How old is to old for safe modern freeway traffic.

HiTempguy wrote: Rufldt has just shown me that Maud Flanders is real... And I am disturbed by it. You're all a bunch of Bob Costas!

Do you mean Helen Lovejoy?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RybNI0KB1bg

mtn wrote: Sliding scale, with the traffic, condition of roads, safety features, comfort, cost, and ability all taken into consideration. A 75 Mercedes is safe anywhere. A 91 Geo Metro? I'd worry about taking that out. Chicagoland? I'm being very careful with what I put my body in--on a weekday, it had better have 3 way seatbelts and my confidence that it won't implode on a collision. Central Illinois? I'd drive around here in a MGA without a seatbelt or helmet.

Agreed. Driving around Chicagoland I'm not driving anything that's not good in a crash. Never mind the motorcycle I'm planning on picking up. That's a different can of worms..

Mezzanine wrote:

tuna55 wrote Depends. Take a look at the braking performance of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBSd2QvY7wQ versus this https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0y2q1akO3lk I'd say you have to feel that out for yourself. If you care about crash testing, then forget it for most old stuff.

Tuna, both links are the same... could you repost the other video you wanted to use?

Fixed.

I guess the oldest of mine I drive regularly on the freeway is my 72 LTD. It cruises like a champ with zero issues. It's all stock other than radial tires and power, braking, handling are all fine. If I changed anything I'd give it an OD trans.

As far as where I would cut it off.....I wouldn't. Cars vary way to much for me to consider a year or era as a stopping point. I'd try it and see how I felt about it, but I DD a motorcycle, so my safety standards are pretty low anyway.

In reply to amg_rx7:

I don't know... When I drive my classics to work, I'm usually not the slowest thing on the road. Even my Mini will hold 70 without much difficulty. The engine is screaming like hell, but it's got more in it if needed. Likewise, my Spitfire in O/D keep up with modern rush-hour traffic as well. Oddly, the GT6 is less happy about it, but mainly because there's some sort of annoying vibration when pushed above 60.

Accident safety is another matter entirely. I drive them as if I'm riding a motorcycle. I assume I'm invisible. But to be honest, being unmarried with no kids, it's not something I really worry about.

I'd drive anything anywhere at any time. I'm not concerned with crash tests in the least. But I've been told that I have a death wish many times.

It depends, but I think brakes are the big issue. I didn't really think about it until driving a few new fords at the ecoboost challenge and seeing hoe fast they will stop, but I think somewhere between early 80s and mid 90s is about it for cars that go on the freeway, at least in general. Modified cars and some specific ones can certainly be exceptions though. My 87 Milano was fine even with stock size uhp summer tires, and my 83 300sd was just barely ok even with 225s instead of the smaller (I think 195s) tires it came with.

HiTempguy wrote: You're all a bunch of Bob Costas!

No E36 M3. I drove a 57 T bird, 60 Vette and a 55 chev (with 400hp and 4.10 gear) through the 80's and never once felt uncomfortable on the highway. Back then I did a lot of highway when I was dating my wife.

Someone here I think hit on the head when they made the shift away from bias ply tires they were able to stiffen up the suspensions and make the cars a bit more "drivable". I think I keep driving older cars on modern tires in "restored" condition and its messing with my head.

Thinking about getting the T-Bird as it is that clean but between renovating the new house, and the old house not cleared though escrow yet its going to a tough sell to the miss'is. Would not be for resale but I always say that.

Might have to skim some cash out of the market and call the T-Bird a cash sink to get it past her though.

It also depends on the car from those periods...

I've had many cars from the period in question... and I use to live in NJ... (wall to wall traffic all going 80+) The foreign cars (Volvo 1800S, Alfa GTV, TVR Vixen) all drove fine on the highway @ highway speeds... they had good suspensions, good steering. the domestics I owned from that period (67 6 cyl Mustang coupe, 68 GTO, 67 GT500) all drove a bit too floaty, with steering that had no feel.

My preference is resto mod... disc brakes, quality/tight suspension, with tight accurate steering.

As far as crash worthiness....... whats that?

oldeskewltoy wrote: As far as crash worthiness....... whats that?

Every car I've ever owned was capable of crashing, and many did. I got traction with that 55 chev in a residential neighborhood one night, when I was least expecting it, and went through a yard and took down a small tree.

My '70 beetle scared the hell outta me every morning. First red light halt in Portland rush hour in the rain with 4 wheel drum brakes that are cable operated and no power assist, all in a vehicle that didn't meet safety regulations in 1970, let alone now... Who needs redbull with a rush like that?

If you wanna daily that thunder chicken, put it on a lift and do a resto-mod. Not sure if it's worth more in original condition or restomod, but I'd take a long hard stare at your bank account and your vision for this vehicle.

I'm comfortable driving anything with hydraulic brakes and a lap belt at the least. However, in cars from 50's and 60's I do prefer to have a little stiffer suspension.

Most anything from the late 40's and up should cruise fine. (I've had a Duesenberg on the highway and was totally comfortable, but that's a horse of a different color)

Brakes are your biggest concern. I would always consider a dual master conversion if at all possible. Drums can be fine as long as you're not in bumper to bumper and they are adjusted properly.

You guys are a bunch of wimps.

We used to drive '50's era cars at max speed a lot.

Max speed was about 85 mph.

And then my drive of CJ5 on I-90 from Toledo to near Albany.

I have a 57 T-Bird, so I can say with some confidence that the early T-birds are notorious for running hot. If you're talking about slow traffic, and a 100% pure restoration, then that would actually be one of my biggest concerns.

Obviously, lots of people drove old cars, including T-Birds like that one, on the freeway for a long time. But the older it gets, the worse it gets compared to other cars. Back then, it could probably brake better than other cars on the road, since it was marginally smaller/lighter. But today, everything is going to stop faster/shorter, and if you're not paying attention, that could be a problem.

I would upgrade the shocks, upgrade the tires, check the alignment and add some negative camber, more castor, then cope with the brakes.....

Rog

Will wrote: I have a 57 T-Bird, so I can say with some confidence that the early T-birds are notorious for running hot. If you're talking about slow traffic, and a 100% pure restoration, then that would actually be one of my biggest concerns. Obviously, lots of people drove old cars, including T-Birds like that one, on the freeway for a long time. But the older it gets, the worse it gets compared to other cars. Back then, it could probably brake better than other cars on the road, since it was marginally smaller/lighter. But today, everything is going to stop faster/shorter, and if you're not paying attention, that could be a problem.

Do you enjoy the ownership of one. that is the 100K question. I have a ton of modified cars from that era and had a blast but they were compromised to look pretty. As for the braking distance my 28' roadster has to be 10x worst then any Tbird with factory brakes. I am totally used to driving predicatively.

Car is 98% restored. It does have electronic ignition, a modern radiator and has a set of modern tires on it currently not bias plys.

iceracer wrote: You guys are a bunch of wimps. We used to drive '50's era cars at max speed a lot. Max speed was about 85 mph. And then my drive of CJ5 on I-90 from Toledo to near Albany.

I guess that the significantly higher fatality rates of yore don't matter as long as it was someone else, right?

Trackmouse wrote: My '70 beetle scared the hell outta me every morning. First red light halt in Portland rush hour in the rain with 4 wheel drum brakes that are cable operated and no power assist, all in a vehicle that didn't meet safety regulations in 1970, let alone now... Who needs redbull with a rush like that?

Unless your beetle was a 1950 it didn't have cable operated breaks...

In reply to wearymicrobe:

After reading the title, but before I read your original post, I was going to tell you about two cars. Conveniently, they are a 1957 T-Bird and a 1965 Mustang.

One of my neighbors is a big time car guy. He ordered the Mustang new and bought a pair of restored T-birds in 1970. He still owned them until just a few months ago. A couple of years back, he asked if I could help him put the hardtop on the T-Bird. In exchange for my help, he let me take the T-Bird for about an hour. I also owned a '65 Mustang at the time, so we had a lot to talk about. I distinctly remember him saying that the Mustang was still a real car that you can use every day, but the T-Bird was really an antique. I immediately understood what he was talking about, though it's hard to explain. The T-Bird was beautiful, but every aspect of it felt ancient as I drove it. It felt as if there was a lot more than eight years separating the two cars.

Trackmouse wrote: My '70 beetle scared the hell outta me every morning. First red light halt in Portland rush hour in the rain with 4 wheel drum brakes that are cable operated and no power assist,

That was a pretty rare Beetle...cable brakes? I think they went to hydraulics back around 1950.

Back to the subject at hand - remember that in the 1950s and 1960s most places had a speed limit of 60 or 70mph. I remember riding in my dad's 1953 Chevy wagon at those speeds all day.

I love, love, love old cars, but a big concern for me is that a lot of pre-'68 stuff didn't have universal joints in the steering column. It's generally easy to fix, but until you do, you're driving around with a spear pointed at your chest that could definitely change your day in a relatively minor accident.

My requirements were 4-wheels with brakes, lap belts, and an engine that will idle at a stoplight.

Then I had a kid.

drdisque wrote: My dad's 66 Mustang 289 2 bbl automatic is definitely not fun to drive on the highway, but if you just plant it in the right lane at 60 mph it's acceptable. Definitely gets very jittery over bumps. Interestingly, for the longest time we thought the transmission was a 2 speed because we only ever felt it shift once. It does have a third gear which it shifts to at 60 mph.

In a '65-'66 Mustang with automatic transmission (and most other Fords of that era with the Cruise-O-Matic C-4), the normal Drive position is second from the bottom (white circle with the green dot). That gives you all three gears. If you put the shifter in what most people would consider Drive, the car will start out in second and then shift to third.

Ford switched to a more modern shift pattern for 1967.

In reply to Woody:

Interesting. It is easy to learn something new around here every day.