Cars of My Past

irismg

1973 Ford Maverick - kept 2 years
19-whatever Ford Granada (didn't keep it long enough to remember what year)
1982 Mercury LN7 - kept 5 years
1987 Chevy Nova - kept 11 years
1998 Toyota Corolla - 9 years so far

With the success I've had from my last two cars, I'll never buy a Ford or Mercury again unless it's got a Japanese engine in it. My preference.

nvbanker

Most Ford small engines now are Mazda designed or built, or both. The V-8s are all Ford, and by the way, award winning. Things have changed a lot since 1982.

I'm not defending Ford, just stating the facts.

hpmctorque

I agree with nvbanker. While it goes without saying that irismg has every right to his preference, it's unfortunate that bad experiences frequently act to deny consumers of good choices, long after the products that caused them problems have been replaced by totally reengineered models. Indeed, one of the great challenges for the domestic car brands is that many people won't even consider a domestic brand because of problems they had 20-30 years ago, even though the successors to the cars they once owned are now competitive in the marketplace. And, in many cases, the perceptions of the children of these people are the same as their parents'. They may buy more youthful models - a Scion, say, instead of a Camry - but its from the same manufacturer as the one that sits in their parents' driveway.

To their credit, Toyota and Honda, in particular, have built up a tremendous reservoir of good will, just as GM, and to a lesser extent Ford and Chrysler, had done in the '30s, '40s, '50s and '60s. The upshot is that the domestic companies will have to offer better and more exciting products, at a competitive price, to win back market share. Their best hope is if Toyota and Honda make some mistakes, as GM did after it had reached the pinnacle. It will be really difficult for the domestics to thrive if Toyota and Honda, and now Hyundai, stay on top of their game.

jrdwyer

Bought my first car in '87 while in college. My brother and I go to a used car dealer and he gives us the keys for a test drive. I CAREFULLY take it out of the lot and get on the interstate. My brother asks me "when did you learn how to drive a stickshift," and I tell him "this is my first time, but don't worry, I've read a book on it." Amazingly, I did pretty good and only stalled it once at a stoplight and ended up buying the car. It had about 80K miles and I think I paid around $2K.

This little truck was very basic with no A/C or power steering (took a bit of effort to parallel park). The rear end was so light that I once pushed it sideways on ice to get unstuck. I put a camper shell on it and took canoes everywhere. I put a trailer hitch on it and pulled small sailboats to local lakes. It had a small 2.0L or 2.2L engine and 5 spd. tranny.

It got me around the country after college, but the clutch did give out on a trip to Canada at around 110K miles. It had warned me though, with a subtle higher pitch drone sound from the gearbox. Live and learn! Funny, I don't ever recall it slipping prior to failure. I sold the Sundowner in '91 with 123K miles when I got a new job.

I saw one in great condition a couple of summers ago at a local library. I now live further south, and most of those era Japanese cars/trucks rusted out up north.

cptchetco

I couldn't agree with you more about how one bad experience can sour one on a brand or even country of origin forever, and unfairly. My and several friends bad experiences with Subarus in the 80s & early 90s, have that on my list, though since they continue to sell cars, they must have improved.

One thing that hurts Ford more than most cars is their longevity. One study of cars in one state (Ohio?) took the registrations of all brands in a given year, and then looked at what percentage were still registered in ensuing years. At 12 years, Ford moved into #1, and each year thereafter, the margin got wider. Why does this hurt Ford? Well there are a lot of old cheap Fords still running, and usually become a persons first car. Since they are old, the teenager longs for that newer other brand with less rattles and problems. And the old Fords with their $30 starters and $50 alternators are kept running while the $300 alternator on the old Toyota is too expensive to keep the old junker running, so they are scrapped out. Looking at the list of first cars on this Forum adds evidence to this

When I was a kid, this same situation used to work against Chev and for Ford, but that changed in the 60s.

nvbanker

At 12 years, Ford moved into #1, and each year thereafter, the margin got wider.

Interesting - I thought I was the only person who knew that. For some reason, Ford Bigots bother me the most, because 90% of them have never had one. They just know someone who did in 1957, and couldn't keep the back doors closed or something....

Young Adults are fascinating - I hear all the time, "I don't like Fords" from them, but they have no idea why. Ford has some real repair work to do to their image. In the 60's, they had some terrific advertising, where they actually showed the car!! (Gasp) instead of some lifestyle ad where only the liftgate and a headlight are featured, but the girls inside surf. It showed a Mustang driving in the mountains, the music was upbeat with a message that Ford was winning the car war. It inspired me to get one, and old used one, but I liked it and stayed with Ford mostly, for years. And most of them treated me well. They were the cars of my past by and large. I still think they were the best cars in some models and years. But though they may run forever, the company doesn't, and stalls frequently, runs with fits and starts and the transmission slips often in the Board Room. I sincerely hope ARM can put this old company back on the road again. But he won't be there forever either, and who knows who will come after him, if there is an after him..... History of this company is fascinating - but inconsistent.

cptchetco

Few people seem to know that GM really started with the merger of Durant (Buick) and Cadillac: Hope my memory has that correct. Shortly thereafter, Oldsmobile was added to the list; Durant was thrown out, and together with car racers Francois and Louis Chevrolet, started Chevie. It was later merged with Durant back at the head of his GM company.

Now here is the interesting part. Who founded "Cadillac"? None other than Henry Ford. It was the first Ford Motor Company; Henry was thrown out by his bankers, who changed the name to Cadillac, and Henry Started a second, new Ford Motor COmpany, which is the current company. Henry hated banks thereafter; his primary backer in the second company was (drum roll please) Dodge Brothers. SOunds like corporate incest if you ask me.

nvbanker

Now here is the interesting part. Who founded "Cadillac"? None other than Henry Ford. It was the first Ford Motor Company; Henry was thrown out by his bankers, who changed the name to Cadillac, and Henry Started a second, new Ford Motor COmpany, which is the current company. Henry hated banks thereafter; his primary backer in the second company was (drum roll please) Dodge Brothers. SOunds like corporate incest if you ask me.

Yes, and then the Dodge Brothers walked out on him too, and started Dodge. Henry was tough to get along with, and he never listened to anybody, except maybe Clara, his wife, on occasion.

andre1969

as one of those who has an illogical hatred of Ford. Or, at least, I did when I was younger, but have pretty much grown out of it, although I still like to rag on them from time to time. But hey, if I'm in the right mood, I'll rag on Mopar, and I've had more Mopars than anything! :shades:

I think I got most of my Ford hatred infused within me by two people: My Dad, and my Granddad on my Mom's side. Dad was always a Chevy man, and his parents always drove Fords, so I think part of that Ford hatred was just kind of a rebellion against his parents. As for my Granddad, he was a shadetree mechanic, and I think his main thing is that he better understood the way GM cars were put together, and could work on them better. The way GM did things just made sense to him, whereas the way Fords were put together just seemed stupid to him. And I can understand that logic, to a degree. Often when you're used to the way one thing works, any other way just seems alien, stupid, wrong, or whatever. Heck, I've even noticed it with the GM cars I've had...the Mopars just seemed easier to work on.

Still, I wouldn't write off a Ford product in my future, if they made something that really caught my eye. And I'll admit that, if forced to choose right now between a Fusion/Milan, Sebring/Avenger, or a Malibu/G6/Aura, which fall into about the size category I'd go for, more or less, I'd probably lean toward Dearborn. Although I do kinda like the Aura.

nvbanker

And I'm one who has an illogical dislike for GM - although maybe it's not so illogical - it comes from the lag in technology they've been getting away with for decades now. Carbs when Mopar and Ford had their entire fleets converted to EFI. Throttle Body FI then, when Mopar and Ford had their fleets converted over to multi-port EFI. And finally, still using plug wires when Ford and Mopar has pretty much got everything converted over to Coil on Plug. Even more finally - pushrods when the entire WORLD has pretty much gone OHC or DOHC in most engines. Also, reciprocating ball steering, when the entire world has gone for decades, to rack & Pinion. Finally, they're starting to get some of this stuff into their fleet. But they are so far behind! The best thing I could say about GM was, they made their old technology work pretty well. The Escalade I have now, has plug wires, R/B steering (loose as can be too), live axle instead of IRS in the rear, and a dead/X suspension that really slams every road bump up into the chassis - however you'll never feel the road in that steering wheel! Still, it runs well, and is pretty comfy to get around in. The Climate control is excellent, and the seats are great. I'd prefer a Navigator though, hands down.

cptchetco

Andre69 hits on my point. When I was a kid, Chevrolet 235 in line 6s were bulletproof, but boring. Every kids first car was a chev, because they were cheap to buy and maintain, and reliable. Fords had to be newer, and with their V8s, not boring (more power, better brakes and handling by a wide margin).

However, Ford had more wiring problems, and made continual production line changes making it difficult for mechanics. No two cars seemed to be the same. For example, I restored a 1941 Ford Convert; there are no less than 8 different distributors and 3 carburators, and two different hood raising arrangements all in the same car. Mechanics of the era were not Ford fans, unless they were racers.

In 1955, Chevie came out with an exciting car, and had the best of both worlds for the next few years. For some inexplicable reason, during the mid 1960s, its cars started to be the ones with electrical problems. We used to joke that the reason the Impala had six tailights is so that the odds were, at least one would work. The front suspensions were problematic, and they started making production line changes without any reference to the model #s. Meanwhile Ford got control of its traditional wiring problems and had been using a more rust resistant steel alloy in their bodies.

Also FOrd standardized its Starters, Alternators, Oil filters etc. (This is no longer the case, since it uses so many different engines derived from US, Germany and Japan.) As a result, Ford parts became far cheaper than the competitors and the basic car lasts longer, not necessarily more trouble free, but relatively cheap and easy to repair, so they go on and on being repaired while the owner wishes he could get a newer car of some other brand.

Another example is for long after GM had followed the Japanese into selling "modules", you could still get the specific part for a Ford. A failed bearing in an "A" arm could be purchased for about $15-20, instead of $300 for an "A" arm assembly, when the only thing wrong was the one bearing. So instead of junking the 1980 Citation, you would be working on your Pinto changing the bearing lying in the driveway while your Mom was hollaring at you to come in and change your clothes.

nvbanker

Mechanics of the era were not Ford fans, unless they were racers.

That is the truth!! Having driven mostly Fords when I was younger, I ran into that all the time - a prejudice that will last for ages.....

cptchetco

I have a photo copy of the 1941 Ford shop manual. It was in looseleaf notebook form. The changes during the production year are amazing. More than I had remembered. The front fenders came in 4 different styles. Not to change thelooks, or fore diferent models, Just because for some reason, they made a change. 1 piece, 2 piece, 3 piece and 2 piece welded. They didn't quite interchange either, bolt holes didn't match. Early '41s had hood raisere like the 40, later models did not. and on and on. Damn nice cars though. drove mine across the US and back with the only problem being some overheating climbing the Rockies. Drove 70 all day long; 20mpg. No problem keeping up with modern traffic, and passed when I needed to. Had to make a couple emergency stops...may not have been as short as the best modern cars, but definitely adequate.

rbenton

I had a 1983 AMC Concord D/L as my first ride. Durable but not exciting to drive. Had to give to my dad when I when away to school almost 10 years ago.

Next Car a 1992 Dodge Monaco (nee Eagle Premier ) I don't know what demons made me to get that car. Roomy and comfortable yes, Horrible reliability and numerous engineering goofs. It was so troublesome it made an 86 Hyundai Excel look like Toyota Corolla for reliability. :lemon:

After 6 months of the French connection disaster and lots $$$ I traded nightmare in with much appreciated help mom and dad on 1996 Oldsmobile Ciera SL Series II. Not exactly a chick magnet car it was much reliable and fix able that the Monaco. It too has had few GM issues and being ex rental car. After 4 years of driving the dull dowdy rattle trap. :confuse:

I bought used 2002 Saturn L200 about 3 years ago. Gave my dad back the Oldsmobile as extra spare family car. After 66k in 3 years. the Saturn has not left me stranded yet (knock on veneer or plasti wood). Only 4 repairs aside maintance. Steering rack replaced under warranty due too groaning noises and leaking, Gas gage sending unit replaced under warranty. Wheel stud/ lug got cross thread unfortunately had to replace the one wheel hub assembly. The timing chain was replaced with a update chain tension er design to avoid an know early eco tech design issue. :shades:

imidazol97

I had a 292 in a 1957 Ford. It was relatively fast. It had torque but a 2-barrel carb. The 312 was used in the Thunderbird of that time (drove a friend's uncle's Bird occasionally). There it had a 4-barrel and was available in the 57 Ford. My buddy had a 312 in 1957 Ford. I did beat a 1956 Ford with the 312 4-barrel.

I recall that I rebuilt the motor with new bearings, rings, et. I don't recall the reason. I may have been using oil and got up near the 80K mark which was a long life for motors in those days.

railroadjames

Short list this time....1) 71 silver Mach One Mustang w/ white interior 2) 63 Impala S.S. (what a classic) 3)70 Opal G.T.(poor man's Vette) 3) 73 Black Dodge Charger S.E.(these babies go for top $$) 4)last but not least 86 yellow Corvette (huggin the rails w/ gusto) and now I drive a '04 Toyota Prius (blue of course)

nvbanker

From a Vette to a Prius? Oh my, the CID Displacia you must have? You over the bends yet? :P

irismg

NV Banker, I'm afraid your "facts" don't do me any good, as far as trying to get me to buy a Ford next time I need a car. The V-8s are usually trucks, and I'm not likely to buy either a truck (since I don't raise sheep) or a V-8 car regardless of make, due to gasoline usage. Seems like the "award-winning" Ford vehicles are trucks, not passenger cars.

Since the cars I buy presently and from now on are likely to be 4-cylinder gasoline or electric engines, Ford's not going to be a likely contender for me. Also, if I ever do buy a car with a Mazda engine in it, it will actually be a Mazda!

john_324

"Seems like the "award-winning" Ford vehicles are trucks, not passenger cars."

Not totally. Check out the growing list of awards for the Fusion triplets...pretty impressive.

cptchetco

Does anyone remember those terrific old 300cu Ford in-line 6s? Not as sexy as the V_*, but what a capable engine. Only time you didn't know it was a V-8 is at high speeds and when refueling. 5-6mpg better than a 351, but pulled in lower speed applications just as well.

I seem also to recall that a couple of years back, Ford offered a high mileage Focus (40mpg), but dropped it for lack of sales. Mileage defficiencies are nearly always the fault of the consumer who wants to have the fastest car on the road.

kyfdx

I drove Econolines from '86-'96, that all had the 300 I-6 engine... About 50K miles/yr.

In all that time, I only blew up two of them... and, both those trucks had over 250K miles, and were "spares".

andre1969

About a month ago I bought a '79 Chrysler New Yorker from a guy whose primary source of transportation was a 1981 or so Ford F-150 with the 300 inline-6. He said the original engine did need to be replaced at around 90-100,000 miles, but the second engine was much more durable. He was pushing 400,000 miles (~300K on the second engine) as of May. The truck itself was pretty beat-up, but this guy worked in construction and worked his truck pretty hard.

I think that engine first came out in 1965, as a 240 CID unit for the full-sized Ford cars. It was later enlarged to a 250 CID unit, but throughout the 70's the only cars light enough to use it were the Maverick and Granada. All their mid- and full-sized cars were so heavy they really needed a V-8.

I'm not sure when the 300 straight six came out, but I imagine it must've been a powerhouse compared to the likes of the 250 straight six that Chevy used in their trucks, or the poor choked down 225 slant six that Dodge used.

bumpy

The Chevy 250 was the base I6 in the trucks, but the 292 became an option beginning in 1966. I would imagine most folks just went ahead and got the 283/327 or 307/350 if they wanted a bigger engine.

How did Ford manage to stuff an I6 into a not-quite-cabover van?

lemko

Wasn't there a V-6 in the GMC line-up back in the day? Remember that one truck at the recent GM-Carlisle show that had it? I think it had the same 3.8 displacement as the one in my 1988 Buick Park Avenue but it was a 60 degree block vs a 90 degree block or something. I forget which is which.

andre1969

The Chevy 250 was the base I6 in the trucks, but the 292 became an option beginning in 1966. I would imagine most folks just went ahead and got the 283/327 or 307/350 if they wanted a bigger engine.

I was thinking more in later years, such as the late 70's/early 80's. How much horsepower and torque did the 300 inline 6 put out, anyway? I remember back in the day, for some reason, most sales brochures wouldn't list its power. I had always thought the reasoning was that it was too close to the 302 V-8, and they didn't want to make that engine look bad.

Did the Chevy vans of the 70's and 80's ever offer the 250 inline-6? I know Chevy had clearance issues that wouldn't allow a big-block V-8 to fit in there, which limited your top engine choice to a 350. Perhaps an inline-6 would have fit, though?

I never heard of a 292 6-cyl. How long was that in production for?

kyfdx

Econoline has a pretty good size hood that sticks out front... I think they went to that bodystyle in '75 or '76?

That plus the big engine compartment cover between the front seats... Plenty of room for an inline-6.

bumpy

Wasn't there a V-6 in the GMC line-up back in the day?

Yep. The 305 V6 (5.0L) came in with the new trucks for 1960, and was the only engine in a GMC pickup until the Chevy I6s became available in 1963, and the Chevy V8s in 1967. There was also a 351 V6 in the pickups beginning in 1966 (that's what I have in mine), and the V6 was dropped except by special order after 1969. The bigger trucks also had a 401 and 478 V6 available, and there was a 379 and 432 available for a year or so around 1973 just before the V6 was dropped completely.

It was a true 60-degree V6 and the first V6 in North America, predating the Buick chop-block by a few years.

andre1969

Econoline has a pretty good size hood that sticks out front... I think they went to that bodystyle in '75 or '76?

Yeah, as I recall, Ford was the first van to have a hood long enough so that the front wheel opening did not intrude with the front doors at all.

Actually, wasn't Ford the first, around 1968 or so, to finally start making a van where there engine was ahead of the driver, instead of behind?

bumpy

I never heard of a 292 6-cyl. How long was that in production for?

The 292 came in with the new I6s in 1963, but didn't get into the pickups until 1966. Chevy dropped it for the 4.3L V6 in the light trucks after 1985, but built the old 292 until 1990 or so for other applications.

nvbanker

Since the cars I buy presently and from now on are likely to be 4-cylinder gasoline or electric engines, Ford's not going to be a likely contender for me.

No interest in the Escape/Mariner Hybrid? Only hybrid CUV out there so far, and it's doing well.

Look, I don't care what you buy. I own a GM car and a Toyota as well, I am not married to Ford. But I do know where their strengths are, as well as their weaknesses. That was all I was trying to point out. This is America - buy what you want from wherever.

british_rover

The fusion has a 4 cylinder and is a very good car. I have one client who has an Escape hybrid and likes it but it doesn't do very well in new england winters. I guess the extreme cold cuts down on battery performance and the 4wd system is only so so in the snow.

irismg

This is the one with the Mazda-built engine. I'm not surprised it's good. The only reason I bought my Chevy Nova is because Toyota built the engine. Kept it 11 years. Thanks!

irismg

No interest whatsoever in the Mariner hybrid since it costs too much. I've driven quite a few of Ford's weaknesses, thanks, and have pretty much have my fill!

Nice try, though :-)

irismg

Thanks, I'll Google that when I get spare time.