zeitgeist57 Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 As I research parts and rip apart the donor engine for my '82 F100, I'm realizing why Ford and Chevy probably did pretty well with trucks over the years...the PARTS NEVER CHANGED. Seriously...the same flywheel for 4 different engine/ transmission combos and 2 different clutch sizes (10” and 11”) from 1965-1996? Yes, it’s a $50 part, but whatever development/tooling cost has been amortized over almost 40 YEARS. I pity automotive companies today, that develop a Hyundai Elantra and as soon as it’s out they go through the same bullshit all over again to make a washing machine on wheels a little more secksy…usually at the cost of scrapping existing parts and designs to make room for new enhancements. Talk about hamster-on-a-wheel… There is truly a rugged simplicity in old trucks that I find intoxicating. I don’t know what it is, but it feels like owning a modern interpretation of a Model T. Plus, even if it’s not Honda/Toyota reliable, it’s more reassuring to me that the parts can be found anywhere in the country I travel, are cheap and durable, and can be serviced simply and cheaply. Part of me KNOWS if Ford, Chevy, Dodge, Toyota, Mahindra, Suzuki, etc…made a relatively simple, sub-$15k truck (especially with the Ranger dying off) there would still be a strong sales market. At the same time, the other part of me instantly knows that a combination of regulations and corporate greed will never allow the business case to ever exist again for such a vehicle…at least not on U.S. soil. *Le sigh*… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schmuckingham Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 This will come off as cliche but they dont make them like they used to. Americans just want something shot lived and disposable anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckeye1647545503 Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 This is why allot of people go oh wow you are going to drive a 60's muscle car across country (for the power tour) but really its not a thing as most of the cars are stupid simple and of they do break you can pretty much restore one in the parking lot of a napa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cordell Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 So true, I keep saying that I'm just going to fix up an old truck for a daily and not have payments, then for some reason I just have to have a new one. I keep falling victim to my desire for the lastest and greatest instead of the old cheap and reliable. I want a 70s- early 80s C10 with a basic 350, turbo 350, really bad, hopefully it'll be my next vehicle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spankis Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 I completely understand you Clay, and that's to some degree what drew me to my Ranger. They fact that the chassis hasn't been largely revised since 1998 (losing the I-Beam front suspension), and that many parts are still interchangeable back to the 1st generation (late 80s) ranger models probably keeps a lot of people away, but it's that simplicity that actually led me to them. Same with my grandpas 88 chevy 1500, VERY easy to work on. Electrical gremlins are it's only challenge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99FLHRCI Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 Really it still exists today, it is just not as obvious. I have a friend that used to work for Honda R&D. They would come up with a good way to do something and the higher ups would say no because they could use part X from another vehicle to do the job. Yes it might be more complicated and result in stupid placement of a part that requires an arm with 4 joints to change a bulb but, the part already exists so they must use it. The problem is that it is not well documented. For example, the HVAC box in my 2000 Acura Integra is exactly the same as a 97-01 Honda CRV or 00-06 Honda Insight. The cool thing is both of those cars have cabin filters and mine doesn't. (So I added one.) Granted it is not 40 years but, there is just one example that goes across 12 years at least (94 Integra RS-06 Insight). There are many more examples (b series engines, k series engines, subaru engines) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg1647545532 Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 This is a really fascinating subject. As a fan of dead-simple cars, I would love for automakers to make an indestructible DIY machine that will still be on the road in 40 years. The problem is that new car buyers get to dictate the cars that get made. New car buyers keep their cars, on average, something like 5 years. That's why bumper to bumper warranties rarely go over that. Automakers just flat don't care what happens to the car after 5 years, because the second owner who's stuck with monster repair bills was never a lost sale to them in the first place. As long as the first owner was happy and stays brand loyal, they win. The other thing is that the optional equipment on a 10 year old car effin blows unless you bought a top of the line Merc or something. Now a mid-grade Elantra comes with the same standard equipment as a 10 year old E-class. What does that mean? The guy who buys a new truck is going to get sick of it after 10 years anyway, and buy a new truck with all the new bells and whistles, better mileage, and better safety equipment. Even if his old truck runs like a top and has cost him nothing in maintenance. YOU might want to keep a car for 20 or 30 years, but if so, you're not the sort that gives money to the automakers. You buy used, and therefore your opinion doesn't matter. And, to make it worse, America has set up this stupid relationship between dealerships and automakers, by requiring automakers to sell cars through independent dealerships. And the dealerships don't make any money on new car sales, they make it up in the service and parts departments. So even if an automaker decided to make a car that was easy to fix and would run for 30 years, despite the fact that there's no incentive for them to do so, it would have the added detriment of pissing off their dealer network. The only answer, I'm afraid, is to keep buying old cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnaplay1647545503 Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 This will come off as cliche but they dont make them like they used to. Americans just want something shot lived and disposable anymore. I dont agree, I want the best bang for my buck. Typically thats not in an average sale price of $25,000 range. I want whatever I spend that kind of money on to last a long time. Unfortunately we are limited by what were presented with. I dont want to pay $25k on a product that cost a fraction of that to develop and implement. The first car company that comes out with a sexy design, quality built, affordable, and easy to maintain car, will own the market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 Hector had ~260k miles on him, did the Hartford Fair Rough Truck, then someone bought him and drove off the fairgrounds that night. they truly don't make them like they used to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyM3rC Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 Just be glad the .gov hasn't completely outlawed cars older than x years. Yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schmuckingham Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 I dont agree, I want the best bang for my buck. Typically thats not in an average sale price of $25,000 range. I want whatever I spend that kind of money on to last a long time. Unfortunately we are limited by what were presented with. I dont want to pay $25k on a product that cost a fraction of that to develop and implement. The first car company that comes out with a sexy design, quality built, affordable, and easy to maintain car, will own the market. Never going to happen, you really think a car company from any country is going to develop a car and not mark it up to the margin they want to make and stay competitive? You see tons of beat up 90s and even 80s cars all over the place, and some of them still look pretty good. Most of the cars from the early 2000s arent looking to good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unfunnyryan Posted September 1, 2011 Report Share Posted September 1, 2011 1. make cars die 2. sell more cars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneRunnin72SST Posted September 2, 2011 Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 Just be glad the .gov hasn't completely outlawed cars older than x years. Yet. Sadly I can see it coming to that. They will ban them all together or heavily tax those who own them. -Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinner Posted September 2, 2011 Report Share Posted September 2, 2011 That's why I love my jeep. Easy to work on parts are cheap and despite what jones thinks it's a great car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.