Things you don't EVER want to see revived in cars.
avalanche325
Member Posts: 116
in General
Since we have the opposite (Things we'd like to see revived), lets put down a few "Thank God they don't do that anymore" things.
Just to get started:
Low back bucket seats. They might have been trendy, but what a rediculous design (or lack thereof)
Just to get started:
Low back bucket seats. They might have been trendy, but what a rediculous design (or lack thereof)
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It is hard to switch back and forth between the two. I don't know if this mirror is original or not.
Also, the live rear axle hops sideways over rough road, especially when going around a corner.
front drum brakes
6V electrical systems
2. Vacuum-operated wipers.
3. No synchro on first gear.
"Good little cars" - questionable (especially those saggy rear springs)
Terrifying on a freeway.
I bought a 66 Mustang Fastback with drums and almost immediatly put nice big ventilated four piston caliper disks on the front. It transformed the whole car!
"art deco" styling
push button transmissions
Oh yeah, then roll the manual window back down and adjust the manual mirror that you bumped getting the wipers going.
All in the rain ;-)
Avalanche, I'm embarassed to admit I never thought of getting out and helping the wipers ;-).
Yes, the Mustang. I'll quote a nameless, perhaps apocryphal Ford engineer who said "building the Mustang on the Falcon chassis was like putting falsies on Grandma. That Falcon was never intended for high performance."
I've never driven a six-cylinder Mustang but I have experience with that platform from the years I spent slogging around in a Falcon. Mustang sixes didn't sell because they're fine cars. They sold because a segment of the car-buying public wants the perception of performance without the initial or operating costs. These were the same Walter Mittys who made the bucket seat Falcon Futura six such a hot seller before the Mustang came out.
IMHO the only thing that keeps the Mustang from being a sheep in wolf's clothing is the mighty 289. It gives plenty of power with great balance, something not easily achieved. Even installing the next-heavier engine, the 351 (as I did in a '67 Cougar) destroys the balance of the car.
Technologically, it was a flashy body on top of a 1936 Buick.
The Corvair Monza created a number of imitators including the Falcon Futura and Comet S-22. The Mustang was based on this very ordinary chassis but with swoopier sheetmetal. I remember they sold a gazillion Futuras and the later Comet versions, Caliente and Cyclone, until the Mustang came out.
In '66 the Falcon and Comet moved to the mid-size platform. The Falcon virtually disappeared except for the occasional four door or Ranchero.
I would imagine they could be a good source of leaks. I would imagine the "can" would get beat up. Does anyone have any experience with them?
Does anybody know who was the first to use the modern spin-on type cannister filters? I know DeSotos, Dodges, and Plymouths with the wedge-head V-8 first had them in '58. Anybody come out with 'em before that?
Another good sounding idea was the roll down back window.Mercury had this feature around 1963(?).Sounds good but served no purpose.
My granddad used to have a '63 Mercury Monterrey with the roll-down rear window. He loved it, because he said it made it real easy to haul lumber and other long items. Plus, it helped a lot with ventillation on hot summer days. Air conditioning by '63 was still pretty expensive, so it was still comparatively rare.
I've heard that keeping the liftgate window open on a station wagon or SUV is dangerous, becuase it'll suck exhaust back into the car. The back windows on these things were probably about 5-6 feet ahead of the exhaust though.
I think we can add the Turnpike Cruiser to the list. Although I do like that Ford styling exercise, what's it called, the 49er?
In the early '60s a neighbor had a Mercury with the roll down rear window. I think it's worth it just for the gee whiz effect.
Here is a really good one: I was living in New Zealand, where they import used cars directly from Japan. My friend down there had a van (Toyota if I remember right) that has a five speed column shifter. Man, it was easy to miss a gear in that thing.
I had almost blocked the memories of hot oil running down my arm while changing the cartridge type oil filter and the leaks when the gasket slipped out of the groove and was cut as the filter was tightened.
What about those pull handle parking brakes. To release them you'd give the handle a 1/4 turn. Some were in a position that would get bumped as you were getting out of the vehicle and accidentally release.
Correct me if I am wrong on this. I think Coca Cola was the company that did the contest. I can't remember how many they gave away (10? 100?)
Anyway, I hope the custom van fad dosen't come back anytime soon.
Another item I'd be really happy to live without are bumper jacks.
I guess Chrysler was actually quick to the game in this regard, as I've had a '79 New Yorker and a '79 Newport, and both had the scissors-type jack that mounted up under the rocker panel.
I don't think you could even jack up most modern cars by their bumper without without doing some serious damage!
Modern cars don't even have bumpers to jack the thing up by!
2. Retarded ignition timing.
3. Lowered compressions ratios, usually with combustion chambers the size of a bathtub.
4. EGR (exhaust gas recirculation). First used on '72 California cars, then nationally from '73 on. Recirculates exhaust gas into the combustion chamber.
5. Smog cams. Basically does the same thing as #4.
6. A stove to heat air going into the carb.
7. No vacuum advance once the engine reaches operating temperature.
Maybe they still use some of this stuff but it works a lot better now. It's a wonder '70s engines ran at all.
No, I think what happened is that I never saw "air pre-heaters" until the late '60s and assumed they were smog controls. Cool air is more dense and lets the engine make more power, so I just figured heating the air going into the carb was another way to trade performance for cleaner air. I've read about carb icing but never run across it.
The 1969 Pontiac shop manual says "use of the carburetor air pre-heater has resulted in improved engine warm-up characteristics and eliminated the need for the heat riser valve". So the pre-heater just replaces the exhaust runner under the carb. Back in the day racers would block off the heat riser with a ball of aluminum foil or use special intake manifold gaskets.
The manual shows a mystery vacuum-operated valve in the snorkel that I seem to recall blocks unheated air until the engine sees a low vacuum condition such as WOT. Otherwise the engine breathes air heated by a stamped steel "stove" and ducted to the underside of the snorkel.
Well, it's always fun to open that manual. This time I saw the Ram Air air cleaner setup. That's something they ought to revive. Maybe they did.
Carb icing, I have experienced this about 2 weeks ago, I usually go 55 at the steepest part of the pass, my truck would only do 40, on the way back put some anti-ice stuff in the gas and no problem. Happened because I have two tanks, and one I only use once in a while I filled them both up for safety (get stuck in some sort of snow storm want to be warm) and I was using the tank I don't use to often so it was bound to have some moisture in it.
I'm pretty sure my '73 Ventura still had the pre-heater and it started fine, but we hardly ever get below freezing. My '71 LeMans had all the pre-heat gear too, but I don't remember if the '69 GTO did. You'd think I would because I had to park it on the street and every night I took the Ram Air air cleaner off and put it in the trunk, then put it back on in the morning. I did this for months before I finally decided to take my chances and leave it on overnight. I'm pretty sure it still had the stove but '69s weren't nearly as leaned out and wouldn't have needed as much help starting.
I've always lived in warm weather states and it sounds like I should keep it that way.
BTW that '71 LeMans had kind of an interesting smog control, no vacuum advance once the engine reached operating temperature. There was a sensor in the intake manifold with a plunger that blocked off vacuum to the advance can once it sensed the coolant was warm. I always thought vacuum advance was a real useful innovation, right up there with the self starter, but I guess it fouled up the emissions somehow--just one more variable to control.
In the '70's, as Speedshift indicated, there were several schemes for changing the ignition advance curves with engine temperature in the effort to reduce exhaust emissions. Some involved switching between ported vacuum and manifold vacuum when the coolant temperature reached a pre-set level. I agree that these spark-advance schemes, combined with the primitive EGR controls and low compression ratios, often caused stumbling or stalling during acceleration - and they consistently provided poor power and fuel economy.
That '71 LeMans was a good indication of what had happened to musclecars by then since it had the optional 400/335 standard on the GTO that year. You'd think it'd be quick around town but part-throttle response was pretty flabby because there was no vacuum advance to bring in an extra 10 or 15 degrees of advance. The 8:1 compression ratio (down from 10.75:1) didn't help either, or all the weight intermediates had picked up by then.