Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I own a relatively modern car (1995). I have rode in a friend's 2010 Cadillac DTS. Not bad, but nothing like the Cadillacs of the past. I expected the seats to be soft and comfortable and they were firm and uncomfortable. Even the owner said it doesn't ride like the Cadillacs of the old days (smooth, boulevard ride).
Stating that many modern "large" cars are not really that large is not living in the past.
I suggest you read up on old cars! Back when full-sized was really full-sized. And they weren't shaped like potatoes!
BTW, that white Lexus shown in the first post has one of the ugliest front ends I have ever seen!
If Caddy still built the cars the way they did, they would be out of business. Their buyer pool was literally dying off
The long hood afforded extra protection in a collision. The rear overhang made for a large-size trunk. With quite a few classic cars, you could see all four fender tips from the driver's seat... a lot different than modern cars with their stumpy proportions.
Lol. Stop dude. Go to YouTube and search Bel Air vs Malibu crash. Older cars were horrible in crashed. If you didn't check out you were badly injured.
The long hood afforded extra protection in a collision. The rear overhang made for a large-size trunk. With quite a few classic cars, you could see all four fender tips from the driver's seat... a lot different than modern cars with their stumpy proportions.
Actually the old car long hood is worst for protection than any short front of today's cars.
Advance in engineering has made current cars much, much more safer (both handling and crush protection) than old boat type cars.
Good to see people coming to defend VW. I'm in the market and am hoping that the reliability stigma surrounding newer VW's is truly gone since the time Ferdinand Piëch took over. I would much prefer a BMW but this is a thread about reliability, after all...
In general, German cars are as reliable as anything, but they can't be abused. You could probably run a Taurus without changing the oil for 50,000 miles. BMW's need careful attention, and if you read their manuals, you will see that.
VW in a most reliable car thread? Now I know its BS. LOL
Like any large manufacturer it is impossible to not create some lemons along the way.
Maybe you had the bad luck of owning one, hence your reluctance to consider VW...
VW has a large customer base for a reason. IMO for the cost, they are above average in the fun factor (drivability, looks, comfort). Also their TDI option makes them a darling for many.
A company does not get to be competing for #1 spot in the world if its cars are not above average in reliability.
You can't go by that video. It's been discussed many times and the nature of the "test" is suspicious. For example, the frame being weakened/rusted in the '59 Chevy.
Comparing classic cars to classic cars, I would rather have a longer hood to put more distance between me and whatever would hit the front end of the car.
If Caddy still built the cars the way they did, they would be out of business. Their buyer pool was literally dying off
And it's very sad how bad taste in cars has become. However, it doesn't stop Rolls-Royce from building 18-19 foot long cars.
But anyway, Cadillac can't still build cars the way they did. Not because it wouldn't sell but because it would be very expensive with the large amount of expensive chrome and metal. Cadillac in the '60s and '70s made little, if any, profit from building the exclusive Fleetwood Seventy-Five sedan and limousine because those were practically hand built and many had special orders. But they built them anyway to maintain their exclusivity and because back then; they catered to the customer.
11-25-2014, 12:07 PM
i7pXFLbhE3gq
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
What's funny is when people can't admit that many of the classic, full-sized cars handled better than expected.
The video you are referring to was a curve on a street. The speed limit on the curved portion is 40 mph and my 76 limousine could go through it at 65 mph, probably even 70 or 75 if I wanted to push it that hard.
Here is a photo and video of street. And I am old enough to show respect to others; let me know when you do.
You can't go by that video. It's been discussed many times and the nature of the "test" is suspicious. For example, the frame being weakened/rusted in the '59 Chevy.
Comparing classic cars to classic cars, I would rather have a longer hood to put more distance between me and whatever would hit the front end of the car.
But we are going off-topic.
You might want to do some reading to understand the car safety progress and the importance of absorbing the energy created during a crush.
Unfortunately old american cars had no crumple zone created to protect passengers, in reality size alone does not help to protect passengers.
Quote:
...
During collision, slowing down the braking by even a few percent of a second can reduce the amount of force involved. Crumple zones accomplish this by making a barrier around the perimeter of the car. This barrier serves as protection by using certain parts of the car resistant to deforming such as the passenger compartment and engine. If those unbending parts hit something, they will decelerate very quickly, resulting in a lot of force. By making those parts surrounded by crumple zones, it allows the unbending materials to absorb the initial impact. The car begins to slow down as soon as this area crumples.
Redistributes the force of impact away from occupant
All the force has to go somewhere away from the passengers or driver. That’s the basic concept of crumple zone. Crumple zones help redistribute the force of impact from the car’s body. Parts of the car are built with structures designed to be damaged, crushed, broken, and crumpled but it takes force to damage them. Crumple zones are primarily designed to do just as it says, to crumple and to crush. By doing so, it reduces the impact of force sent through the car interior.
- See more at: Crumple Zone - Crash Test
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
