Question.....

[DaveMack]

Well stated BurtyBear.

Dave

[gregozedobe]

now to come clean & stirred you all up...... while using up the earths rescouses at twice the rate I do...... what's the point.

Be aware that things can can get very messy when you start playing the "holier-than-thou" card (and yes, I'm aware you are STILL stirring )

What if the person with the big 6l "monster" rides a push bike to work and only drives 5,000Km a year, while you drive 30,000Km a year ? Who is using more resources then ? What about someone who carpools with 3 others while you are always alone in your car ? How many "unecessary" journeys do you do (and who decides what is necessary) ?

A lot of modern performance cars can be suprisingly economical when driven gently, and lets face it, if you drive a fast car at the limit all the time pretty soon you will be off the road for one or more reasons (jail, death, crashed car, lack of $$$ etc).

How about if you regularly attend overseas climate change conferences and produce huge amounts of green house gases flying there in your efforts to save the world ? And what about flying to overseas holidays, and the poluution tourism causes ?

Is the person who still drives around in a 15 year old car being better for the environment than someone who buys the latest "green" car every two years (it takes a lot of energy and materials to produce a new car) ?

Hard questions, with no simple answers I just don't like someone telling me what I should do without discussing it with me first.

[Oneofthegreats]

I believe that true motoring was in the early 70,s..

Oh hell yeh.

Phase 2 GTHO XW, Phase 3 GTHO GT
Torana's XU1 GTR's, GTR's
GTS Monaro's HK,T,G's
Valiant's

Real car time's, Yes sir, Yes sir.

[GermanwithaVdub]

using up the earths rescouses at twice the rate I do...... what's the point. Bazza

i hope it helps you sleep better at night to know you're saving the planet. why didnt you buy a prius instead thats what its for (sleeping better at night that is)

[Jester_Fu]

he said that all of us who drive fast cars have small ****s... not really the best post for popularity on a car enthusiast forum dont you think? he must have a few syndromes of his own

Nah, he said all he could come up with was small **** syndrom. All you set about doing was proving he was right.

Bazzamon - I don't totally agree with you that motoring was at it's pinicle in the '70s in any respect. I'm not from the vintage that should have enjoyed those cars, but for years i owned models from that era and some earlier... many due to my fathers influence who was a mechanic during those years. '72 XJ6 S2 SWB Jaguar, '73 142S Volvo, '68 Mk10 Jaguar, Valliants... hell, most of my mates are still mad valliant fans.

I did quite a few 7 to 8 hour runs to visit remote relatives over the years using those cars and now my modern obsessions. I still do those runs. The only car i ever modified was the Volvo, all of the others i spent vast amounts of money and time putting back to original manufacturers spec, or a more reliable modern version of. Now, 8 hours in say the Mk10 Jaguar or the XJ6 were not particularly hard... but 8 hours in something like the Peugeot 405Mi16 i had made those vintage vehicles seem, well, vintage in all respects. I'd rather drive my new R32 over those distances than anything i've owned from any vintage. Hell, my last ride (Peugeot 206GTi180) left them all for dead with comfort, convenience, reliability and ease of drive. The Fench are masters of arse comfort, any 504 or earlier owner will testify to that

On the other hand, the Ford Falcon work gave me to drive is a dog of a car on a long trip (so i madethem get me an R32). It's very uncomfortable for anything over 3 hours and longer drives really wear you out. I'd much rather be in a Valliant or an old Jag getting the same fuel economy anyway! So, comparing a Holden/Ford to old school european classics, or the old Chrysler cars, is rather like comparing putting your d**k in a blender with having sex with your wife/boyfriend/mistress. They both seem like good idea's at the time, but you get to keep your d**k after one of them. The other makes you look like a tool, despite the fact you've lost your tool.

[ozgriff]

One can suspect that was his 'growing up' period, where the best music and cars was made.

Just like the 90's, with the Mazda RX-7 Series 6 and MX-5, Skyline GTR, Toyota Supra, Subaru WRX, HSV, FPV, Audi TT etc, etc.

I'm sure you can all chip in with great periods of motoring. It's not smoking the tyres, it's the pleasurable cruise up to the speed limit and the knowledge you have plenty to spare. The car is nowhere near its limits - unlike some that are borderline struggling.

The advent of green energy is a great discussion and it's wonderful that everyone is taking it seriously (it would have been better in the 70's) but don't peg a V8 or V6 driver as a major polluter because there are so many factors involved.

[jb747]

Ah, those wonderful 1970s brakes.

Actually, I think the pinnacle of car design occurred much earlier. About 1910. Simplicity was the key. And everyone was made so much safer by the bloke who walked in front of your car, carrying a lantern, to warn of your approach.

[bailey78]

he must have a few syndromes of his own

Exactly right - agree 100%

We should all ask him to stay out of OUR right hand lane

[bailey78]

. ..... I believe that true motoring was in the early 70,s.. Bazza

I am pretty sure brakes were woeful in the early 70's. Bare in mind I was born in 1978 so I wouldnt really know. Going by what I have read! But I'm guessing it'd be a fairly safe statement to make.

Wouldn't stop at brakes either...suspension innovations, engine tuning, light weight materials, safety innovations.....I could go on and on.

[Jester_Fu]

Wouldn't stop at brakes either...suspension innovations, engine tuning, light weight materials, safety innovations.....I could go on and on.

Sorry, but your comments by your own admission are based on ignorance.

Safety in the '70s wasn't as relevant because there was less traffic, less morons on the road, and more METAL in the cars. I'll put a '74 Chrysler into a 2007 X5 or some other massive POS SUV, and still have a car i can drive off... while i watch the insurance company write the other car off, the owner get taken away with a broken nose from the airbag, and a towtruck leave with a very 'safe' piece of scrap metal on the back.

As for brakes, my '72 Volvo had stock brakes that would easily stop any modern V6 Commodore. Disks on all 4 wheels, with a front/rear bias valve (standard) with seperate lines to every caliper. Oh, and they were all minimum 2 pot callipers - not single pot like today. The only things they've achieve with modern cars is ABS - braking for the mentally retarded - and larger rotors under larger wheels to stop heavier cars. Yes, HEAVIER. Look even through the VW range and see how the Golf has porked up over the years. A 'massive' Valliant Charger weighs in a tad under 1100kg's. So, we have bigger brakes to stop more massive cars... not really an 'improvement' as such.

Suspension. Boy... there's been no major developments there since Citroen went bust and stopped fitting their Hydractive system. Which is now back, i believe. Coil over springs and McPherson struts? Pfft - 1960's technology. Independant rear ends? Jaguar started that in the '60s as well... and still no-one does a camber neutral independant rear end like that fitted to Jags until the late '80s. Reason? It costs to much to produce it!

Engine tuning? Hell, i could get a 230HP tune out of my twin SU cabied '72 XJ6 running pump fuel and stock internals. Oh, and still manage to pull 20MPG. Yeah, it was a 4.2L engine, but the current 3.2 VW engines are what, 250HP? They claim 22MPG on combined cycle (the way i use to drive the Jag...) and that's with a mass of technology that easily out computes the original moon landing space craft. Where's the real advance there?

Oh, and 4WD? When did Audi start the Quattro?? 1980? After the Jensen of 1966...

So, umm, yeah. Please, go "on and on". I'd like to see a few 'improvements' in modern cars over their historic competitors. Personally, i can't find anything we're doing better now than we did 30 years ago... we're just doing it more often now.

Edit - was curious so i looked the Jensen FF up on Wiki, and it also had anti lock brakes, back in 1966. Seems our modern cars really are just trophies to the past.

[Bazzamon]

The 70s

I could go & on about the engineering of that time..... What about some car parts that still highly desirable.... The P76 alloy block 3.3 v8 very popular today for motorsport application, nearly all mechanical parts from the Beetle, LSDs. electric overdrive ... a lot of innovation came those years. what about the bmw 2002? A part of driving in those days was to master the machine with all their faults.. you had the lovely noise of a small four eg. Renault 16ts You sit on 140kph (which one could in those days) one would turn the radio off just to listen....you could hear the brakes working & the shockers huffing & puffing when they started to get hot, one could hear the wind noises whistling around the one & only door mirror. The modern owner would go running back to his dealer because they could a little squeak in the lhr back door at 104.34 kph...... talking about radios ( no tapes,cds or such, just AM) that were made in Australia for Australian conditions when the reception was 'australia wide' not like the cheap ****ty things we have to put up with these days. A friend's Vw Polo radio is 'done' from Sydney station recption as he crosses the Hawksbury River bridge.... enough of the good old days when going fast was not necessary to enjoy motoring....

[bailey78]

[QUOTE=Jester_Fu;110518]Sorry, but your comments by your own admission are based on ignorance.

Safety in the '70s wasn't as relevant because there was less traffic, less morons on the road, and more METAL in the cars. I'll put a '74 Chrysler into a 2007 X5 or some other massive POS SUV, and still have a car i can drive off...

Ummmmm, you would have severe injuries from your non pretensioned seatbelts (or was that only lap sash?) also wouldnt be surprised if you would have injuries from the non-collapsable steering wheel column, not to mention the "safety cell" that most decent cars of TODAY come with...yes even POS SUV's.....but i'm the one that's ignorant

The only things they've achieve with modern cars is ABS - braking for the mentally retarded -

Ever heard of EBD? Stability Control? Ceramic Brakes? jesus - that one was too easy.....

Suspension. Boy... there's been no major developments there since Citroen went bust and stopped fitting their Hydractive system. Which is now back, i believe. Coil over springs and McPherson struts? Pfft - 1960's technology. Independant rear ends? Jaguar started that in the '60s as well... and still no-one does a camber neutral independant rear end like that fitted to Jags until the late '80s. Reason? It costs to much to produce it!

What about light weight materials? Aluminiums, alloys etc. And I mean in every day cars.....how many people would have owned high end Mercs and Jags back then?

Engine tuning? Hell, i could get a 230HP tune out of my twin SU cabied '72 XJ6 running pump fuel and stock internals. Oh, and still manage to pull 20MPG. Yeah, it was a 4.2L engine, but the current 3.2 VW engines are what, 250HP? They claim 22MPG on combined cycle (the way i use to drive the Jag...) and that's with a mass of technology that easily out computes the original moon landing space craft. Where's the real advance there?

What did the engines rev out to? Did they have a sweet sound about them? Serious questions these...... as I'm not grandpa enough to know.....

Oh, and 4WD? When did Audi start the Quattro?? 1980? After the Jensen of 1966...

Did I even mention 4WD?

So, umm, yeah. Please, go "on and on". I'd like to see a few 'improvements' in modern cars over their historic competitors. Personally, i can't find anything we're doing better now than we did 30 years ago... we're just doing it more often now.

Safety Safety Safety...Tyre technology, Comfort/Convenience inclusions, Aerodynamics, Sat Nav ....

you need to get out abit more if you seriously think we have not made any advancements........

[DaveMack]

Yawn!

Somebody wake me when this is over please.

Dave

[TDI Dude]

My small intestine is ready to climb up my spinal cord and give my brain a good beating for reading this thread!!!!!

[Jester_Fu]

Ummmmm, you would have severe injuries from your non pretensioned seatbelts (or was that only lap sash?) also wouldnt be surprised if you would have injuries from the non-collapsable steering wheel column, not to mention the "safety cell" that most decent cars of TODAY come with...yes even POS SUV's.....but i'm the one that's ignorant

OK... i'll give you a heads up. Pretensioned seatbelts were only really a necessity when lap sash seatbelts were changed to be retractable. The first lap sash belts, as fitted in the '70s, were not retractable. They did not need 'pre-tensionsing' to remove the slack from a spring loaded coil as there was no spring loaded coil.

The "safety cell" in the '70s consisted of a car made from metal. I know, it's a foreign concept to have steel and actual chassis in cars... some sort of structure around you rather than marketing hype on how they improved things from the cheap manufacturing techniques they used to ruin things with in the first place. You also don't need collapsable steering columns unless your car colapses on impact to a point that means the column is going to hurt you... So, i'll take back my ignorance statement, replace it with "uneducated marketing worshiper", and leave you scratching your head again.

Ever heard of EBD? Stability Control? Ceramic Brakes? jesus - that one was too easy.....

EBD? Stability control?? Ever heard of knowing how to drive? Neither of those features make up for competant safe driving. On a track, neither of them help you put in better lap times - i know from experience. The only saving grace for those features on my last 3 cars has been the ability to turn them off when you actually want to enjoy the drive.

Ceramic brakes is a material improvement. The brakes are still discs, the technology is the material... the application is high end sports cars beyond anything i'd listed from the '70s or comparable today. You can't buy a golf GLi with ceramic disks. You could buy a stock Volvo with full disk brakes in the '70s. Volvo is hardly a car for the elite motorist...

What about light weight materials? Aluminiums, alloys etc. And I mean in every day cars.....how many people would have owned high end Mercs and Jags back then?

You realise they stopped trying to make led zepplins in the 30s, right? You know that all of these alloys you're raving about where primarily developed during the second world war in aircraft, don't you? You'd also realise that there were a number of 'composite' material vehicles from the 60s and 70s including the Daimler SP250 - a relatively cheap sportscar of the era. You also realise that the average Golf - considered a medium/small car by todays standards - weighs in at MORE that a 'large; car from the '70s, yes? I gave the example of the Valliant Charger... a fairly common car back then. Why do you need light weight alloys in cars to make them weigh more than their historic equivalents? Mini Minor springs to mind as a low tech cheap car not requiring alloys for weight reduction. Can you explain where the advantage to alloys is for me? I must be getting stoopider in me ye olde age...

What did the engines rev out to? Did they have a sweet sound about them? Serious questions these...... as I'm not grandpa enough to know.....

Sorry, does engine revs some how equate to faster acceleration? Maybe i'm confused, but torque is what you need to get going fast and accelerate hard. Why do you need to rev out to 8000rpm to get decent torque? The Jag i had was 6000RPM, the Volvo was 6500RPM. Both pretty similar numbers against modern straight six and 4 cylinder engines. The jag had enormous torque, 4.2L's of it. Gear ratios determine top speed against revs, but you need torque to propel the car there

The sound issue is relative, but i think most people would agree the sound of a V12 Jaguar, a DB6 Aston Martin or a GTHO is pretty damn sweet. Hell, hearing a tuned Charger come from nowhere and rip past you still does it for a lot of people.

OK - you're in love with the safety issue. So, i'll ask you a question: Is the road toll increasing or decreasing? If the road toll is increasing, then how exactly are these vehicles safer? If they really are so much safer than in the '70s, we should have a declining road toll - as a percentage of motorists. The numbers say otherwise. Please explain...

Sat nav is for the mentally challenged. They had these things called maps even from roman times. People seemed to navigate around entire continents using them, but suddenly we *need* sat nav to drive to the shops for milk? Yeah, huge advancement that one.

There's no arguement tyre technoloy has improved. Yep, it's an important part of the driving experience. Is it the single dominating factor to a successful and enjoyable drive? Really?