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 must agree with "doc1", reliability and build quality were pitiful. I owned 60's Mustangs, Camaros and GTOs. Fun cars, but with lousy build quality and reliability. Foreign companies built better cars, Honda, etc.. It's time for American car companies to get it squared away. The Corvette and Mustang are an example of what GM and Ford can do, they just need to get their act together or they will become history.
I once had the goal of getting a classic car and rebuilding it with all modern suspension, engine, cruise control, etc -- you know, like the rebuilt "Elanor" models they sell, or something similar.
I changed my mind a few years ago though. I like the newer cars while respecting the old classics. The new sports cars (in various price ranges) are so much better and still have character. I would agree that the newer sedans and coupes, for the most part, lack same.
I find it comical at those who think the 60's cars were built lousy and such poor build quality when you look today some of those same old lousy cars are still held together, meanwhile these newer pieces of crap have plastic and everything breaking off. About the only bad thing about 60's cars is the brakes and fuel systems were not as good as today that's because you're comparing apples to oranges. They didn't have 4 wheel disc and electronic fuel injection in the 60's. Oh and some didn't have safety belts and none had crumple zones but they were also more rigid too so they took a bit more abuse on impact. Facts is back in the day they were made to last a long time, now they're made to last 10 years. That's how the automakers make their money. And no most didn't get 100k because people didn't drive as much as they do today and also they only had a 5 digit odometer so it's hard to tell if it has 36k or 136k.
I totally agree Deez. The 1960s American cars were some of the best ever made. Good build quality and when safety features started coming out with a vengeance. You cant judge the ones today.... these cars are OLD now and cannot expect them to perform like a 2009 car. They have alot of years on them now.
Despite that, a couple of years ago, I had a 1969 Caprice sedan... even on washboard roads, that cars interior was 100% squeak and rattle free, doors shut with a solid thunk, etc. Made with STEEL! Not plastic like todays cars. Another thing that gets me is that naysayers will "dis" 50s-80s American cars, but seem to forget this is when America was financially strong and we sold millions of American cars. I have two early 70s GM cars and both are some of the most reliable cars I have ever owned.
There was a period in the early 80s though when Chrysler was in trouble, but with some help and the arrival of the K-Car, they pulled out fine and even moreso with the arrival of the Caravan/Voyager in late 1983.
Last edited by Tennesseestorm; 03-25-2009 at 11:40 PM..
They didn't have 4 wheel disc and electronic fuel injection in the 60's. Oh and some didn't have safety belts and none had crumple zones but they were also more rigid too so they took a bit more abuse on impact.
Good post! I wanted to add to my above reply that I think 4-wheel disc brakes were introduced as options on the mid 60s Corvettes and late 60s Camaros. I also think the first American car with fuel injection dates as far back as 1957, when it was optional on the 1957 Pontiac Bonneville and Chevrolet Bel-Air. My grandpa had a 1957 Bel-Air with factory fuel injection and we know a man with a 1957 Bonneville with fuel injection. I am not sure of how they were set-up, probably not like todays FI, but the same concept I guess.
Here is a 1969 Camaro brochure page... in the 2nd column, 1/2 way down, notice it says power 4-wheel disc brakes listed in the options. It was also the late 60s when alot of safety features flourished on cars. Even airbags were installed as options on some 1974-76 GM full-size cars.
I'd call the early/mid 70s the bloated baroque era of American car design - as someone who had one. Huge, huge cars with surprisingly little interior space, plush burgundy red faux velour interiors - or worse, cheap vinyl. Also - leaf springs? Conestoga wagons had leaf springs. I remember seeing a BMW 1600 with - wow! - a modern independent suspension.
I didn't like them then and I certainly don't like them now. I did like my 65 Mustang, but by 1970 it had become, IMO, bloated and ugly. I've never cared about fast in a straight line, I always preferred a car that handled well in the twisty bits.
(Currently drive a Mini Cooper S, a Jeep Wrangler for offroad excursions and a Jeep Grand Cherokee at the long trip/hauler.)
IMO, those cars were huge and ugly. I remember my green 72 Caprice - ugh. You couldn't pay me enough to take one like that now. My 71 Chevelle Malibu was a bucket of rust by the mid 80s.
And the plastics they used in interiors made me ill. My Mom's '65 Impala had this awful plasticy smell that wold make me puke on nearly every roadtrip.
U bet. It seems the big Cadillac Roadmaster of the 90's tried to do that. Not bad but still not like the early 70's cars
That was the Buick Roadmaster.
In the '90s, the biggest Cadillac was the Fleetwood.
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.
