Do you know anyone that INSISTS that 60s cars are better than today's? (a rant)

"Kanaric" (Kanaric1) 10/15/2014 at 00:12 • Filed to: None

1

50

I'm getting into an argument with a guy whose claiming an AC Cobra is better than a LS swapped Miata when discussing small cars with big engines put in. His reason? Feels>Reals I guess.

Sorry 60s car fanboys, leaf spring non-independent suspension, iron block engines with pre-70s inflated hp numbers, and body on frame designs are not superior to modern technology of any kind.

I find myself finding people with opinions like that a lot on this subject and it's getting annoying. This isn't 1982. It's always some jackass rockabilly fanboy or someone who wishes it was the 50s or 60s (without hippies or MLK) still. That's when it's not just someone who doesn't know shit about cars. All the old men that I know that like those cars know the difference between a modern an ancient tech vehicle is like to own.

The cars are cool, and could be argued to be "cooler" than modern cars. That is an opinion that has nothing to do with facts.

Edit: For some background on why this set me off so easily it's just annoying when someone talks over and over again how their early 1960s Malibu is an awesome car that could take my WRX or Mustang on with ease. This isn't that guy, that is another person and who set me off on being sensitive to this. Now when people refuse to stop arguing their pet 1960s project is superior to anything new I can't help but to be annoyed.

The Miata also wasn't my example, it was someone else's that I was defending.

What the inferior technology in question might look like:

Cherry_man1 > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:15

1

But the simplicity of working on them. Also look at the BOSS 302. Live rear axle. Also didn't the vette use the same trany from the C3-C5?

anothermiatafanboy > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:16

6

You seem to be forgetting that everyone's definition of better is different. Nothing sounds BETTER to me than Amber Rose sitting on my face. Others may find that torturous.

Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2 > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:17

1

Ehh, I don't really want to get into this right now, but I have more critiques for newer cars just because it's like we are wrapping irresponsible, mindless people in layers of bubble wrapped behemoths. I'm not saying my car is better, but at least I am in control and know what I am doing. Unfortunately, I think tech was at the right level, for me, in the 80s and 90s. Sadly, styling was shit during that period.

Conan > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:17

0

My Dad sometimes argues this. He tries to back it up with better examples though.

Kanaric > anothermiatafanboy 10/15/2014 at 00:18

0

Well better in this regard he's talking about the capabilities of the car specifically. That they are "faster" than modern cars. By faster meaning everything from 1/4 mile to track times. Despite my showing him a list of 1960s cars 1/4 mile times and how 9/10 of them are int he 16s.

Kanaric > Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2 10/15/2014 at 00:19

2

I think you could argue that late 80s or 90s cars are better than todays, sure. In the late 80s you had Honda in Japan with a 160hp civic with suspension that is not even considered to be put into cheap cars anymore. Even the EF Civic SI had that.

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:19

0

I actually think you're both wrong. I think the cobra and the miata are about equal. In differnt ways of course, but equal

Kanaric > Cherry_man1 10/15/2014 at 00:20

0

Yes but the Boss 302 has an aluminum engine with 4 valves per cylinder DOHC heads and without question handles better than it's 60s equivalent.

Kanaric > Conan 10/15/2014 at 00:20

0

The only way he could be right is if he backs it up with the GT40 of which there are better supercars today.

Kanaric > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 10/15/2014 at 00:21

0

Certainly not equal in handling and power though? That's what he's claiming. There's just no way a car with leaf springs is a superior track machine.

anothermiatafanboy > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:22

2

Something the young guys don't get (I'm only 24) is that with cars numbers never tell the whole story. Just because a car is faster or has a higher grip number doesn't make it better. The slower car could have a much more responsive, better sounding engine. The less grippy car could be more fun to toss around. Using numbers to argue about cars is too black and white for such a passionate topic.

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:22

0

No, not handling. But it certainly makes up for that shortfall in other areas.

Conan > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:23

1

His last claim was original Elan > NC Miata.

Kanaric > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 10/15/2014 at 00:24

0

I said the only way it's "better" is in terms of the cool factor from the car. 60s cars exterior designs are IMO superior in terms of looks for sure. However that's not his argument, he's arguing from a performance standpoint.

HammerheadFistpunch > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:24

3

I guess my comeback is; what is "better"? In either case, I've learned that this kind of fight is tiring and meaningless. I'm just for the love of cars.

Cherry_man1 > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:24

0

Then you also have the GT40 problem, I bet it could eat modern cars alive.

Kanaric > Conan 10/15/2014 at 00:26

0

That is a reasonable claim. Especially since aftermarket exists to fix the faults of the Elan.

The Elan also has some fairly modern technology.

Kanaric > Cherry_man1 10/15/2014 at 00:28

0

Well perhaps but that is a supercar race homologation.

There are modern equivalents like a Ferrari F40 that I think it couldn't take, or I would like to see it take on. Would make for a good, if not impossible to film, Top Gear episode.

anothermiatafanboy > HammerheadFistpunch 10/15/2014 at 00:29

0

amen! When you get so worked up over this kind of an argument, then bring it to the Internet to be proven right, you just don't get it.

Logansteno: Bought a VW? > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:29

0

I think cars from the 60s are better than cars today from the perspective of how they drive and feel. I'd much rather have a '69 Camaro RS/SS over a '14 Camaro 1LE. This topic is more personal opinion than black and white numbers.

Also, LS swapped Miata was the best modern example you had against an AC Cobra? How about a TVR or Jag F-Type?

Kanaric > HammerheadFistpunch 10/15/2014 at 00:30

0

It is. It's just annoying when someone talks over and over again how their early 1960s Malibu is an awesome car that could take my WRX or Mustang on with ease. This isn't that guy, that is another person and who set me off on being sensitive to this.

Kanaric > Logansteno: Bought a VW? 10/15/2014 at 00:32

0

That wasn't my example, it was someone else's that I defended.

Conan > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:32

0

Yeah, I think the only times that it works are really stunning historic cars and trucks/bloated modern stuff. As a whole it just generally isn't true.

HammerheadFistpunch > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:33

1

Meh, its annoying when anyone picks a fight, my advice is to just say:

Kanaric > HammerheadFistpunch 10/15/2014 at 00:34

0

I need to change my attitude to this.

Alex from Toronto > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:35

0

Old cars are cool but I like safty and crumple zones.

Cherry_man1 > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:37

0

True, you would need a GT40 kit car (not hard to come by) with the 427Ci ford motor. the F40 would be that hard one to get. but the GT40 could whoop up on it I bet.

Kanaric > Cherry_man1 10/15/2014 at 00:41

1

Kits are IMO a completely different story. You never know what is under there. A lot of them are fairly modern tech.

This Shelby Daytona Factory Five kit is quite awesome, and have seen it in person. Never driven though.

https://www.factoryfive.com/kits/type-65-c…

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:42

0

It has a better power to weight ratio. Really the only way its better. But because it lacks handling, this fact makes it equal with the miata

Squid > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:44

0

Art Morrison frames are the only thing that can convince me that an old car can get close to modern handling dynamics and standards of rigidity. But to those whom insist on old iron being king are sorely mistaken. V8 Miatae and V8 Miata variants like the Locost and Exocet blow the Cobra replicas out of the fucking water. Granted you are doing a whole fuck ton of work to to reduce the chasis flex of that lil roadsters body, but given the right motor and suspension, they are damn fast and really flingable.

Art Morrison G-Max frame with Corvette suspension for reference. . . .

JGrabowMSt > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:50

5

The 427 AC Cobra is probably the worst example you could have picked for this.

They have coilover suspension, they're tube frames, and extremely well built for the time. Are they deadly? Any car that can break the tires loose in their lowest gear at highway speeds is 100% deadly.

Also, I'm not going to debate your points, I think they're completely valid, and I do agree that modern cars have an advantage, but better? Inflated HP numbers? I don't think so.

Some parts were built to higher standards, others were engineered to as safe as the times provided. Ford had to recall thousands of transmissions that were built in China because of their ridiculously poor quality. 1960's transmissions going into Shelby cars, COPO cars, and other insane factory monsters had to handle ridiculous power, with no electronic safety mechanisms in place whatsoever.

For reference, the Ford Cobra Jet motors, factory rated in the ballpark of 320HP were actually putting out extremely healthy 500HP numbers. When you drop the clutch in your lowest gear from a dead stop, the tires would spin. Try doing that today in a modern LS swap.

Regardless, I digress. Agree to disagree with your friend, because from how you started off, I'm not quite sure either of you are equipped to delve into that kind of discussion.

From a safety aspect, it was a different time. Being home and inside before the street lamps turned on wasn't an issue.

From a performance aspect, Maranello wasn't catering to the masses. Funny, they still aren't.

From an engineering aspect, those cars were arguably tougher than todays cars. Built to be driven, and easy to be fixed. Who thought times would change?

But all that aside, Shelby Cobras did not have leaf springs, iron blocks can handle a more prolonged beating, and lets be honest, body on frame is a whole lot easier when dealing with tinworm.

In the end though, you like cars or you don't. You can certainly have preferences, but hating a car? Who has the time?

Kanaric > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 10/15/2014 at 00:52

0

Does it really have better power to weight though? I mean you could put a LS7 in a Miata if you wanted to instead of the LS1 or LS2. There are several V8s you can put in there. Especially for the cost of what an actual Shelby Cobra would go for, not a kit. There were several different kinds of V8s that came in the Cobra as well.

Keep in mind that before the change to SAE hp numbers the numbers are inflated compared to today's as well. By quite a lot. Most of the Cobras were not 427s and the numbers for that engine are claaimed to be 400hp or 425hp in pre-72 horsepower calculations, probably more like 350hp in post-72 numbers.

Wiki shows me that 427 equipped cars (not cobras) were getting 12s which is comparable to what like a 5.0 Mustang would get today. And these were NHRA drag cars.

Kanaric > JGrabowMSt 10/15/2014 at 00:54

0

They do have inflated HP numbers, SAE calculations were changed post-72. Cars that had the same quarter mile times and 0-60 numbers in 73 had MUCH less listed horsepower because of this. 300hp cars became 225hp cars. Especially int he case of the ford 302. By the time of the late 80s the 220hp Fox Mustangs were making the same power as the mustangs of the 60s were pretty much, just with a different kind of way to calculation horsepower. Gross vs Net. Look it up, it's a serious thing to consider and it's a large reason why you see 60s cars with claimed 350+ hp only getting 16s in a quarter mile.

Keep in mind a Ls swapped Miata could have a LS7 or any number of engines. What engine in the car is irrelevant. Any Ford motor on the Cobra you come up with you can come up with something better to put in the Miata. You raise me the 427 i'll raise you the LSx crate engine with a supercharger.

Are 427s with coil springs number in the hundreds or is that like some less than 10 build homologation car like the Shelby Daytona.

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:57

0

You have to remember the AC cobra weighs next to nothing. A Miata is light, but not cobra light

JGrabowMSt > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:58

1

Post 72 and we're looking at the emissions era. Everything changed. V8 motors were putting up sub 200HP ratings for complete shame.

Let's also not forget the difference between polyglas tires and what we have today.

Trying to many any direct comparison is always going to be apples vs oranges.

Aaron James > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 00:58

1

Turn off the internet for a bit. Why waste your time arguing with internet people. People like what they like and prefer what they prefer. You'll never change an internet persons mind about their car preference. It's like GTR fanboys on youtube that think the best thing that has ever existed in the history of time is a car they will never own.

Kanaric > JGrabowMSt 10/15/2014 at 01:05

0

"The only year where BOTH Net and Gross was listed was the 1971 model year. In 1971 the base engine was 350/270 Gross and also listed as 350/210 Net."

Regarding corvette engines.

The Net vs Gross measurements do make a serious difference. Gross hp was measured with the engine out of the car with no accessories or transmission (iirc) installed.

JGrabowMSt > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 01:18

2

Regarding your question about 427's with coilover suspension, it's every single car. The 289 as well if I'm not mistaken. The only models with less than 10 built were the Dragon Snake (7) and the twin supercharged Super Snake (2) (there are about 17 Super Snakes with a single supercharger, but I'm unsure of how many are actually accounted for today).

You're also starting off with comparing apples to oranges. The 427 Cobra was sold to you. You bought the car, that's what it was. Sure I can go buy an LSx crate motor, but now I have to buy the rest of the car to put it in.

From how you're describing it, Net vs Gross is no different than crank vs wheel horsepower. Unfortunately, we can't go back in time and get a brand new, freshly built motor to actually test, using exactly what they had available at the time.

Unless we're putting the cars through the exact same paces under the exact same conditions, it isn't possible to compare old and new cars. What I can tell you is that I'd rather walk than put a modern car on polyglas tires. Sure we could raid a Shelby warehouse and build another Cobra that would theoretically be fresh out of 1966, but we wouldn't have the 1966 gas, 1966 oil, or 1966 tires to stick on our 1966 dyno to compare with a newer car.

What newer car even compares to a Cobra, since it was your go-to car for comparing? The Veyron? I don't think so, they're totally different cars. A Super Snake could put out more horsepower, but the Veyron is four wheel drive. The Cobra weighs a ton, the Veyron weighs a couple tons.

Cars aren't built like they used to be, they can't be compared to new cars. Simple as that. You can have your preference, you can like certain things better personally. As a whole, neither is actually better, only better to/for you.

Christos_Adam > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 01:23

0

I love that you talk about body on frame and leaf spring and the car you were talking against actually has fully independent rear suspension, tube frame chassis, amazing distribution, inboard rear disk brakes (to reduce the unsprung weight). I had the chance to ride in an original 427 cobra and I can tell you it's a very well built car.

Frank Grimes > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 01:33

1

I would argue a 1966 Malibu is better than a 2014 malibu. here is why.

1. The old one is better looking, come in a two door version has better choice of colors isn't covered in plastic. Looks slimmer more athletic and less bulbous.

2. The old one is easier to work on.

3. the V8 and four speed sounds better makes more power more rough and has more character.

4. RWD

5. I like old interiors better. Also the switches and gauges are more mechanical often made of metal and have a better feel to them rather than electronic displays or switches.

6. I like simplcity to me simplicity is the most sophicticated. When I want a car I don't want lots of electronics stuff sounds systems automatic climate control and other luxuries. I just want what is there to look good feel good and be simple focusing me on having fun driving.

7. Its unique sure back in its day it might have been a little boring but today with fewer of them on the road it is unique and I dont think anyone would argue that its more rare than a rental car malibu.

8. Ability to modify the 1966 to make it what I want is much easier. There are aftermarket frames massive disc brakes airbags spindles rear ends roll cages wheels and much more to make the A-body my own unique car to do what I want it to. Sure the malibu can have some aspect of this but not to the extent or extreme also smog testing prevents lots of engine mods and limits the HP mods.

I am not ignorant. I am not gonna argue that a 1966 Malibu with a V8 is technically superior to a 2014 malibu if all you are looking at is MPG, HP/Liter, comfort, tech ,range, or safety on paper the new one wins everytime. But that is not why I buy a car. If you offered me either of the cars pictured I would choose the 1966 every time without hesitation and If I have to explain you might never understand.

Gabor Vajda (@Gabor_V) > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 01:38

2

The Cobra is a racing car from the early 60s, bred to win Le Mans, Daytona, Sebring and the lot. The Miata/MX5 is a roadster road car from the late 80s.

Neither of them is "better".

Satoshi "Zipang" Katsura > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 02:00

0

Feels are probably the reason why I would want to steer for the Cobra. It feels alive, to say the least. A Miata is fun, sure, but I don't know. It just feels... There's just a little soul in there.

MultiplaOrgasms > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 03:29

0

Comparing a modified (!) Miata to an unmodded car from the 1960s is BS. Keep in mind that there also is huge aftermarket for old cars. Compare an LSx Miata against a GT350 with modern coilovers, shocks, sway bars etc. and modern tires, then we can talk.

crowmolly > Squid 10/15/2014 at 05:21

0

Look into DSE and RideTech. Further proves your point.

crowmolly > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 05:27

0

You are correct in terms of technology and performance.

This is a serious case of rose-colored-glasses. And I am a strong GM muscle era guy.

The only exception being how easy it is to make power in your driveway with old carbed engines. You can buy, say, a '74 Nova and have 400hp (net hp if you are splitting hairs) in a weekend for less than $1500, probably without even removing the engine from its mounts.

tromoly > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 11:42

0

I don't understand why people hate solid axles or leaf springs. Just like an IRS suspension can be considered crap if set up wrong, a solid axle can be just fine if the suspension setup is adjusted correctly for the other vehicle parameters.

Vin > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 13:15

0

Only place to settle such debates is on the track. If there's no way to do so/no pre-existing proof of either side's argument, then there's no point in arguing - you'll only get frustrated.

Don't let it bother you, bruh.

kanadanmajava1 > Kanaric 10/15/2014 at 19:23

0

"Better" doesn't describe much very accurately. Better in performance? Better in safety? Better in keeping their value? Better in fuel economy? Better in maintenance costs? Better looking? Modern are better in some but not in all.

I'm one of those guys who prefer 60's cars over modern ones. I don't say that they are better than newer ones but I'm just not interested in modern cars. I'm still not purist in originality. Modern cars have more sophisticated engines and I don't see problem in using them in old cars.

The value of new cars will drop like a stone so I'll rather use my money for something that doesn't get worthless in 5 years.

samssun > Kanaric 10/16/2014 at 03:24

0

Counterpoints:

samssun > Kanaric 10/16/2014 at 03:30

0

The C6 and C7 Corvette are superior track machines to 99% of cars out there, and beg to differ on leaf springs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corvette_…