• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Maybe American car manufacturers should bring back simple, easy-to-maintain automobiles(perhaps successful models from the 1950s - 1970s).

Stealers Wheel said:
But . . . they are mandated by the big bad government. I know much you despise the government having a say in anything with regards to safety.
Click to expand...

Is this your way of saying you were wrong?

Nothing should be mandated by idiot politicians. If consumers desire safely, then the market will (and does) provide it.
 
KevinKohler said:
I'll bet they're not the same weight.

I'll also bet the newer truck has a smaller displacement moter.
Click to expand...
Weight is within 50 pounds. Both are 2.4 liter.
 
In the early 70's you would make $12,000 in a basic job. You could buy a basic car for $3,000, so that's 25% of your salary. Today you would make $50,000 and spend $30,000 for a basic car. So that is 3/5ths of your income. There is the problem.
 
Last edited:
coyote505 said:
Weight is within 50 pounds. Both are 2.4 liter.
Click to expand...
Then the newer one has improper gearing, or the wrong size tires. Or something internally wrong with the motor. Carbed engines are, by the requirements of simple physics, going to produce less power per unit of fuel consumed than fuel injection.
 
aociswundumho said:
Won't pass emissions, won't pass safety standards, won't help with cafe ratings. Welcome to the progressive regulatory state, where politicians decide what kind of car you may buy.
Click to expand...

Because pollution is so free it doesn’t hurt us, it just sets us free. We should all be free to burn a pile of tires in our front yards while shooting at chipmunks and squirrels as we watch our neighbors children frolic naked in traffic.
 
devildavid said:
Because pollution is so free it doesn’t hurt us, it just sets us free. We should all be free to burn a pile of tires in our front yards while shooting at chipmunks and squirrels as we watch our neighbors children frolic naked in traffic.
Click to expand...
Yeah, @aociswundumho hates it when government mandates anything. I'll bet he had a grand mal conniption when they demanded lead be removed from household paints. Parents should be free to poison their toddlers any way they see fit.
 
KevinKohler said:
Then the newer one has improper gearing, or the wrong size tires. Or something internally wrong with the motor. Carbed engines are, by the requirements of simple physics, going to produce less power per unit of fuel consumed than fuel injection.
Click to expand...
Wrong. Simple physics tells you what should Theoretically happen. "Theoretically" is what the scientist says when the experiment goes wrong, like when Musk's rocket undergoes "rapid unplanned disassembly".

I can give you a couple real world reasons why the '84 was better: The '84 had 2 valves and 2 plugs per cylinder, for better flame propagation. The '97 is picky about which plugs I use, exhibiting a strong preference for symmetrical plugs, eg Bosch Platinum 4. The '84 didn't give a damn. The '97 has 3 valves and 1 plug, stuffed way over in the corner.

The '84 was styled like the 510 sedan, reasonably aerodynamic. Some Bozo stylist decided that the '97 should emulate a Chevy pickup, considerably blunter at the nose. Though it theoretically makes 30 more horsepower, top speed is slightly lower.

I am reminded of the '70s, when Volkswagen switched from 25 mpg carbureted engines to 12 mpg fuel injected. Either the computers, or their programmers, were not as smart as they thought they were.
 
coyote505 said:
Wrong. Simple physics tells you what should Theoretically happen. "Theoretically" is what the scientist says when the experiment goes wrong, like when Musk's rocket undergoes "rapid unplanned disassembly".

I can give you a couple real world reasons why the '84 was better: The '84 had 2 valves and 2 plugs per cylinder, for better flame propagation. The '97 is picky about which plugs I use, exhibiting a strong preference for symmetrical plugs, eg Bosch Platinum 4. The '84 didn't give a damn. The '97 has 3 valves and 1 plug, stuffed way over in the corner.

The '84 was styled like the 510 sedan, reasonably aerodynamic. Some Bozo stylist decided that the '97 should emulate a Chevy pickup, considerably blunter at the nose. Though it theoretically makes 30 more horsepower, top speed is slightly lower.

I am reminded of the '70s, when Volkswagen switched from 25 mpg carbureted engines to 12 mpg fuel injected. Either the computers, or their programmers, were not as smart as they thought they were.
Click to expand...
So, let me get this straight: You're saying carburetors are better than fuel injectors? And as a result gas mileage is better with carburetors than with fuel injectors?
 
Helix said:
I keep trying to convince my wife that we should buy a 1967 Chrysler Imperial and / or a 1970 Chevelle, but no luck with that so far.
Click to expand...
If Checkerboard Strangler is lurking, that’ll give him wood!
 
Stealers Wheel said:
So, let me get this straight: You're saying carburetors are better than fuel injectors? And as a result gas mileage is better with carburetors than with fuel injectors?
Click to expand...
Well designed and well developed carburetors are better than half assed poorly developed fuel injectors.
 
This might get you guys mad, but every car company in Mexico sells a small inexpensive stick shift car.

A lot of them are used for Uber service.

I make it a point to ask the drivers how many kilometers they have and what repairs they have had to do.

Generally they tell me they have had no problem in 300,000 KM or 400,000 KM.

I was in a Dodge Attitude, which is a Mitsubishi Mirage sedan, and he had 419,000 KM on the car.

Other than regular maintenance he had to replace the clutch at 200,000 and again at 410,000 and that is it.

It is amazing how these cheap cars go for a long time under hard use and they keep going.

The only cheap car in the US that offers a stick is the Nissan Versa and I think that was discontinued for the 2025 model year.

The companies should all offer a cheap car with a stick shift over there.
 
As a former "mechanic" (NOT technician!) of automobiles for more than 30 years (long since retired), I have a few opinions about the requirements for taking care of a modern motor vehicle. First, when motor vehicles were initially deemed insufficient for our atmosphere, the fossil fuel reciprocating engine should have been halted, replaced with electric and hydrogen and/or nuclear and been rid of on the planet's surface. Second, the outrageous plumbing systems that exist in modern cars should NEVER have happened! Third, the very sophisticated electronics that are necessary to operate antique engines by modern standards would have never been necessary and the outrageous plumbing would never have had to fit impossible spaces under the hood. With my limited acumen, I never had a problem with understanding the functions of electronics in automobiles, just the locating and servicing of them. The logics behind them made sense to me while the rats' nest plumbing did not. With all that having been said, a completely new style of power plant would have allowed constant improvements without Rubics Cube x 100 solutions! A: repairs and alterations would now be easier and far less expensive, B: systems would be far easier to trace and improve, C: the costs of repair components would be far less on average.
The primary reason for CORPORATIONS not following the better path is threefold - not having to build and equip new plants, not having to redesign/replace the service parts sector and not having to educate and train new "technicians". In other words, GREED, the bane of progress and TRUE technical advancement!
 
KevinKohler said:
Then the newer one has improper gearing, or the wrong size tires. Or something internally wrong with the motor. Carbed engines are, by the requirements of simple physics, going to produce less power per unit of fuel consumed than fuel injection.
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with my motor. EPA MPG: '84 22-28, '97 21-25. My actual is a bit lower for both, since my foot is a bit heavier.
 
Mason66 said:
This might get you guys mad, but every car company in Mexico sells a small inexpensive stick shift car.

A lot of them are used for Uber service.

I make it a point to ask the drivers how many kilometers they have and what repairs they have had to do.

Generally they tell me they have had no problem in 300,000 KM or 400,000 KM.

I was in a Dodge Attitude, which is a Mitsubishi Mirage sedan, and he had 419,000 KM on the car.

Other than regular maintenance he had to replace the clutch at 200,000 and again at 410,000 and that is it.

It is amazing how these cheap cars go for a long time under hard use and they keep going.

The only cheap car in the US that offers a stick is the Nissan Versa and I think that was discontinued for the 2025 model year.

The companies should all offer a cheap car with a stick shift over there.
Click to expand...
Stick shifts require drivers to have some aptitude. My experience is that Mexicans, once well south of the border, are much better drivers than Americans. Maybe stick driving is the "wash out" course?
 
Stealers Wheel said:
That's because simpler cars are neither government mandated nor desired in a mass market way. Smaller, safer, cleaner cars are what manufacturers are focusing on.

I'm reminded of a quote from the Lee Iacocca (Father of the Ford Mustang and savior of Chrysler) autobiography when back in the 50s when someone suggested carmakers could offer seatbelts as an option.

"No!" was the response. "Our customers will think our cars are not safe!"

My 90 year-old FIL is still pissed that he can't have a new car with hand cranked windows.
Click to expand...
The only thing power on my '93 Miata is the brakes. Everything else is do it yourself. Some of us, Drivers, like it that way. A Buick would put me to sleep.

Probably my most nostalgic vehicle was a '60, BSA 500 Twin. Mag ignition, kick start . Never worried about my battery. I didn't have one.
 
coyote505 said:
Stick shifts require drivers to have some aptitude. My experience is that Mexicans, once well south of the border, are much better drivers than Americans. Maybe stick driving is the "wash out" course?
Click to expand...

I required my kids to learn to drive a shift stick. Only once they were fully proficient did I let them drive an automatic.

Today, that would be harder to do, since stick shifts are few and far in between in the United States. Still a few out there, but not many.
 
aociswundumho said:
There's no demand for that, but there is a demand for cheap, easy to repair cars and trucks.



Yeah, that's relevant to car production.



Indeed.



Bullshit. If that were true, then there would be no need to outlaw them.
Click to expand...


The demand for cheap easy to repair vehicles do not exist


No one bought the Mitsubishi mirage, the Hyundai Venue barely sold
 
ModerationNow! said:
You're talking from the perspective of upper middle class and wealthy progressives, who can afford to hand over $1,000-$3,000 to mechanics for relatively minor repairs that should be easy and inexpensive. The regular middle class and workers have taken a financial beating in the past 20 years, and I promise you they'd prefer to be able to do their own repairs for pennies on the dollar vs being basically forced to pay mechanics $100/hr.
Click to expand...


The vast majority of people don't do their own oil changes. You aren't going to get them to change their brakes
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
The vast majority of people don't do their own oil changes. You aren't going to get them to change their brakes
Click to expand...

Hell, I haven't looked under the hood of any car I have owned for literally decades.

Light comes on, I go to the shop.

If I break down or a tire goes down, I call AAA.

And I usually buy dealer service contracts with the new vehicle.

I am pretty diligent in getting scheduled services done on schedule.

When I was much younger and cars were much simpler, I did play around with them a bit. But those days are long gone and I have neither the skill, time nor motivation to be screwing around with them.
 
Safiel said:
I required my kids to learn to drive a shift stick. Only once they were fully proficient did I let them drive an automatic.

Today, that would be harder to do, since stick shifts are few and far in between in the United States. Still a few out there, but not many.
Click to expand...
You should look at older mini pickups, or Miatas, for stick shift.
 
Ask and ye shall receive:
www.slate.auto

SLATE

SLATE Auto | The Customizable EV That Works for You
www.slate.auto www.slate.auto

1746568544948.webp
 
I love all the gadgets and whatnots on our car. That thing practically drives itself.
No, not going back.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom