Standards have risen considerably since the introduction of MOTs. In the 1950s the condition of 20 year-old cars (and there were a lot that old) had to be seen to be believed. I bought a car with completely bald remould tyres (no tread pattern whatsoever) and sold it with the same tyres. I once (but only once!) drove a car in which you could turn the steering wheel 5" (at the rim) before the road wheels moved!
--
L\'escargot.
|
I once (but only once!) drove a car in which you could turn the steering wheel 5" (at the rim) before the road wheels moved!
That's awful! 4" was reckoned the limit for an MOT pass.
|
|
|
|
L'escargot - I know what you mean. When I was 17 ( not exactly yesterday ! ) I bought an MG Midget which had a footbrake which had no effect at all on the speed of the car, the handbrake was the only method of slowing down. When you opened the boot you could see your feet through the holes in the floor, goodness knows what the rear suspension was attached to ! Never dared to check ! Loved it to bits tho'. It was (perhaps fortunately) subsequently stolen. It was later found completely wrecked in a field. Looked as though the thief had lost control on a bend and gone involuntary off-roading. I kind of thought it was poetic justice at the time ! It's condition didn't seem too unusual at the time but now we just have to look back and shudder !
|
|
|
|
Due to the relative afforability of new cars, the prevalence of company cars and the abundance of ex company cars, cars beyond five or six years old in this country lose so much value they are then not looked after beacuse it is not worth spending a lot on something of little value, it is a vicious circle.
To the contrary in Scandinavia where tax on new cars is very high and company cars are less prevelent there are a lot of cherished 10+ year old cars on the roads.
|
"To the contrary in Scandinavia where tax on new cars is very high and company cars are less prevelent there are a lot of cherished 10+ year old cars on the roads"
Not sure about that. Here in Sweden, GM are just advertising the Meriva and Zafira (without the annoying northern kids) starting at £11,110. The cheapest new Meriva on Lookers (in England) is £10495. And they're advertising the Chrysler 300C for £22,200. And they're list prices.
It's true there are quite a few old cars, but only Volvos. There are 1988 Volvo 240's going for serious money. A reasonable one will sell for £2 - 3K easily. As a rule of thumb, an old 240/740/940 etc will be worth at least twice as much as anything else of the same age.
There was an article on the motoring programme here the other day about customer satisfaction with Volvo. It seems the Swedes have cottoned on to the fact that they're nothing special anymore, and are buying other makes. They've realised that dressed up Fords are not very durable or reliable, and worst of all, they're rusting! Never heard of before on newish Volvos.
|
|
Perhaps today for "Scandinavia" read "Denmark", I should say that my experience in that region in not that recent though I stand by the principals of the point. Mid 90's a family saloon was nearly twice the price in Denmark (and at the time in Sweden) than here, accordingly 5 and 10 year old vehicles were worth more and were thus better maintained.
Edited by cheddar on 22/11/2007 at 09:49
|
|
I'm not so sure this "the poor have lower standards" is as clear cut as people are suggesting. Could it not be that second hand cars are so cheap now that almost anyone can afford to buy one, yet maintenance is increasingly expensive, so gets skimped on? Not through choice but necessity. I can't see a sensible person on minimum wage with a couple of kids shelling out on Autoglym car care products, but they could probably afford to run a car of some sort at a basic level of maintenance.
|
|
|
Wasn't there a recent survey claiming that 30% of motorists never have their car serviced unless it breaks down? Based on people I know, I reckon that could be conservative.
In my opinion, the value argument mentioned above has a lot to do with why the "premium" brands are perceived to be more reliable than the mainstream brands. If a 6 year old 3 series needs £600 worth of maintenance, it is much more likely to get it than say a 6 year old Mondeo needing the same thing on the grounds that a 6 year old 3-series could still be worth £10k and the Mondeo is likely to be worth £2k.
After a few situations like this, the BMW will be running well while the Mondeo is likely to have a few unfixed faults and be feeling decidely more secondhand. Used values are partly built on this kind of thing, hence it feeds the whole cycle again.
I'm not saying there are no other reasons for a 3-series to be worth more than a Mondeo by the way - I'm just using them as an example.
Cheers
DP
--
04 Grand Scenic 1.9 dCi Dynamique
00 Mondeo 1.8TD LX
|
|
Perhaps we need documented maintenance for cars, as with aircraft, in addition to an MOT?
|
Who are today's 'poor' anyway?
Those with not much money and no inclination to feed the banks or the treasury by trying to run a motor they can't afford?
Or maybe those with houses worth more than a quarter of a million (at the moment, allegedly, but ask again this time next year!) and a shiny company-subsidised motor on the driveway but not enough cash in their pocket to keep the fuel level warning light off?
|
|
Its not what the house is worth, it is what is owed on it, we have near neighbours with a mortgage that is 3x ours and another with no mortgage at all.
|
|
In 1950 I wonder what the proportion of cars was that were involved in accidents of all types; and what the proportion of deaths to accidents was, versus today?
|
Are stats available which say how many accidents are the result of a maintenance and mechanical failures?
I suspect it's a small number, although doubtlessly inflated by unscrupulous types who would prefer to blame the accident on the car rather than admit their carp driving.
Number_Cruncher
|
|
|
If you (or anyone) have to live somewhere and you can't afford to buy another home without selling the existing one for its full 'value' then in useful terms it isn't actually worth anything at all...:-)
|
...>> If you (or anyone) have to live somewhere and you can't afford to buy anotherhome without selling the existing one for its full 'value' then in useful terms it isn't actually worth anything at all...:-)
unless of course you move to France! Where 2nd hand cars cost a lot cf UK.
--
pmh (was peter)
|
I've just remembered the 1936 Wolseley 14 which I bought in 1956. When it got up to about 45 mph it invariably developed a front wheel wobble. The only thing to do then was to slow down to a standstill, before starting off again. I think I can safely say my standards have improved, not lowered! I don't suppose front wheel wobble is something that most Backroomers have experienced. Unless you know different .......!
--
L\'escargot.
|
wheel wobble is something that most Backroomers have experienced. Unless you >> know different .......!
It's very familiar to Land-Rover Series drivers; afficionados refer to it as "wibble-wobble" and - as you say - once begun, it can only be overcome by slowing to a crawl.
It's caused by resonance in the front leaf-springs after hitting a lateral-axis bump . A slight increase in static toe-in is the easiest cure.
|
|
can you not just slap the steering wheel then ;-~)
|
It's caused by resonance in the front leaf-springs after hitting a lateral-axis bump .
Mine was caused by all the excessive free-play in all the suspension and steering joints. The car was fit only for the scrap-heap, and that's where I eventually took it!
--
L\'escargot.
|
If it's the same phenomenon I'm thinking off, it might be called shimmy.
Where there's some slack in the joints, and you have an axle rather than an independent set up, you can get the situation that as the wheel rises, it pivots in camber - owing to the wheel spinning, you get a gyroscopic torque that tries to turn the wheel as if to steer. The slop allows this, and the wheel turns. You then get another gyroscopic torque that slams the wheel back down onto the road. The poorly damped wheel bounces, and the cycle continues. The vibration builds up becuase it takes its energy not from the bumps, but from the forward motion of the car, and that's why you have to come to a stop to stop it.
Eliminating slop, and making sure that there's enough damping will stop the problem. If there's no slop, the wheel can't steer, and you don't get the groscopic torque - you're usually stuck with some amount of coupling between bump and camber, depending upon your suspension set-up, so that source of gyroscopic torque is difficult to be rid of completely.
Number_Cruncher
|
NC
If you'd ever seen a Series do this, then you'd realize why steering "shimmy" doesn't even begin to cover it.
If you stick your head out of the rough area of where the window used to be, the whole front axle is slamming 6" from side to side in virtually a blur. The vehicle shakes so violently that your jaw hurts; slowing down until it ceases is the - only - option, jellification of your internal organs is imminent.
A front wheel hits the side of a depression that causes three hundredweigh of axle to move laterally away from the impact. As the steering track-rods are in front of the axle line, this creates a steering input that exacerbates the axle's movement on the leaf-springs.
Once the axle has forced the springs to their lateral distortion limit; then a reaction is created that slams the axle back, past it's median point and on to it's opposite limit - aided, once again, by an auto-generated steering input.
Certain makes of tyre were particularly prone to initiating this phenomenon; slack in the steering didn't help, but keeping a slight load on the tyres from extra toe-in was the best way to prevent it starting.
Edited by Screwloose on 23/11/2007 at 14:29
|
>>If you'd ever seen a Series do this
Thankfully, no, it's something I haven't experienced. As the area where I used to work was quite rural, we used to see a lot of Land Rovers, and even from the posher customers one or two Range Rovers. Apologies to those on here who are devotess, but IMO, they're all awful things, best avoided unless you have an off-road use for one.
For a while, I was a member of the Northern Off Road Club**, and I looked after a Land Rover that entered the competitions. Despite looking rugged, not many of the series Land Rovers would last an event without needing some attention. Awful things.
**(a temporary aberration!, the scales fell from my eyes as I watched the Simmonites winning everything largely by virtue of throwing lots of money at their car - perhaps I'm an idealist, but I think sport should have some semblance of a level playing field to be worth competing in)
Number_Cruncher
|
I think sport should have some semblance of a level playing field to be worth competing in
I'm sure Spyker used to think the same....
|
I was following an army Land Rover along the Falls Road in Belfast once when this violent dynamic oscillation of the front wheels set in. The whole vehicle shuddered violently like a jelly and had to slow to a crawl. The squaddies in the back, whose rifles were pointed loosely at the road in front of my hired Fiesta, were all falling about with laughter, slightly alarmingly under the circumstances.
My first car, a thirties six-cylinder Fiat, used to do it too. In its case though the fault may have had something to do with the offside rear leaf spring, whose front shackle had torn out of the rusty monocoque and come up through the back seat.
|
|
Indeed they do cost more - but they depreciate more slowly so it's a bit 'swings and roundabouts' really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
