The Golden Age of automobiles is...

kreb wrote:

ebonyandivory wrote: In reply to OldGray320i: Agreed, Maverick (I actually like those), Vega, Grenada, Pacer, Gremlin, Diplomat, Volare... Wait, I like ALL of those!

A bit heavy on the wacky tobacky? Those cars are great.... if you also dig plad suits, velvet wall hangings and lava lamps. Kinda like saying "man, I loved those 286 computers! They'd run DOS like anything!"

Wait, what? There's something wrong with plaid suits? What are you saying about my velvet Elvis painting?

I'm starting to get the shakes, like time has passed me by or something....

Although in all seriousness, I have seen some wicked cool hot rodded mid 70's ugly's turned cool, like a Gremlin and a Granada. But they weren't turned out that way from the factory.

I think golden era is really late 50's through early 70's. The variation in styling from generation to generation was better, both for sports cars and muscle machines.

For those cars, the whole was greater than the sum of their parts. No, they don't perform nearly as well as today's cars pound for pound, in any respect, but they evoke a feel and emotion that few of today's cars do.

For an appliance, I love my new focus. And it is a good performer, too, especially compared an "economy car" of yore. But for driving fun and enjoyment the older ones just have something the new ones don't.

Haven't read the rest of the thread yet, but..

I doubt that. When fuel injection came along folks decried it as the end of hot rodding. There is no way you could work on that in your garage. Then when obd1 and obd2 arrived people said the same thing. Now you can get a cheap phone app and a generic Bluetooth adapter to do anything you might need. In 20 years who knows what will come along but it will be so easy that the idea that these cars will be difficult to keep going will be just as laughable as fuel injection being the death of hot rodding.

I disagree. I think the thing that people are very blind to right now is that the automotive landscape is on the edge of a paradigm shift. In 20 years the cars we drive today will not just be old, but also have a decent chance of being almost totally irrelevant. Have you considered the possibility that in 20 years, driving something that runs on stinky, expensive "gasoline" and takes gallons and gallons of it just to get across town, will be totally ludicrous? I mean, it's not exactly going to be like driving a steam-engine car is today, but it may very well be that driving a 2007 bmw 328 on any kind of regular basis will be the equivalent of someone who drives a carb'd 460ci 1971 ford pickup today. It's not fast, it gets E36 M3 mileage, it sucks by modern truck standards, it's uncomfortable, it's unsafe, it's expensive on a per-mile basis.. basically the only upside will be fitting in with other people who share your taste for old junk. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Right now, you can drive around in some 25-30 year old cars that are at least plausibly comparable to some modern cars in the sense that they get 'similar' economy and at least use the same fuel even if they are relative deathtraps. In 20 years even THAT won't be true in most cases.

mazdeuce wrote: I think we might be close to the peak of gasoline only cars. Super cars are going hybrid. Look at the Porsche 918. Hell, look at the Tesla. There are distinct performance anvantages to adding at least some electric power to cars. If you look at the Volt or the Prius, there are also distinct economy advantages. The barrier is cost. On very high performance cars cost is less of an obstacle than on regular cars, so I expect that the very high end will soon be made up of cars with a significant electrical component. These will be better in pretty much every way, but we will lament the loss of our gas only super cars.

I would also note one difference in usage between race cars and street cars, and hybrid systems with different goals: You can't use 1000hp for very long, or very often on the street. And you don't need a very big battery to make 1000hp for a few seconds.

Using electricity to supplement a smaller engine to better meet both the average and peak power demands makes a lot of sense.

I can almost see a track day car having a mode where its 200hp ICE is running flat out pretty much constantly, and throttle application distributes more of that to the wheels, along with electric power, and under braking and at part throttle, power is diverted to a capacitor bank or small battery instead. All the power you can use as often as you can use it, because you can take the average output of the small engine and apply it when you want it and bank it when you don't. Not too effective on a banked oval, though

I have read every post, just skimmed the thread but here are my thoughts.

The Golden Age of cars will always the the late 50s to mid 70s. I know that's a large almost 20 year span, but when you consider the automotive offerings as a whole you have European sports cars starting in the 50s and also the Corvette. Then through the 60s and into the 70s you have the horsepower wars of the muscle car era and the beginnings of some of the big auto races that are iconic today. When you look at newer cars, you do get more in every way, but how many modern cars that aren't supercars will be classics or considered iconic in 25 years? Look at now. what cars from 20-30 years ago are considered classic? Not many when compared to how many cars from 50-60 years ago carry that distinction.

That doesn't even take into account what the parts market will be like for today's cars in 25 years. What happens when your 2013 1 series burns out one of it's many control modules? Will there replacements or someone to fix it? When you look at 80s cars, lets take 80s Chryslers. You pretty much have to pillage every car you find in a junkyard to make sure if you burn out an ecu you have one to replace it.

I think the 3-D printer is going to revolutionize modern car restoration. When anyone can download the file and print their own A pillar plastic or unobtainable vent cover. Circuit boards won't be far behind.

The golden age man be coming up when it becomes even easier to build yourself.

former520 wrote: I think the 3-D printer is going to revolutionize modern car restoration. When anyone can download the file and print their own A pillar plastic or unobtainable vent cover. Circuit boards won't be far behind. The golden age man be coming up when it becomes even easier to build yourself.

You been reading Corey Doctorow by any chance? He writes in the context of a near future society that is based on the evolution of technology that already exist in our present day world.

Ransom wrote:

mazdeuce wrote: I think we might be close to the peak of gasoline only cars. Super cars are going hybrid. Look at the Porsche 918. Hell, look at the Tesla. There are distinct performance anvantages to adding at least some electric power to cars. If you look at the Volt or the Prius, there are also distinct economy advantages. The barrier is cost. On very high performance cars cost is less of an obstacle than on regular cars, so I expect that the very high end will soon be made up of cars with a significant electrical component. These will be better in pretty much every way, but we will lament the loss of our gas only super cars.

I would also note one difference in usage between race cars and street cars, and hybrid systems with different goals: You can't use 1000hp for very long, or very often on the street. And you don't need a very big battery to make 1000hp for a few seconds. Using electricity to supplement a smaller engine to better meet both the average and peak power demands makes a lot of sense. I can almost see a track day car having a mode where its 200hp ICE is running flat out pretty much constantly, and throttle application distributes more of that to the wheels, along with electric power, and under braking and at part throttle, power is diverted to a capacitor bank or small battery instead. All the power you can use as often as you can use it, because you can take the average output of the small engine and apply it when you want it and bank it when you don't. Not too effective on a banked oval, though

This would make a fine autocross car. There is a guy locally who autocrosses a first gen Insight on R comps. The car doesn't set great times, but a ride with him shows that the car is way closer to sports cars than the numbers would suggest.

Very few of the posts seem to consider styling as a criterion, which is unfortunate, and probably why it isn't much valued today. Cars are better than ever technically, but stylistically, generally meh.

Basil Exposition wrote: Very few of the posts seem to consider styling as a criterion, which is unfortunate, and probably why it isn't much valued today. Cars are better than ever technically, but stylistically, generally meh.

This

In reply to DirtyBird222:

I did not ignore styling at all. I look at the 50's to be the only thing on par with the modern age. (cue the boo's) but the 60's, to me, had a few stand out but wasn't ground breaking by any stretch. It was no different than any other era.

Once you take everything into context, and I do mean everything, give them all equal weight, I would say my argument is still today. If you want to break out by genre then I would go.

Power: Today
Style: 50's
Interior Comfort: Today
Interior Style: Tie between today and 50's
Reliability: Today

While I want to be all form-follows-function, I've long thought that the reason that a lot of old stuff looks good is because we didn't know enough to make it better. A vintage Triumph motorcycle's crankcase and covers are gorgeous to me, but FEA sure isn't going to come up with that shape.

I agree with Flight Service. The golden age right now is NOW. I have had a driver's license for 54 years now. I have had a chance to drive a good percentage of the cars and trucks everyone talks about from different eras. I can't think of any vehicle that I couldn't find one today that is better in many respects (performance, handling, comfort).

For example: My father had a 65 Mustang with the HIPO 289 and a 68? with the 390 engine. We auto-X'ed and time trialed both of them extensively. Last week I had a 2013 Mustang V6 as a rental for 2 days. IMO, the 2013 was better than the 65 in all categories and only lost out to the 68 in straight line acceleration.

While on the subject of Mustangs: I cracks me up to see some people on here talk about how great the older ones are/were. Then from other posts I figure out that they are not old enough to have driven one in its original form. They have only seen/driven one that has been modified to correct the deficiencies and are comparing it to a new bone stock version. This probably applies to all the other retro muscle cars out there today.

Yes, the golden age is now. What's now considered a "classic" is irrelevant. Outside of some truly amazing cars, it's just a sliding range of car production and its relationship to 50-60 year old men. That demographic and what was cool in "their time" drives the values. It will continue, the fully restored 1 of 1000 lancer evo with option code en56 will cross the auction block for some ridiculous amount of money in 2037.

I guess my take on this one is making people put their hands over their ears and sing lalalalalalalala.

In reply to Vigo:

I think it's entirely possible that you're right, but I guess it seems like a bit of a tangent to a tangent; it doesn't really address the Golden Age (apart from pointing out that we may be about to go off the precipice), and it's sort of a reaction to an answer to a question about whether current cars are or aren't going to be repairable in the future.

I'd be bummed to be in a carless world, but a world that becomes carless because people don't care about them wouldn't necessarily be worse off, and might be better. It depends to a great degree on what people want, and that's a moving target.

Perhaps now? Though the evolution of technology between 1987 and 1993 netted the biggest gain in top speed (according to Wikipedia).

1949 Jag XK120 - 124.6mph

1959 Aston Martin DB4 GT - 152mph

1968 Ferrari 365 GTB/4 Daytona - 174mph

1987 Ferrari F40 - 202.687mph

1993 McLaren F1 - 240.1mph

2010 Bugatti Veyron Super Sport 267.857mph

2014 Hennessey Venom GT - 270.49mph

good lord... 270mph.. that has to a mile ever 12 seconds? how do you ever react?

Hal wrote: I agree with Flight Service. The golden age right now is NOW. I have had a driver's license for 54 years now. I have had a chance to drive a good percentage of the cars and trucks everyone talks about from different eras. I can't think of any vehicle that I couldn't find one today that is better in many respects (performance, handling, comfort). For example: My father had a 65 Mustang with the HIPO 289 and a 68? with the 390 engine. We auto-X'ed and time trialed both of them extensively. Last week I had a 2013 Mustang V6 as a rental for 2 days. IMO, the 2013 was better than the 65 in all categories and only lost out to the 68 in straight line acceleration. While on the subject of Mustangs: I cracks me up to see some people on here talk about how great the older ones are/were. Then from other posts I figure out that they are not old enough to have driven one in its original form. They have only seen/driven one that has been modified to correct the deficiencies and are comparing it to a new bone stock version. This probably applies to all the other retro muscle cars out there today.

I'm with you, though I've only had my license for 36 years. ;)

One other area that modern cars are superior is in build quality/fit and finish. Cars from the '50s, '60s, and '70s had horrible panel fitment, and were usually worn out by 100k miles due to loose tolerances in the body and drivetrain. Modern manufacturing ahs made even poor cars run well past 100k miles regularly, with 200k being the new 100k for mileage.

I had Mustangs from 1970, and my '06 GT was better in every measurable way, and even in a couple immesurable ones. I've done quite a bit of restorations on cars from the '40s, '50s, '60s, and '70s, and no one allows the build quality of those cars in modern cars. Exposed screws? Ill fitting panels with large gaps? Misaligned trim? Factory specs allowed for a wide variance, while modern cars, even the worst ones, have better fitment and finishing.

Vigo wrote: Haven't read the rest of the thread yet, but..

I doubt that. When fuel injection came along folks decried it as the end of hot rodding. There is no way you could work on that in your garage. Then when obd1 and obd2 arrived people said the same thing. Now you can get a cheap phone app and a generic Bluetooth adapter to do anything you might need. In 20 years who knows what will come along but it will be so easy that the idea that these cars will be difficult to keep going will be just as laughable as fuel injection being the death of hot rodding.

I disagree. I think the thing that people are very blind to right now is that the automotive landscape is on the edge of a paradigm shift. In 20 years the cars we drive today will not just be old, but also have a decent chance of being almost totally irrelevant. Have you considered the possibility that in 20 years, driving something that runs on stinky, expensive "gasoline" and takes gallons and gallons of it just to get across town, will be totally ludicrous? I mean, it's not exactly going to be like driving a steam-engine car is today, but it may very well be that driving a 2007 bmw 328 on any kind of regular basis will be the equivalent of someone who drives a carb'd 460ci 1971 ford pickup today. It's not fast, it gets E36 M3 mileage, it sucks by modern truck standards, it's uncomfortable, it's unsafe, it's expensive on a per-mile basis.. basically the only upside will be fitting in with other people who share your taste for old junk. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Right now, you can drive around in some 25-30 year old cars that are at least plausibly comparable to some modern cars in the sense that they get 'similar' economy and at least use the same fuel even if they are relative deathtraps. In 20 years even THAT won't be true in most cases.

I'll take this on, since I have thought about it, and I very much disagree with the idea that ICE's are going away anytime soon.

They may get 20 years cleaner, and 20 years safer, but not away. Not even close.

One HUGE reason for this is materials. be it the material that generates the energy, or the form of the storage of that energy, or even the form of taking that potential energy and making it mechanical. Every single one of those would require a rather quantum change in technology to have ICE's go away anytime soon.

Let's just look at the engine-motor. An electric motor and a gas engine do use very similar materials- aluminum, iron/steel, copper. But the porportions of what is needes changes very toward the copper side of things. To the point that I don't see enough copper volume in the world to make ~50M 200hp electric motors annually. Geez, if even 10M electric cars are sold annually, that would be huge ability.

Moving toward the storage. Gas has it easy- the potential is chemical, and very easy to store in a plastic or metal container. Electric potential is really hard to store. Right now, the best of the best use materials that are generally called Rare Earths. Not so rare that they are precious metals, but rare enough to be called as such. Being that rare, again, the idea that there's 50M cars a year's worth of that isn't feasable.

That's one of the most overlooked advantages of the gas motor- most of the material used is among the most common materials the earth can produce- iron oxide to make iron/steel and bauxite to make aluminium.

Unless someone figures out how to store energy in an aluminum and steel battery. And make an alloy of aluminum and copper that extends the use of copper enough to make 50M 200hp electric motors. Could happen....

1930's.