beater cars

It's in history books now.Cars from the Fifties were literally falling apart at the seams,just after reaching the age of their first owner making the last payments on them...Consumer activists complained so much about this trend,that Detroit actually did start making cars that lasted longer than five to eight years.The average life span of a Seventies car was 15 to 20 years.It had nothing to do with how they were put together,it had to do with putting together higher quality parts.AND,believe it or not,engine and transmission technology improved greatly during that time.Engines and transmissions of the Seventies are/were of much higher quality than those of the Fifties...Another aspect not to be ignored was,more and more cars were being sold in areas of the country where cars didn't rust out so quick and authorities didn't put salt on the roads in winter time...The Omni/Horizon cars were Chryslers answer to the VW Rabbit.If you inspect the two cars,you will see much of the Omni/Horizon line is directly "borrowed" from the Rabbit.And no,Chrysler didn't a very good job...I can say this stuff,because I was paying attention during the last forty years.I haven't read up on Detroit historymfrom biased dources during the last few years...Yes,Detroit made some crappy cars,from time to time,but that doesn't mean all their cars were crappy.And it was people who didn't like 70's cars that complained the most when Detroit made them so well.They wanted 70's cars to last only five to eight years,and the 70's cars weren't doing that enough to please them...That's why they were complaining.They wouldn't have been complaining if they were as crappy as is claimed...

 

I began driving during the Nixon administration. The cars I reference are the cars I owned, drove and fixed, a lot. I am an Ersatz mechanic today because of them. I could regale you with stories of ridiculous failures due to poor design, build quality and corrosion. The steering box FALLING OFF the frame on a Chevelle comes to mind. Camshaft failures in near new GMs in the late seventies and continuing into at least 1984. You'd think they could get a handle on it sooner. How about the disintegrating interiors of my beloved sixties Mopars? Ford's frames rusting literally in two in less than a decade.
To state these were great cars or that they had average lives of 15-20 yrs. is plain wrong. BTW an average is not a range. Perhaps a few smoked along in the sunny west longer than the ones here in corrosia but damn near all of were dead by twenty. Me thinks you've watched too many Ford F-100 commercials.

 

there is some truth to all of this. My Dad was a Cadillac dealer in the 70s and 80s and we had our share of disasters with new cars. 8-6-4 comes to mind, HT4100s eating camshafts, new Sevilles not starting ON THE DELIVERY TRUCK. And this does not even address the diesels or the amazing disapearing bumper fillers. But I am happy and surprised that my 3 are in the condition that they are in, 33+ years later.

 

Ross and Taranau. I have to agree with you both. The American cars built post WWII through the early eighty's are really junk. However, even I have to admit they were and are easier to maintain. The build quality and materials used are quite inferior to methods and materials used today.

I had to opportunity to rebuild a 66 GMC truck. What a piece of junk. Nothing fit properly, door hinges with no bushings, elongated tranny crossmember holes that I'm sure were designed to make up the dimensional slop between the frame and drivetrain mounts. I think each vehicle was a one off. Doors from another 66 didn't fit without moving the fenders which resulted in an excessive gap between the hood and cowl.

Todays cars are simply much better built. There's a world of difference between my 82 Cougar and my 86 Thunderbird. This is true even though 98% of the chassis and drivetrain parts are interchangable. The 86 is of much better build quality with better panel fit.

Now this doesn't take away from the fact that they styling is so much more pleasing on most of the cars of the 40's, 50's and 60's.

 

maybe,me and all the people I knew,who drove Seventies cars were more fortunate than most.I don't remember any of the problems afore-mentioned.No door handles or window cranks breaking off,they had nice cumfy seats.If they were damaged seats,it was because kids and/or dogs had been walking around on them.Cracked dashes happened because people pounded on them with their fists..Because of safety regulations and the advent of enough structure to support super-bumpers,70's cars were more sturdily and solidly built than 50's and 60's cars.Engine gaskets and piston rings were not as advanced as they are now.I can remember my dad and brother working on cars and using cork for gaskets,and not just for the valve covers.You cannot fault the automakers for not having technology that wasn't there yet...AND,you have to keep in mind,they still wanted the cars to wear out and break down,so they could sell more.AND,that they're cars...And that there's so much that can go wrong with even the best built/repaired ones...There was NO chrome-moly anything,back then...

 

Studies also showed that,because most Americans thought of American cars as "crap" right off the end of the assembly line,,,they had a tendency to treat them like "crap",right off the showroom floor.Maintainence schedules were not adhered to,as religiously as for some brands of foreign cars.The vast majority of maintainence schedules were thrown out with the rest of the owner's manuals.Most Americans did NOT change their oil every 3000 miles,but often waited 4,5 and sometimes 6000 miles before doing so...While MBZ and BMW owners were apt to change their oil every 1500 to 2000 miles...Many Americans were not getting tune-ups,until getting one was what was needed to make the car run again...Owner's Manuals suggest NOT flooring the gas pedal and "hotrodding" the engine until after the first 500 miles,some prefered until after the first oil change at 3000 miles.Most Americans went hotrodding and speeding in their brand new cars,as soon as possible...Americans who bought foreign cars,had a tendency to baby them...I'm not saying 70's cars were perfect,or even near perfect.I'm just saying that they weren't the rickety pieces of crap,right off the showroom floor,that many portray them to be...And if they were such rickety pieces of crap,brand new,and not built to last---how come there are still so many of them around?..Here in Socal,I see way many more American cars from the 70's, still rolling around, than I do foreign cars from the 70's still rolling around.And I don't think it's a choice thing.I think it's because the cars were well built and meant to last more than 5 to 8 years.Like cars of of the 50's were...

 

From personal experience........The best vehicle I have ever owned, hands down, was a '76 Dodge Tradesman van. It had a 360 with a 727 tranny and 9.25 Dana rear axle. It was 20 years old when I bought it and showed 39,000 miles. I am sure that it was probably 239,000, as I bought it from my best friend who had owned it for years and the engine rarely cooled. I drove it another 11 years, added 100,000+ miles to the odometer and it never let me down. I drove it everywhere, vacation, work, daily runs.....EVERYWHERE. I did a valve job on it when I first bought it and replaced the timing chain. Over the years, I replaced the starter, alternator and AC compressor, a couple mufflers and a pinion seal and maybe a battery and of course, brake pads/shoes. I paid $1250 for it and sold it for $1200. I never changed the transmission fluid. Sometimes on older vehicles, the fresh tranny fluid will break loose debris and cause problems. I left well enough alone and NEVER had a tranny problem. I sold it to a guy in Florida on Ebay, he drove it home and it never missed a beat. He since sold it to a biker chick who was in Florida for a bike run and bought it and drove it back to Montana, I think he said. I would almost bet my Custom Cruiser that it is still going strong. This old truck must have been built by the Energizer Bunny. I would take a '70s car anytime over a new one.

 

I do agree that with proper preventative maintenance many hundreds of thousands of miles, trouble free, could be achieved quite easily.

Maybe I should have used the term fit and finish to better describe build quality. Even though my wagon is an 82 there are quality issues with the way it was manufactured. For example:

The front kick panels don't line up with the trim on the edge of the carpet. The flexible bumper ends don't fit the same on either side in with regard to the front fenders even though the bumper is centered. Same for the rear. The door gaps are each different. There are wavy areas near spot welds that show particularly above the rear windows. The GS emblem on the right side is crooked. It is installed in to drilled holes. The dashboard structure is very weak resulting in a couple of hairline cracks. Most of the plastic faults are simply due to age.

On my 86 there are none of the same issues. panel fit is consistant both inside and out.

I think most cars will last a very long time with the proper care. Check this out:

http://growingbolder.com/media/technology/vehicles/romancing-the-road-259598.html

 

You boys have some amazing memories going on here. I can believe that there are quite a few 70's running around or sitting around in California. For those of us that grew up in Milwaukee and Chicago we know what weather and the salt do to vehicles. The rust belt is aptly named. As for clunker bills. I was at a speaking engagement for my representative to the House in Washington. He, Joe Donnelly, had a line that sent me across the room gagging. He was co-sponser of the bill that you refer to now in congress. He stated that cars ten years old only got half the gas mileage of those produced today. Well, how wrong can a guy get. We are only 20% better today than we were ten years ago. CAFE standards are now going to be changed again and the result will be smaller cars that weigh less. It's a good thing Donnelly was speaking at a nursing home when he made his erroneous remarks, most of the listeners were from the alzheimer unit.

 

Now,that lady is NOT like most Americans...And that Merc is lucky to have such a conscientious owner.

 

There's a saying about looking before leaping.Apparently politicians don't think it applies to thinking before speaking...

 

WOW, she is as sharp as a whip and seems like the type who would'nt blink an eye if she needed her weapon.

You Go Girl!

 

I'm not sure what 60's cars you owned, but my uncle had a 1969 Oldsmobile Cutlass that he purchased new and drove unit it finally died in the mid 80's, not due to mechanical suicide, but rather because of a severe impact. It was rear-ended while parked. It had over 300,000 miles on it, and never needed more than normal maintenance, save for a transmission rebuild while still under warranty.

My parents owned an early 70's Custom Cruiser wagon that had over 200,000 miles before it was sold, and a '71 Cutlass 4-door that was purchased used with over 100,000 miles and driven as a daily driver for the next 50,000 or so.

With all of the vehicles listed above, all had their original interiors and all were in good shape save for the seats in the '69 Cutlass. None had cracked dashes. Even the '72 442 I am restoring still had its original dash pad, and I have reused it after dying it to match the new interior.

According to the book "100 years of the American Auto," Chrysler went to 5 year/50,000 mile powertrain warranties in 1963, while GM, Ford, and AMC kept theirs at 2 years/20,000 miles until 1967 when, to compete with Chrysler, they upped their powertrain warranties to match.

Shiny Side Up!
Bill

 

I can't recall if the article was for a 1957 or 1958 Rolls Royce, but the standard was that door fitment was 1/16" space all around. That's a 1/8" total gap! Those were hand-built. One crew per car from start to finish. Assembly lines just can't go there and be affordable for the masses.

If we're gonna decide which brands had better quality, we should look at the number of years, makes and models that people still own today. Not repros, but original tin. If they made it this far and are in good running condition, (of which we are verifiable witnesses), then whatever crappy cars came off, burnt up, exploded the gastank or had the wheels fall off, are not the survivors. We've got the gems. The bad ones died already.

Most of the 60's and 70's cars rattled when you drove over railroad tracks, but so did the 50's cars. My dad's old 1939 Pontiac didn't rattle. But it was tough enough to run on five cylinders out of 6. Some dealer pulled the bad piston and shoved a wooden plug in instead.

We should have a sticky of the common defects by brand and year/model. And another one, for the new, younger members of all the dirty tricks that shops used to do to fix them or f'k them.

I recall a story of how transmission shops used to sit the owner down with a cup of coffee, get the car on the hoist or over the pit, and take the tranny pan off, add some sand and show the owner how overdue it was for a rebuild (just after the warranty expired). Fleecing the innocent was a common game. Especially since most 'mechanics' were just warm bodies looking for any job.

 

Hey, Norm, I like the idea of the sticky about defects and "tricks of the trade". I could add a few, like banana peels or corks in the rear end to quiet it down or service station attendants dropping pennies in car batteries to short them out in the 6 volt days. Wow..hadn't thought about that in years. There is no question about it, there is good and bad about old and new cars. When I was a taxi mechanic, we ran Chevy 4.3 Astros/Safaris and 3.1 Luminas. Those engines survived cabbies for upwards of 300,000 miles. Most still ran good when we got rid of them, as there was an ordinance that when a cab was 10 years old, it had to go. The 302 Fords were about as good. I don't like the newer ones because of all the electronics. They give more problems than the mechanics do. I have a '94 Chevy van with a 350 that just turned 200,000 miles and runs great. It has a computer, but is not nearly as sophisticated as the late ones.