In almost every quantifiable way, modern cars whip the pickles out of older cars. They’re faster, more efficient, more comfortable, last longer, require less maintenance, and their defoggers actually work. And yet there’s one really glaring way that old cars are hectares better than new ones: repairability. That’s why I picked that image above: because it shows not just that cars were once vastly easier to repair, but also that carmakers actually gave a shit about that, to the point of including it in their brochures, like in this 1961 Citroën ID brochure. Can you imagine any modern carmaker showing off how easy their body panels are to remove in a modern car ad? I can’t.
I think this is a big deal because we have cars driving around now that are absolutely financially devastating to repair, even in minor-seeming incidents. I hate that. I’m a forgiving person, and I like that quality in my cars, too. We’re all fuckups, sometimes, aren’t we? And why does the price have to be so dear for every time we do something stupid? Headlight units on modern cars are vulnerable on the corners and can cost thousands of dollars. Compare that to the price of a sealed beam headlight, which is often less than a burger at a fancy restaurant. And brighter, too.
Those ID fenders would pop off with just a few bolts! And that was an advanced, premium car, too!
This brochure is full of other great art, too. I love when carmakers would show interior space with line drawings like the one up there. It makes it all so damn clear! Literally, I guess.
I also love this iconic Citroën illustration, where the ID/DS becomes a hover-car. Citroën had a real one of these – well, physical, it couldn’t really hover, you’d have heard about that– that they used to bring to car shows:
Man, mid-century Citroën must have just had their own independently-operated coolium mine in some French colony.
Speaking of cool, this is a pretty cool way to show the available colors of your car. Also, who knew accessorizing with a car door worked so well? Put your stuff in the door pockets and it’s a perfect, hard-to-lose handbag!
“Man, mid-century Citroën must have just had their own independently-operated coolium mine in some French colony.”
The perfect phrase for that Pic.
Also note that Citroën – for ride comfort – always recommended ridiculously low tyre pressures. It’s also there in the drawing. Anyone else would just draw the tyres round.
I mean that’s not the one and only way old cars are better….
Serviceability
Price
Longevity in some cases
Efficiency in some cases
Durability
Complexity
Weight
Size
Space utilization
Accuracy of gauges(relevant article today)
I feel like “durability” and modern “crashworthiness” are at irreconcilable odds with one another. Yeah, old cars were more “durable”, but a car that keeps its shape in an accident will throw the driver through the windshield, or impale them on the steering column, etc.
How do you mean “space utilization”? Do you have examples? While I can certainly criticize how a car might be laid out, to pretend I have better ideas a lot of the time would probably be false. Easy to point out something isn’t ideal; hard to point out a workable solution.
I still pity the people at NHTSA who have to come up with policy decisions like safety and rollover standards. “Do we want to cause more accidents because A-pillars have to be thick and create blind spots, but have more people survive the accidents–or do we want fewer but deadlier accidents because rollovers are deadly?” I’d probably answer the same way they did.
Not necessarily crash durability. A 1995 f150 can land a jump waaaaay harder than a 2023 f150 could without damage. If you watch Matt’s off-road recovery it becomes very apparent that suspension and structural failures are much more common in vehicles made in the last 15 years or so.
Likewise, drivetrains have become much more fragile. Abuse a Jeep 4.0/Ford 300/Chrysler slant six/Chevy 350/Honda d series/really most engines conceived before 1990 or so and an new 2.0 turbo anything and see which one survives.
The most obvious example of space utilization was when I parked a 92 Accord next to a 16 Dodge Dart. The Darts exterior dimensions were a couple inches bigger in every dimension, but the inside dimensions were a couple inches smaller in every dimension. The doors, ceiling and floor were thicker. All of that crash structure and noise insulation takes up space, and that space comes from the passenger compartment. My grandparents have a 14 Buick Encore that is similarly weirdly small inside for how large the outside is.
Not to mention cars the likes of which just aren’t made anymore, like a VW Bus or Corvair Van that could carry 7 people and all their stuff in a footprint smaller than a new Civic(while getting 25mpg). Even something like a 90s Astro van has considerable inside space and a footprint that is below average nowadays.
That first one makes sense, but at the same time….I’m pondering how often or why a car’s ability to jump would be practical? (Beyond “for fun” which I acknowledge is completely legitimate)
The engine one makes sense. If turbos are generally more fuel- and space-efficient and can still reach 150,000-200,000 with regular maintenance, I see why manufacturers would prefer them to NA equivalents, even if that means we see fewer get to 300,000+. By chance I’ve never driven a turbo.
Yeah, I loved my ’97 Econoline conversion van for how roomy it was…but I always did wonder how it might do in a given accident. Only things I could find were something like 3 stars safety for driver and 4 stars for passenger. And that would’ve been stock, not necessarily a conversion, and who knows for any passengers in the back, and woe to anyone inside if I ever rolled it over.
Either way, I know a close relative who bought a minivan explicitly for the safety features, after deciding a Transit was just too risky in a crash in comparison.
All valid points though. A 2012 Prius v is one of the newest cars I’ve been in, so I don’t have much room to comment.
Suspension durability on jumps is very important, you’d be surprised how little the difference is between a gentle jump and a hard pothole.
Any body on frame vehicle, like an Econoline, inherently is not going to crumple as well as a unibody car, and because there is less structure in the roof, it’s more likely to crush in a rollover.
Deciding a minivan is significantly safer than a Transit is an interesting conclusion.
I mean, last I checked, they don’t even test the rear passenger safety of “commercial vehicles” like that. They didn’t for E-series, last I checked.
I don’t know offhand if Transits have side airbags in the back now.
Agreed, repairs are insanely expensive. There is one inevitable repair that has always been near impossible: leaky heater core or heat temp valve. Why could those components not be located to be removed without upside-down, crippling gymnastics, or even complete dash removal?! I say a firewall cover plate and enough hose and cable to pull them into the bay, keeping the mess out of the interior. and while your at it, a sealed area with a drain inside so a leak goes where it should, on the ground. Not applicable to EVs, of course.
“The aristocratic profile is the embodiment of beauty found in true functionalism”
*Habsburgs not included
Oh wow, could those floating ID/DS be the inspiration for Jacob Munkhammar’s floating Citroëns?
Agree so much (again: of course). Everything I currently own/drive cost less than $5K, and the average age is 24 years. Hearing about the insane costs to fix a Rivian or Tesla, even from a small fender bender, scares the bejeezus out of me. I’m not saying I’ll never buy a new car because of this concerning trend, but the continued push towards gigacastings and such does pour some cold water on the idea of buying new. If I do eventually buy a new or newer car, it’s going to be from the cheaper end of the automotive spectrum, in hopes that might cap repair costs at only-slightly-insulting rather than truly insane.
My neighbor had to spend well over $2K to replace the headlight assy. on an about 5-6-year-old 5 Series Bimmer. $2K+ for a HEADLIGHT! I know we don’t get sealed beam units anymore (which still irks me) but that’s just exploitation IMO.
I’d be tempted to 3D print a sealed beam enclosure, stick a headlight in it, bolt it to the car, and find a way to wire it in.
Must be some overlapping genetic predispositions among Autopians… I swear I’ve been thinking the same thing ever since I heard about that $2K+ bill.
I’ve never 3D printed anything, but I sort of imagine it goes something like this: take the broken unit and get it scanned into an editable file. Buy a suitably sized 12v sealed beam unit (for all of $20, or something nicer and LED via Amazon) and scan that too. Then edit to combine the geometry of both scans so that the printed housing will still attach/bolt/clip into the car just like the OEM unit did, and also allowing for the sealed beam to fit nicely inside the enclosure with threaded holes for mounting and aiming the beam.
Then print the whole thing, spray paint it black or whatever, mount the housing w/the sealed beam into the car. Then use a multimeter to find the switched +12VDC wire from the wires that originally went to the OEM unit) and connect that wire to the back of the sealed beam (positive) and the other contact to ground (you wouldn’t even need to cut into the OEM harness… just tap into the necessary wire). I suppose if you want to be fancy, it might also be possible to adjust the housing edge geometry before printing to leave a bit of room for a thin clear plastic cover to maintain body contour too (I’d try to reuse the one from the front of the OEM unit, but I suppose you could heat/bend your own).
Of course, all of this wouldn’t be easy, but even if it took a few tries, there’d be the satisfaction of only having spent $20+scanning/printing costs. 🙂
And watch the car’s computer refuse to power the headlight because it’s out of spec.
“Sorry, Scott, I can’t let you do that.”
Well, it’d have to be an older car of course. One with a more modest (and less picky computer). But your point is well taken Harvey… a modern BMW probably WOULD complain about the change… the way some inkjet printers refuse to print black text if one of the color tanks is low.
I suppose that’s progress.
Fuck it, plug the headlight into the cigarette lighter.
I got a Wrangler to learn how to wrench, because it’s as close to a DIY car as possible these days – if expensive and a true addiction… and even a Wrangler will complain if you swap headlight types (e.g. from halogen to led)
I wish I wasn’t too afraid of the lack of safety in older cars (think pre OBD vintage)!
You can also unbolt the roof from a DS since these use a base unit chassis like a Rover P6, or a Pontiac Fiero. All of the exterior panels are non-structural so you can drive it as a bare chassis.
My peeve is car audio. My requirements are: FM radio, 2 or more speakers and volume greater than the road noise. Bonus would be an alternate media (CD AUX IN Bluetooth). I understand I’m in the lower end of the target audience but if you build a car with a double DIN opening in the dashboard, the audiophiles can do what they want while I can get on with my life along with a $100 radio.
Many cars still at least keep the climate control separate from the rest of the infotainment system, but I just don’t see a great way to separate the user-selectable car options (lock chirp volume, whether the doors unlock when you put it in park, and similar stuff) from music, radio, etc. without something like two separate screens.
My parents’ 2014 Sienna has a separate ~3″ screen that covers only car functions, completely separate from its head unit that is only music and entertainment functions. It’s great in theory, and would probably make replacement or upgrading it a cinch, but the 3″ screen shows the backup camera, which is pathetic.
I went through ~$1000 putting an Android Auto head unit into my 2012 Prius v. Was easier than I expected, and it’s nice having everything in one place. (Plus the car had zero good places to hold a phone by default, so not needing to do so anymore is fantastic.)
The last picture, with the car doors, brings to mind the old joke about two people walking in the desert:
Person #1: “Why are you carrying a ’53 Oldsmobile car door?”
Person #2: “If it gets too hot I can just roll the window down.”
Dude, you are speaking my language on this one. Found this out the hard way when someone did a hit/run on a newish Subaru that had to have the rear fender cut out and welded back in.
I would gladly switch back to larger panel gaps if that meant all exterior panels were non-structural and could be unbolted or unriveted and removed, like old Saturns or Fieros.
Even the roof! I live in an area where we can have massive hail storms that total cars very quickly. If the panels (and roof) could just be easily replaced then it would make for a lot less totaled cars, at least I think it would.
you can in theory replace the fenders on modern F-150’s, but those aluminum panels are very pricy. also patches or even body work on cracked or holes punched in the material means complete replacement is the likely route you have to go.
true and good point. You can unbolt a pickup bed, doors, fenders, hood on most if not all pickup trucks (save for maybe some unibody examples).
Next up: gigacasting. You won’t even be able to replace a wiper blade.
Okay, help me understand why people are freaking out about the repairability of gigacasting. Isn’t it just the chassis that’s cast? Most folks don’t repair frames anyways, I don’t see the issue.
As one of the few (if only) Autopian members who dedicated a severe amount of memory to the Saturn S-Series, I have to chime in here. The LK0/L24/LL0 engines were designed to be easily maintained by owners. Saturn even dedicated an entire two pages to their 1995 brochure to the engine layout:
https://oldcarbrochures.org/United%20States/Saturn/1995-Saturn/1995-Saturn-Full-Line-Prestige-Brochure/slides/1995_Saturn_Full_Line_Prestige-12-13.html
As the front piece of that mentioned, the transmission filter is accessible just by lifting the hood: it’s a spin-on just like the oil filter!* Unfortunately, the oil filter itself is tucked up under the power steering pump, and tended to spill used oil on the engine cradle and suspension components. The design of the transmission is what really warmed me to them: one could test the solenoids at the top of it simply by removing a minor component to access, then unplugging a connector. Swapping solenoids was, iirc, under 3 hours the first time I did it, and subsequently around an hour with familiarity.
My GF & I did an engine swap on a late SW2 in about 12 hours—her first, and I’m no professional. I came to have (initially grudging) respect for these cars as I looked after 7 of them for her and her friends If GM hadn’t cheaped out and omitted the drain back holes in the oil ring lands, I’d likely have one now. Well, that, and that manual Saturns seemed to rarely come up for sale around here unless totally worn out.
*here’s a laugh: first time I changed oil on her SL1, I removed the spin-on transmission filter. I wish she had gotten a picture of the expression on my face when I saw the color of the fluid… 🙂 I felt a little better when I read on Saturnfans that a fair few others did the same. D’oh!
Replying to myself so I might help somebody: when AAMCO rebuilds a transmission, they *test* the solenoids and leave them if in spec. If you have a transmission rebuilt, pony up for new solenoids! Their guarantee does not subsequently cover those used solenoids. Note that in many transmissions, they require splitting the case to access: costly.
This was expensive for my GF to learn, so take this to heart, people.
Yes modern cars are virtually un-repairable. It is kind of a result of overlapping safety regulations and competition for insurance ratings. Sadly, bolted on panels don’t hold up in crashes as they act poorly as crumple zones. Doors have side impact beams that block access to the sheet metal on the surface. Bumpers have dozens of sensors in them that cost more to replace than my first car. Heck, my windshield costs more to replace than my first car. It has so many cameras and sensors looking out of it, it isn’t just a replacement, it is a complete calibration as well. Then there are bunches of sacrificial foam blocks strategically placed in inaccessible spots with inaccessible prices to match. Consumer advocates used to wail about the planned obsolescence of cars in the 70’s, now it you get a small hit in a Model Y, it totals the car because the battery pack is an integral structural member. Thank god that cars never get hit with all the cool tech in the bumpers, windshield and in the clever AI mind in the dash. Don’t get me started on how much to replace all the zillions of airbags and sensors for them. They do wonderful things in crashes, but bankrupt you in a minor collision.
Copart and crazy hourly rates for body repair people also contribute. Insurance companies don’t seem to want to fully insure a repaired car, and the insane prices they are getting back from copart stuff is fueling the idea that replacing is more cost effective for them than paying for the repair and then insuring a vehicle with less value after the repair. they also seem to like to provide an unreasonable value not based upon any one book value or reasonable search of replaceable alternative locally for the owner of the vehicle.
Then you have older modern cars (early to late 00s) where manufacturers are discontinuing parts and the aftermarket parts industry is either slow to catch up or isn’t making parts at all for a particular model. Then you have lots of cars and trucks that need only simple repairs that are getting totaled because of parts availability because insurance companies refuse to pay for anything other than brand new OEM even on a 15-20 year old vehicle.
Never had the doors or front fenders off my DS, but I’m here to tell you a single bolt — and a large fixed peg — was all that held each rear fender in place. And you HAD to pop said fender off to change a flat….
But you could also drive a long way before even realizing you had a flat, thanks to that wonderful hydropneumatic suspension and its self-leveling goodness. When I finally realized (visually) that I needed to change a wheel, it was a simple matter to raise the suspension (there’s a handy lever next to the driver), insert a brace into the “jack” point, and drop the suspension. The errant wheel was then free to be removed and replaced.
While the fact that there isn’t a dress that corresponds to every available color bothers me, there’s arguably only ONE boring color!? Maybe the old days really were better.
That line drawing is a bit terrifying, though, as I’m pretty sure that space occupied by the luggage is not very impact absorbing. Get rear-ended by a truck driver who’s had one too many Bordeaux at lunch (so, like, seven I guess by old French standards) and little Chloe and Jean-Pierre are headed off to meet the great baguette maker in the sky.
I’m fairly sure that an errant 2CV or Renault Floride would pretty much bounce off the back of that Diesse.
>almost< did a spit-take there: thanks for brightening my morning coffee with that last sentence
(thumbs-up emoji)
Bump- and roll-steer are another way Modern Cars Are Definitively Worse Than that particular Old One, where they were rigorously prevented. Soft suspension and precise steering? Yes please.
I regularly have to back into a very tight spot. The best strategy is to line the vehicle up and then centre the steering and creep in. The last two vehicles I have bought have electronic power steering and centring the steering by centring the steering wheel rarely works. Something to do with the variable assist. A total pain in the ass.
Oh, and even Citroën used Tiny Advertising People (TM)! I thought they were too clever/avantgarde for that 🙁
Not even Danny DeVito would sit with his eyes in line with the bottom of the windscreen!
Coolium mines are ideal mushroom nurseries.
Creative marketing technician; “What if we stand it on its tailpipes, cover the wheel wells, and make it look like a missile ready to launch ?”
Marketing director; “DUDE! DO IT!”
Marketing director: “Excellente idée”
I usually joke that the panel gaps on the ID/DS are measured in centimeters – not in milimeters (probably funniest where people also use the metric system…), because a 50+ year old car has been taken apart and assembled so many times, and it’s only the real classic Citroën pros, who can adjust all 10 sheet metal parts right.
There isn’t even a multi plug for the many wires going to the front wings, you have to do them one by one following the 50+ year old french paper labels on the wires, if they’re still there..
And remember to reconnect the hood release wires, before closing it again, or you’ve got a couple of extra hours of fiddling with long tools in there in the darkness. Well, at least there are the before mentioned big panel gaps, so you can actually get something in there 🙂
I THINK the female models’ dresses represent the interior colors available: My black DS21 came originally with dark green seats and door cards.
“Whip the pickles” is gold.
Someone has seen The Ex with Zach Braff
Much like the final appearance for bikes has been found long ago with the diamond shape I keep thinking which cars are actually so close to the final answer on personal transportation that we may be happy using those and focus our energy on other fields.
VW Golf MkII, turbodiesel or GTI 16V
Mercedes 123 series turbodiesel or M102, preferably the utility of the station wagon
Audi and Porsche with the zinc treated metal, again diesel, this time the direct injection set the benchmark in efficiency for years
Fiat Panda and Renault Twingo, enough for clever city driving
Toyota Camry, sales numbers don’t lie
Your input is welcome and the Citroen ID/DS was actually quite efficient (aerodynamically and subsequently using less fuel than it’s contemporary choices)
Alright–I have to scare up a big envelope and send you my 1960 DS brochure, picked up in a clearance at the Simeone Foundation in Philly. The locations they choose are so, so weird. It brags about simplicity: “using the absolute minimum of fasteners” in a way that would make Sandy Munro short of breath. My favorite line in the whole thing: “Leaving far behind the vanity of nickel plate…”
Eh not so sure I agree on the more efficient part. The 90s-early 00s GM V6s all got mid 30s on the freeway, my 94 accord could get close to 40 on road trips, that’s not even getting into the stuff designed for it like the CRX HF and the Insight. Also, I feel like that was the best era for reliability too. Before everything went so completely electronic and you could still work on things with basic tools. How many ecoboost engines do you think will make it to a million miles? Yet Toyota has several cars that will do that with basic maintenance. If we’re comparing against OLD stuff, like 60s-70s then yes I agree to all of the above.
In terms of safety, speed, and comfort, yes, new cars are superior, but in terms of ease to work on, reliability and efficiency I think we have gone down over the last 20-30 years.
As the owner of many a GM V6, mid 30s is maybe possible driving 55 mph downhill with a tailwind.
The best tanks I ever got in my Grands Prix or my Lucerne were 29-30 mpg, driving at a more normal 70-75 mph. 25-28 mpg was typical.
Meanwhile these days you can buy a Camry hybrid that gets 53 highway mpg.
Really? My mom’s 1997 Olds Cutlass supreme with the 3.1 always got 35 on family road trips, and that was with 2 adults, 2 teens, and loaded with gear doing 75-90 through Wyoming. Then I had a 2000 Monte Carlo with the 3.4 and averaged upper 20s in mixed driving, and a 2001 Grand Prix with the 3.8 that I got upper 30s out of on one 2000 mile road trip.
Yes the new hybrids do great, but the first gen insight (not a comparable car I know, but it’s freaking old now, we should be better) got 60.
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but the government rates a 97 Cut Supreme at 18/26 mpg. a 00 Monte at 17/29, and an 01 GP at 17/28. Your mileage is not what a typical consumer should expect to see.
Oh they definitely were well above average, but everyone I know with those regularly exceeds the gov MPGs on those. The trans is geared so high that you can cruise at 80 and barely be above 2000 rpms.
I can confirm I had family with cars on that early aughts Impala platform that also raved about their high mileage. Regularly high 20s and 30s with reasonable highway driving was common.
I mean, given the choice between “great fuel economy” and “poor crash safety”, I’ll gladly take modern options that give you a good amount of both.
On high-octane gas, my 3.1 V6 Corsica Z52 had to be going between 65-75 for best fuel economy. Most likely because at 55 through just past 60, it had to make so many throttle corrections to hold speed even on cruise control. By 65, it could settle down and just, well, cruise. Clearly we didn’t have the high resolution/high number of digital steps in fuel injection controllers back then.
A lot of it was due to torque — give it a little fuel and it would just fling itself up to higher speed. It also made stop-and-go traffic a not-fun affair because it was entirely too easy to tickle the gas and get close to eating the next car’s rear bumper. Pretty common experience for high-performance cars (usually imports) of the era, but not normal Corsica behavior — it was rather insistent on punching above its weight.
I too tend to think of ’90s through early ’00s as a sweet spot where efficiency, longevity and reliability really came together.
Yep. OBD1 was peak mechanical/electrical reliability without being too complex to repair when things did go wrong. So much easier and better than the previous carbureted and vaccuum lined disasters that came before and the overly complex sensor on every dang piece and check engine light and limp mode for looking at me wrong of today.
Agree totally. I call this the golden age of cars.
And now I’m picturing a Harlequin ID.
Same! And I want one!