By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Still a very well balanced car in the hills, with minimal understeer and adequate torque. Sold it to some friends who still have it and love it almost twenty years later.
Even the GTO was a decent handler with the handling package, maybe a $6 option but not something dealers usually ordered. Kind of a shame because it made a big difference in handling with hardly any difference in ride quality.
"Hey, what's this "handling package" stuff. I ain't payin' no handling charge."
Time for bed, Graves.
why aren't there more aluminum engines out there today? ummm costs a pile to make.
but, would it not be fun to put such a beastly engine and put it into something little, like a civic? this could be the civic SS of my dreams.
There's just not that much that needs to be adjusted. In all fairness though, there's really not much to tuning up something like my '68 Dart. I had a set of points last 40,000 miles, once. But then the next set lasted about 12,000. At the same time, though, the Dart's lucky to get 17 mpg on the highway. If the Intrepid EVER did that bad, I would know there was something wrong with it!
Of course, let's fast forward enough years to where the Intrepid is the same age and mileage as my Dart. At that point, all that electrical stuff is definitely going to count against it! It's one thing to replace the points, condensor, cap, rotor, plugs, and wires on a Dart (and for good measure, throw in the ballast resistor). Something else entirely to have some problem that the dealer, after multiple visits, can never diagnose or fix correctly.
I realize the vast improvements that are being made and the fuel economy and horsepower gains that electronics bring with them, but in the long run the mechanics get lazy or forget the basics.
In my personal opinion simple is ALWAYS better. I would even go as far as to say give me an engine with fuel injection that only has the essentials. Not with 50,000 sensors, and 200 miles of wires, just the basics. I still say my favorite thing to see under the hood is the engine, not a bundle of wires, just the engine and a few vacuum lines, what a beautiful site to see!!!
But economically, simpler might be better, also for conservation /recycling purposes (perhaps) or in very difficult situations (would you rather try to fix a '65 Plymouth in the middle of the desert or a 2001 Porsche?)
Certainly if you were a person on a budget and very handy with tools, you could push around an old 60s cars and keep it running for a whole lot cheaper than you could a new-ish car out of warranty.
Some of the devices on modern cars are brilliant, some are rather foolish extravangances.
Power windows (though it wouldn't suprise me if standardizing on power isn't cheaper)
The whole cup holder thing (why does anyone even care)
Anti-lock (oh boy, flame away, I'll bet that stuff's hard to fix in ten years though)
Power steering in small cars (Miata for example)
Power antennae
Hyper-complex automatic transmissions (I'd rather eat the mpg and have a T-400 in a pickup)
That stupid transmission lockout in Z/28s and Corvettes.
Road hugging weight.
The whole SUV thing.
Lack of engine access. (Camaro for example, extravagant due to styling constraints).
+
what I think is the worst sin, whole systems approaches to cars...as the different subsystems become more intertwined (engine -> transmission is an obvious example), the difficulties in debugging or modifying some of this stuff is going to get horrendous.
Brilliance:
Timed fuel injection
The catalytic converter (requires #1)
More common use of four wheel disks
Stiffer chassis (significantly so)
Modern spark managment systems (coil / cylinder)
6 speed manual trans
overdrive auto trans
Modern tires (admittedly this can be retrofitted)
Whatever metallurgy magic that is resulting in 200k+ mile engines
Four wheel drive cars (that new WRX looks pretty amazing)
Air bags (maybe, I don't have a strong opinion on that)
Much more crash worthy (as far as the humans inside are concerned).
Hmmm, I'm convinced, bring over that new Holden LS1 / 6 speed car and I might even give a darn about new cars.
Back to the topic!! I would also like to see steel bumpers on cars, the urethane, painted bumpers really lack the style and flash the older cars had.
But my friend just hollered at me "ARE YOU CRAZY!?", when I hit them. But I figured hey, they're bulky 5 mph bumpers, it's not going to do anything to them. But that's something I would never dream of doing with a newer car, like my Intrepid. In fact, I have accidentally bumped them a few times with that car, and have the marks to show it! My friend looked at me like I was a psycho when I told him that I used to bump those wooden posts all the time with the old Plymouth...that was my way of knowing that I was all the way in the parking spot!
I think the thinking behind the extra chrome is that if you're unhip enough to not want 17" wheels and an ice-wagon ride you're probably unhip enough to like chrome.
It's scary how well they know me.
That, plus headlights could kill ya
One thing I've always wondered...how reliable was the fuel injection system they used on Chevys and Pontiac Bonnevilles back in '57? I know that Chrysler tried fuel injection as an option in their DeSoto Adventurers and Chrysler 300D's for '58, but it was so unreliable that every single example was returned to the dealership and re-fitted with dual-quads. I think it was actually some form of electronic fuel injection as well, supplied by Bendix?
Besides, my computer has currently...
Windows 98 Uptime: 2wks 6days 12hrs 26mins 14secs
Not bad for a bloated Microsoft program.
Will somebody please speak English?
>>>>
Ah yes, but the processors used in your computer, and the operating systems/instruction sets for them are very, very different from the ones in your car. I've yet to hear of a CPU in a car that wasn't RISC, and if there is one I would be astounded. RISC-based systems are very stable.
>>>>
Here's the deal (Classics Illustrated version).
CISC - Complex Instruction Set Computer
RISC - Reduced Instruction Set Computer
Processors (like the Pentium in an IBM PC) read a stream of numbers which tell it what to do (add two numbers together for instance). One strategy, in an attempt to make processors faster, is to simplify the set of different instructions, make them the same size, and use up space on the chip for internal storage of the program (which can be accessed faster). In truth, the microprocessors out there display both philosophies and are changed over time to suit the types of programs and programming languages people tend to write (adding graphics oriented features, for instance). CISC is the concept of a whole bunch of specialized instructions for the computer, RISC is the concept of a simpler set being executed at a faster rate.
However, this has zip to do with system stability. Geez, at least I didn't say VLIW.
I've also seen some cars with computer equipment or other stuff that shouldn't be visible hanging down below the dashboard. Well, I have a size 13 foot, so it's pretty easy to snag it on some of that low-hanging junk. In fact, there's something that looks like an interface port under the dash on my Intrepid, down below the steering wheel. I'm surprised that I haven't kicked it loose yet!
The only car my family ever had that was plagued with serious computer problems was a 1982 Malibu wagon that my grandparents had. Well, I also had an '88 LeBaron that was far from perfect, as well. It had stuff failing and disabling that car that didn't even exist 20 years earlier! And it had a trip computer that would lie on a regular basis.
Still, for all my griping, I agree that computers are a good thing. But as a car ages, they will also become its downfall.
As for heat, well, how hot does your temp gauge say your car is running? Yes, computer chips are sensitive to heat, but if your car is running hot enough to damage one you already have a problem. Those things naturally run with a lot more heat than most people guess. And, if it's properly designed, it should be MORE reliable than a mechanical component. The reason? Friction and moving parts. True, it can't take as much of a good ole fashioned beating, but that's why (most) of them are nicely hidden away and protected. If I ever see any exposed circuit boards when I'm looking at a car, I can assure you I would skip over it.
But now that you mention it, what's VLIW?
Where I think the problem in cars will erupt is the following:
- Interaction between systems causing difficult to find problems (ie transmissions talking to spark control systems, convertible tops talking to A/C systems, etc.)
- All the additional parts generally.
- Connectors (after a zillion hot/cold cycles, this stuff gets brittle)
- Mid-year changes (oh...that's a 2002 and a 1/4 rear-end speed sensor, we'll have to special order that)
- Goofball electrical issues...bad grounding, noise problems
- Sensor failure (#1 with a bullet)
VLIW, oh boy...in a hundred words or less...
VLIW = very large instruction word
let's take an imaginary processor and write a single line of assembly language (the stuff the machine actually thinks in) for it...
add r1,r2,r3 which will add the contents of some internal memory (called a register) in r2 to the value in r3 and stick it in r1.
To the machine it might look like...
12 5 9 15 (I just invented these numbers) where:
12 = add
5 = r1
9 = r2
15 = r3
so... r1 = r2 + r3
the computer sucks this in and performs the operation, taking some amount of time to do it.
Let's say instead we have two sets of registers...
r1,r2,r3 and s1,s3,s3 and wanted to do the following...
r1 = r2 + r3 *and* s1 = s2 + s3
-or-
12 5 9 15 12 20 25 38
By building one big instruction that does both *at once* we can get twice the work done (on separate chunks of memory). By adding more simultaneous instructions, more stuff can get done at the same time. This sort of thing is done in some specialized processors (Texas Instruments builds a couple, for example) and works pretty well if the software is developed with these abilities in mind. In general there's been a race between making processors faster (ie run at a higher clock speed, that's that mhz/megahertz thing that keeps coming up) vs get more done in a given number of 'ticks'.
VLIW is another thing that has popped out of IBM through the years (like RISC). Those guys really are the uberlords of new, basic computer research.
I was just reading about the new 8-cylinder VW product (a W-8?), which seems to share tooling with the 15 degree V6. Aside from the packaging issues (ie. cram the motor in and around a transaxle in the front), I can't see much here that seems reasonable. A four valve eight (holy toledo, imagine the amount of monkey-motion crammed into that small space), it weighs over 400 pounds!! (410 I think), just a smidge less than a 302 Ford with considerably less displacement (and less horsepower). I expect any significant work on this baby will require pulling the whole drivetrain. Due to the v-angle and weird placement of cylinders, I'll bet it's more of a shaker than a traditional pushrod V-8 (so much for the 'refinement' concept).
A sad thing about modern VW products, is that due to the extra poundage, the new rompin', stompin' motored cars (ie VR6 or 1800 Turbo Golfs) are hardly any quicker than a 1986 16V second generation Golf/Scirroco. Still low to mid 15's in the quarter mile.
Wow! I didn't start out planning a rant this long! Sorry!
I remember replacing the ignition control module in my wife's Omni (this was in the mid-80s). Piece of cake, pull a plug, undo a bolt, pop the new one in. No moving parts, just a small silver box. Much easier than screwing around with points/condensor, or whatever was the equivilant components before EI.
Whover mentioned sensors being the problem was right. I still have nightmares about the '75 Opel Manta I had. Only year of fuel injection + few sold = one nasty expensive mess to fix. i once found out there was only one engine control module for it in the entire USA, but it didn't matter, because no one knew how to fix it anyway.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Well, I've had the chance to drive that kind of minimalist car and it's interesting. Not bad, not good, just interesting.
I'm renting a Geo Metro LSi because the Lincoln LS is in the shop, that's all they'll pay for and right now I can't afford to upgrade to a real car. (There's something wrong when you're leasing a $32k car and you get the same loaner you'd get if you were driving a two-year-old Mystique. Next time I'll read the fine print.)
You'll recognize the Metro if I tell you it looks like the car nine out of ten circus clowns prefer. Every car looms over it, even my wife's Infiniti G20. You're definitely at the bottom of the food chain and it's changed my perspective. I saw that new upmarket Hyundai (XG3?) and for an instant it looked mighty good, God help me.
I wouldn't say the Metro is tinny, but when you close the trunk it sounds like you're closing an empty 55-gallon drum. Opening the driver's door makes the same noise my wife's Thunderbird did after the accident shoved the fender back into the door.
There is no apparent sound deadening so you actually hear mechanical noises. Not all of them are enjoyable, and some of the clunks and groans probably shouldn't be there, but overall this is not a bad thing.
It has a three-speed automatic and I'm pretty sure it's not a Turbo 400. However, it bangs off shifts like one, which I like.
It's actually pretty quick around town and gets on the freeway with some authority. I was beginning to suspect they did this with gearing and when I tried to get it above 70 I found out I was right--it was not happy.
The steering is manual, and makes up for its truck-like heaviness by having no feel. If any of you have driven an old Mustang with manual steering--my previous benchmark for lousy steering--this is much worse.
In fact, the Metro is the 2001 version of a '61 Falcon I had years ago, a car I hated then and get nostalgic about now. Not bad in small doses, but not what I'd want as an everyday driver.
Uh, I better shut up now. Someone here might actually own a Metro!
Power windows were once a luxury thing, but nowadays, it seems like they've designed crank windows to be such an annoyance that you're better off getting power windows just to avoid the hassle. Windows in cars are taller nowadays, and the mechanism to roll them down is much flimsier, so as a result, a window that used to take 2-3 turns of the crank to put down now takes 5, 6, or more. Plus, they always seem to put the window cranks in the most awkward of places, for me at least. Sometimes I worry about power windows failing, as well. Over on one of the Intrepid boards, it seems that power window failures are pretty common on them. I haven't had one fail yet, and have about 52K on my '00. I think the earliest my family's had a power window fail was on an '85 Chevy Silverado, when it was about 6 years old. Forget the miles, though. I had 2 fail on my Gran Fury, one around 9 years/75K miles, and the second around 10 years/100K miles.
As for stripper cars, I think the biggest car I've seen lately that you can still get pretty basic is the Malibu. I know I've seen a few of them with crank windows. But it's going to have ABS :-( I guess, if you want to go large, you can still get a base Suburban with crank windows, can't you? Might get mistaken for a construction crew truck, though!
The only real problem I have with something that small is that I don't real safe mixing it up with Suburbans. I didn't feel that way when my daily driver was an MGB but I was younger then and there weren't as many 5000-lb. trophy trucks on the road then.
From the way he was driving it though, he should be thankful he had ABS!
Today I pulled the plug on my experiment in seeing how little car I could live with. I told the service writer--nicely--that I wanted either my own car fixed and back or an upgrade from the Metro. So now I'm driving an Altima (waahoo!). Sure hope I don't put L-M out of business. You'd think so the way the service manager reacted. (I lease a $32k car from these guys and get the same level of service I got when I brought them a $14k Mystique. I guess they don't want to spoil me.)
I'm just minimalist enough (or cheap enough) to like the Metro even though it's a penalty box by modern standards. All I would ask for is a four-speed automatic...even just a locking torque converter would be a bonus. The engine starts winding around 35 and by 65 it's about to wind right out of its mounts.
I also think a plus-2 wheel/tire package would go a long way toward improving the Metro's looks, but I'd hesitate to do something that would make the manual steering even harder to use.
Remember how an MGB sounds when you start it? Doesn't the starter make kind of a dry scraping sound and barely turn the engine over? So does the Metro, which I think is a nice retro touch. I wonder if it's positive ground?
I'll never wish for less stuff on a car again. Stuff is good.