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.
If we were still on leaded gas, had no emissions controls, and made no effort to improve the efficiency of our vehicle fleet, we would be worse off than Beijing is right now. Far worse. People forget how bad the smog in places like San Jose and Los Angeles was in the '70s.
i disagree. by 1970 we still had the federal clean air act of 1968, which was going into effect even at that time. we also had the insurance industry working to cover the amount of money paid out in claims, so emissions regulations would have been tightened up on the automobile anyway, and the insurance companies would have been putting heavy premiums on high performance cars. if we did not have to deal with the oil embargo, the japanese cars that got 25-30mpg would not have sold as well as they did, as americans would not have panicked about fuel shortages.
we would not have had the C.A.F.E. standards to deal with, thus big block engines of 500ci would be in everything high performance, the 351 cleveland engine would not have gone away until later, perhaps around 1988 or so. cars would not have started being downsized in the mid 70s. that would have started probably 15 years later.
and technology would not have been pushed to the limit trying to get better fuel economy, performance, and emissions all at the same time. the 2015 mustang would probably look like the 1995 mustang, assuming the nameplate made it that far. we would still have station wagons, i doubt SUVs would ever have been created, and i doubt the minivan would have made an appearance.
i disagree. by 1970 we still had the federal clean air act of 1968, which was going into effect even at that time. we also had the insurance industry working to cover the amount of money paid out in claims, so emissions regulations would have been tightened up on the automobile anyway, and the insurance companies would have been putting heavy premiums on high performance cars. if we did not have to deal with the oil embargo, the japanese cars that got 25-30mpg would not have sold as well as they did, as americans would not have panicked about fuel shortages.
we would not have had the C.A.F.E. standards to deal with, thus big block engines of 500ci would be in everything high performance, the 351 cleveland engine would not have gone away until later, perhaps around 1988 or so. cars would not have started being downsized in the mid 70s. that would have started probably 15 years later.
and technology would not have been pushed to the limit trying to get better fuel economy, performance, and emissions all at the same time. the 2015 mustang would probably look like the 1995 mustang, assuming the nameplate made it that far. we would still have station wagons, i doubt SUVs would ever have been created, and i doubt the minivan would have made an appearance.
Uh...SUVs existed before the 70s, and station wagons still exist. Norhing wrong with cars not downsizing, I would love for CAFE to never have existed. I'm also pretty sure vehicle design would not halt, or be offset, that the mustang would still be around, as well as probably other models, the Camaro probably wouldn't have been on a ten year hiatus. Economy cars would be these able to be modded rwd vehicles such as the Nova, Mavrick, and Demon. Technology would still advance, cars would just continue to look as they did just more modern(not that retro modern either) like how restomod cars look.
A few cars i had from back in the early 70s
Pinto
Gremlin
Econoline
Vega
Impala
Pieces of unreliable junk one and all compared to todays automotive standards.
The Challenger hellcat gets 707 hp and passes emissions. Even your average vanilla sedans get 200-300 hp and it doesn't stink to be stuck in traffic behind most all cars.
I say it's a win; we may have lost a decade of performance cars but now we can have our cake and eat it too.
Remember, though, that Challenger needs a supercharger to make that much hp.
Technology moves forward based on consumer demands. Gov't may put a speed bump in the road to design and performance but the reality is the manufacturers make what people will buy based on focus groups, marketing surveys, and reactions to prototypes. Other than the time frame and some added expenses, I personally don't think the end result would have been a lot different.
American automakers in the 1970s were whiny babies with lazy engineers. While Honda was building the CVCC engine, GM, Ford, and Chrysler complained and complained about EPA standards and produced cars that wouldn't start reliably, sucked fuel, and had pathetic power (like the 170 HP Corvette).
Part of running a manufacturing company is to deal with the hand you are dealt - whether it is high fuel prices or government regulations.
I like clean air. So I have no problem with emissions standards.
Today we have fantastic cars, clean burning, safe, fuel efficient, and faster than ever. It is amazing what engineers can do if they want to.
Older cars are far more reliable than new ones over the long term. My 1969 Charger is a rust bucket, falling apart and still runs fine despite almost 400,000 miles. New cars are horribly ugly, with cheap plastic "bumpers" and turd inspired styling. Ugliness is so common that people accept it as normal. Big government killed off small companies and left us with a big 3 and imports. The gas crisis of the 70's would have led to more fuel efficient cars, government or not. The result of the current system was me rejecting new cars and never buying one. Actually I am currently working on a "new" Dodge Charger which is built on a 1970 Charger that has sat in storage since 1990 and will have a reworked 440 V-8 with computer controlled multiport fuel injection system I put together. On the body I have added reinforcements to make it less likely to collapse in a crash. When I look at the new Dodge "Charger" I feel so disappointed. Where are those cars of the future we were promised?
Older cars are far more reliable than new ones over the long term. My 1969 Charger is a rust bucket, falling apart and still runs fine despite almost 400,000 miles. New cars are horribly ugly, with cheap plastic "bumpers" and turd inspired styling. Ugliness is so common that people accept it as normal. Big government killed off small companies and left us with a big 3 and imports. The gas crisis of the 70's would have led to more fuel efficient cars, government or not. The result of the current system was me rejecting new cars and never buying one. Actually I am currently working on a "new" Dodge Charger which is built on a 1970 Charger that has sat in storage since 1990 and will have a reworked 440 V-8 with computer controlled multiport fuel injection system I put together. On the body I have added reinforcements to make it less likely to collapse in a crash. When I look at the new Dodge "Charger" I feel so disappointed. Where are those cars of the future we were promised?
What you're doing is kind of a half assed restomod. I'd much rather pull the 1969 Charger body and throw it on a modern chassis, suspension, engine and transmission.
If it didn't happen muscle cars would have kept going. Thankfully it did happen and cars got better down the road. PUN. Cars back then were junk in comparison to today's cars. Sadly American cars are still behind and they are advertising horsepower all the time. They also advertise huge SUVs as some success symbol. I am a driver, so I am rare in the US and like performance cars that handle well, not just go in a straight line. I also want good fuel economy, so we have all these great options now. Turbos help.
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.
