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.
Location: Butler County Ohio and Winters in Florida
929 posts, read 2,724,961 times
Reputation: 635
Advertisements
Chris on cars; the title says it all. This is Chris's opinion.
Quality was lacking for sure on all brands back in the 1970s. I was in Auto Tech school back in 1980, when these vehicles were out on the road. I interned at several dealers; AMC/Ford, a Honda/Datsun, and a Chevrolet.
Nothing rings a bell about being worse than the others. I drove a 1977 Chevy Camaro that was fairly dependable until I messed with it.
As most of you know, Maverick's were my first love. I've owned 26 of 'em. Currently have 7 plus a building full of parts. Mine are still ok considering they range from a Sept. 69 to Jan. 76 build dates. I gets lots of attention in my 76 with the one year only Stallion Package. Sure, it's just a paint and trim job, but it looks good.
Are there 26 Mavericks in the country? What are you doing with them?
You can't judge cars by the standards of 4 decades later. I don't recall anyone particularly complaining about the 70s cars at the time perhaps because they didn't know better. Yeah, they lacked power and had ugly bumpers and the rest but they took people tow work and on family vacations.
Wow! Where to begin. Let's just say that the 70s were a wash for most cars on most levels. Some highlights for me:
- The Datsun B-210 - One of my family members had one and had to put cinder blocks in the trunk to keep it from sliding around in the winter. It had virtually zero sound deadening and the cheapest carpeting I've ever seen to this day. It had carpeted "mats" that were held down purely through metal spikes (that didn't work)
- The Buick Skylark (the one based on the Nova, not the mid-size of earlier years). My aunt had one and the headliner fell down before the car was two years old. It also had no power at all.
- The early Ford Pinto - My father wanted to buy one but, when we went for a test drive, the diminutive 1600 cc engine could barely make it up a medium sized hill ... truly pathetic
- Every Audi Fox ever made - Ironic that the writer touts the "beautiful" Audi Fox as a winner. It was very pretty, no doubt, but for those who can remember, it was an absolute pile of junk (just like its VW Rabbit cousin) and the gamble was whether it would stop running before it rotted out or vice-versa
- Every last Ford mid-sized car - I'm surprised that these didn't make the list at all. Because, the re-branded Mitsubishi Chryslers were absolute gems compared to these Ford dogs. In fact, the Maverick and Mustang II were also an improvement over them. I don't care whether you're talking about the Ford "Elite," Torino, Thunderbird, Mercury Cougar, or whatever other monstrosities Ford invented, they were all ungainly hideous dogs with interiors that were half the size of the gargantuan hood and trunk. It was as if Ford hired absolutely blind designers.
- Downsized GM late-seventies mid-sized cars - These dogs, such as the Malibu and Cutlass, came in four-door and wagon versions that had conspicuously glued in rear door windows. That's right; you actually could not open the rear windows on these four door cars (I don't think I've ever seen that anywhere else in my life). I don't think any more needs be said about the fundamental penny-pinching mentality of GM at the time.
Over the course of the mid-to-late 70's, my family owned 3 different Ford Pintos. The popular media line since then has been to relentlessly trash the Pinto, and yes, the cost-cutting by Ford regarding the gas tank is inexcusable (good thing today's cars never, ever, ever have similar types of problems, right GM and Toyota?). But my recollection of the Pinto is that it was, by and large, an inexpensive and generally reliable car to own and maintain. The one I recall most (a '75 Squire Wagon) was much more reliable than the Volvo 240 Sedan we traded it in for several years later.
Many of these worst cars provided reliable transportation and some had MSRP of around $2,000
I have driven everyone on the list owned a few and still own a couple and a more accurate description would be mediocre.
The Monza I had came with a 350ci motor and the Mustang II Cobra had a 302ci motor... and a Maverick Grabber with a 302ci motor... these cars could be bought for very little when Americans were dumping V8's for puddle jumpers..
Drove a Pinto for a comter to school and found the 1600 motor and 4 spd more than adequate.
As for the Datsun B210... they had nearly indestructible drive trains and were some of the highest MPG cars at the time...
The 70's were the time of two oil embargoes and the auto world was being turned upside down... also the 55 mph national speed limit, gas lines, high unemployment and then Stagflation...
Even though I had two of those cars, Chris is obviously a kid as it was a Datsun B210 not a Nissan B210.
Anyone who was driving in the 70's would know that.
when the Japanese first wanted to start selling cars they were in such a rush to make one they forgot to name it. The Japanese had no clue what to name it and they knew Germany was great at naming cars. They called up a German Marketing firm and Said they need a name for their new car right away, today if possible. The German marketing man responded, Dat Soon and so the car was named.
In the 1980s, the Mavericks became the common vehicle for many U.S. high school kids who could not afford something more exciting from the 1960s.
The pacer was the "nerd" vehicle of choice.
Japanese vehicles from the 1970s rusted out very quickly. Not just body parts, but the frames and critical components. The rumor at the time was Datsun changed to Nissan to escape their reputation for rusting out almost immediately. Not sure if that was true.
I saw a Maverick with a forsale sign on it yesterday. Generally I think 70's cars are uninteresting and boreing. I owned a X1/9, 2 x body cars, (Citation & Skylark), Fairmont, Vega. I loved my x1/9. The X-body cars had lots of space inside. The vega's engine was awful. It's been a while now but I used to occasionally see very old 4WD AMC Hornets on the road.
As most of you know, Maverick's were my first love. I've owned 26 of 'em. Currently have 7 plus a building full of parts. Mine are still ok considering they range from a Sept. 69 to Jan. 76 build dates. I gets lots of attention in my 76 with the one year only Stallion Package. Sure, it's just a paint and trim job, but it looks good.
G/D! Can I have one?! There's a guy who lives here, who's Maverick has square headlights, it's flat black with bonneville disc, and exhaust. It has a stock 200I6, with exhaust that dumps into th fake lake pipes, I have a pic somewhere. Anyway, he claimed to work with ford to invent the square headlight.
Little known fact, the fox chassis is called that, because it's based off the audi fox.
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.
