in what ways are new cars better than old cars (if that's what you think)?
#61
Electric power steering is way better than hydraulic power steering. My wife's 06 Civic blew a power steering line again, I guess the aftermarket replacement was low quality. We replaced it with an OEM line from a junkyard Civic. When I had my 99 Accord, I had to replace the power steering line when it cracked during a cold snap. Zero issues in -50c weather with the CX-9.
Something I noticed about Toyota/Lexus
Land Cruiser 300 with the 3.5tt uses hydraulic power steering
Lexus LX with the same 3.5tt uses electric power steering.
Yup
New cars will almost always be better. I think what people dont like in newer cars is that it can be overcomplicated. Its great that new road cars can go 0-60 in 4s or even much faster, but then they might have to go through 2 or 3 layers of menus to turn on the heat on some cars. Or adaptive this, self driving that, super that and etc. Imagine having a fast modern car and I can just reach over a twist a button to turn the heat on. I know, its a novel concept.
Last edited by Toys4RJill; 02-21-23 at 12:58 PM.
#62
#63
I loved my BB as well, but the CEO at the time wouldn't let his go! Everybody had moved on to Android or iPhones, but we had to keep a BB Enterprise server running just for him! Finally I had to show him the costs of running a dedicated BB server just for him, and he finally relented and we got him a Samsung Galaxy. As far as I know, he still only uses the Galaxy's.
BTW, I didn't save that BB for nostalgia reasons. I'm just a packrat. It's been sitting in my work cabinet since 2010 LOL
BTW, I didn't save that BB for nostalgia reasons. I'm just a packrat. It's been sitting in my work cabinet since 2010 LOL
#65
I didn’t say that at all. I said that cars designed after 2012 (when the small overlap test was implemented) are safer because they were designed to perform in that test.
I said I would not put my family in a car not designed to perform well in that test, because I want them to be in as safe a car as is possible. What’s hard to understand about that?
I said I would not put my family in a car not designed to perform well in that test, because I want them to be in as safe a car as is possible. What’s hard to understand about that?
It's not like I'm bringing up a car from 1963 and comparing it to a 460. I just think we've hit a point where we're getting very diminished returns for safety on the cars manufactured in the last 20 years compared to the 20 years prior to that, then the 20 years before that.
It's like the Pacifica example you gave. You are strongly considering keep it but you likely won't because it doesn't have lane centering abilities. Perhaps that feature prevents the van from being rated (for safety) as high as one with the function, yet they are basically the same exact vehicle and there are tons of people who wouldn't even care if it had it or even use it. They would probably just turn it off.
#66
Thread Starter
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 75,640
Likes: 2,589
From: Present
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/car...you-think.html
You forgot "go back and look at the doorframe to find out what they SHOULD be". Hell I just topped both cars off less than 2 weeks ago (thanks to TPMS letting me know that my pressure had dropped more than I expected due to a cold snap. Thanks TPMS!) and I couldn't tell you what the spec is for the F/R pressure on each car.
People sometimes resist change for good reason. Old cars, even with their acknowledged limitations compared to new ones, are often much more satisfying to drive, having a personality and character to them that simply doesn't exist any more with today's rolling-appliances.
Part of it, too, was that not just the cars, but the roads themselves were more fun to drive on back then, being more picturesque and scenic from less development, and not just traffic-choked strips of pavement like they are today.
I loved my BB as well, but the CEO at the time wouldn't let his go! Everybody had moved on to Android or iPhones, but we had to keep a BB Enterprise server running just for him! Finally I had to show him the costs of running a dedicated BB server just for him, and he finally relented and we got him a Samsung Galaxy. As far as I know, he still only uses the Galaxy's.
#67
He's a very good CEO and inventor, built many companies in the Bay Area, some of the medical devices used in hospitals today were invented by him and are standards of care. He moved on from his BB in 2010, and now you wouldn't catch him without his Samsung Galaxy (never more than two years old), so he's adapted well enough
#68
You said you wanted the safest car you could possibly get for your family. I just think it's a bit overblown when presented with the example I gave. Two very, very safe cars overall. One just slightly less safe according to a comprehensive safety test, yet this car has every other feature imaginable to you where the one just barely safer is a no frills econobox.
This is a 2014 Pilot, designed before the new test:
This is the next generation, redesigned because of this test:
Which would you rather be in? 2014 driver is seriously injured or dead, 2016 driver is likely uninjured. Not a small difference.
It's not like I'm bringing up a car from 1963 and comparing it to a 460. I just think we've hit a point where we're getting very diminished returns for safety on the cars manufactured in the last 20 years compared to the 20 years prior to that, then the 20 years before that.
It's like the Pacifica example you gave. You are strongly considering keep it but you likely won't because it doesn't have lane centering abilities. Perhaps that feature prevents the van from being rated (for safety) as high as one with the function, yet they are basically the same exact vehicle and there are tons of people who wouldn't even care if it had it or even use it. They would probably just turn it off.
Last edited by SW17LS; 02-21-23 at 03:10 PM.
#69
People sometimes resist change for good reason. Old cars, even with their acknowledged limitations compared to new ones, are often much more satisfying to drive, having a personality and character to them that simply doesn't exist any more with today's rolling-appliances. Part of it, too, was that not just the cars, but the roads themselves were more fun to drive on back then, being more picturesque and scenic from less development, and not just traffic-choked strips of pavement like they are today.
It seems everybody has their own interpretation of what it means and its clashing with other's thoughts.
So what do you all mean by Better Car? More Character? Easier to live with? More space? More refinement? More Raw? More engine noise? Less engine noise?
I think its this discrepancy that leads to the endless circular arguments we see here on Car Chat. I feel we need to learn that there is no one correct answer and respect what other's opinions are even if they are different than what our particular Tribe believes in.
#71
#72
Everything outside of the passenger cage is expendable. All you have to do is look at crash test videos of old cars vs new cars and the difference in how that passenger cage holds up is obvious.
Yes I have. My cars still have personality and character.
I want the "slightly more safe". And the difference between a car performing well in the small overlap crash test and performing poorly is not a slight difference. Its the difference between being dead and being alive.
This is a 2014 Pilot, designed before the new test:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SPBd108Sfc
This is the next generation, redesigned because of this test:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMtOcKK6I4o
Which would you rather be in? 2014 driver is seriously injured or dead, 2016 driver is likely uninjured. Not a small difference.
That is just completely untrue. Just look at the crash tests, and look at passenger fatality stats. Modern cars are dramatically safer.
The lane centering tech is not for safety, its because it makes the vehicle much more relaxing to drive on a long trip. Most consumers want this technology, which is why its developed and added to cars.
Yes I have. My cars still have personality and character.
I want the "slightly more safe". And the difference between a car performing well in the small overlap crash test and performing poorly is not a slight difference. Its the difference between being dead and being alive.
This is a 2014 Pilot, designed before the new test:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SPBd108Sfc
This is the next generation, redesigned because of this test:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMtOcKK6I4o
Which would you rather be in? 2014 driver is seriously injured or dead, 2016 driver is likely uninjured. Not a small difference.
That is just completely untrue. Just look at the crash tests, and look at passenger fatality stats. Modern cars are dramatically safer.
The lane centering tech is not for safety, its because it makes the vehicle much more relaxing to drive on a long trip. Most consumers want this technology, which is why its developed and added to cars.
I get that modern cars are safer but modern stretches back 15 or so years. I don't believe that a 2019 is a death trap or some unsafe vehicle that shouldn't be on the road like you think.
#73
Okay what exactly is the criteria for "Better"?
It seems everybody has their own interpretation of what it means and its clashing with other's thoughts.
So what do you all mean by Better Car? More Character? Easier to live with? More space? More refinement? More Raw? More engine noise? Less engine noise?
I think its this discrepancy that leads to the endless circular arguments we see here on Car Chat. I feel we need to learn that there is no one correct answer and respect what other's opinions are even if they are different than what our particular Tribe believes in.
It seems everybody has their own interpretation of what it means and its clashing with other's thoughts.
So what do you all mean by Better Car? More Character? Easier to live with? More space? More refinement? More Raw? More engine noise? Less engine noise?
I think its this discrepancy that leads to the endless circular arguments we see here on Car Chat. I feel we need to learn that there is no one correct answer and respect what other's opinions are even if they are different than what our particular Tribe believes in.
#74
This is just my opinion @xjokerz but you seem overly fixated on this issue, which is why people keep replying back to you. If I can offer some insight, I think you should just enjoy the cars you like and not worry about what others say, like or don't like. Otherwise it's just never ending circular arguments that continue until eventual thread closure
#75
There are a ton of variables as to how the car would crash in the real world and if/how occupants would be injured. I also don't believe every study done on the internet. You fell for that comparison video because that's exactly what Honda engineers want you to believe: the newest car is so much safer than even a slightly older one. This makes them money since the consumer will think "my goodness, I need to buy a brand new car because even though my current car is 2 or 3 years old, it's a death trap and the new one will save my life."
I get that modern cars are safer but modern stretches back 15 or so years. I don't believe that a 2019 is a death trap or some unsafe vehicle that shouldn't be on the road like you think.
I get that modern cars are safer but modern stretches back 15 or so years. I don't believe that a 2019 is a death trap or some unsafe vehicle that shouldn't be on the road like you think.
You believe what you want, I’ll drive newer and much safer cars thanks…