post from me, but that article by ryan got me thinking. Reading about why our older rides are arent great for the environment, which I care about, or how their lower gas mileage, and hard to find parts are a hassle. Well, I keep trying to convince myself that it's true, but it really isnt. I, like a lot of folks, dont care for bigass SUV's, I cant see passed them, they are too damn big for parking spaces, they go through tires and brakes sooner than smaller cars...yadda yadda yadda. I also see a bunch of people running out and buying hybrids, which, from what I read, are actually worse for the environment than the worst gas guzzling Hummer is. Considering the battery is built in one country, shipped to another for filling, then shipped to another for installation in a car, then the car is shipped to it's country of sale, then the battery life/disposal issues and the mediocre gas mileage improvement. Some say a Hummer is better for the environment over a 15 year period. Who knows? I dont. Here are some things I do know. New cars have a LOT of plastic, which as we all know, just kicks the environment in the nuts. On top of that, There is a lot of silicone, and circuitry. Thousands of parts, that ALL wear and need replacement at some point, right? Some of the cars we repair at the shop, have parts that are fiber optic, really...fiber...OPTIC. WTF? I think new cars are overly complicated. Just me. I put timing belts on cars every 30K. My timing chain has 313K on it. Shitty wheel bearings, A/C compressors, and cheaply made alternators, all very rarely last as long as they should. So, Im still trying to figure out what about my 58 is sooooo bad for driving around? It has ONLY several pieces of plastic anywhere on it. tail lights. Radio buttons. Speedo plastic. Dome light cover. Hmmm. I think thats it. My car is 4 thousand pounds of steel. The cars I repair are around average, lets say, 3500 pounds. probably 35% plastic, maybe more. Their fuel pumps are expensive, electric, are mostly composite, plastic and pot metal. last a few years...then go into a land fill. Like the belts, shitty water pumps, ac compressors, window motors, all of ther shitty emissions crap. Dont get me started on plastic radiators. So, Im thinking, my car get 12MPG, maybe 15 MPG HWY. It has the original motor, 313K. Yeah, three hundred and thirteen thousand. Nothing major has been replaced. Wheel bearings. it had a radiator in 98. Tranny rebuild in 04. It's almost 100 percent recyclable. Prolly 100%, if I yank the battery. So, I have to ask, ultimatley IS my simple reliable, unbreakable, indestructable, all steel ancient 58 fairlane worse for the environment than the 40K Nissan? Considering all the many manufacturing facilites, that are needed to make one car(gadgets, parts and other farmed out stuff), and their waste, and bi product, and given the amount of stuff in them that is NOT biodegradeable, which is really better? I have no car payment, cheap insurance, and if I would stop "Just fixin" stuff, and only fix what really needs to be fixed, Probably only sink a few hundred dollars in it per year. Im starting to think Old cars like ours are better for the environment than ANYTHING on the road being made today. Or after 70? They are simple. Hard to kill, and need only gas and air to run. no sensors, relays, ecu's, AFM's, or BFD's. Agree or disagree? Just curious.... Cheers and beers Hodge
Another important point - the energy to build your 1958 was spent a LONG time ago and have NOT had to be done again. 12 MPG? A lot of SUV's get only a very little better. Admittedly the emisions are dirty. But not as bad as back in the day due to cleaner burning fuel. I run an '86 XJ6 - 283,000 miles - averages 15 MPG around the valley here and almost 22 out on the road. It is paid for both as far as what I owe and the original energy to build and ship it. Very little plastic, but some. The rest is recyclable - hell the leather can be composted. Of course if I would recycle them when I am done it would be a good thing, instead they go behind the barn and rot and that is probably wrong.
I know what ya mean about all the plastic shit nowadays. I work for a huge aftermarket (non OEM) company & about 75% of my inventory is either plastic bumpers or the styrofoam impact absorber. WTF!
and even when our cars do break the old parts are often repaired instead of replaced, creating more junk
i don't mean to hijack your post, but your comments struck a nerve with me as well. plastic in late model vehicles has really gotten out of control. manifolds constructed of it just do not hold up to the heat/cold cycles like metal. it just turns to crap. if the oem's would de content some of the cars think of the mileage that could be achieved, i mean really, radio buttons on the radio, radio buttons on the steering wheel, heated and cooled seats, mirrors the tilt in reverse, pedals the are electrically adjustable, i could go on and on. who buys this junk? most of it is just trash after a year or two. your 58 ford will be on the for years to come because it is infinitly repairable, and servicable, sorry for the rant, just sick of touching things under a hood only to have them crumble to dust...
no worries, you get the point. I have a hard time believing we are the only ones that see this though. Ten years, and three owners. Thats what cars are built for these days. It's sad. The cheap plastic interior in cars these days rots and warps after four years. Ten years down the road, door handles are completly useless. Who expects there seat to get warm in ten years? Sorry it aint gonna happen. Simple IS better, I hope people are starting to see it. Cheers Hodge
Why would a car company want to build anything that lasts longer than a few years? They'd be out of business... Planned obsolesence...
Then there is the constant cycle of replacing the car with a new one. How much more energy does that take? If you consider that someone who upgraded their car every three years from 1958 onwards would have had aprox 17 new replacement cars by now, that is alot of energy and resources wasted. Stick with the 58! It's saving the planet! Adam
I was NEVER considering not sticking with it...it will never again leave the family....ever. My 10 and 11 year old girls argue who get to drive it to school when they get old enough, so no worries.... Cheers Hodge
Have you ever seen the HBO special with Penn and Teller called "That's Bullsh*t". One of the programs was about going "Green". It's an interesting and thought provoking show.
not to mention all the thin sheet metal...ask body shops around you & you will find 95% replace the sheet metal on newer cars adding to the heap of shit that is already out there...like said before hot rodders were the first recyclers
I can't wait in about 7 years there are going to be a bunch of chevy volt's with 2000 lbs of batteries that won't charge what do you do with your precious green car then? Throw it away and buy a new one? Buy a new $3000 battery for your 7 year old $2000 car? Electricty aint green, got to get it from somewhere, hybrids as mentioned are worse, and just wait till some of that wiring starts to go bad, I've been around hybird military vehicles, let me tell you there is A LOT of voltage that needs to be properly stepped down from the engine. Old cars are best, I have a suburban, it's great if you have to haul stuff, but when it dies, it's pre computers, and a carburetor to replace it. No more gadgets in my hauler.
we have a winner....The state of Texas started charging a "recycle" fee on batteries long before any facility was built for that purpose. Now add to the fact that all of these large batteries are going to have to be dealt with. And as an added note. the new Volt, the one that "be charged from any electrical outlet". Where does the energy come from to recharge the car....the electric car fairy??? Don't think so. Kinda like the folks that want to mow with an electric lawnmower, because it's the "Green" thing to do. The energy to produce my stuff was done long ago, and while the impact it made might have been greater at the time, relatively speaking, it's long gone now. "yours may be a hybred, mine's recycled"
Hybrids work well in the place they are designed for. Places like city centres in London where they are sat in stop-start traffic all day and the engine would otherwise use more gas sat there idling than it would do to charge the batteries up for a bit and creep about on the motors. Why they put them in 4x4's to be 'green' I have no idea, it's all marketing. I know a lot about enviromental design and impact, a fair chunk of my degree was based on it, but I always get shot down when I try and explain it or demonstrate the maths so you can see it how it is rather than how the press or government or 'green' agencies try and spin it to you. Basically the energy ratios are approximately this: 10% in building the car, 85% in use of the car and 5% in destruction of the car. This is based on an average (european) fuel consumption on a 100K mile lifecycle and happen to be the same numbers that I have calculated the way I was taught, the same as the ones bandied about by the UK government and the same as those used by the likes of Greenpeace. Hopefully you can see that the higher the fuel consumption and the further you take the car the more 'damage' you do. Over a 100K mile period about a 3mpg improvement in fuel consumption will result in less energy used overall in the car's lifetime from construction to destruction, thus justifying building that new car over continuing to use the old thirsty car. Edit: I should add that I couldn't care less either way. I'm not trying to justify anything here, just tell it how it is rather than hearsay.
Yes, the hybrids are not as kind to the evroment but they sure make the owners feel good about themselves. Has anyone thought about what our kids and their kids will be restoring/rodding? I guess I will save my '37
It's called "Planned Obsolesence", or manufacturer greed (profit to them). There was a program not too long ago called OBD I and II (on-board diagnostics), that, in effect, discouraged any one from working on their own car...hence the 'planned obsolesence', that way only the "dealer" could work on your car since it had a computer in it (greed or profit, depending on how you look at it). And that continues to this day...the average person can't even change spark plugs or oil anymore...and that in itself in not cheap at a dealer. In other words, combined with the lobbyists/representatives/senators that want to see your old car get scrapped by trying to slip laws in on us, they are trying to force everyone to buy a new car every few years...keeps the manufacture in business, keeps the insurance companies in business, keeps the lobbyists paid and keeps the credits for polluting rolling. R-
My 1958 ford straight six has better gas mileage than my daily 2000 Saturn. I would like to see this show! Cars these days are driving chem-labs and the Hybrids are just plan deadly.
electric/hybrid cars have to start somewhere....the problems they have now might be resolved at any time....nobody knows, but not trying would be a mistake....till then i'll roll in my 80 yr old car
This is exactly why I drive a 64 plymouth as a daily. Its a four door so its easy with the kids. A low milage around 60k now origanal car. The bonus is I get 25mpg highway. I bacically told a Prius owner at the pump the same thing you started this thread with but also corilated to dollars as well as the enviroment. He started the conversation with "I wouldn't want to pay for the gas in that tank", By the time I was done with him he was thinking he got screwed when he bought his new green car. Besides I told him my Plymouth is a hybred too, it burns gas and OIL!!!! Ha ha hahahahaha
My 1962 Cadillac is a hybrid...it burns oil and fuel! I have the same argument with anyone who thinks my car is a gas guzzling road hog...it's almost 100% recyclable, reusable, paid for...not to mention...it was designed, built and bought in the USA and it's more stylish than anything on the road today! And I'll be able to fix it after the robots take over...
Let's not pretend that our non-emission compliant cars are "greener" than a new car. (I probably put out more CO in a day than my wife's CR-V does in a week). However, I agree with your main point: there is a big picture here and nothing that has to be manufactured and shipped tomorrow is going to harm the environment more than something that is still usable after 40 or 40 or 60 years. And you are right: my '53 Chevy gets better gas mileage than ANY full-size SUV (even the hybrids). This is the approach I take: they can drive their hybrids or SUVs, I'll drive my lead sleds, and as long as no one tries to shoot me I'll leave them alone, too.
Alot of good points. Many I have not even thought about. 3000 batteries is definitely an awakening.. But the safety factor of a new car is also something to be considered when throwing in your two children in the back seat. Not just restraints here. we are talking better handling, braking.. aAlot of money has been spent on investigating the best saftey standards. What price can we put on our family? Reliabilty is another factor... I will argue till I am blue in the face the new cars (especially the popular Japanese) makes last much longer than any rebuilt used car. My experience proves this... In the 60's and 70's. We used to brag when our cars broke the 100,000 mile barrier. None of us ever mentioned the amount of maintenence and labor it took to get our cars to that point.
You all raise very good points. I have seen tons of people on brand new scooters and motorcycles. Say they buy a brand new harley for x dollars. They could keep that monthly payment towards the bike to use for gas in their truck. All they are doing is spending the same amount of money for a different thing. Sure they pay less in fuel, but more in paying off the bike. Thats reversed from when they were driving the truck. This is on a personal level though. As a whole, a motorcycle will use less gas thus polluting less. We have tried electric cars before, but it seems that people love the power of gasoline no matter how much they complain about gas prices. Especially now days, people want to go fast. No patients, and not enough brains to realize that by going fast all they do is get to the red light to wait longer. Stay steady and go the speed limit, don't hit the gas so hard, and you will conserve, and catch the green lights.
my 2001 windstar has 168k on it. 1 set of brakes 3 sets of tires no exhaust work no timing belt work no fan belt work 21 mpg. i cant complain. riverrat
Plastic can be reused for bio fuel from what I caught on that Dirty Jobs show. It is ground down, pressure cooked, compressed, and the result is bio diesel. They used everything in the interior of a modern car, plastic, seat foam and upholstery. I still would rather drive my old car instead though.
One of the few things the instructor said when I took auto shop in High School ('65-'66) was; "If complete combustion of gasoline was possible to obtain, all that wold come out of the tailpipe would be HARMLESS water and CO2." In '66, CO2 was considered "harmless". Depending on who's (probably swayed) statistics you care to repeat, beef cattle put out more CO2 (and methane) than all the cars and trucks combined. So, drive your hotrod, just not to Mickey D's! I was just about to go for a bike ride after this post, maybe, and need to air up my tires. I have to start the compressor in the garage and wait for it to get FULL because the tires take 120lbs of pressure. I'm at this moment thinking that's a lot of electricity spent just to air up what should be a 99% green transport, right? Maybe I need to spend $20 on an acceptible quality hand pump to get that job done? That way I can let my consience have some brownie points for the poluting my '40 GMC and '73 MGB GT do. at least on one of those the manufacturing polution occured before I was born, and the other half way around the world before al lot of you guys were born. Quit eating dead cows and use the cattle feed to make fuel? All I really know for sure is I don't trust Pit Bulls.
Ok... What about this. If we are worried about the environment, energy efficiency isn't the only factor. Pollution due to the energy used manufacturing and driving is only one part. Two other points to ponder... Birth and death of new cars. 1 Birth of a car. These cars are made of NEW materials. The act of mining steel, smelting it, and transporting it not only uses a lot of fuel, but is extremely polluting to air and ground water. Maintaining my daily driven 56 Ford only contributed to this form of pollution once. The 'buy new' people have done this six or seven times in during the life span of my car. 2. Death of the 'new' cars If the point of all this is to lower pollution, what about the process of scrapping cars. Lots of the plastic, upholstery, seat foam, wire insulation gets burned during this process. Therefore, the cycle of new cars causes this to happen more than my 'drive a classic for many decades' approach. Again, my daily driven 56 ford has been on the road for 52 years. In that time the 'buy new' people have scrapped six or seven cars. If we are worried about the environment, energy efficiency isn't the only factor.
Hybrids are nothing new. Ferdinand Porsche built the first around 1900. It didn't revolutionize transportation then and the Prius won't do it now. I don't know how Al Gore III got his up to 100mph a few years ago but he must have had a 40 degree slope and 20 miles to do it in. The folks around here that drive them are all into the hyper-miling crap where they try to get 6000 miles per gallon. Good for them but the rest of us would like to get home or to work the same day. If you pass them they give you this look like they know you are on your way to pinch sleeping babies and drown kittens. Never mind that you've been behind them on a winding 2 lane road for 10 miles and they haven't made it to 40 mph yet. They are the pace setters! Shame on us for driving vehicles that don't have batteries that begin their lives in Canadian mines (aka toxic waste sites) before the ore is shipped to Scandanavia for processing, then on to China to be made into lithium foam and from there to Japan for the battery to be assembled. Yeah the battery has moved nearly 30k miles before it is ever installed. Its green huh? The old joke should now read "What's the difference between a cactus and a Prius?" The cactus has the pricks on the outside.
Jeez I never really thought of all this. You have raised a lot of very valid points Chief one being,Drive an old car.You'll still save the planet and you'll look cooler doing it
53' straight six w/ od. Great gas mileage. Just about every time I stop at a stop light or I'm getting out of it at a parking lot. I get the "what kinda gas mileage do you get" and a crappy little grin. I'll point to an escalade... 2-3 times better then that.
The Jalopy Journal
