The Old Vs. The New

  • Thread starter Thread starter RDF97
  • 274 comments
  • 12,045 views
The only reason the stripper models today aren't as stripper as they were even 10 years ago is because there is no cost benefit to offer, say, an F150 that's so basic it doesn't even have a radio.

A lot of the old stuff had radio. And that was about the extent of it. Fine with me, I don't need all that other junk. As long as I have heat in the winter I'm ok. Don't even need A/C.




The main problem with the trucks of today is the external dimensions are getting much too large; particularly with the cartoonish new Silverado.

I'm trying to figure out how they are keeping the weight down by 2,000 pounds. Door tags say they are around 4,700lbs....our '85 weighed 6,600 off the showroom floor. I'd venture with all the iron on it now and the plow it's somewhere in the range of 8,000lbs.
 
Slashfan
A lot of the old stuff had radio. And that was about the extent of it. Fine with me, I don't need all that other junk. As long as I have heat in the winter I'm ok. Don't even need A/C.

That's great, but the people who have the money to buy brand new trucks want A/C. As Toro said, there just isn't a cost benefit to it any more, taking out all the "crap" isn't going to save much weight or money, and for most people buying any vehicle no A/C is a deal breaker.
 
The only reason the stripper models today aren't as stripper as they were even 10 years ago is because there is no cost benefit to offer, say, an F150 that's so basic it doesn't even have a radio.








The main problem with the trucks of today is the external dimensions are getting much too large; particularly with the cartoonish new Silverado.


Ok one thing I love the new 2014 Z71 silverado. Especially the new headlights its by far the best looking new truck. That's my opionon. Haha. Just saying.
 
That's great, but the people who have the money to buy brand new trucks want A/C. As Toro said, there just isn't a cost benefit to it any more, taking out all the "crap" isn't going to save much weight or money, and for most people buying any vehicle no A/C is a deal breaker.
Most of the old ones came with A/C if you wanted it.
Ok one thing I love the new 2014 Z71 silverado. Especially the new headlights its by far the best looking new truck. That's my opionon. Haha. Just saying.

I think it's time for a change, because, ya know they've only used the same design for 50 years.
 
Well of course, from the fuel economy side of it, it makes sense. It's just that, because I pay way too much attention to politics, anything about lower emissions immediately sounds like "OH NOES TEH PLANET WILL BLOW UP IF WE DON'T ALL DRIVE PRIUSES!"

No, that's just in your head.
 
Most of the old ones came with A/C if you wanted it.

And now air conditioning systems are so cheap to make (and so much more efficient in terms of how much power it takes to run) that it is easier and more beneficial overall to include them rather than design a center console insert that doesn't have it and save maybe $100 in parts. It also makes it easier on the production line if the differences between the models in terms of base equipment aren't so drastic, which increases the overall quality long term.


It's the same reason that absolute crapbox economy cars are so much better equipped from the start than the ones from the 90s; and why the OEM market for stuff like aftermarket CD players is so dead now.
 
Last edited:
American cars from the 70's were built with american steel, so they're much stronger than cars that are made modern day.

Care to explain? I wasn't aware that the same type of steel with the same composition of various metals and produced in the same way will be weaker if it's not made in America?


Its America home of big motors and low MPG. I personally do not care if my car is green or not,

Gas mileage should and does matter.

Let me ask, do you pay for your own gas and drive hundreds of miles each week? If you do, wouldn't you want to spend a little less money each week at the pump so that you can put that money towards something else?


Plastic intake manifolds are by now means ideal, but they are hardly just a cost saving measure. They are lighter, easier to isolate for NVH purposes, and are a bit safer for pedestrians.

There's no need to use metal intake manifolds anymore, especially with the advances in plastics. Intake manifolds see very little mechanical stress, making plastic a great alternative, as they do not need to be as stout as other high stress parts. The only thing about plastic manifolds that would be of concern in normal daily use would be the fatigue induced by thermal cycling. I don't know enough about the tons of different plastics out there to talk about their specific properties, but I'm sure it's been thoroughly thought through by engineers.


I'm trying to figure out how they are keeping the weight down by 2,000 pounds. Door tags say they are around 4,700lbs....our '85 weighed 6,600 off the showroom floor. I'd venture with all the iron on it now and the plow it's somewhere in the range of 8,000lbs.

It's called better engineering. They are probably using higher strength steels, thinking more about what actually needs to be metal and what can be plastic, and more efficiently packaging everything so there's less waste. It's great that the new vehicles can do the same work with less; that's just being more efficient.
 
It's called better engineering. They are probably using higher strength steels, thinking more about what actually needs to be metal and what can be plastic, and more efficiently packaging everything so there's less waste. It's great that the new vehicles can do the same work with less; that's just being more efficient.

It's pretty well agreed on in the truck community that the older trucks were way stronger than more stuff on the road today. Way more beefier. I push on the body panels of new trucks and they shake and dent easily. Can't say the same about a '70s truck. Takes a very hard hit from a baseball bat to leave a dent.
 
Why did so many manufacturers produce the same engine for 40+ years and most still offer them on their racing websites? Does that not count as reliable? 350's, 351's, 454's, 460's, 318's etc were all produced for a very long producing run. Hell, some of Ford's motors even out-lived their replacements. You don't see that now either...it's a different motor every few years.
1) Ford & Chevrolet crate engines are about the only exception, but that's only one part of the car. Take into account everything else; interior, wiring, & so forth.

2) It's a different motor because technology has found ways to make the motor better, more efficient, more reliable. That's not saying the old motors aren't, but a regular motor's production lifetime usually allows for a significant improvement for a new one.

The point is I don't believe new stuff lasts as long or was built with as good of quality as things before my time. Simply because I work with this stuff daily, I've come to this conclusion. This is sort of the reason why I prefer the older stuff, besides the obviously styling differences that I've grown to love. I will agree that even though technology wasn't quite as advanced, sometimes keeping things simple is better. I will also accept that not everything produced back then was great, but there was definitely some big highlights that a lot of you are not giving credit to.
Whether you believe it or not, the simple fact is that in general, the average automobile built in the last 10 years compared to the average automobile built in the 60's/70's will outlast it when the variables between both are equal.

Proper maintenance, maintenance costs, & whatever else is irrelevant. Both cars from a new stand point with the same upkeep being done, the new car will live longer without issues because it is designed to.
It's pretty well agreed on in the truck community that the older trucks were way stronger than more stuff on the road today. Way more beefier. I push on the body panels of new trucks and they shake and dent easily. Can't say the same about a '70s truck. Takes a very hard hit from a baseball bat to leave a dent.
I haven't read the rest of this thread since last night, but I hope it's not full of ridiculous, over-exaggeration by you. You can push on a body panel & dent it easily? Does the dent actually stay or are you trying to use the fact that body panels will give some way & then comeback when you put weight on them? Because, that's not the same thing as what you're trying to attempt at making a point of.

Secondly, that doesn't really chance Crash's point. Just because they used a lot of steel & heavier materials back then, does not equal to better engineering.
 
Last edited:
1) Ford & Chevrolet crate engines are about the only exception, but that's only one part of the car. Take into account everything else; interior, wiring, & so forth.

2) It's a different motor because technology has found ways to make the motor better, more efficient, more reliable. That's not saying the old motors aren't, but a regular motor's production lifetime usually allows for a significant improvement for a new one.

Aftermarket takes care of that and everything is up to production specs or better.

Not really. More power from new parts maybe, but that's about the extent of it.

Whether you believe it or not, the simple fact is that in general, the average automobile built in the last 10 years compared to the average automobile built in the 60's/70's will outlast it when the variables between both are equal.

Proper maintenance, maintenance costs, & whatever else is irrelevant. Both cars from a new stand point with the same upkeep being done, the new car will live longer without issues because it is designed to.

Time hasn't told about how new cars of the lot today will last. So one can't draw a conclusion on them yet. I was refering to cars roughly 10 years old.
I haven't read the rest of this thread since last night, but I hope it's not full of ridiculous, over-exaggeration by you. You can push on a body panel & dent it easily? Does the dent actually stay or are you trying to use the fact that body panels will give some way & then comeback when you put weight on them? Because, that's not the same thing as what you're trying to attempt at making a point of.

Secondly, that doesn't really chance Crash's point. Just because they used a lot of steel & heavier materials back then, does not equal to better engineering.
I'm talking about giving them a good push. It really depends on the car and where on the body your pushing it. For example, a light hit from a dog collar left a large dent. Granted, that's not from a a human hand but I bet you do that to an old pickup and nothing happens except maybe you chip the paint.


I didn't say it was better engineering, I said it was better/stronger/heavier steel. Thicker tends to last longer.
 
Time hasn't told about how new cars of the lot today will last. So one can't draw a conclusion on them yet. I was refering to cars roughly 10 years old.

There are a lot more cars from ~1985 on the road now then there were cars from ~1975 ten years ago. The Reliants may largely be gone, but the Celebritys and Centurys and Tempos and Tauruses are still all over the place. I don't see why the situation would reverse for cars from ~1995 or cars from ~2005.
 
There are a lot more cars from ~1985 on the road now then there were cars from ~1975 ten years ago. The Reliants may largely be gone, but the Celebritys and Centurys and Tempos and Tauruses are still all over the place. I don't see why the situation would reverse for cars from ~1995 or cars from ~2005.

I mean, there is significant data pointing to the fact that cars are lasting longer, and people are keeping them longer. Roughly 60% of cars on the road today have more than 100,000 miles on them, and now it's becoming increasingly regular for owners to keep their cars for more than 10 years and 150,000 miles. Certainly the weak economy factors into those numbers, but the simple fact is that in most vehicles newer than 1991, more than 100,000 miles is less than halfway through it's life.

Of course we can talk for days about the four horsemen that'll probably last forever...

  1. Volvo 240
  2. Mercedes W123
  3. GM B-Body
  4. Ford Panther

My brother is enough of a madman to be in that 10% of people that'd want to drive a '70s era GM car everyday. But, he and I know enough to keep the car running, and keep it rust-free. To expect anyone else to do that, even my automotively-inclined friends to do so... It's 900 miles beyond where they'd ever want to be. Expecting most people to do more than a simple oil change, let alone fill the windshield wiper fluid is too much.

We can throw anecdotal stories out there about our cars all the live long day. I can talk about my Grandfather's '89 Prelude Si and the lack of attention it has required. I can talk about the lack of attention we had to give to our '95 Camry that went 220,000 miles before it was offed by a deer. I can talk about my Celica that has had only a single hiccup in it's lifetime.

The simple fact of the matter is that what is new is lasting longer, requiring less maintenance, and costing less overall to own. It's not a matter of what you prefer, or what you perceive to be "easier to work on," it's simple facts based on actual observations.
 
Aftermarket takes care of that and everything is up to production specs or better.
Aftermarket also completely throws this whole argument of old vs. new right out the window.

Not really. More power from new parts maybe, but that's about the extent of it.
Uh, no. Do yourself a favor & look up what has been the biggest concern of automobile manufacturers in the last decade when it comes to designing a new engine. It sure as hell isn't getting more power out of it.

Here's a hint. Preservation of the planet.

Time hasn't told about how new cars of the lot today will last. So one can't draw a conclusion on them yet. I was refering to cars roughly 10 years old.
Oh really? Didn't stop you.
Thats sort of my point though. The only reason my truck is so rusty now is because we don't drive it anymore. So the moisture from the ground rots it out. It's always been well taken care of and it's cheaper to put another 10 grand into it and get annother 20+ years out of it then buy a new one for $40,000 and get half the life this one has already seen.
If we can't make conclusions about the new cars today, how the hell did you come to one that they live half as long as the pile sitting in your yard?

:rolleyes:
I'm talking about giving them a good push. It really depends on the car and where on the body your pushing it. For example, a light hit from a dog collar left a large dent. Granted, that's not from a a human hand but I bet you do that to an old pickup and nothing happens except maybe you chip the paint.
You're so full of it. A dog collar put a dent in a car? Stop exaggerating, goodness. Makes your argument look even worse than it already is.
I didn't say it was better engineering, I said it was better/stronger/heavier steel. Thicker tends to last longer.
Doesn't. Change. His. Point.
 
You're so full of it. A dog collar put a dent in a car? .

Want me to take a picture of it? Cause it's still there. And because like it's your vehicle, you would know exactly what happened to it. :rolleyes:
 
Uh, no. Do yourself a favor & look up what has been the biggest concern of automobile manufacturers in the last decade when it comes to designing a new engine. It sure as hell isn't getting more power out of it.

Here's a hint. Preservation of the planet.

To add to this, while automaker have been making more economical engines that produce less harmful emissions, they've also made engine produce more power at the same time from less displacement. Something like the Focus ST would have been extremely rare 20 years ago with it's 2.0L engine putting out 250hp and getting around 26mpg in a mixed driving environment. Now hot hatches/sport compacts that get good fuel economy and have plenty of power seem to be the norm.

Want me to take a picture of it? Cause it's still there. And because like it's your vehicle, you would know exactly what happened to it. :rolleyes:

Ludicrous claim much?

Yes, post a picture of it because you are exaggerating and I don't believe you can actually produce said photo.
 
To add to this, while automaker have been making more economical engines that produce less harmful emissions, they've also made engine produce more power at the same time from less displacement. Something like the Focus ST would have been extremely rare 20 years ago with it's 2.0L engine putting out 250hp and getting around 26mpg in a mixed driving environment. Now hot hatches/sport compacts that get good fuel economy and have plenty of power seem to be the norm.



Ludicrous claim much?

Yes, post a picture of it because you are exaggerating and I don't believe you can actually produce said photo.

It's not a large dent, its about 2 inches across in a square shape. I'll produce itat some point tomorrow when its light out. It's next to the radio antenna. Want a piece of paper with my GTP username on it with it? :lol: It's only a dent. Neighbors dog at my moms work got off his leash and his collar was attached (rope break and it slid off his neck). Dog ran by and got hung up on the antenna (which was later replaced) and the collar that wrapped around it left a dent several years ago.
 
It's not a large dent, its about 2 inches across in a square shape. I'll produce itat some point tomorrow when its light out. It's next to the radio antenna. Want a piece of paper with my GTP username on it with it? :lol: It's only a dent.

Yes I do actually. And a picture of the this dog collar while you're at it, because unless the dog collar is made of lead there's no way it dented the car.

I've put a pretty decent size yellow lab into my Focus, as well as in the Cooper, several times and his collar banged off the rear door when he stuck his head out the window. There wasn't even a scratch on the paint, let alone a dent. It takes quite a bit of force to dent a car and for the more part they are fairly durable.
 
How am I supposed to get a picture of the collar of a dog who is dead? Let alone the owners that live 16 miles away and the place is a drug house.


I'll get a video of the dent but I can't provide any evidence of the collar mostly because the animal was not ours and it was an accident that happened in 2007-2008 ish. If you still don't believe that is what it's from then that is your choice and I can't change that. But I assure you that is what the dent is from.
 
You can't ask the owners for a photograph? And 16 miles isn't far, out of your way sure, but shouldn't be a hassle.
 
You can't ask the owners for a photograph? And 16 miles isn't far, out of your way sure, but shouldn't be a hassle.

I can't understand the guy half the time. Talks like he has marbles in his mouth and I don't ever leave the house. I really don't trust the place as its a big crack house thats been busted numerous times and losts of drug money pulled. How would you like me to ge there anyways? I can't legally drive.


Like I said, if you don't beleive me, then fine. I don't need to prove myself to some people on a forum as I know what happened. I will take a picture/video of the dent and the new antenna but that is about the extent of which I can provide evidence to my "claim".
 
How am I supposed to get a picture of the collar of a dog who is dead? Let alone the owners that live 16 miles away and the place is a drug house.


I'll get a video of the dent but I can't provide any evidence of the collar mostly because the animal was not ours and it was an accident that happened in 2007-2008 ish. If you still don't believe that is what it's from then that is your choice and I can't change that. But I assure you that is what the dent is from.

I suppose that is better than the old "My camera is broken" excuse.

Seriously, you're either lying/exaggerating about the dent or you're purposely leaving out a chunk of the story because a light hit from a dog collar, that's mostly made of nylon, wouldn't have dented a vehicle. Even if it was one of those choke chains a hit that was described as "lightly" wouldn't dent it, scratch the paint maybe, but not dent it.
 
I suppose that is better than the old "My camera is broken" excuse.

Seriously, you're either lying/exaggerating about the dent or you're purposely leaving out a chunk of the story because a light hit from a dog collar, that's mostly made of nylon, wouldn't have dented a vehicle. Even if it was one of those choke chains a hit that was described as "lightly" wouldn't dent it, scratch the paint maybe, but not dent it.

I assure you this is not the case, as I witnessed the event itself unfold. The animal got hung up on the car antenna (this happened in a parking lot), and the collar was already half ripped off and when the dog ran off it slammed against the fender taking the antenna with it. The dog was a blue and white pitbull named "Diesel".


I'll even admit the dent isn't "huge" by any circumstances but nevertheless there is a dent.
 
So from that story it sounds more likely that the animal itself would've caused the dent.
 
So from that story it sounds more likely that the animal itself would've caused the dent.

More or less yeah. But I'm sure with equal force a person could slam one down on a car and make some kind of mark.
 
Want me to take a picture of it? Cause it's still there. And because like it's your vehicle, you would know exactly what happened to it. :rolleyes:
I don't really care if it's there or not. Fact is, that didn't happen in the way you're describing or it wasn't a "light" hit. Car panels aren't so brittle that dog leashes put dents in them.

It's not a large dent, its about 2 inches across in a square shape.
Ok, so now it's not a large dent which is what you said it was earlier.

Though, I actually hope you do produce a picture or whatever to prove your post. Not because it will change my mind, but because it bring great humor to know you actually went to such a length for something that still wouldn't prove what you unlikely claimed to have happened. As minty said, it sounds like the dog caused the dent, not one of these.
p-12508-43034PZ-dog.jpg
 
I don't really care if it's there or not. Fact is, that didn't happen in the way you're describing or it wasn't a "light" hit. Car panels aren't so brittle that dog leashes put dents in them.


Ok, so now it's not a large dent which is what you said it was earlier.

Though, I actually hope you do produce a picture or whatever to prove your post. Not because it will change my mind, but because it bring great humor to know you actually went to such a length for something that still wouldn't prove what you unlikely claimed to have happened. As minty said, it sounds like the dog caused the dent, not one of these.
p-12508-43034PZ-dog.jpg
Now is a dog going to cause a dent at a point almost onto the hood? Like I said, beleive it or not, I don't care. I know what happened if if you choose not to believe it, so be it.
 
Modern car panels are thinner, and yes, you can dent them. But these are mostly cosmetic.

A modern car is made of several grades of steel. Surface panels are lower grade, this makes them springy and allows them to pop back after a dent. High-tensile strength steel and ultra-high tensile strength steel in the roof hoop and crash structure may look thinner than the steels used before, but crash a modern car with these steels into an older one with thicker steel and it'll slice into the older car like a knife through butter.

Just because there's a lot of deformed surface panels and a lot of damage after the impact doesn't mean the car is "soft". It means that the soft parts have dissipated the impact energy. With an older car, those "thick" low tensile strength steels, which are uniform all throughout, will simply bend like butter, like so:

old_vs_new_crash_test_video_4-312x185.jpg


old_vs_new_crash_test_video_3-312x185.jpg


old_vs_new_crash_test_video_5.jpg


-

Can't deny the romance and style of an old car, but really, those old ladder-frame monstrosities aren't as strong as you think they are. The ladder itself makes for better carrying capabilities (up to a point) but that's about it.
 
Now is a dog going to cause a dent at a point almost onto the hood? Like I said, beleive it or not, I don't care. I know what happened if if you choose not to believe it, so be it.

How does a dog get hung up on the antenna?
 
Back