Car Have Become Too Complex!

[JOD]

I don't know... I think sometimes people get some rose-colored glasses thinking about the 'good old days'. Personally, the good old days to me seemed like a lot of exhaust fumes (as a cyclist, trust me, I notice), and a lot more cars off to the side of the road, broken down. I just don't see this that often anymore.

Personally, the car I own now is certainly more reliable that what I owned 25 years ago.

Lastly, anyone poo pooing 'emissions' or putting it in parenthesis probably didn't live in a major city in the 70's. I did (and still do), and I'm glad for the regulations.

As far as the increasing dependence on electronics, I think it's people's unfamiliarity with the systems which often makes things seem 'too complex'. The fact is, electronic ignition systems have reduced a lot of mechanical parts. I can't remember the last cap and rotor I've had to replace...

Lastly, as far as electrical problems, ever since I've broken up with my '80's VW's I haven't spent much time chasing electrical problems

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: StevieC
I have an '89 Cabriolet with Continuous (CIS) Mechanical Fuel injection, no EGR valve and no computer. It passes the emission test with flying colours and almost all 0's and the car is 20 years old and it still averages 9-10 L/100KM.

Is your car subject to the same emissions tests as new cars?


Originally Posted By: StevieC
So why do we need all this new fancy junk that really doesn't do much but add weight to the car?

I'd say it does plenty. How many PZEVs were there in 1989?


Originally Posted By: StevieC
How about making cars simple again with less "control equipment" which will then weight less and use less fuel because of this weight reduction.

Removing all emissions equipment will save maybe 50-100 lbs, depending on the car. Nowhere near enough to save enough fuel to offset the increased emissions.


Cars are heavier than they used to be, and people want them to be faster than they used to be. A lot of the added weight has to do with crash compatibility with SUVs. If you really want to save weight, start convincing soccer moms that they don't need Suburbans to carry 2 kids and their lunchboxes to school...

 

[bdcardinal]

personally i would rather work on a newer car than an older one. i actually to refuse to work on older cars and only make certain exceptions for cars that are not OBD2.

 

[Liquid_Turbo]

Originally Posted By: parimento1
For example, all this emissions equipment! EVAP, EGR, PCV, catalysts, are all band-aids on what are inherently dirty machines.


Inherently "dirty" yes, but that doesn't mean every measure should be taken to reduce pollution.

That is simply inexcusable.

 

[Pete591]

Originally Posted By: MGregoir
We need a car that's a:

- diesel, to eliminate the ignition system with mechanical direct injection
- preferably an inline four with a balance shaft or an inline six
- SOHC, with a single chain driven cam
- iron block and head
- body on frame
- rear wheel drive with a four or five speed manual transmission
- live axle/leaf spring rear end
- simple multi-link IFS

The only electrics required to make the vehicle run would be the starter, and without the starter you could push start it in a pinch. Almost any part on the vehicle could be duplicated by a decent fabricator or machinist out of readily available materials, and it probably would cost less than a good ATV to build.


It's here very soon.

http://wardsauto.com/ar/bmw_diesel_us/

I will not give up independent suspension or AWD in my neck of the woods though.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
personally i would rather work on a newer car than an older one. i actually to refuse to work on older cars and only make certain exceptions for cars that are not OBD2.
Then you aren't a real mechanic IMO you are a replacement artist.

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: StevieC
I have an '89 Cabriolet with Continuous (CIS) Mechanical Fuel injection, no EGR valve and no computer. It passes the emission test with flying colours and almost all 0's and the car is 20 years old and it still averages 9-10 L/100KM.

Is your car subject to the same emissions tests as new cars?


While it has less stringent test standards because it is an older vehicle the numbers are as good and better than that of modern day vehicles. Hence my post stating almost "0's." In other words it almost completely clean and would have no problem passing hooked up as a 2009 model IMO.

 

[tonycarguy]

I'd rather work on an older car but I'd rather own and drive a newer car. In other words, I'd rather be a mechanic in the 80s but a car owner in the 2000's. If you don't feel the same way, feel free to trade in your newer car for a 1982 Chevette. The worst cars today are still more reliable, cleaner-running, more user-friendly and drivable than most cars from 25 yrs ago. I have only had 1 unscheduled repair in the last 10 years, and about 5 in the previous 10 years.

My parents were less lucky. They've had no problems on their cars from 2000 and newer but 10+ problems in their pre-2000 cars. It was one problem after another. Cars from yesteryear were awful, I don't know why people are longing for the those days???

 

[MONKEYMAN]

My mechanic who wrenched about 30 years said he hated working on cars since they have become too complex. He was great. He retired a few years ago. I guess he could not take it any more...

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: StevieC
In other words it almost completely clean and would have no problem passing hooked up as a 2009 model IMO.

Try it, get a printout, and post it here!

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: MGregoir
We need a car that's a:

- diesel, to eliminate the ignition system with mechanical direct injection

Disagree (emissions).

Originally Posted By: MGregoir
- preferably an inline four with a balance shaft or an inline six
- SOHC, with a single chain driven cam

Agree.

Originally Posted By: MGregoir
- iron block and head
- body on frame

Disagree strongly. Holy heavy, Batman!

Originally Posted By: MGregoir
- rear wheel drive with a four or five speed manual transmission

Agree on the transmission, disagree on the drivetrain layout. FWD is lighter and produces less drivetrain loss.

Originally Posted By: MGregoir
- live axle/leaf spring rear end
- simple multi-link IFS

Iffy on live axle. Too heavy. Heartily agree on suspension, though.

MacPherson struts are great when they're set up correctly.

 

[bdcardinal]

Originally Posted By: StevieC
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
personally i would rather work on a newer car than an older one. i actually to refuse to work on older cars and only make certain exceptions for cars that are not OBD2.
Then you aren't a real mechanic IMO you are a replacement artist.

never said i was. i sling parts for a living. my comment was for side jobs.

 

[StevieC]

Just bugging you Bdcardinal...

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: StevieC
In other words it almost completely clean and would have no problem passing hooked up as a 2009 model IMO.



Try it, get a printout, and post it here!

Look up my old VW Cabriolet thread somewhere here the numbers were already posted. You will see almost 0's as I stated in this thread. Nothing to hide... They are also posted on Terry Dysons blog!

 

[d00df00d]

Was it tested "as a 2009 model" as you said?

 

[StevieC]

The year being tested just changes the allowable limits.. With the numbers that the Carbriolet scored it would still have passed as a 2009 as the numbers it had still fell within the 2009 limits...

I will see if I can dig up the numbers and limits and post here.

 

[labman]

Yes, cars are too complicated. I can't believe the way some of the stuff on my 02 Cavalier is wired up. I hate to think what a new Cadilac would be like.

It is everything else too. I think a big part of the problem is too many unneeded features.

 

[StevieC]

Ok,

Here it is:

Allowable is for 1989 vehicle years, actual is what it scored during the test. (Averaged between Running & 30 Second idle test)

Allowable NOX: 800 – Actual: 98
Allowable CO: 1.0 – Actual: 0
Allowable HC: 200 – Actual: 33

Sorry I can't find the 2009 allowable numbers but these would be within it

 

[parimento1]

I agree cars are more reliable for longer, but once they start breaking...well

 

[The_Jeff]

Fuel injection? Absolutely! Even the TBI of the 80s beats carburetors with their soggy floats, sticky chokes, and wear parts. GM and Dodge got diagnosing those systems right with paperclips and key flashing for code retrieval.

Independent rear suspension? Love it. Front wheel drive? Perfect for the commuting vehicles. Inline 4 fits nicely under the hood.

Struts you have to take apart to replace dampeners? Maybe. But they unbolt cleanly. Shocks, while cheaper, often jam in place one way or another.

Huge rims/ tires? Stupid, expensive, and bad in the snow. IDK if my 195/60/15s got cheaper because of technology involved in making 45-series tires so maybe I'm glad someone is buying them. That size used to be semi exotic, now is base-model commuter tread.

OBDII in my county involves a computer scan to pass inspection while 95 and earlier get off scot-free. Can be maddening, especially if you, say, fit a computer from a junk vehicle that's one option different and it sets a code even though it runs fine and doesn't pollute.

TPMS? Yuck! This is the worst debacle since 1974 when you had to have your seat belt buckled to start the car. People sat on permanently buckled belts!! I've rented new cars with issues already.

Drive-by-wire? Ditto! Had a rental Pontiac that didn't fully "get on it" until 25 MPH, then it downshifted as I held the throttle steady when it hit 45 MPH. (crossed into "highway pep" mode). As far as I'm concerned they can figure out how much air I'm pumping in and set the fuel to match. It's worked for 100+ years of gasoline combustion.

ABS? OK if done correctly. Set the things up so they can be bled without a scan tool.

In closing the one truth remains: A car will get junked/sold when its repair expense exceeds its value, or it truly annoys its owner beyond their breaking point. What this has been has changed over the years; it used to be worn out low compression motors. C4C briefly disturbed this adage.

 

[d00df00d]

@ StevieC: I hate to be a stick in the mud, and I don't want to come across as having a bone to pick with you or your car, but until you find the new regulations it's hard to say whether your car meets them.

Also, how would your car compare to its 2009 counterpart? I'd think that would be informative as well.

 

[The_Jeff]

There is also much more to emissions than what comes out of the tailpipe at a steady warm idle. All the extreme modes have to be accounted for. (Though getting the feedback fuel injection system setup cut the first 95% easily... some just can't stop though!)