I'd say the vast majority of performance improvements of the last few decades are due to computers, from computer aided design of slippery bodies and tuned intakes and exhaust, to the computer control of fuel mixtures and timing, along with them learning about quench areas and such (all good things). OTOH, I hear a lot of problems with Hemis suffering camshaft failures due to some part of the casting shadowing the oil splashing onto them, or transmission failures for Mopars and some weird Ford multiclutch thing. (although back in the '60's Ford had quite a rep for bad trannys to the point where they had TV ads showing someone smoking the tires between Drive and Reverse for an extended time to show they didn't break anymore). I also watch a lot of "Uncle Tony's Garage" on youtube where he's posted several times about even brand name parts for lifters, breaker points (for old cars) etc. breaking within a few days or even minutes. I guess I'm just a glass half empty kinda guy. I also guess that's why I seem to like poal.
Modern cars are awesome. I absolutely love modern cars - and that includes them having computers. I find most of the folks who argue are just people who refuse to update their skillset to understand what's going on. They're more reliable, more efficient, faster, safer, etc... They're better cars by pretty much every metric.
Then, you get the people who don't understand logic. "Well, my 1984 F250 still works!" Yeah, any car can do that - but look at how few survived and how quickly they were off the road compared to modern cars. You can't really argue the data.
On the other hand, it's getting tougher to find a really analog car - by that I mean one where you really feel like you're in touch with the road itself as you were in older cars. Modern brakes and suspensions take that road-feel away.
But, someone's gotta keep the old and special cars around. They really are good stores of value, appreciating faster than S&P 500 and the likes. I'm in the process of moving some investments around and will go on one more buying spree. Then I'll be done... Well, that's what I tell myself.
On that note, I'll be heading out soon. The wife would like some attention before we meander off to bed.
They're better cars by pretty much every metric.
Yeah, when people complain about how expensive it is to fix a modern car when it breaks down every few years, I ask them if they' like to go back to cars that got 16 mpg on a good day.
"Well, my 1984 F250 still works!"
I had an '81 Fairmont I'd have to replace some sort of computer looking module on the wheelwell every couple of months because it wouldn't run, OTOH I could buy replacements at a local department store for $15 and alway had an extra in the trunk. I imagine it had something to do with electronic ignition, and if I had the problem now I'd look for incorrect voltage on the inputs.
Modern brakes and suspensions take that road-feel away.
I also had a '77 T bird with power steering (not an option) that had no feedback at all. If you were pointed the wrong way, you turned the wheel. But it'd go around corners like it was on rails as long as the pavement was smooth so as not to get that 150 lb. solid rear end bouncing around.
A rambling response...
You can finally get a Mustang with independent rear suspension, by the way.
But, speaking of efficiency, I have a 2005 Ford GT that gets in the area of 27 mpg when I'm gentle with it.
I don't mind adjusting points or even dealing with carburetor issues. But, today's folks ain't gonna deal with that - not anymore, not now that they know they can have cars with electronic ignition and fuel injection.
Oh, this is related, and 'car culture' is just as strong as it ever was, probably even stronger. There are even more drag strips now than there have ever been. There's track days, autocross, cars and coffee, and hoon and tune events.
And the Fairmont sounds like a relay. I had a beat up old Nissan Maxima that ate them like potato chips.
(post is archived)