse frontal collisions in which their owners were apparently saved by the airbags.
I was in an accident with a strong side impact with my former 1968 Buick 4 door hardtop and while the car wasn't fixable, the side glass shattered and the rear door, the roof and quarter panel were seriously bent but the center post didn't even move and the front door still opened and closed perfectly. I wasn't so lucky with another similar 1993 Toyota that I had (but this time, it was a frontal collision)
This link below shows pictures of 1970s GM cars with airbags. I also added a few from my car. Fortunately, I didn't have to test them yet but apparently, they did save a few lives. I uploaded the pictures from the pickup in which I had an accident that left me with a few problems and pictures of 1970s cars with similar or worse frontal collisions in which their owners were apparently saved by the airbags.
OK, Phil... I read everything, and I believe I'd seen some other photo's of your '75 Buick & probably recalling it having those airbags...
Surely there could have been more of those GM cars ordered with 'em, but buyers weren't willing to sacrifice the traditional instrument panel layout, and I wouldn't have been either...
I see the armrest-stealing passenger seat, too! (I like the dual-armrests that GM briefly experimented with, putting them in the '77-'78 models more frequently, if not pushing the d'Elegance (Cadillac) models that featured them standard (the '79's, onward, had the not-so-attractive, to me, seating pattern and back to the traditional-GM split-front seat) & encouraged a number of owners to get... (I would have!)
-- Dave
Surely there could have been more of those GM cars ordered with 'em, but buyers weren't willing to sacrifice the traditional instrument panel layout, and I wouldn't have been either...
I see the armrest-stealing passenger seat, too! (I like the dual-armrests that GM briefly experimented with, putting them in the '77-'78 models more frequently, if not pushing the d'Elegance (Cadillac) models that featured them standard (the '79's, onward, had the not-so-attractive, to me, seating pattern and back to the traditional-GM split-front seat) & encouraged a number of owners to get... (I would have!)
-- Dave
vacerator
Well-known member
Those old 70's
land yachts were tanks, wether they were colonade coupes, sedans or hard tops.
They did however lack crumple zones to absorb impact. The other main draw back was fuel economy.
If the frame wasn't bent in a collision, a new front dog house could be put on, negating the vehicle being totaled if it was new enough. Minor frame distortions were often straightened. The 5 mph bumper often survived unscaved as the car nose dived upon braking, and or retracted back on it's hydraulic mounts. If not, a hole was drilled into the side of the shock absorber, and pressure relieved, an a new one installed.
If you were belted in, with both lap and shoulder belts, chances of injury were greatly decreased as you had so much more space inside, and more bulk around the vehicle. Even without air bags. Today, they are detrimental because of the lack of room and heft. Even then some kill you.
My sister was broadsided in a '76 Pontiac Catalina by a '79 Cadillac going 35 mph in the right front wheel. Spun her around 90 degrees, but she was not hurt. The wheel was crooked, the hood raised up 3 feet sideways. It was a total loss because it happened in the 80's. That was a near mint car too. She bought it from an older neighbor. Only had 76,000 miles on it.
land yachts were tanks, wether they were colonade coupes, sedans or hard tops.
They did however lack crumple zones to absorb impact. The other main draw back was fuel economy.
If the frame wasn't bent in a collision, a new front dog house could be put on, negating the vehicle being totaled if it was new enough. Minor frame distortions were often straightened. The 5 mph bumper often survived unscaved as the car nose dived upon braking, and or retracted back on it's hydraulic mounts. If not, a hole was drilled into the side of the shock absorber, and pressure relieved, an a new one installed.
If you were belted in, with both lap and shoulder belts, chances of injury were greatly decreased as you had so much more space inside, and more bulk around the vehicle. Even without air bags. Today, they are detrimental because of the lack of room and heft. Even then some kill you.
My sister was broadsided in a '76 Pontiac Catalina by a '79 Cadillac going 35 mph in the right front wheel. Spun her around 90 degrees, but she was not hurt. The wheel was crooked, the hood raised up 3 feet sideways. It was a total loss because it happened in the 80's. That was a near mint car too. She bought it from an older neighbor. Only had 76,000 miles on it.
