[DMCForum] Re: Bases/Qualifications for Martin
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[DMCForum] Re: Bases/Qualifications for Martin
- From: "content22207" <brobertson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 02:49:50 -0000
You want the evidence, eh? That's cool.
In no particular order, these are some reasons I prefer vintage
Aesthetics -- I do not like the styling of contemporary automobiles,
inside or out. Makes no sense to spend my hard earned money on a car I
think is ugly, especially when I think many cars from the 60's and
70's are absolutely gorgeous, inside as well as out. Subjective
opinion of course, but the last time I checked it WAS my name on the
bank account, (to spend as I want).
Cost -- with the exception of the DeLo, every vehicle in my stable
costs a fraction of a new car to buy and maintain. Initial purchase:
$1,000-$1,500. Bodywork & paint: $1,000-1,500. Insurance: $275.
Personal property tax: $5. Parts: generally 25% of later models (the
smaller a part is, the more it costs! My 8 cylinder cap & rotor, with
brass inserts, come as a set for $15. Bought tiny 4 cylinder cap &
rotor for a Mazda once that cost $50!). The only area in which newer
cars cost less is fuel economy -- but $20,000 buys a lot of gas.
Sentimentality -- attachment to my AMC is obvious (been driving it for
22 years). When we were 14 years old, my fire department buddy and I
used to ride our bicycles to Brown Lincoln Mercury to look at the Mark
V's (that's when that love affair started). Salesmen would give us the
keys and let us wander through the lot trying each one on for size.
Every southerner falls in love with his truck, no matter how many
dents it accumulates in rough service. My vehicles mean much more to
me than just transportation.
Ease of maintenance -- I do my own mechanicing. Thus I want the
biggest bolts, with as little blocking them, as possible. Reduced time
and aggravation in a repair are more important than performance after
the vehicle is back on the road (newer cars do perform more
consistently over a wide range of engine and environmental conditions,
but there's a lot of crap under the hood making that possible). Here's
a neat bit of Mark V trivia -- the heater core and A/C evaporator are
located in a housing that protrudes into the engine compartment. For
some reason every Lincoln I buy comes with a leaking heater core --
less than 25 minutes to replace ($29.95 at Autozone, lifetime warranty).
Comfort -- a 5,000 lbs automobile is simply more comfortable on the
road than a smaller vehicle. Longer wheelbase, wider track, larger
tires, heavier duty suspension, etc. Big engines spin at half the
RPM's of a smaller vehicle power plant. I drive to DC with my shoes
off, feet UNDER the pedals, steering with two fingers. Not too worried
about an accident -- saw a Mark V in a junkyard once that hit a pole
or tree dead center (drunk driver must have been using the hood
ornament to aim it). Bumper was bent into a Vee. Header panel was
shattered (fiberglass). Damage continued another inch or two to the
core support, and that's where it stopped. I think the radiator was
Pride -- hubris, I know, but I am proud to be seen in public in a
vintage automobile that I restored myself. I am proud to use such a
car as daily transportation, not just a hobby or recreational
showpiece. I am proud to serve as a tangible link to the past (why
read about AMC in the history books when you can stop by my driveway
and see one in person. I'll even take you for a spin).
Are those reasons enough?
>--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Martin Gutkowski <martin@xxxx> wrote:
> Bill, I am taking this particular thread tongue-in-cheek. I will
> my position.
> I don't like the way you shout from the rooftops that "old is better
> than new" with no real basis, or more specicifally, qualification.
> My first car, built in 1989 was a Citroen BX DTR Turbo. It had a 1.7
> turbo-diesel engine. This engine was the most fantastic piece of
> simplicity even you'd have to like it, Bill. There was no electric fuel
> pump in thw whole car, just a mechanical unit run off the cam belt.
> There was no ECU. There was ONE item (besides the glow plugs) that was
> in any way electrical on the entire engine - and that was the solenoid
> valve that turned the engine off by cutting the fuel. Once running,
> engine was entirely self-sufficient - as long as it got air and
> would run underwater! The engne itself was cast iron with an ally head
> and would typically run to 150,000 miles, then reauire a new head
> gasket, then it'd run the same again with no more than oil changes.
> I know where you're coming from, I really do - but today I drive a
> Citroen Xantia HDi - which is the 2 litre turbo direct injection diesel
> - which puts out 110hp and 250Nm of torque compared to the BX's 80hp
> rather less torque. The turbo comes in on the xantia as low as you
> on the BX it was 2500rpm and quite annoying, even though it went like a
> rocket after. The Xantia's got electronic everything and it's the way
> But being an electronic engineer, I'm not scared of this stuff.
> content22207 wrote:
> > Don't know which irritates you more:
> > - That I drive wonderful old automobiles
> > - That I am in total bliss doing so
> > Either way, it's worth driving them just to watch you squirm.
> > It actually is to my advantage that you DON'T look at motoring the
> > same way I do. You won't be competing with me for a finite number of
> > remaining autos.
> > I find it hard to take seriously automotive advice from people who
> > change cars every 4 or 5 years. If I had to move to a new house or
> > marry a new wife as often as some people buy a new car, I'd quickly go
> > mad.
> > Bill Robertson
> > #5939
|Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
Yahoo! Groups Links
Back to the Home of PROJECT VIXEN