Videokarma.org

Go Back   Videokarma.org TV - Video - Vintage Television & Radio Forums > Things with Motors

Notices

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old 11-01-2019, 10:25 PM
MadMan's Avatar
MadMan MadMan is offline
The Resident Brony
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telecolor 3007 View Post
But why in the early '60's they didn't designed a engine that would be a little more modern and offer a liitle more power at let's say 50 cubic inches less then the models of engines that where still existing.
Actually, the early 60s were a time when engines were very powerful and (reasonably) efficient. Higher compression ratios were common, and new(ish) technologies were being employed. Like hydraulic valve lifters, hemispherical combustion chamber (Hemi!), overhead valves, small blocks (making big displacement motors physically smaller), etc. But then catalytic converters became mandatory and kind of ruined the power (and efficiency) numbers of engines in the 60s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telecolor 3007 View Post
But the modern engines where a little bit more economic?
I've heard that the focus mainly on price was something that affected in a bad way the American industry.
Well focus on the bottom line sometimes does make problems. But normally competition drives companies to find new ways to make things simpler, and therefore cheaper.

As for efficiency, gas was cheap back in the day. Even if it wasn't quite as cheap as you might imagine, people didn't care, they just kept filling up. The economy must have been better back then. To be fair, gas is still pretty cheap in America compared to... literally most other countries in the world. It's probably about $3.00 per gallon (~4L) where I'm at, right now. And people complain about the price. But then you go to Europe and it's probably two or three times that. So fuel economy really was not a pressing issue. Hell, it still isn't, really, but people here like to imagine that it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandy G View Post
There's also a video where a 1959-60 model 4 door Chevy gets smacked in the front by a more modern car. It made me SICK not only because the crash test dummies got a real workout-bouncing around all over the car, but because the Shivverlay looked to initially be in really good shape... Then when the impact happened, you saw all the RUST comin' out from everywhere..
I've seen that video. I think the obvious frame rust played a major part in that, but also, most cars back then were not as tank-like as people see in their rose-tinted hindsight goggles. Those cars were big on the outside, but sort of hollow on the inside. Modern cars are much more densely packed.

Last edited by MadMan; 11-01-2019 at 10:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
 



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:30 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©Copyright 2012 VideoKarma.org, All rights reserved.