Proceedings of the Castle Aching Parish Council, 1905

[Annie]

My last car was a 1954 Morris Minor that I stripped down to a bare bodyshell and rebuilt.  I owned 'Maeve' for ten years as my daily driving car before I had to give up driving altogether.  She went to a good home though I made sure of that.  A surprising amount of new Morris Minor parts were being manufactured by various companies so I never had any difficulty with obtaining parts.  Well except for tyres, - Morrie sized tyres weren't being made anymore except in special limited run batches and they were getting a bit expensive by the time I had to sell my lovely old Morris.

[webbcompound]

2 hours ago, Annie said:

With proper real older cars you could nearly always get them to go again on the side of the road with a basic kit of tools, a few lengths of wire and some of that decent insulation tape they used to sell before that plastic stuff usurped it from hardware store shelves.  I've only ever owned 1950s cars and I've never regretted that for a moment. 

 

Same thing applies to motorbikes as well. All part of the trend to make things more complex and expensive than they need to be.

[Nearholmer]

7 minutes ago, webbcompound said:

All part of the trend to make things more complex and expensive than they need to be.

Now that I firmly agree with. Even the humble pedal cycle has long been overtaken by the trend towards “excessive functionality”, which is why the role of the ordinary utility bicycle has been assumed by ‘mountain bikes’ that could, given the right rider, probably be used to ascend mountains, but are used mainly for going to school or popping to the shop for a bag of sugar.

 

It ought to be perfectly possible to have modern, highly reliable things, cars, bikes, phones even, without all this wasteful excess functionality.

Edited July 2, 2021 by Nearholmer

[webbcompound]

20 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Old vehicles are all right, provided you don’t actually want to use them for their intended purpose of providing transport. Once you have one, you quickly realise how far vehicle technology, safety and convenience have progressed in the past 50+ years. They’re time-consuming even on basic checks and maintenance in a way that modern ones aren’t.

Although it does make you wonder how they managed to do all that succesfull mechanised warfare in the 1940s

 

[Nearholmer]

Lots and lots of tinkering and roadside repairs, plus a significant proportion of the machinery actually failing in battle conditions. Look at the history of British tanks during WW2.

 

 

[Hroth]

25 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

They’re time-consuming even on basic checks and maintenance in a way that modern ones aren’t.

 

Oiling and greasing all round is just as bad as owning a 1:1 steam locomotive, and I'm glad I'm not responsible for one of those!

 

Then its wise to check that there's enough water in the radiator for any trip longer than one to the shops and it's best to check the engine oil level too.  Was that a hint of blue smoke from the exhaust? Is it sounding tappety?

 

At least running a "classic" (something that is, I think older than 1972) is cheaper in the sense that there's no road tax or MOT requirements at present, though as you say, it is imperative to keep on top of maintenance for safetys sake. 

 

[DonB]

As I indicated above, I fancied a go at this Car racing game.... So I started to produce a "special" based on 750 Club formula. which is where Colin Chapmen started And that's where the similarity ends!!

I did however break several Austin Sevens (all pre-war) and made a few pounds by reselling  "Race -ready" modified 750cc, side-valve engines and gear boxes to other enthusiasts. Not difficult as I worked in a factory producing car components for the then major car manufacturers, and a lot of the equipment and machinery was unused at night!   Four years later my own car build was abandoned and sold for the spares it contained. I had been allowed to try a friends Lotus Six, got a BRDC licence,  and two practice laps at Silverstone convinced me that I hadn't a clue !! Stirling Moss had nothing to fear from me.  End of all hopes of Fame & Glory !  I do wonder how much those Austin Sevens would be worth today 

d 

[Annie]

47 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

Oiling and greasing all round is just as bad as owning a 1:1 steam locomotive, and I'm glad I'm not responsible for one of those!

 

Then its wise to check that there's enough water in the radiator for any trip longer than one to the shops and it's best to check the engine oil level too.  Was that a hint of blue smoke from the exhaust? Is it sounding tappety?

 

At least running a "classic" (something that is, I think older than 1972) is cheaper in the sense that there's no road tax or MOT requirements at present, though as you say, it is imperative to keep on top of maintenance for safetys sake. 

 

Wot!  I used to really enjoy doing all that.  At least I knew everything was properly in order when I went out on the road with Morrie.  Most drivers of modern cars wouldn't have clue as to the mechanical state of their vehicle.

 

43 minutes ago, DonB said:

As I indicated above, I fancied a go at this Car racing game.... So I started to produce a "special" based on 750 Club formula. which is where Colin Chapmen started And that's where the similarity ends!!

I did however break several Austin Sevens (all pre-war) and made a few pounds by reselling  "Race -ready" modified 750cc, side-valve engines and gear boxes to other enthusiasts. Not difficult as I worked in a factory producing car components for the then major car manufacturers, and a lot of the equipment and machinery was unused at night!   Four years later my own car build was abandoned and sold for the spares it contained. I had been allowed to try a friends Lotus Six, got a BRDC licence,  and two practice laps at Silverstone convinced me that I hadn't a clue !! Stirling Moss had nothing to fear from me.  End of all hopes of Fame & Glory !  I do wonder how much those Austin Sevens would be worth today 

d 

I tuned up a Ford 100E sidevalve engine according to a book I found in second hand bookshop and I had a lot of fun doing it too.  My aim was to build a Ford 10 special, but life happened and I didn't.  The engine got sold to someone else who was building up a special so at least it wasn't wasted.  My Dad taught me how to use tools and to look after my own car maintenance and I taught my daughter to do the same.

[Nearholmer]

31 minutes ago, Annie said:

Most drivers of modern cars wouldn't have clue as to the mechanical state of their vehicle.

 

Because its so reliable that they don't need to have. Given standard inspection and maintenance (basically one day out of traffic each year), it can be taken for granted that all is fine, unless a little icon appears on screen to tell you that it isn't.

 

I say that as a person who enjoys a good tinker with an old truck (I still miss my Land Rovers), who has had three cars in a row, one of them for fifteen years, where the only time I've needed to open the bonnet was to add screen wash, and clean dead leaves from the cabin air intake.

 

They don't make 'em like the used to. Thankfully.

[rocor]

On 01/07/2021 at 15:46, Compound2632 said:

 

Now that is a case where the bus is providing a real replacement for the passenger train service. I dread to think what other guard's van items might have been on the bus - a crate of piglets, maybe?

 

That would have been regular practice on the bus to Buggleskelly.

 

 

 

Edited April 7, 2022 by rocor

[rocor]

2 hours ago, webbcompound said:

Although it does make you wonder how they managed to do all that succesfull mechanised warfare in the 1940s

 

 

In the case of the British army, that was because they had the Corps of the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (REME), to keep everything in operation.

[webbcompound]

1 hour ago, rocor said:

 

In the case of the British army, that was because they had the Corps of the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (REME), to keep everything in operation.

Yes indeed. My uncle was in a REME LAD, initially with 1st Armoured in France in 1940 (Before anyone says "ah, Dunkirk" this was after Dunkirk) when they had to burn their trucks before boarding a fishing boat in Brittany, then he was sent to North Africa where he was in time to retreat towards Egypt, during which time they had to burn their trucks; After which he was sent to the far East,  they landed in Malaya and had to retreat towards India, during which time they had to burn their trucks. His comment was "You can get fed up of burning trucks". Then he was off to Italy as a D-Day dodger. Since his job was repairing tanks on the battlefield with all that implies I don't think it did his mental health much good.

 

But this is a bit of a digression. The point is vehicles used to be easily repairable at large numbers of places across the country by large numbers of people. Wherever you were it wasn't far to find a little garage that could get you moving again. Now if they break (they still do) they need hauling many miles to the nearest specialist which usually means abandoning your original  journey, often ending up back where you started. And instead of a bolt, or a bit of tubing, you just have to have a whole subassembly replaced, with lots of perfectly good bits junked, thus depleting the (very finite) resources of the planet even further.

[Nearholmer]

Somewhere in the world, somebody (Toyota?) must still be making easily repairable utility vehicles for countries where people can't afford to be so wasteful as we tend to be, and where the "motoring support infrastructure" is a bit more trad. 

 

 

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, webbcompound said:

Yes indeed. My uncle was in a REME LAD, initially with 1st Armoured in France in 1940 (Before anyone says "ah, Dunkirk" this was after Dunkirk) when they had to burn their trucks before boarding a fishing boat in Brittany, then he was sent to North Africa where he was in time to retreat towards Egypt, during which time they had to burn their trucks; After which he was sent to the far East,  they landed in Malaya and had to retreat towards India, during which time they had to burn their trucks. His comment was "You can get fed up of burning trucks". Then he was off to Italy as a D-Day dodger. Since his job was repairing tanks on the battlefield with all that implies I don't think it did his mental health much good.

 

But this is a bit of a digression. The point is vehicles used to be easily repairable at large numbers of places across the country by large numbers of people. Wherever you were it wasn't far to find a little garage that could get you moving again. Now if they break (they still do) they need hauling many miles to the nearest specialist which usually means abandoning your original  journey, often ending up back where you started. And instead of a bolt, or a bit of tubing, you just have to have a whole subassembly replaced, with lots of perfectly good bits junked, thus depleting the (very finite) resources of the planet even further.

 

I wonder if he served with my maternal grandfather, a REME man who was involved in battlefield armour recovery in the Western Desert. 

 

He rather took against snakes as a result, and disapproved of Arab men using their wives for mine clearance. 

 

The barber at the Army & Navy club, in years gone, would invariably recall how he missed Dunkirk; apparently he was all set to ship out for France with his regiment when a hundred new recruits arrived at the regimental depot, all needing a haircut. 

[alastairq]

4 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Because its so reliable that they don't need to have. Given standard inspection and maintenance (basically one day out of traffic each year), it can be taken for granted that all is fine, unless a little icon appears on screen to tell you that it isn't.

  I think there needs to be a distinction  between the several apparent meanings of 'reliability?'

 

Personally I don't think moderns have much of an advantage over properly maintained oldies in terms of 'reliability?'

 

What has appeared to me to happen is, the things that cease to function correctly on moderns seem to differ to those that cease to function correctly on oldies?

 

But both categories can suffer from things that cease to function!

 

Moderns still need consumables, in the same way as oldies need consumables.  [What may have changed is how easy those consumable are, to fit or replace?]

Needing new brake linings isn't a reliability issue. Neither is the need for a replacement clutch.

One advantage [[or, disadvantage?] moderns have over oldies is that the engine management systems are far less tolerant of failure, or,  simply going out of tune?  Hence, the slightest whiff of the wrong air into the wrong place has sensors going banzai, and warning lights appearing on the dash. Whereas, an oldie may just chugg on forever, getting smokier and smokier...and as long as one drives after dark, who will notice?

 

However, I did wonder, in the late 90's [last lot, not the lot before!]....I was amazed at how easy it was for a 3 year old Audi to fail its first MoT. When it was alongside one of my disreputable ancient motors [with sprung steering joints, etc ] to pass with flying colour!

 

Of course, to modern motorists the 1990's was the vintage era..I forgot.....

 

Before anyone starts to trumpet the reliability of modern cars...it might be worth taking a look at the 'reliability ' tables by the various parts of the motoring press, etc?  A quick scan through Honest John puts me off buying a modern of any description. If the reliability tables are taken notice of?

[Ask anyone buying anything new  with a Land Rover badge stuck on it somewhere, for example???]

Edited July 2, 2021 by alastairq

[Caley Jim]

1 hour ago, webbcompound said:

 The point is vehicles used to be easily repairable at large numbers of places across the country by large numbers of people. Wherever you were it wasn't far to find a little garage that could get you moving again.

Back in the early '70's my wife and I were on a motoring holiday to Italy.  On our way back a rattling noise started from the engine.  We arrived in Andermatt around 4:00pm on a Friday, booked into a hotel for the night and I went to a garage.  The owner drove it up and down the street and declared 'Wasser pump, come back 12:00 tomorrow'.  True to his word it was repaired and we managed to make our ferry at Rotterdam on the Sunday.  Where he obtained a water pump for a Maxi in the middle of the Swiss Alps on a Friday evening I'll never know!

 

Jim

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, Caley Jim said:

Back in the early '70's my wife and I were on a motoring holiday to Italy.  On our way back a rattling noise started from the engine.  We arrived in Andermatt around 4:00pm on a Friday, booked into a hotel for the night and I went to a garage.  The owner drove it up and down the street and declared 'Wasser pump, come back 12:00 tomorrow'.  True to his word it was repaired and we managed to make our ferry at Rotterdam on the Sunday.  Where he obtained a water pump for a Maxi in the middle of the Swiss Alps on a Friday evening I'll never know!

 

Jim

 

And yet, when the starter motor went on my father's British Leyland Princess during a family holiday, no one could get one as far as Wales.

 

Lucas probably on strike as usual.

 

Those were the days!

[Nearholmer]

3 hours ago, alastairq said:

I think there needs to be a distinction  between the several apparent meanings of 'reliability?'

 

Planned and un-planned non-availability. 

 

Planned non-availability is the time out of traffic for routine maintenance.

 

Un-planned non-availability is time out of traffic due faults, failures, and accidental damage.

 

I would wager wads of used fivers that a modern car beats the socks off the cars of c50 years ago under both headings, except possibly the 'accidental damage' sub-clause, because they can be a real devil to sort-out after even a minor impact.

 

The improvement in availability is very marked, and quite an achievement given how much more there is on a modern car that can go wrong, taking it out of traffic.

 

A year of relying for transport on a 1970 car of comparable size and age (this would obviously require a time-machine) to the modern one a person drives now would take all the rose-tint off of anyone's spectacles.

 

PS: This is tempting fate, but I'm sitting here trying to recall when we last suffered un-planned non-availability of a car in this household, other than due to accidental damage (I'm rather good at backing into trees, scraping on bollards etc.), and with cars ranging from 0-15yo, I can only think of one in the past twenty years, and that was my fault for trying to nurse a 12yo starter battery through one more winter - it cost me about two hours at the roadside waiting for the AA. If I go back 23 years, another one ccomes into play: a blown head-gasket on a nearly-new Renault, which took it out of use for about a week.

 

Edited July 2, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Annie]

2 hours ago, alastairq said:

Whereas, an oldie may just chugg on forever, getting smokier and smokier...and as long as one drives after dark, who will notice

I had an ancient Ford 100E run out of petrol miles from home and a service station.  A country town general store was nearby though and I eventury made it home with a mix of kerosine and white spirit in the petrol tank.  Try doing that with your modern blob-mobile.

And then there's the question of ground clearance.  Modern poser 4 wheel drive objects apart,  aerodynamically designed modern cars always scrape their chassis on my 1980s laid concrete driveway whereas Morrie never had any problems with it at all.

 

As for reliability and owner fixability a co-worker at the clinic when I was still a part of the workforce had one of those sealed black box thingies with wires coming out of it go duff and to get a new one cost as much as it cost me to buy Morrie in the first place.  

[DonB]

18months out of warranty the heater matrix above the glovebox on my wife's Ford Escort 5-door leaked. Lots of warning lights and instruction to stop and get it serviced. Towed in by AA, local Ford agent took about 4 hours to identify problem.  "no problem sir, parts here tomorrow, that will be £900 please"

Since i had worked briefly for couple of suppliers to Ford I made contact with their Customer Service, referring to my experience within the car industry and my professional engineering qualifications. Ford paid rather more than two-thirds of the bill. I took the precaution of insisting that the  failed unit was retained and passed to me. I still have it.,   

 

I had a Vauxhall Viva !800 which was "interesting" to drive. A 1800 cc engine was shoe-horned into the bodyshell designed for a 1300 engine, and adding a beefier gearbox forced the engine to be mounted further forward. In consequence, the weight distribution was altered and the car was "Tail-happy". 

I  rang Vauxhall' competitions department, explained the problem, and asked if I could fit an anti-tramp bar to the rear suspension, the component being listed as available for the 1300cc and a standard fitting to the 2300cc version of the car. " Sorry, no! It will make the problem worse". Didn't keep it much longer!  

[wagonman]

All I know is that my current 9 year old VW Passat is vastly better – more reliable, more comfortable, much more powerful, slightly more frugal – than the 2 year old Ford Cortina I had in the early '70s. That was totally rubbish, so much so that I swore I'd never buy another Ford.

[Annie]

16 minutes ago, wagonman said:

– than the 2 year old Ford Cortina I had in the early '70s. That was totally rubbish, so much so that I swore I'd never buy another Ford.

That was because it had its valves in the cylinder head instead of where they should have been.  Though it's true enough that the 1970s were a horrifying wasteland for the British car industry.

[Annie]

1 hour ago, DonB said:

I had a Vauxhall Viva !800 which was "interesting" to drive. A 1800 cc engine was shoe-horned into the bodyshell designed for a 1300 engine, and adding a beefier gearbox forced the engine to be mounted further forward. In consequence, the weight distribution was altered and the car was "Tail-happy". 

I  rang Vauxhall' competitions department, explained the problem, and asked if I could fit an anti-tramp bar to the rear suspension, the component being listed as available for the 1300cc and a standard fitting to the 2300cc version of the car. " Sorry, no! It will make the problem worse". Didn't keep it much longer!  

My brother was working for a General Motors dealership when those were released on an unsuspecting public here in NZ.  They didn't last long and were dropped from sale fairly quickly.  Though one of the car salesmen at the GM dealers owned a worked over one that he used for rallying.  Must've been out of his mind.

[CKPR]

14 hours ago, Annie said:

With proper real older cars you could nearly always get them to go again on the side of the road with a basic kit of tools, a few lengths of wire and some of that decent insulation tape they used to sell before that plastic stuff usurped it from hardware store shelves

And a spare fuel pump and distributor arm stashed under the front seats if you are / were an MGB owner... my two GTs were usually carefully stowed in the manner of a LRDG / SAS jeep.

[monkeysarefun]

4 hours ago, DonB said:

I had a Vauxhall Viva !800 which was "interesting" to drive. A 1800 cc engine was shoe-horned into the bodyshell designed for a 1300 engine,

Down here where we quote bits from Mad Max in the same way you guys  quote that Shakespeare speech about having cheap manhoods we'd  call that a "Good Start" - GMH turned the Viva into the Torana GTR XU1 by putting in a 3 litre 6 cylinder with triple Strombergs 

 

It eventually morphed into a 4 door 350cubic inch V8 hatchback that dominated Bathurst in the '70's  and is now  worth a tidy some for your super if you didn't write  it off going around a corner the first time you drove it in the wet.  A 1977 Bathurst special  model was auctioned off last week for $750,000.

 

Edited July 3, 2021 by monkeysarefun