The Sorry State of Affairs in Automobilia in the 1970s, 80s and 90s

[Max Rockatansky]

C4 Callaway Corvette Super Natural.  I remember when 400hp territory was considered ungodly....almost 130k is out of control even for a modern Corvette:

[Henry]

1994 Ford Aspire, the bridge between the Festiva and the second coming of the Fiesta:

Also, it was technically Kia's first foray into the U.S.; they would sell cars under their own banner just three years later.

[Max Rockatansky]

1990 ZX Turbo, my brother had one of these cars.  The lack of a tilt wheel was a bigger problem than people realize today, so damn annoying:

[PHLBOS]

1994 Ford Aspire, the bridge between the Festiva and the second coming of the Fiesta:
...
Also, it was technically Kia's first foray into the U.S.; they would sell cars under their own banner just three years later.

Actually, it was the Festiva that was Kia's first foray into the US.  The Aspire's an updated version of that platform.

[formulanone]

1994 Ford Aspire, the bridge between the Festiva and the second coming of the Fiesta:
...
Also, it was technically Kia's first foray into the U.S.; they would sell cars under their own banner just three years later.

Actually, it was the Festiva that was Kia's first foray into the US.  The Aspire's an updated version of that platform.

I still see Ford Festivas on the road, many more than Aspires.

Any truth to a story that the Aspires were just here to balance out CAFE fuel economy numbers in light of their light truck sales?

[PHLBOS]

Any truth to a story that the Aspires were just here to balance out CAFE fuel economy numbers in light of their light truck sales?

Only 1/2 correct.  Both the Aspire & its Festiva predecessor were introduced to balance Ford's CAFE figures from penalties incurred by every Crown Vic. & V8-powered T-Birds & Mustangs they were selling.

Light trucks were subject to a lower CAFE standard than cars.  Such was the main reason why manufacturers started focusing on & expanding their SUV line-ups.

[formulanone]

Any truth to a story that the Aspires were just here to balance out CAFE fuel economy numbers in light of their light truck sales?

Only 1/2 correct.  Both the Aspire & its Festiva predecessor were introduced to balance Ford's CAFE figures from penalties incurred by every Crown Vic. & V8-powered T-Birds & Mustangs they were selling.

Light trucks were subject to a lower CAFE standard than cars.  Such was the main reason why manufacturers started focusing on & expanding their SUV line-ups.

That makes more sense; the entire manufacturer's light truck fleet was like 20-21 mpg and passenger cars were 27.5 mpg (or something).

The push for greater fuel economy was forced on light trucks, and I guess successfully so. Meanwhile, passenger cars got a free pass for essentially 20 years, and while I advocate for improved fuel economy numbers, that two-decade lag wasn't really improving the breed.

I guess we're going to see some, uh..."interesting" little cars coming out soon, but I'm not sure how this whole "vehicle footprint" thing is going work out. I think we'll either see a lot more underpowered large vehicles (probably better for driver-less technologies) and equally-compromised small cars on both extreme ends of the spectrum.

[J N Winkler]

I guess we're going to see some, uh..."interesting" little cars coming out soon, but I'm not sure how this whole "vehicle footprint" thing is going work out. I think we'll either see a lot more underpowered large vehicles (probably better for driver-less technologies) and equally-compromised small cars on both extreme ends of the spectrum.

I am concerned about long-term durability, since in this family our preferred approach to dealing with the cost of car ownership has been to buy new and well-equipped, for cash on the barrelhead, and keep until the car is compromised by rust (happened to my 1986 Nissan Maxima after 22 years) or destroyed in an accident (happened to two of the last three family cars).  My daily driver has been in the family since new and is now 23 years old.

The current CAFE push has given rise to substitution of turbo fours for normally aspirated V6 engines, which causes me to worry about sludging and oil consumption.  High specific output tends to correlate with sticking rings in the absence of good oil temperature management, and turbos run hot, which can lead to sludging.  My 1994 Saturn was purposely designed with slow oil drainback in the late 1980's because the 5W-30 oils then available were considered vulnerable to film strength failure, and as a result it has a 1500 MPQ oil habit.

Besides the possibility of oil consumption and sludging in the engine, there are wider powertrain durability issues due to the automakers clinging to ATFs that are semi-synthetic at best while making the ATF increasingly difficult to change (the Toyota Camry hasn't had a transmission dipstick since MY 2006), as well as battery life for hybrids.  With the rise of leasing, I envisage the "product as service" concept bleeding over from the software industry to automobiles.

[formulanone]

I guess we're going to see some, uh..."interesting" little cars coming out soon, but I'm not sure how this whole "vehicle footprint" thing is going work out. I think we'll either see a lot more underpowered large vehicles (probably better for driver-less technologies) and equally-compromised small cars on both extreme ends of the spectrum.

I am concerned about long-term durability, since in this family our preferred approach to dealing with the cost of car ownership has been to buy new and well-equipped, for cash on the barrelhead, and keep until the car is compromised by rust (happened to my 1986 Nissan Maxima after 22 years) or destroyed in an accident (happened to two of the last three family cars).  My daily driver has been in the family since new and is now 23 years old.

The current CAFE push has given rise to substitution of turbo fours for normally aspirated V6 engines, which causes me to worry about sludging and oil consumption.  High specific output tends to correlate with sticking rings in the absence of good oil temperature management, and turbos run hot, which can lead to sludging.  My 1994 Saturn was purposely designed with slow oil drainback in the late 1980's because the 5W-30 oils then available were considered vulnerable to film strength failure, and as a result it has a 1500 MPQ oil habit.

Besides the possibility of oil consumption and sludging in the engine, there are wider powertrain durability issues due to the automakers clinging to ATFs that are semi-synthetic at best while making the ATF increasingly difficult to change (the Toyota Camry hasn't had a transmission dipstick since MY 2006), as well as battery life for hybrids.  With the rise of leasing, I envisage the "product as service" concept bleeding over from the software industry to automobiles.

I suppose the nearly universal switch to full synthetics or semi-synthetics will help out; many manufacturers are starting to push for full synthetics.

The transmission dipstick is starting to become a thing of the past on many vehicles in the past 5-10 years. I think a few fearful owners still want a transmission pan services (or if it is leaking), but there is no interval specified in the owner's manual, and no idea if even the pan service is a good idea in the first place. Traditional logic is that you either change it on a regular interval, or just never change the fluid once it acts up, because they'll be back in three days with an even worse case of transmission problems.

With everything else that will fail electronically and render it less-than useful, I think the third-hand market will look really haphazard another decade or so, because there is basically no aftermarket for control modules, airbags, InfoNavRadioTainment systems, instrument clusters, and the like. The problem is that there's very few "simple" vehicles anymore...Maybe Jeeps and Caterham 7s?

[Takumi]

The  problem is that there's very few "simple" vehicles anymore...Maybe Jeeps and Caterham 7s?

Jeeps aren't even that simple anymore. The Renegade is basically a Fiat, and the rest are more complex than their predecessors. Cars like the 7, the Ariel Atom, and even the Lotus Evora* are very, very niche. The current Mazda Miata, even though it's smaller and lighter than its immediate predecessor, has stuff you wouldn't see back in the 90s.

*I originally had the Exige here, not the Evora, but the Exige and Elise haven't been sold in the US for a few years because they're too simple for our regulations!

[J N Winkler]

The transmission dipstick is starting to become a thing of the past on many vehicles in the past 5-10 years. I think a few fearful owners still want a transmission pan services (or if it is leaking), but there is no interval specified in the owner's manual, and no idea if even the pan service is a good idea in the first place. Traditional logic is that you either change it on a regular interval, or just never change the fluid once it acts up, because they'll be back in three days with an even worse case of transmission problems.

As with lots of other stuff auto-related, there is an upright view and then there is a cynical view.

The upright view says that shear stability matters far less than it used to now that friction modifiers (for which each automaker has its own bespoke package) are the principal determinants of shift quality, and routine maintenance is no longer necessary because transmissions run cooler, so that the fluid is protected from heat degradation, and strainers and magnets do a good enough job intercepting grit particles that a transmission can be trusted to last well over 100,000 miles on the original fluid.  Therefore, eliminating the dipstick gets rid of a potential source of contamination and also a potential source of mechanic error since there is no such thing as an easy-to-read transmission dipstick and the idiots at the iffy-lube places insist on checking transmission fluid with a view toward upselling unneeded and possibly damaging transmission flushes.  Moreover, having a fluid-check routine in the PCM that uses the CEL to signal fluid level gives a more reliable indication of adequate fill.

The cynical view holds that while friction modifiers do control shift quality, viscosity still has an impact, and factory fluid will shear down enough that shifts will start banging noticeably.  Bespoke friction modifier packages either support inflated-margin OEM parts sales (if the customer decides to service the transmission completely by the book) or contribute to planned obsolescence (if a general-purpose ATF is used that nominally meets manufacturer's specs but is too far away from out-of-bottle performance of OEM fluid).  Changeout of fluid is still one of the most reliable ways to get rid of grit, as is dropping the pan and cleaning or changing the strainer.  Getting rid of the dipstick builds in planned obsolescence since it puts the transmission "out of sight, out of mind" for the majority of customers and helps ensure leaks are not found until the transmission is irretrievably damaged.

I personally think there is merit in both views, so I navigate between them by changing fluid every so often.  I had a 1986 Nissan Maxima for which no service interval for the ATF was specified; the FSM did not even explain how to drain the ATF.  I got the latter information from a Haynes manual and drained and filled the transmission every year at a time when I was doing 30,000 miles a year.  This was in the Dexron II age, when viscosity loss had much more of an effect on shift quality.  Under this maintenance regime, which did not include strainer changing, the transmission shifted like new well beyond 200,000 miles; other Maximas of similar vintage I saw advertised in the newspapers invariably had had the transmission rebuilt at least once.  It was only when the car hit 20 years, clearcoat started peeling, battery started going out, etc. that I let maintenance slip and shift quality started to go.

I think I would have done better if I had used synthetic ATF from the get-go.  The Saturn now has about 75% Castrol TranSynd in its sump (two drains and fills), and shifts very smoothly aside from an occasional notchy 1-2 shift that I suspect has to do with the throttle position sensor (factory original) having worn out of spec.  I tried the Camry with Valvoline MaxLife full synthetic, with misgivings owing to a large mismatch in out-of-bottle 100° C kinematic viscosity; after about 30,000 miles of mostly mediocre shift performance, I changed to Amsoil ATF, which is a closer out-of-the-bottle match, and am pleased with the results.  (MaxLife:  5.9 cSt; Toyota T-IV:  7.1 cSt; Amsoil ATF:  7.5 cSt; estimated viscosity of mixture currently in sump after two drains and fills: 6.9 cSt.)

With everything else that will fail electronically and render it less-than useful, I think the third-hand market will look really haphazard another decade or so, because there is basically no aftermarket for control modules, airbags, InfoNavRadioTainment systems, instrument clusters, and the like. The problem is that there's very few "simple" vehicles anymore...Maybe Jeeps and Caterham 7s?

I am a little more sanguine about the durability of electronic components now that we are past the problem of capacitors with quaternary ammonium salts.  The Maxima had dementia symptoms which at the time I blamed on static discharge while vacuuming the trunk carpet, but which could well have been leaking capacitors.  The Saturn is in excellent "mental" health at age 23.

On the other hand, the Takata bankruptcy could have an effect on the secondhand market.  I have seen no word on who would even make the replacement airbags, let alone finance their changeout.

I suppose the nearly universal switch to full synthetics or semi-synthetics will help out; many manufacturers are starting to push for full synthetics.

I am actually a little worried about this development.  It is a very demanding discipline for the automakers to design engines that will run well for hundreds of thousands of miles on the unbranded garbage that the bulk tankers decant at the iffy-lube places, but when they succeed the result is usually bulletproof.  Making synthetic oil an owner's-manual requirement reduces the customer's margin for error and also scope for realizing superlative wear and sludge protection by investing in Walmart synthetics.

The latest Amsoil house magazine notes that the new tranche of oil specs coming in 2019 (API SP, ILSAC GF-6) is designed to accommodate automakers' desire to progress CAFE compliance by using the oil, not control logic in the PCM, to prevent low-speed preignition.  It's hard to see how this promotes robustness in design.

[formulanone]

planned obsolescence

Not to boil away your fine post, but I feel this is essentially the biggest concern with many complex things, especially when everything is in perpetual Beta.

Can a smartphone last seven years? Yes, with a little care. Do we want to struggle with it after three? Probably not.

I think that people think of their cars that way...keep it only 7-8 years, even if it can last 15-20 with a few expensive repairs along the way. The difference is that it is still 99% usable and reliable after the first decade, unlike 3 years of the phone becoming bogged down with OS updates and software that it wasn't primarily designed for (or kludged against its will).

[PHLBOS]

That makes more sense; the entire manufacturer's light truck fleet was like 20-21 mpg and passenger cars were 27.5 mpg (or something).

The push for greater fuel economy was forced on light trucks, and I guess successfully so. Meanwhile, passenger cars got a free pass for essentially 20 years, and while I advocate for improved fuel economy numbers, that two-decade lag wasn't really improving the breed.

IIRC, the fore-mentioned truck standard went to 20-21 mpg at the same time that the car standard went to 27.5* mpg circa 1985.  *the car standard was temporarily lowered to 26 mpg from 1987 to 1989 due to law enforcement agencies complaining about the gas guzzler taxes imposed on their patrol vehicles.

The truck standard was the main reason why Ford, Chevy, GMC and later Jeep & Dodge started offering compact pick-up trucks (Ranger, S-10, S-15, Comanche & Dakota) & SUVs (Bronco II, S-10 Blazer, S-15 Jimmy & Cherokee/Wagoneer).  Most of these were sales successes in their day with the Wagoneer (later rebadged as a 4-door Cherokee) setting the stage for the 4-door SUV boom that would start in the early 90s.

I guess we're going to see some, uh..."interesting" little cars coming out soon, but I'm not sure how this whole "vehicle footprint" thing is going work out. I think we'll either see a lot more underpowered large vehicles (probably better for driver-less technologies) and equally-compromised small cars on both extreme ends of the spectrum.

Not to get political here, but given that we just had a major election last year & its results; I don't believe that we're going to see as aggressive of a push for increased mileage for vehicles as we've seen in previous years outside of items that were already in the design/development pipeline beforehand and are nearing production-ready status in the next year or so. 

If anything & from a market perspective, we're going in the opposite direction now; especially now the small cross-over (CUV) has dethroned the mid-size sedan as the best selling vehicle type.  Most of the CUVs due to their design get lower mileage than mid-size sedans; especially in AWD form.

More law enforcement agencies are choosing SUVs & even full-size pick-ups over more fuel-efficient sedans.  Right after Ford discontinued production of their long-running full-size Panther platform (Crown Victoria); the California Highway Patrol (CHP) modified their required payload specs for their Enforcement Class vehicles so that only SUVs like the Utility Interceptor (Explorer) & the Tahoe PPV would be eligible.

Long story short; I would not be so quick to make any ambitious predictions here.  History has shown time-and-time again that such can turn on a dime.  One reason why automakers started struggling with the CAFE standards during the early-to-mid 80s was due to buyers returning to larger (Caprice, Crown Victoria, etc.) and/or performance-oriented (read V8-powered Mustang GT, Camaro Z28 & Trans Am) cars that were originally destined for discontinuation.  If one told a Ford designer circa the late 70s that their Panther platform would run through the first decade of the 21st century; they would've laughed in one's face.

[Max Rockatansky]

1994 Taurus SHO:

Love how much revs those Yamaha V6 could handle.

[Max Rockatansky]

1977 Pontiac Can Am, my Uncle picked up one of these as a collector and is the only car he regrets selling:

Pontiac really was the only light in a really dark period in the late 1970s in American performance.  I find it amazing how long the Pontiac 400 managed to hang on through the emissions era.

[PHLBOS]

Pontiac really was the only light in a really dark period in the late 1970s in American performance.  I find it amazing how long the Pontiac 400 managed to hang on through the emissions era.

One can thank the 1977 movie Smokey & the Bandit for such.

[Max Rockatansky]

Pontiac really was the only light in a really dark period in the late 1970s in American performance.  I find it amazing how long the Pontiac 400 managed to hang on through the emissions era.

One can thank the 1977 movie Smokey & the Bandit for such.

Off the top of my head didn't the 400 last only through 1979 before it was replaced by the 301 Pontiac Turbo and 305 Chevy Mouse Motor?   Weird to think back at that movie and how people thought Coors was some fancy pants high end beer.

[PHLBOS]

Off the top of my head didn't the 400 last only through 1979 before it was replaced by the 301 Pontiac Turbo and 305 Chevy Mouse Motor?

Yes.   

Weird to think back at that movie and how people thought Coors was some fancy pants high end beer.

Different time/different era.   

In 1977, Coors was unavailable for sale east of Oklahoma. A 1974 Time magazine article explains why Coors was so sought after that someone could be willing to pay the Bandit such a high price to transport it. Coors Banquet Beer had a brief renaissance as certain people sought it out for its lack of stabilizers and preservatives. The article says that future Vice President Gerald Ford hid it in his luggage after a trip to Colorado in order to take it back to Washington. President Dwight D. Eisenhower had a steady supply airlifted to Washington by the Air Force. The article also mentions Frederick Amon, who smuggled it from Colorado to North Carolina and sold it for four times the retail price. The lack of additives and preservatives meant that Coors had the potential for spoiling in a week if it were not kept cold throughout its transportation and in storage at its destination. This explains the 28-hour deadline.

[Max Rockatansky]

Off the top of my head didn't the 400 last only through 1979 before it was replaced by the 301 Pontiac Turbo and 305 Chevy Mouse Motor?

Yes.   

Weird to think back at that movie and how people thought Coors was some fancy pants high end beer.

Different time/different era.   

In 1977, Coors was unavailable for sale east of Oklahoma. A 1974 Time magazine article explains why Coors was so sought after that someone could be willing to pay the Bandit such a high price to transport it. Coors Banquet Beer had a brief renaissance as certain people sought it out for its lack of stabilizers and preservatives. The article says that future Vice President Gerald Ford hid it in his luggage after a trip to Colorado in order to take it back to Washington. President Dwight D. Eisenhower had a steady supply airlifted to Washington by the Air Force. The article also mentions Frederick Amon, who smuggled it from Colorado to North Carolina and sold it for four times the retail price. The lack of additives and preservatives meant that Coors had the potential for spoiling in a week if it were not kept cold throughout its transportation and in storage at its destination. This explains the 28-hour deadline.

So I say this not having boned up 1970s era alcohol distribution laws...   Wouldn't  it be perfectly legal to purchase Coors in a state where it was legal to do so and transport it to a private local for private use?  its still amusing to think that Coors was once considered "exotic" in those days when it certainly would be lumped in the bland/generic category today. 

[catch22]

Off the top of my head didn't the 400 last only through 1979 before it was replaced by the 301 Pontiac Turbo and 305 Chevy Mouse Motor?

Yes.   

Weird to think back at that movie and how people thought Coors was some fancy pants high end beer.

Different time/different era.   

In 1977, Coors was unavailable for sale east of Oklahoma. A 1974 Time magazine article explains why Coors was so sought after that someone could be willing to pay the Bandit such a high price to transport it. Coors Banquet Beer had a brief renaissance as certain people sought it out for its lack of stabilizers and preservatives. The article says that future Vice President Gerald Ford hid it in his luggage after a trip to Colorado in order to take it back to Washington. President Dwight D. Eisenhower had a steady supply airlifted to Washington by the Air Force. The article also mentions Frederick Amon, who smuggled it from Colorado to North Carolina and sold it for four times the retail price. The lack of additives and preservatives meant that Coors had the potential for spoiling in a week if it were not kept cold throughout its transportation and in storage at its destination. This explains the 28-hour deadline.

So I say this not having boned up 1970s era alcohol distribution laws...   Wouldn't  it be perfectly legal to purchase Coors in a state where it was legal to do so and transport it to a private local for private use?  its still amusing to think that Coors was once considered "exotic" in those days when it certainly would be lumped in the bland/generic category today. 

Each state probably has laws limiting the amount imported like that to a fairly small amount.

In the mid-1970s, I was making 5 or 6 trips from Detroit to Denver and back every year.  I had a standing order from my father (who had been introduced to Coors on a family vacation to Colorado in 1968) to bring back as many cases as would fit in my car.  This was usually around 6 to 10, depending on the car I had.  Never saw the attraction myself, but he paid me well. 

[bugo]

Perhaps the ultimate oddball from GM, or all of Detroit for that matter:

On a side note, I've always wondered why GM allowed the Riviera to be a RWD car from 1966 to '76, even though it rode on the same platform as the Toronado and Eldorado (which were both FWD)? At least they got it right in '79, when it was finally converted to FWD as well.

Front wheel drive is considered a demerit when it comes to sports or luxury cars by a majority of drivers. It is more practical for economy or family cars but not for premium cars.

[bugo]

1977 Pontiac Can Am, my Uncle picked up one of these as a collector and is the only car he regrets selling:

Pontiac really was the only light in a really dark period in the late 1970s in American performance.  I find it amazing how long the Pontiac 400 managed to hang on through the emissions era.

I'm not a big fan of the Colonnade cars, but for some reason I like the Pontiac Can Am. I don't even know why.

Speaking of Colonnades, the original plan was to offer the SD455 engine in the 1973 Pontiac GTO and Grand Am. Unfortunately, this plan was changed and the SD455 was only available in the Firebird Formula and Trans Am models.

[bugo]

A disturbing trend in cars today is the lack of a spare tire in many new cars. About 1/3 of new cars do not offer spare tires, even as an option. This is unacceptable for many reasons. The reason given for discontinuing the spare tire is for weight reasons. The government with its unreasonable mileage regulations is directly responsible for ridiculous moves such as this one.

[Max Rockatansky]

A disturbing trend in cars today is the lack of a spare tire in many new cars. About 1/3 of new cars do not offer spare tires, even as an option. This is unacceptable for many reasons. The reason given for discontinuing the spare tire is for weight reasons. The government with its unreasonable mileage regulations is directly responsible for ridiculous moves such as this one.

But really even those that have them usually are of the 20-25 pound donut variety.  Really the 50 MPH speed limits and 50 mile tread life those things carry isn't going to help anyone in modern urban traffic or in the boon docks.  I build a full size spare for whatever my daily driver is out of whatever the cheapest wheel/tire combo I can find.  I much rather rely on a real tire built for real road use over some hunk of junk requiring 60 PSI.

[bugo]

But really even those that have them usually are of the 20-25 pound donut variety.  Really the 50 MPH speed limits and 50 mile tread life those things carry isn't going to help anyone in modern urban traffic or in the boon docks.  I build a full size spare for whatever my daily driver is out of whatever the cheapest wheel/tire combo I can find.  I much rather rely on a real tire built for real road use over some hunk of junk requiring 60 PSI.

It's going to help a hell of a lot if I'm 50 miles from home on a Sunday in an area that doesn't have cell service.