Can I drive it every day?

[JamesR]

Bloo, their inexperience was actually the point of my comment. That and the little kids, who depend unquestioningly on their parents doing the right thing (i.e., that which is in the children's best interest.) My Chrysler minivan is 15 years old, has 185,000 miles on it, has a little rust and is probably worth what those folks paid for their New Yorker or whatever it was. I replaced the engine at 136,000 (with a used unit with slightly less miles on it.) I figure my van has another 30-50k decent dependable miles on it. We aren't short of money, we just keep every day cars a long time so whenever something's wrong I get it fixed without putting it off. There are thousands of vehicles like my van on the used market. Some of them are junk, and some of them are dependable.

 

However, there are aren't many old cars in the collector market in my van's price/value range ($2500) that have my van's level of dependability (motor replacement aside.) Even at twice that value. I drove it to the west coast and back last month to pick my son up from college, then drove it 4 hours to Iowa and back to pick up my daughter from college. I personally felt there was relatively little risk involved in doing that and I didn't feel I was taking a chance making the trips. It ran great, other than the oil sensor in the dash acting up around Tempe.

 

Now, parents exposing little kids to old American cars from the 70's or earlier is a good way to get kids to love old cars. Conversely, depending solely on such cars (and getting the family stranded frequently as a result) might be a good way to get kids to hate them.

 

 

[1935Packard]

9 hours ago, JamesR said:

I went to the "dealer" (a very small lot owned by an acquaintance) where I bought my old wagon several years ago, and was discouraged to see a youngish couple buying a mid to late 1960's Chrysler four door as their everyday driver (as in the guy who bought the yellow MG from Matt.) When I complimented the lady on the car (it was cool) she told me it would be the family's one and only vehicle. She also said that neither she or her husband knew that much about cars. The reason I was discouraged was because they had two or three small kids in tow, and I was thinking about how often that car was going to leave that family stranded. Let's just say this place wasn't Harwood Motors...I think the price on the Chrysler was around two grand, maybe 2500, and at that time that could buy you a somewhat presentable looking and somewhat (i.e. marginally) roadworthy car of it's type.

 

I suspect they bought the car to be different from their friends, not as the tool that would best serve their family. The parents didn't look like they were made of money, but they didn't look destitute, either. What do you do in a case like that? I'm not going to say something that messes up the dealer's sale. People have to live and learn, but I sure felt sorry for those kids.

 

I'd worry not only about leaving the kids by the side of the road, but also about safety in the event of an accident.  It's one thing to have a collector car that you drive on occasion, and usually by yourself.  And when that was what people drove, that's what people drove.  But with apologies for being a downer, our older cars are so much more dangerous to occupants in the event of an accident than modern cars are, and a family car with kids in the back is probably intended to log a lot of miles.  (Most people don't realize that; they see a big old car and they assume big size means it's safe.) From that perspective, maybe it's not so bad that it won't run often enough....

 

 

Edited June 2, 2021 by 1935Packard (see edit history)

[8E45E]

11 hours ago, Bloo said:

I take it you haven't driven many miles in 60s Chryslers.....

 

I had one that I called my daily. It was my daily in the winter, and on long trips, and whenever I wasn't driving a "project". It was getting close to 400k miles when it got wrecked in the mid 90s. Worn out? Yes completely, but well maintained. Always started in stupid cold weather. I recall one winter when it was way below 0F every night for weeks, and a lot of that between -10 and -20. Never boiled in Eastern Washington hot weather. It gets over 100F here every August. Never vapor locked. I took it out of state and to Canada without even thinking about it when I could afford the gas and oil. For about 10 years of that I wasn't even carrying a jack, let alone any tools. It never had to be towed, not even once.

 

That's not quite the same thing as trying to drive a restored open MG on salted New England roads.

 

Of course there were always little projects and things to fix. Any old car needs more maintenance than something from the 2000s era, but that was just a known expected thing. Maybe it isn't widely known now. I would be more concerned that they said they didn't know much about cars.

 

About 30 years ago, I drove a '74 Dodge Dart for a dependable winter beater.   Bulletproof drive train; slant six, automatic.  Always started regardless of the weather, and got quite a few years out of it.  I paid $300 for it, and sold it for $250.  The person who bought it drove it around the block a few times, turned it off, started it back up again, then never argued price.  He just handed me the $250 in cash I was asking for, and never saw the car again.

 

Craig

[alsancle]

3 hours ago, 1935Packard said:

 

I'd worry not only about leaving the kids by the side of the road, but also about safety in the event of an accident.  It's one thing to have a collector car that you drive on occasion, and usually by yourself.  And when that was what people drove, that's what people drove.  But with apologies for being a downer, our older cars are so much more dangerous to occupants in the event of an accident than modern cars are, and a family car with kids in the back is probably intended to log a lot of miles.  (Most people don't realize that; they see a big old car and they assume big size means it's safe.) From that perspective, maybe it's not so bad that it won't run often enough....

 

 

 

 

It would be interesting to see what would happen when a 5k lb 69 Eldorado runs in to a 3k lb 2020 Econobox.   I might take my chances in the Eldorado.

 

 

 

[8E45E]

13 hours ago, JamesR said:

I went to the "dealer" (a very small lot owned by an acquaintance) where I bought my old wagon several years ago, and was discouraged to see a youngish couple buying a mid to late 1960's Chrysler four door as their everyday driver (as in the guy who bought the yellow MG from Matt.) When I complimented the lady on the car (it was cool) she told me it would be the family's one and only vehicle. She also said that neither she or her husband knew that much about cars. The reason I was discouraged was because they had two or three small kids in tow, and I was thinking about how often that car was going to leave that family stranded. Let's just say this place wasn't Harwood Motors...I think the price on the Chrysler was around two grand, maybe 2500, and at that time that could buy you a somewhat presentable looking and somewhat (i.e. marginally) roadworthy car of it's type.

 

I suspect they bought the car to be different from their friends, not as the tool that would best serve their family. The parents didn't look like they were made of money, but they didn't look destitute, either. What do you do in a case like that? I'm not going to say something that messes up the dealer's sale. People have to live and learn, but I sure felt sorry for those kids.

Not sure where this family lives, but in some areas of the country it is feasible to drive a car like this year-round.  In places like San Diego, Portland, etc., one doesn't have to be concerned about road salt eating away at it.  An older Chrysler will definitely require a bit more annual maintenance that a newer vehicle, but I don't believe it will leave a person any more stranded than a new car will when an unforeseen breakdown occurs.

 

Craig

[Ken_P]

1 hour ago, alsancle said:

It would be interesting to see what would happen when a 5k lb 69 Eldorado runs in to a 3k lb 2020 Econobox.   I might take my chances in the Eldorado.

 

Nah. The car would fare much better than the 2020 econobox, but you wouldn't! The crumpling of the econobox absorbs a whole bunch of energy so your body doesn't have to. Similarly, airbags are much better landing spots for your face and body under rapid deceleration than a steel dash, even if it is lightly padded.

 

I love older cars, and they are far superior in style, but as an engineer, the I have to respect how the newer cars are just designed to be so much safer.

[alsancle]

37 minutes ago, Ken_P said:

 

Nah. The car would fare much better than the 2020 econobox, but you wouldn't! The crumpling of the econobox absorbs a whole bunch of energy so your body doesn't have to. Similarly, airbags are much better landing spots for your face and body under rapid deceleration than a steel dash, even if it is lightly padded.

 

I love older cars, and they are far superior in style, but as an engineer, the I have to respect how the newer cars are just designed to be so much safer.

 

I was actually surprised that the Eldo wasn't twice the weight of a Sonata, which was my baseline "econobox".    I fully appreciate and understand that the crumple zones and airbags are working to minimize damage (EDIT: to the occupants, not the car).   But it is hard for me to get away from F = M*A and one car is dealing with a much bigger M than the other.   It might depend on what sort of collision we are talking about.

Edited June 2, 2021 by alsancle (see edit history)

[Pilgrim65]

On 1/12/2021 at 7:59 PM, Matt Harwood said:

Look, you guys know I'm a big proponent of driving your cars and using them as intended. I do drive my old cars daily whenever possible. However, I don't think I'm being a hypocrite here. This latest example of adults without brains is exactly why my patience is shot and my energy is gone and my interest in cars is plummeting. Yes, I frequently get the question, "Can I drive it daily?" on cars we're selling, which I typically take to mean, "Is it reliable?" I usually say yes with the caveat that it's an old car and will require commensurately more maintenance and tinkering than a modern car. That's why there were full-service gas stations and why tune-ups, valve jobs, ring jobs, and other labor-intensive processes were part of a regular car's life cycle. Go in with your eyes open, but yes, old cars can be made to be daily-driver reliable.

 

So we recently sold this car:

 

 

A relatively normal transaction, although the guy used some kind of farm equipment bank to lend him the money to buy it. Whatever. He did ask about daily driver reliability, and I told him it was probably as good as such cars could be, but there's certainly a reason why MGs (and other British cars) have the reputation they do.

 

Today he calls and says he likes the car but he can't get insurance for it. What?!? How about Hagerty? JC Taylor? Grundy? State Farm? Literally any insurance company that insures old cars should have no problem with an MG TD.

 

Ah, here's the rub: this guy really does intend to drive this car every day. In Rhode Island. In January. And no, he doesn't have any other cars. This will be his only car. Seriously? If someone asked me to name the worst possible cars that you could still technically drive every day, I'd probably get to an MG before I was out of fingers on my first hand. No windows, no heater, no defroster, marginal wipers, marginal lighting, tiny taillights, and 60 horsepower with tepid performance, never mind the total lack of safety equipment and the Impale-O-Matic steering column. Oh, and it's small enough to become little more than bug splatter on the front of a modern Dodge Ram, which will plow through an MG without even scratching the bumper. Are you INSANE? Hell, three days of driving that thing in high-speed commuter traffic on sunny days would make me give it up, but trying to make it work in a New England winter?!? WTF dude? Like, the BIGGEST of WTF?s for you.

 

I have to take the car back and refund his money, right? That's what he's asking me to do. I can't leave him out there like that. Even a light fender bender in this car could be fatal. No mainline insurance company in the world would insure that. It's like trying to get them to issue life insurance when you tell them your full-time hobby is sticking your head in the oven and inhaling the fumes.

 

This is only the latest edition of how we have to constantly protect grown adults from their own stupidity and it's friggin' exhausting. This waterhead just cost me a bunch of money and hurt the marketability of the car, all because he was so stupid as to think this would be a good way to get around town in today's world.

 

Am I being unreasonable? Is this even remotely a sane choice for winter transportation? I hear all kinds of stories about MGs in awful weather, but it's usually connected to "The worst driving experience I ever had," and remembered with fondness only because it's over, the way I tell amusing anecdotes about remembering getting my wisdom teeth yanked out of my head with pliers because it was 35 years ago.

Feh.

I think bad experience of MGs extends to Mga also 

sold my Mga to a french dealer who came to collect but couldn’t find my daughters house where I garaged the car , so he went to my house 8 miles away , insisted I meet him so not wishing to lose sale agreed , but this was late January in Uk , no roof, or side screens , freezing cold driving sleet , useless wipers  a long 8 miles , arrived he put car on trailer never inspected it , transferred money and drove off , cest tout.

[MICKEY667R]

😂😂😂

[junkyardjeff]

If I lived where it did not snow I would be driving a old car for a daily driver,I feel safer in them then the newer vehicles.

[Pilgrim65]

In Cyprus most of year and after selling my Juke , my daily driver all last year was my 72 stag only let me down 4 times !! One time my fault put big case in trunk squeezed gas line 😀other times carbs flooding and faulty coil , sorted now .

[Bloo]

55 minutes ago, alsancle said:

But it is hard for me to get away from F = M*A and one car is dealing with a much bigger M than the other.   It might depend on what sort of collision we are talking about.

 

Having been in a wreck in one of those big American cars, I think you might be disappointed. I got injured, so afterward I went out and bought an enormous 69 Cadillac. What I learned: Big is heavy is ok if you are going to be all fatalistic about it and just resign yourself to crashing into whatever is in the way. They react too slow and aren't great at stopping either. Your best option if you cant stop is to steer around something. The hole you need to put the car through to escape (if there is one) needs to be a lot bigger for a full size Cadillac, provided the steering and chassis would react fast enough to let you drive through. It wont.

 

The Cadillac was followed by some daily drivers of a MUCH smaller size, and I never looked back.

 

 

[bryankazmer]

1 hour ago, alsancle said:

 

I was actually surprised that the Eldo wasn't twice the weight of a Sonata, which was my baseline "econobox".    I fully appreciate and understand that the crumple zones and airbags are working to minimize damage (EDIT: to the occupants, not the car).   But it is hard for me to get away from F = M*A and one car is dealing with a much bigger M than the other.   It might depend on what sort of collision we are talking about.

and A=d2s/dt2.  The crumple zone spreads  the deceleration over more time

[Ken_P]

9 minutes ago, bryankazmer said:

The crumple zone spreads  the deceleration over more time

 

And absorbs much of the force via the deflection, which is something the Newtonian equations don't account for.

[bryankazmer]

21 minutes ago, Ken_P said:

 

And absorbs much of the force via the deflection, which is something the Newtonian equations don't account for.

actually they do because force and acceleration are both vectors

[MikeC5]

On 6/1/2021 at 11:46 AM, Matt Harwood said:

The unfortunate thing is that idiots like this never know about--or participate in--the havoc that they create. They just glide along from disaster to disaster never quite getting touched by them.

Great Gatsby anyone?

 

For what it's worth Matt, I agree with your decision.  Getting an ulcer or heart attack over prolonging a stressful situation is not something I would do, even if I lost a little money in the process.  

[Ken_P]

2 hours ago, bryankazmer said:

actually they do because force and acceleration are both vectors

 

You may have misunderstood me. Force and acceleration are both vectors, but that's not the whole story. Newtonian physics assume perfectly elastic collisions. Vehicle collisions are inelastic - not all force is transferred from one body to the other as motion. A vector analysis of a crash wouldn't add up. Much of the force of a collision is converted to work, by things such as the crumpling of sheet metal, compression of deployed air-bags, losses to friction, etc. Pool balls colliding are pretty close to elastic collisions - minimal friction, no deformation of materials involved in the collision, etc. Vehicle collisions are not so simple.

 

Newtonian equations are simple, and very useful, but don't account for all of the energy absorbed in a collision.

 

The reason modern cars are safer, even with reduced mass, is because they are designed to absorb much of the force of the collision (the kinetic energy of the crash) via crumpling, material deflection, etc. vice behaving more elastically (less deflection) and forcing your body to absorb the force.

 

Interestingly - my 1937 Packard 120 weighs 3,300lbs, a brand new Hyundai Sonata weights about 3,100 lbs - so not that different. Granted a '70s El Dorado weighs about 5,000 lbs.

[John_Mereness]

Matt, that was very generous of you.  

 

As to "cannot fix stupid" - yep, that is correct and you cannot.  

 

As to driveability - MGTD's do fine in the winter, but I would stay away from salt and ice with anything of the vintage (as well as with any collector car "worth its salt" to begin with).  The cars were used by plenty of people as daily transportation when new - this is how British cars received "bad names" as Americans really tried to use them and someone from Europe would never even imagine using one for much of anything.  

 

Negatives

1.  They are wood body framed car like a 1930's vehicle

2. They are fairly low horsepower matched to marginal gearing

3. They have a 55 mph speed "tops", though will go as fast as you are willing to pay to repair them 

Plus, It is a lot of non-SAE hardware, hard to get in and out of, and ....

 

Advantages:

1. They are a blast of fun to drive

2. They are a blast of fun to drive

3. They are pretty close to the Model A Ford of England and parts are readily available and ....

Plus, they are a blast of fun to drive and ....

 

 

 

 

[wws944]

I guess here in California there is an attraction to buying a pre-1975 car - just because it doesn't need bi-annual smog checks.  It seems like lot of post-1975 cars end up in the local Pick-N-Pulls simply because they won't pass smog.  One time I bought a Delco ignition module/coil setup at a PNP to try out in my Reatta.  It came out of a really nice late '90s Olds.  Reatta ran like c**p with it, and it turned out the module was bad.  One can buy a new module for like $75-100 bucks.  But someone decided to sell the car to the PNP and collect $500, rather than fix it.  I've had a few smog test related problems over the years - but not counting my recent MB experience, the worst has just been to replace an O2 sensor (four in the Suburban).

 

I would never want to daily drive a 45+ y/o car in the best of circumstances.  They were designed for a 10-20 years lifespan, so repair parts often difficult to get.  If it is anything collectible, one accident and it is history.  Plus all the safety and convenience features of newer cars.  I'm really appreciating things like backup cameras, front/rear parking assists, blind spot alerts and lane keeping assist.  LKA is one that has really surprised me.  Normally I'm pretty good about staying in my lane.  But every once in a while, it'll 'catch' me getting too close to a lane edge (without signalling) and gently nudge me back towards the center.  Adaptive cruise control is wonderful on congested freeways.

[JamesR]

13 hours ago, 8E45E said:

Not sure where this family lives, but in some areas of the country it is feasible to drive a car like this year-round.  In places like San Diego, Portland, etc., one doesn't have to be concerned about road salt eating away at it.  An older Chrysler will definitely require a bit more annual maintenance that a newer vehicle, but I don't believe it will leave a person any more stranded than a new car will when an unforeseen breakdown occurs.

 

Craig

 

Craig, there are no guarantees against breakdowns, only probabilities. And all of us consider probabilities, and act accordingly - the type and age of airliner we get on, the type of companies we work for, the kind of investments we make. A young freedom loving adult couple can hit the road in their VW Beetle and more power to them...it's an adventure. I once met a retired couple who only drove classic cars (that's all they owned - 50's and 60's.) Same deal. Kids are a different story because they don't decide the course of their early lives, their parents do. This isn't about the Chrysler being a bad choice, it's about parents of modest means making a sub-optimum choice for their family. Not at all saying they were bad parents, but when you're of modest means there's a lot less margin for error.

 

Yes, this was in the heart of the salt belt, and bad winters (for the US.) My cars don't see any roads from November to April.  This was about 10-15 years ago, and it's likely they all survived the experience. Hopefully they kept the Chrysler as a hobby car and bought a mid 90's Buick sedan.

[mike6024]

UAE here I come!

[Ed Luddy]

As far as driving a mid 60's Chrysler sedan as a sole vehicle I think the cost of fuel is going to be the biggest issue. Big V8, no overdrive, carb instead of EFI, etc. That will likely sour the romance of driving heavy old iron more than reliability.

[carbking]

On 6/2/2021 at 7:38 PM, wws944 said:

 

 

  Adaptive cruise control is wonderful on congested freeways.

The greatest thing about "adaptive cruise control" on our new car is Ford made it fairly easy to disable!!!!!!!!!!

 

Lead car in fast lane driving the speed limit, and overtaking some slower vehicles. First car to pass slid over in front of me, with plenty of room; and of course the adaptive cruise control slowed my vehicle without warning (or reason) to the cars behind. Darn near got rear-ended, and about three of the drivers behind me, when passing, laid on the horn, and nominated me as "number one" with a single finger. After Google taught me how, ADC has been disabled since, and will remain that way!

 

Different options for different people!

 

Jon

[8E45E]

On 6/2/2021 at 8:10 PM, JamesR said:

Kids are a different story because they don't decide the course of their early lives, their parents do. This isn't about the Chrysler being a bad choice, it's about parents of modest means making a sub-optimum choice for their family.

I was well before legal pre-driving age when I discovered my love for cars & trucks, and while on vacation with my parents in the mid-1960's, we did stop at a museum in Saskatchewan, and got to see several vintage vehicles up close.  It was not until the early 1970's, did my mom, out of the goodness of her heart stop at a car & vintage farm machinery museum to let me visit.  She remained inside the car with my younger sisters while I took my time inside.   All I heard from her after was how long I took inside to see everything, and the cost of admission.  Needless to say, I never went on vacation with my parents ever again as my idea of a 'fine vacation' and her idea of a 'fine vacation' were totally the opposite!

 

Fast forward when I was on my own.  For years and years, I drove a '65 Studebaker Commander all over the US & Canada on my vacation, with the main emphasis on attending a Studebaker meet, and then, possibly several stops at car museums and other points of interest to ME along the way there and back.  I could NEVER see either of my parents accompanying me on any of these trips, especially with no a/c and their worry about the age of the car.  I had no problem jumping inside it and driving it almost anywhere!

 

Craig