Wildguzzi.com

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Lannis on February 13, 2018, 08:15:05 AM

Title: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 13, 2018, 08:15:05 AM
Ten thousand miles?

Boy, if this isn't a commentary on improvements in automotive design and assembly over the years.   

(https://photos.smugmug.com/General/i-7JL9mHf/0/eb3c8a27/O/ad-1935-chevrolet.jpg) (https://lannisselz.smugmug.com/General/i-7JL9mHf/A)

We don't even change spark plugs in 200,000 miles any more ....

Lannis
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Triple Jim on February 13, 2018, 09:07:42 AM
I'm not sure what that means, "Its quality shines brightest after 10,000 miles."  My first thought is they're saying that if you compare all new cars available at the time, and run them 10,000 miles, the Chevy will appear to have the highest quality.  Or maybe they mean that it takes 10,000 miles to break it in, an then the quality shines brightest.  It's certainly an example of advertising words arranged to have some sort of feeling, but little meaning.
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: PJPR01 on February 13, 2018, 09:08:23 AM
So after 10K miles, the engine smooths out, just like a Guzzi...incredible parallel universe here! 
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 13, 2018, 09:24:31 AM
That could very well be the message ... but remembering how short the intervals were between "tuneups", "overhauls", "rebores", and all back in those days, I assumed it was more like "You'll go 10,000 miles without any major trouble!".   

It wasn't until the 80s that our local Sheriff's department quit trading in their cruisers at 35,000 miles, and STILL operated a mechanical shop ... Today, the bogie is 150,000 and they get the cars serviced at Jiffy-Lube ....

I still like the old cars, the average age of the bikes in my shop is 50 years, but I'm under no illusions about relative longevity!

Lannis
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Tusayan on February 13, 2018, 09:36:32 AM
I don't drive any of my hobby vehicles a tremendous mileage, because I have 13 of them including motorcycles, planes and a car.  So like most people who are into old stuff,  I'm more interested in longevity expressed in years than miles.  Old stuff is better in that regard, and that's one reason why we continue to buy it.

I have new vehicles too, but I don't think about them much and 2018 advertising has little affect on my buying preferences. I buy the ones I can drive a long way before throwing them away without any regret.  Nobody will be collecting 2018 cars in 50 years, but they probably will still be collecting what we're collecting today.
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: PJPR01 on February 13, 2018, 09:43:28 AM
Nobody will be collecting 2018 cars in 50 years, but they probably will still be collecting what we're collecting today.

With a few notable exceptions, such as Porsches, Ferraris, Bugattis and maybe a few other marques...
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 13, 2018, 09:49:18 AM
Nobody will be collecting 2018 cars in 50 years, but they probably will still be collecting what we're collecting today.

I wouldn't bet on that.   Is there ANY sort of 1968 car that isn't worth (in good shape) more today than it cost new?   What was the most common, cheapest, throwaway, beat-it-and-trash-it, this'll never be worth anything, highest world volume of manufacture car in 1968?   The VW Beetle, in a runaway.  Priced an excellent original recently? 6 to 8 times what they sold for new.

What was next behind that?   For example, a Citroen 2CV would be in the running.   Built cheap, rear crank bushing built right into the block, meant to drive it and throw it away.   Nice one today?   $10,000 if you're lucky, probably 8 times what they sold for then?

I could go on and on, but people then said the same thing as we're saying now ... and if you see what Chinese and Near Eastern folks can do with repairing supposedly non-repairable electronics, driven by economic necessity and fueled by ingenuity, I'll wager that the electronics won't be a problem either in 2068.

Unfortunately, I can't say "Let's wait and see" on this one ... !

Lannis
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Chuck in Indiana on February 13, 2018, 10:24:12 AM
Quote
But I have to say I have done the best with antique aircraft...

The only time I've seen them lose value was during the crash of 08. They are coming back, though.
Of course, I buy "projects" cheap (Guzzi content) and spend literally years restoring them. I've never "lost" money on an antique airplane, if I consider my labor free.  :smiley: And I do.

But, you are right. I bought my first airplane, a Cessna 140.. for $2250. Flew it for 3 years, and sold it for $2750. That has been pretty typical over the years.
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 13, 2018, 10:46:50 AM
The only time I've seen them lose value was during the crash of 08. They are coming back, though.
Of course, I buy "projects" cheap (Guzzi content) and spend literally years restoring them. I've never "lost" money on an antique airplane, if I consider my labor free.  :smiley: And I do.

But, you are right. I bought my first airplane, a Cessna 140.. for $2250. Flew it for 3 years, and sold it for $2750. That has been pretty typical over the years.

I don't even know where to look for the "real" value of old planes.

For example, what would it cost a regular guy to get flying in a classic yellow Piper J3 Cub?   Just a standard airplane, nothing fancy with upgraded motor or avionics, with the annual inspection done and ready to go?

Lannis
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 13, 2018, 11:44:47 AM
Trade A Plane.com

enjoy!

That's one of those sites that you could spend an unconscionable amount of time perusing.

If I sample the 12 J-3 Cubs currently for sale on there, they range from $69,000 for a perfect collector's item, $33,000 for the "excellent flying condition" category, to $19,000 to "needs paint".

Good info, although I don't know what to do with it now that I asked.   Probably too late for me .... !

Lannis
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Orange Guzzi on February 13, 2018, 12:16:31 PM
I remember when a new car came with a 6,000 mile warranty.  I drive that much in 2 months.
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: screamday on February 13, 2018, 12:23:58 PM
I'm not sure what that means, "Its quality shines brightest after 10,000 miles."  My first thought is they're saying that if you compare all new cars available at the time, and run them 10,000 miles, the Chevy will appear to have the highest quality.  Or maybe they mean that it takes 10,000 miles to break it in, an then the quality shines brightest.  It's certainly an example of advertising words arranged to have some sort of feeling, but little meaning.

I thought they were talking about the model in the car.  :evil:
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Steph on February 13, 2018, 12:25:43 PM
I'm not sure what that means, "Its quality shines brightest after 10,000 miles."  My first thought is they're saying that if you compare all new cars available at the time, and run them 10,000 miles, the Chevy will appear to have the highest quality.  Or maybe they mean that it takes 10,000 miles to break it in, an then the quality shines brightest.  It's certainly an example of advertising words arranged to have some sort of feeling, but little meaning.

Without over thinking it, looking at the image, my guess is that the add’s message ran on several levels and could be rephrased:

‘You will be happier in good company’
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: oldbike54 on February 13, 2018, 01:22:28 PM
 My very first car was a 1950 Plymouth Club Coupe , purchased for a hard earned $50.00 . 50,000 miles on the odo , and smooth worn out . It did run , barely , and another 50 bucks and probably 50 hours of labor later it was still smooth worn out  :laugh: It did carry me to school and work for another 10,000 miles before going CLANK . Traded it for a Suzuki 120 dirt bike that wasn't in much better condition . Funny to think about how perceptions change , the Plymouth was 19 years old at the time I purchased it and seemed a very old car . Now there is a '97 Nissan P.U. and an '01 Jackal in my name , and even the Jackal is almost as old as the Plymouth , and the Nissan is older. Neither one feels old , and even the Guzzi has almost triple the miles . Our expectations have changed dramatically .
 
 Dusty
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Chuck in Indiana on February 13, 2018, 01:55:03 PM
That's one of those sites that you could spend an unconscionable amount of time perusing.

If I sample the 12 J-3 Cubs currently for sale on there, they range from $69,000 for a perfect collector's item, $33,000 for the "excellent flying condition" category, to $19,000 to "needs paint".

Good info, although I don't know what to do with it now that I asked.   Probably too late for me .... !

Lannis

The Cub has a lot of nostalgia value.. many of us old farts learned to fly in them. I used to rent one for $5 an hour..with fuel. They are so docile they can just barely kill you.  :smiley:  You can find a beater Taylorcraft (Taylor designed the cub.. Piper was a money man that uhh ripped off Taylor) for considerably less than a cub. A friend just bought an airworthy one for 10K. It's a better flyer, too, IMHO.
The problem, Lannis.. is you probably don't physically fit a Taylorcraft. You *might* be able to get into the back seat of a cub.
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 13, 2018, 02:01:10 PM
The Cub has a lot of nostalgia value.. many of us old farts learned to fly in them. I used to rent one for $5 an hour..with fuel. They are so docile they can just barely kill you.  :smiley:  You can find a beater Taylorcraft (Taylor designed the cub.. Piper was a money man that uhh ripped off Taylor) for considerably less than a cub. A friend just bought an airworthy one for 10K. It's a better flyer, too, IMHO.
The problem, Lannis.. is you probably don't physically fit a Taylorcraft. You *might* be able to get into the back seat of a cub.

I can fly across the ocean in economy class on a modern airliner.

I can fit in ANYthing ....   :azn:

Lannis
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Tusayan on February 13, 2018, 04:42:35 PM
I can fly across the ocean in economy class on a modern airliner.

I can fit in ANYthing ....   :azn:

Lannis

I wouldn't be so sure.  A Taylorcraft BC12D, the common postwar variant, has about half as much room as an economy class airliner seat  :wink: Better with the thinnest possible seat cushions but still not workable for a substantial fraction of the 2018 population.  It seems to me thinking about it, that the biggest issue with old vehicles may be people getting bigger and bigger. Same issue with small cars of the same era, like the MG TC.  Motorcycles are a bit easier because you sit on the outside, not the inside.

J-3 Cubs are not that fun to fly, with heavy elevator control and poor visibility in most directions but they're reliable, cheap to run and safe.  At the time of production 70 or 80 years ago that was notable and its still true.
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Chuck in Indiana on February 13, 2018, 04:54:28 PM
I can fly across the ocean in economy class on a modern airliner.

I can fit in ANYthing ....   :azn:

Lannis

About half of you would fit..  :smiley: They are a little crowded for me, and I'm as Pete sez, "one of those miserable dwarfs.."
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Tom on February 13, 2018, 05:09:18 PM
Airline seats are shrinking in width too.  The onboard lavatories have already shrunk to about the width that's little wider than the toilet seat.  :shocked:
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: twowings on February 13, 2018, 05:18:07 PM
My uncle managed to augur in a J3 into the Oklahoma hills 'hunting coyotes' (whatever that means)...killed him and a friend...he wasn't a very experienced pilot but learned to fly at Oklahoma State University so he could travel to rodeos more efficiently...
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 13, 2018, 07:07:39 PM
I wouldn't be so sure.  A Taylorcraft BC12D, the common postwar variant, has about half as much room as an economy class airliner seat  :wink:

Well, I don't know whether I'd really fit or not.   The ONLY road vehicle, including A-H Sprites and Honda 600 Sedans, that I do not fit in is a Lotus Super 7 (or a Caterham 7 replica).   Not enough room between the door sill and transmission tunnel.   I fit fine in my Morgan 4/4, though.

Lannis

If I ever find myself around a friendly Taylorcraft, I'll try it and see ....
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 13, 2018, 07:10:45 PM
The onboard lavatories have already shrunk to about the width that's little wider than the toilet seat.  :shocked:

I wouldn't know about that.  I've been flying on airlines for business and pleasure since 1976.   Flown coast-to-coast, across the Atlantic quite a few times ... and I've never been in an airplane head.   Careful intake management.   I can never fathom why people are getting up out of their seats one after another and heading to the hopper 10 minutes after takeoff.  They can't ALL have the trots and got caught short ... ?

Lannis

Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Tom on February 13, 2018, 07:22:13 PM
I could mistaken but the width is about 32" now.  :tongue:
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 13, 2018, 07:27:55 PM
I could mistaken but the width is about 32" now.  :tongue:

You ARE mistaken.  This desk chair I'm sitting in is 22" between the arms and it's way roomier than an airline seat!   32" would be like super first class .... I think an economy seat is like 18" or less.   32" sounds like the distance between the seat backs ...

Lannis
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Tom on February 13, 2018, 07:55:14 PM
The whole lavatory is 22".  (correction)  That's on Delta.  You're right Lannis.  I had the measurement messed up.  I always wonder how the sumo wrestlers fly.  They must put in a special order for wider lav's.
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 13, 2018, 08:38:21 PM
The whole lavatory is 22".  (correction)  That's on Delta.  You're right Lannis.  I had the measurement messed up.  I always wonder how the sumo wrestlers fly.  They must put in a special order for wider lav's.

Given that Japanese sumo wrestlers are like pop stars or pro golfers here, they probably charter planes that have seats that will fit them.   I have a ... Large .... relative who flies all the time, and they ALWAYS book a first-class seat.  Maybe the first class loo is wider than the plebian one, I've never seen one ....

Lannis
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Turin on February 13, 2018, 11:23:33 PM
Lannis wrote:
Quote
I wouldn't bet on that.   Is there ANY sort of 1968 car that isn't worth (in good shape) more today than it cost new?   .

How about a 1968 Rambler American 4 door?  There are all kinds of cars of that vintage that aren't collectable( mostly 4 door ).

Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 14, 2018, 08:22:22 AM
Lannis wrote:
How about a 1968 Rambler American 4 door?  There are all kinds of cars of that vintage that aren't collectable( mostly 4 door ).

I had a 1968 Rambler American "Rebel" 4 door in 1981.   It was a primitive thing - vacuum operated windshield wipers, everything was steel and rubber.   I haven't priced them, but I still think a 4-door in excellent condition would sell for more than the car sold originally.

My in-laws sold their worn out, one-owner 69 Galaxie for a good price to a guy who made a police car replica out of it.   That's how a lot of them end up ....

So that would be 4-door sedans.   Today's garden-variety Dodge Neons and Toyota Camrys will be the cheapest "collector" cars in 2068, but the Subaru WRXs and such will be bringing big money, I'll betcha.   They'll be like Model T's - sell for $400, you could buy a running one right after WWII for $15, all you wanted, and now they're $8000 ....

Lannis
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Gliderjohn on February 14, 2018, 08:39:18 AM
Had a college roommate that had a mid-sixties Rambler 4-door with the fold down rear seat, factory 4-speed and a 4 barrel small block V-8. All stock. What we use to call a sleeper.
GliderJohn
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Lannis on February 14, 2018, 09:23:10 AM
Had a college roommate that had a mid-sixties Rambler 4-door with the fold down rear seat, factory 4-speed and a 4 barrel small block V-8. All stock. What we use to call a sleeper.
GliderJohn

Something that would have been in a 1974 ABC Wide World of Sports "Demolition Derby" and scrapped out by the pound in 1980.

In nice condition today, I'll say $10,000 ....

Lannis
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Turin on February 16, 2018, 06:09:34 PM
Back in 1990 I briefly owned really nice 1965 Marlin ( Rambler fastback ) with it's stock 327 4bbl and it went pretty good. ( like a dummy I sold it for and bought a 67 mustang that was in sorry shape ) I'd love to find another someday. prices are still pretty reasonable.

(http://amcrc.com/photos/10full.jpg)
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: ITSec on February 16, 2018, 10:56:12 PM
You ARE mistaken.  This desk chair I'm sitting in is 22" between the arms and it's way roomier than an airline seat!   32" would be like super first class .... I think an economy seat is like 18" or less.   32" sounds like the distance between the seat backs ...

Lannis

This is correct - 32" is a typical seat 'pitch' (spacing from one row to the next). Here's a story from a couple years ago that tracks changes to the average width and pitch over the years - https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/columnist/mcgee/2014/09/24/airplane-reclining-seat-pitch-width/16105491/ (https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/columnist/mcgee/2014/09/24/airplane-reclining-seat-pitch-width/16105491/)
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: Sheepdog on February 17, 2018, 12:34:26 PM
I love old cars, but not for daily use. They pollute more, are less safe, wear out quickly, and need a great deal more maintenance. These days, I consider my 4-wheelers to be more of an appliance than a hobby. My motorcycles are my passion.
Title: Re: Old vs. New .... (NGC)
Post by: SED on February 17, 2018, 08:25:51 PM
I love old cars, but not for daily use. They pollute more, are less safe, wear out quickly, and need a great deal more maintenance. These days, I consider my 4-wheelers to be more of an appliance than a hobby. My motorcycles are my passion.

 :thumb: