Past, Present, and Future

[TVC]

Is it only me who thinks cars are going down hill? Not only the companies but the actual cars. Look at the F40 compared to the Enzo. Or the Porsche 993 to the 996. Or even a new Civic compared to a 5th or 6th gen civic.

I don't really know the point I am trying to make but it seems like cars are going down hill and companies are focusing on different things. There are great cars today but they don't seem to be able to match the style of cars 10-20 years ago.

Does anyone agree with me or am I just stuck in the past when it comes to this stuff? To me the 80's and 90's were the height of car design (except for American companies). The basis for modern super cars came out of that period.

I see some new designs and I am like (BMW 7 series F01/F02).

 

[YSSMAN]

Depends on what you're looking for, and what we're talking about. Certainly some sacrifices have been made in the search for safety, fuel economy, and the constant pursuit of "luxury" or "comfort," and while I may miss the old days of pre-ABS and airbag technology, I understand how important it is to have when out there on the roads.

I can certainly think of some cars that have moved downhill over the past few generations, but there are also some that have moved forward significantly... And will even further as time moves on. Progress is progress, and the good news is, we still have the used car market.

 

[Philly]

I agree. Why? Cars are becoming more and more regulated. Fuel economy and emissions are putting restrictions on engines, and safety regulations are forcing weight through the roof. These are also giving rise to electronics, so the car is less machine and more computer these days. So from a a car enthusiast's standpoint, that makes everything seem like it's going downhill. It is pretty cool from an engineering standpoint to see what complicated things everybody is coming up with to counteract all the extra restrictions.

As for design, I think the last few years were a very low point overall. There used to be so many designs that looked so cool, and then it looked as if the designers were trying too hard making complicated for a while. But if the auto show circuit this year is any indication, we're going to start seeing some very cool things coming out in the future. Just don't expect cars to get less porky and have bigger engines any time soon.

 

[Nikkolaz]

i agree, but i like german cars more than before
BTW im new, i've been reading this forum and i love it

 

[niky]

It depends on what you want in a car.

If lightness is what you want, then that's out the window... modern regulations and a growing market (literally... people.are.getting.bigger) basically doom your typical supermini to weigh as much as a compact of a few generations ago, and your typical compact to weigh as much as a midsizer of just two or three generations ago.

Involvement? depends on where you find it. Electric steering has killed steering feel on most cars, but some still have it (European Focus) and some cars handle quite well without it (MX-5, Honda Fit).

Do I miss the heroes of yesteryear? Yup. The first generation MX-5... the DC-5 Honda Integra... the soulful engine note of a 1970's Barracuda. But do I wish to turn back the clock? No.

Ever had to tune a carb in the cold hours of the morning when the car wouldn't start? Or choke it clean, burning your hand on a hot throttle-plate? Ever have your car die climbing uphill, as the carb couldn't cope with the altitude? Ever had to un-snag a stuck-up throttle cable? Ever had an explosive blow-out at 160 km/h because you were using tubed tires? Poke your hand through a rear fender that rust had eaten into in just a few months? Have a muffler rust clear off in just a year?

Modern cars are 100% more convenient than cars that came before them. And 100% safer. And safer invariably means stiffer. And stiffer means that your modern Toyota Corolla, given the proper tires and suspension, could probably out-corner a 20 year old Porsche. And modern Porsches are likewise incredibly far-out, in terms of ability.

There are things that have gone downhill, yes. That feeling of involvement is the first one to go. But if you know where to look, you can find it. Just not where you were expecting. Not with the big, mechanically grippy and stupendously powerful sportscars of today, but with the new batch of small cars... modern bangers that can put a smile on your face on the proper road.

And manufacturers are finding ways of making the technology more transparent. People didn't like hydraulic power steering when it first came out... and in the last ten years, they perfected it... now, manufacturers are finding ways of engineering "feel" back into electric racks (reference Mazda6). It's only a matter of time before we're taking these things for granted.

And even with modern emissions, cars can still have an engine note to raise your hackles:



And I dare you, without looking at the youtube page... to guess what this car is...



Still one of my favorite engine notes of any car I've test driven...

 

[eiriksmil]

Is it only me who thinks cars are going down hill? Not only the companies but the actual cars. Look at the F40 compared to the Enzo. Or the Porsche 993 to the 996. Or even a new Civic compared to a 5th or 6th gen civic.

I don't really know the point I am trying to make but it seems like cars are going down hill and companies are focusing on different things. There are great cars today but they don't seem to be able to match the style of cars 10-20 years ago.

Does anyone agree with me or am I just stuck in the past when it comes to this stuff? To me the 80's and 90's were the height of car design (except for American companies). The basis for modern super cars came out of that period.

I see some new designs and I am like (BMW 7 series F01/F02).

I prefer older cars because they are tin cans, but new cars are comfortable as [ Come on, Erik, don't pull stuff like this 👎 ] compared to older. Design wise, I have a soft spot for cars from the 70s, because they are still fresh, and cars from the 80s, because of the character in the squareness and the "non-appeal". Most of the latter look ****, you just have to know what to do to make them nice The worst modded 80s cars I see are the ones that are trying to be "modern".
I prefer old cars and how they look, but I like many new cars as well. You can't compare a F40 directly to an Enzo really. They are both good designs from each era.

I think the reason for why we like old cars and the designs is just because they are old. Cars from this era are probably "great designs" in 20 years time

 

[niky]

And lest we all go lovey-dovey on the 80's and 90's... one word... "Aztek".

 

[Slick Rick]

Im not sure about going down hill but I think all or most new cars have gotten bigger and fatter than their predecessors.
That said though cars have come leaps and bounds in terms of comfort, safety and effeciency but at a sacrafice of performance. This being a car forum with lots of car enthusiats most of us are going to agree they have gotten worse but maybe a family man not concerned about performance will think cars have gotten a lot better since the 80's 90's

 

[Stotty]

Bah, rose tinted glasses me thinks.

Styling is always a mater of taste of course, but in almost every other way (performance, safety, handling, road holding, comfort, fuel consumption) cars have improved massively over the past 10-20 years.

Driving ‘feel’ may have been eroded somewhat, but this is generally a result of the increase in weight, which is a direct consequence of things such as…

• Consumers generally wanting bigger cars
• Vast improvement in safety (ABS, Airbags, ESP, traction control, EBD, crumple zones, side impact protection)
• Introduction of efficiency improving features such as electric steering and extended service intervals.
• Vast improvement in the quality of materials used in interiors
• Increases of equipment levels (eg; almost every car sold now has AC as standard)

The 996 for example, is a much better car than the 993. It might not have the same style and the engine note isn’t ‘old school 911’ following the move to water cooling, but in every other way it’s a superior car to both drive and own. And the 997 is a huge step forward from the 996.

I remember the cars I owned back in the 80’s and 90’s… some I had to push-start in a morning if it was cold and damp. Most needed servicing every 6k miles (my last BMW managed 20k between minor services). They were less reliable. They were less comfortable. They were certainly less safe in the event of an accident. When I look back at these cars today I don’t miss them!

 

[Barracuda]

Modern cars are 100% more convenient than cars that came before them.

Well that could go either way. I agree a modern car for the average Joe is 100% more convenient than an old car, that is until it comes time to fix or change something. I can change close to anything in my car for the price of the part and an afternoon whereas you might not even be able to change a part in a modern car because you have to take half the car apart to get to it.

I do agree though that for any everyday car it's a small price to pay to be able to have air conditioning, radio, sat nav, air bags, power steering, etc.

 

[Nicksfix]

I am stuck in the '60s - 80's mode , although my personal vehicles are into the 2000's

 

[TheBook]

Well that could go either way. I agree a modern car for the average Joe is 100% more convenient than an old car, that is until it comes time to fix or change something. I can change close to anything in my car for the price of the part and an afternoon whereas you might not even be able to change a part in a modern car because you have to take half the car apart to get to it.

However, the average Joe would probably just take it down to the dealer and have them deal with it. I agree though; I see examples of this at my job all the time, where it takes 10 minutes to get to something as simple as an oil filter.

On topic: It's kind of a toss-up. The everyday drivability of a modern car, or the stripped-down, more enjoyable driving experience of earlier eras?

For the moderns:

• Safety features abound. ABS, TCS, airbags, etc.
• Reliability (to a point); Things are engineered better nowadays.
• The ability to get in, start up, and go.

For the older versions:

• Stripped down, back-to-basics driving: Traction control? ABS? Learn to work your right foot properly.
• Easier to work on (as stated above) when something breaks.
• Weight: Minus all the safety stuff, these cars are feathers compared to the cars of today, which translates to a car that's just plain more enjoyable to drive.

 

[Wolfe]

I agree. Why? Cars are becoming more and more regulated. Fuel economy and emissions are putting restrictions on engines, and safety regulations are forcing weight through the roof.

Exactly. The only safety features that should be required are the seat belt, and crumple zones. Those who want more will buy a car with more. It isn't even a matter of being an enthusiast who wants a light, sporty car -- if manufacturers were given more leeway in safety regulations and emissions, we could finally start seeing the fantasy fuel-efficient vehicles CAFE demands. And if we lowered the average vehicle weight out on the roads, well whaddya know, there would be fewer fatal collisions, fewer instances of loss of control, less wear and tear on vehicles, less wear and tear on road surfaces...the list goes on.

Every engineer knows that weight is the enemy of everything. If only our legislators had half a clue.

Modern cars are also hopelessly complicated. There will likely be no such thing as a reliable 20 year old car 20 years from now (and don't try to tell me they don't exist today). In fact, everything from cars to handheld electronics to appliances are designed to be replaced rather than repaired these days.

It's true that today's cars perform better in almost every way than their older counterparts. But as each year passes, we fall further behind what we could do with today's technology.

 

[The Vanishing Boy]

-> I am somewhat agree with TVC on this part. In my opinion, cars of today are muffled every generation that they came out. Which correlates to driving fun (in my book), but as what most people stated earlier, its all what the individuals think.

-> Like me for exmple, I adore many cars from the '80s up to '05s. Here are my short list:

- '92-'01 Integra's
- '93-'00 Civic's
- E30, E36, & E46 3-series
- E39 5-series
- McLaren F1
- Honda Fit/Jazz (1st gen)
- E38 7-series
- Porsche 993 Turbo/Turbo S/GT2
- Porsche 959
- Pontiac GTO 6.0
- Mitsubishi Lancer (2nd & 6th gen)
- Honda Prelude series
- Acura Legend (2nd Gen)
- Honda CRX
- Honda/Acura NSX series
- Mercedes-Benz W201
- And my car, Honda S2000 series

^ And I'm sort of afraid that most cars are going towards to blandness in due time.

 

[Azuremen]

Cars haven't really gotten worse. Heavier, yes, but they are quite a bit faster than they use to be, handle better, and are safer.

Driving feel is the only possible complaint, and having driven several different MR2s, I have to say the Spyder maintains almost all of the feel my heavily modified AW11 had, while being a lot more civil and stable. People are mistaking character of older cars with their lower quality construction, noise, and bouncy feel from being light and not as well setup in the suspension department.

My opinion of super cars, well, is poor. They are primarily status symbols and people place far too much importance on them.

 

[YSSMAN]

People are mistaking character of older cars with their lower quality construction, noise, and bouncy feel from being light and not as well setup in the suspension department.

Spot-on. While I may love the character of my old Fox more than any other car that I've owned, I'm far enough away where I can see the dangers in what there was. However, it isn't as though I can't get a similar experience with brand new cars that are out there. The MX-5 and Fit Sport that Niky mentioned are perhaps two of the best examples, and the new Maz2/Fiesta comes to mind as well.

 

[Philly]

Exactly. The only safety features that should be required are the seat belt, and crumple zones. Those who want more will buy a car with more. It isn't even a matter of being an enthusiast who wants a light, sporty car -- if manufacturers were given more leeway in safety regulations and emissions, we could finally start seeing the fantasy fuel-efficient vehicles CAFE demands. And if we lowered the average vehicle weight out on the roads, well whaddya know, there would be fewer fatal collisions, fewer instances of loss of control, less wear and tear on vehicles, less wear and tear on road surfaces...the list goes on.

Not to mention that a skilled driver would probably end up safer in a lighter car. A skilled driver is going to have a much better chance of not getting into an accident in the first place if the car can turn on a dime and doesn't take a mile to stop. And then they don't need to rely on all those safety gizmos to save their life because it's not in danger in the first place.

But that'll only apply to skilled, heads up drivers. Many drivers will still need all that extra mass of padding because they wouldn't be able to avoid that telephone pole with unlimited handling.

Modern cars are also hopelessly complicated. There will likely be no such thing as a reliable 20 year old car 20 years from now (and don't try to tell me they don't exist today). In fact, everything from cars to handheld electronics to appliances are designed to be replaced rather than repaired these days.

That's just marketing. Volkswagen is going to make a whole lot more money if the GTI blow up before I go to sell it so that person looking for a VW ends up having to go for a new Golf than if my GTI changed hands, which is a transaction VW won't make any money off of. Well, it's probably not done intentionally, but it is an added bonus for the big corporations.

 

[niky]

Actually... new cars may be terribly complicated, but poor serviceability will depend on the manufacturer... some cars don't require you to have incredible dexterity or a lifter to stencil the engine number come registration.

But electronics make things oh-so-much-simpler, if you have the right equipment. No more yanking this, tapping that, and poring over the engine with a stethoscope... a simple handheld OBD scanner will tell you exactly what's wrong.

And electronics are mostly plug and play... unplug, remove, chuck, buy a new piece. It's interesting to note that a new ECU isn't that far removed in price from a needlessly complicated (especially post-emissions) carburetor. Sure, you need new tools besides your old wrench set, but the modern owner will adapt to the times...

I'm kind of with Azureman on this... people mistake quirks and problems for character... a car can have lots of character without bursting into flames or dying at every stoplight... or both at the same time...

Airbags and EPS requirements don't add significantly to weight... I don't mind these features, but I don't mind not having them, either. It's mostly the need to reinforce bodies to meet crash requirements and customer needs. Now customer needs is the important part here... A modern car carries a crapload of stereo/entertainment equipment, powered/articulated seats (well-cushioned, to boot) and sound insulation. It's amazing how much weight you can lose by stripping out sound insulation from a modern vehicle... hundreds of pounds in foam, tar and etcetera... thick, noise-absorbing glass... thicker engine mounts and even active engine mounts to absorb vibration, extra rubber bushings between the suspension and the chassis to absorb sound... that stuff all adds up.

Stripped of everything strictly un-necessary, a car like, say, the Renault Megane R26.R loses over 120 kilograms. And that's while maintaining the same crashworthiness as the regular car... but the deletions add infinitely more character...

 

[Azuremen]

While cars are still using a design that makes spark plugs a huge hassle (cough Subaru cough)

Sound deadening is huge. Most of the weight is from comfort, more glass (visibility) and so on. I could probably find 40 pounds of stuff to easily pull of my Spyder just to hide ugly mechanical bits and the likes.

And stripped out cars have a lot of character. And may reduce the quality of your hearing

 

[niky]

Hearing? Wossat? I can't hear you over the din of my unmuffled, solid-mounted high-cam motor...

 

[buickgnx88]

Most of the weight is from comfort, more glass (visibility) and so on.

More glass? in the windshield area perhaps. To me it seems like the way cars are designed now, there's less glass in the cabins.

 

[eiriksmil]

Visibility used to be poor, think split-window Beetles for instance. Something happened though, and windows became larger and much seen in the 80s, side windows started going down from the hood and boot instead of just following a line. Now they've grown smaller again.
Visibilty is crap on new cars compared to old, with their crash-improved, thicker pillars. I usually say that you're better off if you crash in a new car, but the chance of having blindspot-related accidents in older cars is smaller.

Some ugly-ass Lancer only I see the potential of (I was brought up in one) Note big windows:

New Lancer:

 

[buickgnx88]

Another "greenhouse" example
Early 60's Dodge Wagon

00's Dodge Magnum

 

[PARAGON GT]

It really depends on what you are looking at.

I would have to say that cars have gotten better mechanically as they have evolved.
Better safty ratings, more features and creature comforts, better handling, breaking and acceleration.

Its a world of difference when I jump from my 2004 Colorado to my 1967 Mustang. Both are fun to drive, but its 2 diffrent era's of thinking are involved. The spray bottle for my window wipers in the Mustang is foot pedel operated (you would think that its an E-brake pedel if you didn't know better) and the hi beams are controled by a switch on the floor. You won't fine either of those things on a Modern car.

Styling is so subjective to who is viewing the car. Its hard to say what era has better styling. I personaly LOVE the styling of cars in the late 60's. But I like most of the cars now a days too. 70's and 80's styling is bla to me.

 

[///M-Spec]

A lot of posters here have said "it depends on what you're looking for", and I'm going to put my hat in with them. Obviously older cars have positive as well as negative qualities and it's all down to what qualities you prefer in an automobile.

But I'm also going to take it a step further and say that some people tend to form strong preferences for certain things at certain stages in their lives (usually positive ones) and keep these preferences over time.

Music is an excellent example of this, as evidence by the lack of people born in the 1940s attending Ludacris concerts as well as people born in the '90s rushing to Atlantic City when Barbara Streisand's in town.

To a lesser extent, cars are very similar in the way they 'imprint' upon the minds of car lovers through the ages. Go to a classic American muscle car and hot rod show and you will generally find people in their late 40s and 50s --because those are the cars they grew up with. Go to an import car show and the crowd will be much younger.

I think this trend in viewing older cars through nostalgia tinted glasses to be just another example of the way people fixate on a certain set of qualities from a particular time (and place).

In the BMW community, of which I've been a member of for well over 15 years now, I've observed repeated cycles of the same trend: a new car comes out. Half the people love it, the other half says the older one was better.

When the E90 came out, lots of people cried about how the E46 was better styled, had more character and how the E90 was 'better' only on paper but had no 'soul'.

Which is exactly what people said about the E46 when it replaced the E36 in 1998. And what they said about the E36 when it replaced the E30 in 1990. And when the E30 replaced the E21 in 1984. And when the E21 replaced the 2002 in 1977. Somewhere out there an old guy is standing by his 1938 BMW 328 Roadster saying "post-war BMWs have no soul and no character".

The bottom line is at some point, someone will say a car has too much X or too little Y for them. Where they choose to draw this line is really more a matter of perspective and circumstance than any solid reasoning.


M

 

[Tornado]

Music is an excellent example of this, as evidence by the lack of people born in the 1940s attending Ludacris concerts

In the BMW community, of which I've been a member of for well over 15 years now, I've observed repeated cycles of the same trend: a new car comes out. Half the people love it, the other half says the older one was better.

Sounds like the Porsche community.

 

[Gil]

Is it only me who thinks cars are going down hill? Not only the companies but the actual cars. Look at the F40 compared to the Enzo. Or the Porsche 993 to the 996. Or even a new Civic compared to a 5th or 6th gen civic.

I don't really know the point I am trying to make but it seems like cars are going down hill and companies are focusing on different things. There are great cars today but they don't seem to be able to match the style of cars 10-20 years ago.

Does anyone agree with me or am I just stuck in the past when it comes to this stuff? To me the 80's and 90's were the height of car design (except for American companies). The basis for modern super cars came out of that period.

I see some new designs and I am like (BMW 7 series F01/F02).

I hate to totally disagree with you, but this forum is all about spirited discussions

With the exception of the fact that I can't fit comfortably in a Civic SI Coupe, I think it's safer, faster, and nominally better looking than any of the earlier Civics, and better looking than ALL but the last generation of Preludes.

I give props to Porsche 993 for being the last air-cooled 911. But, I believe the 996 and 997 are better cars, though not any better looking.
I remember when 911's were infamous for being ready to bite an inattentive driver in the ass with SNAP drop throttle oversteer.
The engineers have mostly worked that out of the design.

While some think the last gen Mustang was awsome, (it is) the new pony car takes me back to my friend Kyle's 66 GT-350H. I can remember my Dad's I6 Coupe. And you can now get a car with a V-6 That not only runs on "cheap" regular instead of premium, it makes similar horsepower to the last gen's V-8.

Sounds like progress to me...

 

[eiriksmil]

Go to a classic American muscle car and hot rod show and you will generally find people in their late 40s and 50s --because those are the cars they grew up with. Go to an import car show and the crowd will be much younger.

...

Somewhere out there an old guy is standing by his 1938 BMW 328 Roadster saying "post-war BMWs have no soul and no character".

And you have another effect.. Take my Corolla, I think it's bad-ass that I drive a RWD Corolla because you never see them anymore, and compared to modern Corollas these cars are sports cars. 25 years ago, these cars were econoboxes, bought by boring people to go back and forth to work with.

On a side note, young people can't have hot rods because they take a lot more time, a lot more patience and a lot more knowledge than your average young guy has.. But few old guys are interested in this modern crap, and on that point you hit the nail on the head.

 

[Azuremen]

And you have another effect.. Take my Corolla, I think it's bad-ass that I drive a RWD Corolla because you never see them anymore, and compared to modern Corollas these cars are sports cars. 25 years ago, these cars were econoboxes, bought by boring people to go back and forth to work with.

The irony is my stock 99 Corolla would destroy an old AE86 at a track. End of story.

 

[Wolfe]

Not to mention that a skilled driver would probably end up safer in a lighter car. A skilled driver is going to have a much better chance of not getting into an accident in the first place if the car can turn on a dime and doesn't take a mile to stop. And then they don't need to rely on all those safety gizmos to save their life because it's not in danger in the first place.

But that'll only apply to skilled, heads up drivers. Many drivers will still need all that extra mass of padding because they wouldn't be able to avoid that telephone pole with unlimited handling.

I was speaking of all drivers. Fewer fatal collisions because there's less kinetic energy. Fewer instances of loss of control because the tires have less weight to push around. Less wear and tear on vehicles because bearings, suspension bits, and other parts have less weight to handle. Less wear and tear on road surfaces because there won't be so many two ton vehicles pounding their tires against the ground.

However, you're right, of course, that skilled drivers will benefit most. With how well cars handle today, just imagine how amazing they'd be with a half ton weight drop.

The irony is my stock 99 Corolla would destroy an old AE86 at a track. End of story.

And minivans, SUVs, and family vehicles can outaccelerate most 1980s sportscars thanks to their big, thirsty V6s.