BTW, not all of those worn out cars from the 50's and 60's immediately went to the junkyard. They were the source of many $50 or $100 cars that me and my buddies would drive as teenagers, and we drove them until the wheels fell off. :-) After that is when they ended up in the junkyard.
Or ended up in Sweden for renovation and now they are in better condition than new. Sweden have American car meets with up to 24 000 old Americans cars at the same time. Pretty impressive. www.wired.com/2017/03/axel-oberg-swedish-greasers-power-big-meet/
In my neck of the woods, they were turned into dirt track racers. I can remember 1955-1957 chevys and everything else being destroyed weekly during the early 1970's on a 1/3 mile clay track..
My wife and I emigrated to Canada over 30 years ago. We started collecting these 60's and 70's giants while they were still relatively plentiful. Now, driving a Colony Park station wagon makes us celebrities as people gather around in the parking lots, remembering their childhoods growing up with these giants. We have to smile as they leave in their BMW's and Lexus, wishing they still had their old woody wagon. An excellent documentary. Thank you Sir!
I drive a 1972 LTD Country Squire. The ultimate Brady Bunch machine in original paint of olive green / woodgrain. You are right. People react like it is a Lamborghini or Bugatti...
We had an '83 Colony Park when I was growing up (actually, my parents were forced to get it because of me - before that, my parents and 3 sibs could all fit into any car just fine). When my 2 kids were little, I bought an '85 Country Squire, which I had for only about a year and a half before I was afforded the rare opportunity to upgrade to an '88 Grand Wagoneer. It most certainly is true - you can't beat the classics!
All of the straight 6s were about bullet proof back then with the slant six really quite something. Until everything went to hell, nobody wanted a v6. Buick started producing them around 1976 again because of the cafe' problems but they actually had one in the early sixties. A succession of updates on the design turned it into a very tough engine that continued into the 2000s. Wonderful engine, the last version - 3800 really was - 200 to 260 hp. Used in all GM cars at one time. It was used in the Buick Grand National in the mid 80's, a turbocharged engine and quite fast.
@@montymatilda I’ve owned (and still own) cars with L8, L6, V8 and /6 and the durability of the /6 (especially its resistance to abuse) is something else. The manifolds are a different story though. :D The stove bolt sixes from the interbellum and a decade after WWII are also very forgiving but have their power limitations. I’ve owned (and still own) cars with their original engines still going strong after 70 odd years. Okay, they don’t have to put up with modern abuse and mileages but it does say something about the sturdiness of these machines. The seventies were a forebode of the limitations of ICE when it comes to performance, durability and mileage. That’s where companies like Toyota stepped in.
@@RustOnWheels Gosh, you own some interesting vehicles/engines. As a child, I remember a couple of relatives that had the L8 in a Pontiac and a Buick. I was fascinated by the exhaust note being so different and nice. They were automatics. They were also factory standard. I love the sound of a V8 except when the exhaust is so loud and popping you cannot hear the engine. A buddy and I had 63/64 Impala SS 409s and we used the standard exhaust with Corvair turbo mufflers. Deep throaty sound but no crackle a popping. The 80's and up Buick v6 sounded nice. IIRC, the Honda Civic rolled into dealers about 1975. They were all the rage where I live. You couldn't even test drive one without giving them $500 and signing a contract. I won't do that with any car, so never got to drive one.
My family had a 74 LTD with a 400 V8. Despite all its faults it could eat an econobox for lunch in an accident and when gas prices plummeted in the 89's and 90's the fuel economy wasn't a problem anymore. My mom drove it on a 120mi daily commute and we had to fill up the tank every other day. Fortunately gas was only $0.75/gal in the mid 90's so it wasn't a big deal. Eventually put 380,000 miles on it before we gave up and purchased a second hand 97 accord in 1999.
Those engines didn't have to be weak and inefficient. I bought a 1975 Dodge station wagon with a 400 V8 (6.6 liter) in 1988. It weighed 3 tons, got 28 mpg on the highway and 22 in the city, and at emissions testing had 0% unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust. I achieved this through the simple measures of frequent maintenance, driving with a light foot (using the optional Fuel Minder system that warned when you were burning fuel inefficiently), and buying premium gas. Sadly, I lent it to a friend and he destroyed the transmission.
My father also had an LTD. From the day it rolled off the dealer's floor (New!) it was repair after repair. US auto makers cared nothing for quality nor its customers. My father, who was bitterly anti-Japanese from his war experience, only bought Toyotas since.
Well two of them are. Unless Chrysler's been building pickups I didn't know about (Note: I'm only going off commercials, in which the only ads for "Heavy Duty Pickups" are from either GMC or Ford)
Exactly right, 3.5 ton leather-clad chrome-plated four-door monstrosities, equipped with ubiquitous but entirely unnecessary 4-wheel drive (in most cases) and a bed free of scratched paint. Used to be that trucks were made for work.
The 'malaise' fall in power outputs in the mid-70s was caused first primarily by emissions reduction requirements. The fuel efficiency drive came later & was accomplished with smaller displacements and taller axle ratios, even further diminishing performance.
It was also the switch from SAE Gross horsepower to SAE Net engines. Before 1972, automakers basically lied about engine performance. Forget all that “underrated from the factory” BS. No.. these engines were bolted to a stand, had a prony brake clamped down on them.. and with no air cleaner or exhaust manifold and no accessories not even a water pump they were run until the engine seized and the highest number was what went into the brochure.
Yes Boggy well said and true. But I believe it’s still true. Detroit, or what’s left of it is still in the midst of that so called 70’s malaise ! And it’s the fault & failure of the former ‘ big 3’ because they ignored the Japanese model of car making , and doggedly followed with cars like Pintos, Vegas and others , which the American buyers wouldn’t purchase. And now isn’t GM just a shell of itself ? Chrysler , to survive has been shoved into a marriage with French and Japanese makers, and maybe Ford is the most alert of all these days , with innovation of electrics, the new Bronco , and their updated pickups. I’m still stunned by the way GM cancelled the Oldsmobile and Pontiac models. It’s still their shame because they could have revamped with some exciting news models and kept each division albeit on a smaller scale !
_"diminishing performance"_ - you had better define that. I reckon that anything that improves the chances of my grandchildren's children's existence I would define as *_increasing performance._*
The problem was that rather than develop more efficient engines they just detuned the engine worse and worse, making it eat fuel much faster and make less power but produce less emissions per litre, and pass the emissions tests. This lazy direction is why the emissions regulations ruined the power output.
@@justanotheryoutubechannel It was preferable (believe me) to adding *_tetra-ethyl lead_* to the fuel to improve its compression efficiency. Lead is poisonous to human beings - though no longer as dangerous as the use of petrol (gasoline) itself.
Chrysler did not buy Jeep from AMC. Chrysler purchased AMC and promptly plan to close everything down that was not Jeep. There was a short-lived eagle brand.
THAT is correct....Chrysler bought out AMC and closed the Kenosha plant and kept the Jeep Toledo plant, as they knew that Jeep was going to be a good (or as we see today) a fabulous investment.. When John Ricardo ran Chrysler in the mid seventies, he adamantly stated that "Americans will never buy a small car".....boy was he ever WRONG!! That along with a decline in quality control, almost killed the marque....
@@SSGTA440 Chrysler kept open until 2004, AMC's Kenosha engine plant to make derivatives of AMC's 1964 straight 6 for the Jeeps. Kenosha also built a Chrysler design V6.
Cars of the fifties and sixties were works of art. I had a 1977 and a 1978 T-Bird land yacht. Full tank and I could cruise for around 500 miles before fill up.
@@seed_drill7135 The Buick V6 was sold to Kaiser which used it in Jeeps. After AMC bought Jeep in 1969, the Buick V6 was retired in favor of AMC inline 6s. As you say, AMC sold the tooling back to GM which put it back into production quickly, having never demolished or repurposed its factory site where it had been produced. AMC never used a V6 in any of its passenger cars. AMC did use a later GM V6 in the 1984 XJ compact Jeep, but soon substituted its own inline 6.
Buick V6 was a simple cut-down 90 degree V8, not good for balance. The Italians and Ford developed the V6 properly later on but they stayed niche until the mid/late 80s with FWD adoption.
Chrysler’s brand name sucks so bad in Europe they rebrand the few cars that are sold there with other names like Lancia and Fiat. Lancia Voyager former Chrysler Voyager. The funny thing is Lancia and Fiat are just slightly better than the Chrysler brand, none of these names are associated with quality.
The government prints the money, and instead lending them the money, let the banks make business with the government guarantee. Capitalists always win and use the capitalist state for that.
I'm an American and lived through part of the American car culture history that you were talking about. I'm 55 years old and it is interesting to sit back and listen to you and take the opinion of someone not from America, I'm not offended though and much of what you say was truthful and it does make sense of why OPEC was created and has made the American peoples economy suffer! Its unfortunately true how much are American government"CIA" etc. does work against the common American citizen In their unbridled lobbyist pursuit of backing huge corporations! I believe we the people lost control of our government between the 50s and the early 60s if not even before, pretty sad just look at our recent election????
No I'm not disrespecting America I'm just disrespecting this overgrown government we have built by corporate lobbyists and if people feel that way that's their problem! I love my country and the people in it ! The government need's some serious overhauling for a long time now and improving is all I'm pointing a finger to! But then it goes back to we the People right to make the improvements! Jedi I wouldn't worry about it man people are going to hate anyway there's haters out there you know our government's not perfect! Peace to all my friends and Merry Christmas 🎄⛄🎄!
The planned obsolescence was not that the cars would only last a few years but rather to offer new designs and new technology frequently so that the previous models would seem dated and consumers would desire more modern designs and technology.
Exactly! Glad someone else caught that. The cars were still well made very well (unless you lived in a rust belt state and then it really isn't the car companies fault), just lots of model updates.
The fuel consumption was better than my 2018 Subaru! That's a fact! The Lincolns easily achieved 24 to 27 miles per gallon on the highway, I know that because I owned several new Lincolns of this era. They were luxurious, comfortable, stable, and reliable. The only negative thing about it that I can remember is the padding on the glove compartment lid would curl over time. We lived on the sea coast so rust proofing was a must with all cars of this era.
You must’ve had a 6 cylinder or turbo model to get worse than 27 MPG highway. Subaru has always had lower than average MPG due to the design of their engines/drivetrain, though the 2011 overhaul and introduction of the CVT resolved it for the most part. My 2019 Outback easily does 35-40 MPG highway and 27 overall...
I had always heard that to own a Subaru you had to have a short haircut, wear flannel and jeans, have a wallet with a chain attached to a belt loop, and wear black motorcycle boots. Correct?
Gosh... So succinct. These distilled histories are rarely free of detail errors, but this one makes few. Chapeau to the maker of this piece. You have caught the essence of the social realities, the political changes and the engineering trends. Good video.
In 1975, Japanese car maker Daihatsu, was selling a four door, sub compact, tested repeatedly giving 68 miles per US gallon. Seventy five UK gallon. So amazed were testing organisations, the tests were redone, refined and finally hidden from the driving public.
The exploding Ford Pinto's were only the "Runabout" hatchback model, and it wasn't technically a design flaw - it was a last minute before production bean-counter cost-saving scheme. The subsequent recall saw Ford installing a part that cost less than 1 dollar (1970's prices) per car - a part that the designers/engineers had originally specified to be installed on the cars.
Ford did not learn from the Pintos. In the 90's Ford had the same problem with exploding Crown Victorias and Lincoln Town Cars when hit from the rear. Again. a shield had to be installed to correct the issue.
The clasdic case we learnt in law about product liability, just as its implications were coming across from the US into Europe. Sickening decision making by Ford, and the best reason for prohibitive damages.
The Pinto "Exploding" when hit from behind wasn't "Location of the fuel tank", but actually from Ford trying to save 11 cents per car by not including the rubber gasket that isolated the fuel tank from the side of the car body. When the car was rear-ended, the tank moved position, and sheared off the fuel spout, thus causing sparks to ignite the gas fumes in the filler tube.
And a lot of people don’t know that Jeep had a prob with exploding gas tanks on some jeeps in the ‘80s and early ‘90s, when equipped with a towing receiver .
Wow, that was a brilliant and succinct analysis, speaking as a retired British industrial designer. What was the name of the aliens that destroyed Earth for a galactic bypass? ("Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy") - Vogons, weren't they? Whatever . . . SUV's, resistance to Climate Change, resistance to renewable energy transport . . . these guys are still evolving. Thanks, anyway, for resolving some of my stresses.
IIRC, around 1971-72 they began rating HP at the rear wheels instead of the crankshaft, which caused a significant drop in numerical HP. But I can tell you that the engines in the 400 - 500 cube range even in the later 1970s could still move out those land yachts pretty well.
I had the 74 Delta 88 Royale convertible. 455/4BBl, Red, white interior and top...the cops should've pulled us over every Saturday night but for some reason never did. They'd just pull along side, nod and smile. We'd invite them to come along but they we're on duty. Funny thing is, I don't even remember selling it.
Around two minutes in, you state that they cars were powered by V6 and V8 engines, this is incorrect. Practically all six cylinder engines at this point were inline.
With lots of distortions due to his lack of understanding and seeking exceptions as typical. Look at his most popular videos for his real area of interest.
@@gioneraeciofi111 I did in a later comment saying - Lots of distortions here. Does not understand the late 50s demand for smaller cars with Rambler and Studebaker doing so well. Led soon after to the Ford Falcon, Chrysler Valiant and chev Corvair. All six cylinder lighter cars. Then soon after the chev nova. Except Corvair all were inline sixes. Falcon sold near as many as the Mustang in its early years and the Mustang was based on it. Quotes the largest engine option as being standard, but even full size were mostly in line sixes until the late sixties. VW Beetle impact ignored. Although the Valiant started in 1960 I think. Darts were much larger until 1963. Saw elsewhere how the Falcon was heading to 3 million sales by 1966, so not trivial numbers, unlike the 500 cui Eldorado.
Alive and well for the well to do. A friend just bought a nice 2020 Tahoe. $74k. Yikes. Try buying anything with a V-8 now brand new. Rare as hens teeth.
Agree, the new full size pick-up trucks are some of the biggest pick-up trucks ever made. They are gigantic. Not only that they are very expensive, even a 3 year old Ford F150 is selling at $30k.
Correct. Desinged-in failure of major components around an engine that should reliably last 300k. The folks getting burned are not those with the wherewithal to purchase a new vehicle. Pisses me off. I will never own another big-3 auto again.
@@ssbn6175 I've owned many of the big three and decided I was tired of throwing money away and the inconvenience of repairs . I have owned three Toyota's now . A Tercel , Corolla and presently I have a Tacoma and all have been worry free . You pay more up front but save in the long haul .
Great video but a couple of things. The EPA did not bring out the Clean Air Act. The clean air act was a law passed by Congress which created the EPA. Don't forget, an American gallon is about 80% the size of an English gallon.
@@JerkVegas86 I could name one, bat one would take a lot of time to explain. as short as possible. The hatred of the Islamic world against the USA did not start with the creation of Israel, or the support of the USA for Israel. the Barbary pirate states of the Islamic world is a topic I'd advise you to look up. As far as the Jew-Hatred in the Islamic world, this goes back to the founding years of Islam, to the time when Islam came the Jewish-Pagan settlement of Yathrib, today knows as Medina.
True! To use the word quality infers that there may have been some to begin with. Many of the late 60's and early seventies left much to be desired in fit and finish. GM's low end models were sloppy. The cheap, molded plastics discolored and desintegrated smelling of ripe arm pit as they did. So, to say that they stunk would be an accurate statement.
Funny timing I’ve just bought an LTD Crown Victoria lol. Being a 1989 model, it does have fuel injection, but it’s just a facelift of the model from 1980, downsized compared to those early 70s LTD’s in the video, but still very big, with a 302 V8 making only 150hp. At least the torque rating is pretty good. Fuel economy not so much lol. Nothing prepares you for the amount of room you feel around you in a car of that size with a bench seat, it’s really so comfortable around a town or city.
89 Crown Vic's are quite attractive, to me, even though we know it is an old platform. They really didn't change it when the new ones came out in 92. Nor did Chevy. I have an 89 Lincoln Town Car, same engine set-up and I am quite happy to get a consistent 21 mpg. I am with you on how comfortable they are. I have had mine since 94.
There were NO Minivans or Crossovers in 1975. SUV's were considered trucks and did not sell as were a fraction of a full sized car at the time allowing the exemptions to the CAFE standards. Also many 5 litre engines in domestic cars got 15 to over 20 miles to the gallon. Inline 6 engines were getting well over 20.
This era was the last generation of distinct styling. In the 80's everything began to look the same and lost their uniqueness. It is no wonder we have alarms to find our own cars these days.
There's so much nostalgia for the styling of the golden era cars, they're being resurrected from Junkyards, barns and vacant land in order to restore them to their former appearance on the exterior with all the state of the art latest drive trains, suspension and braking, electronics and cosmetic interiors. Completed, these restomods can cost more than the newest high price range assembly line products, however, when maintained, they always appreciate in value while their assembly line competitors depreciate considerably then after time head for the Junk Yards, Barns and vacant land.
Nah. In my opinion, restomods are for people who don't appreciate vintage cars as they are enough. My perspective is that if you want to go vintage, either go all the way or don't even bother. Of course, this is just my own opinion. People can do whatever they want to their cars as long as they own them.
Very fascinating video essay! Good information. Planned obsolescence is still a thing, which is why I drive Nissan's today. We had a new 1998 Ford Expedition; gorgeous vehicle inside, but so mechanically over engineered that at around 54,000 miles, parts began to fail... a lot. Our last new Ford was a 2002 Ford Ranger that began to exhibit the same problems after 30,000 miles. We also bought a new Saturn Vue that had parts literally falling off of it starting at around 12,000 miles. It totally died when it hit 76k. We tried a Honda for a few years; a CR-Z, bought new. Great gas mileage (Hybrid), and ride, but the overall fit and finish were horrendous! The paint began to crackle after a year, the interior looked equally as ragged. So not all imports are worthy. Not a week goes by that Ford, GM or FCA announce some massive recall or another. And BIG recalls, too. Where is the quality? I picked up a 2004 Nissan Frontier with 112k miles on it to be my "dump hauler". Other than routine maintenance and general road wear repairs, the truck lasted to 200k miles! Drove it on several cross country trips; great gas mileage. We've been Nissan fans ever since. Traded that Saturn in on a 2015 Nissan Rogue. Got almost 90k miles on the Rogue now and other than routine maintenance and road wear repairs, the car has been superb. Finally drove that old Frontier into the ground last year, upgraded it to a 2019 model. Just a wonderful vehicle. I know we're done with American cars.
@@2.7petabytes Emissions controls on cars began appearing earlier, as noted in the film. I recall that 1963 cars had Positive Crankcase Ventilation, a simple technology that reduced a fair percentage of pollution. This was driven by government regulations.
I think your assessment is spot on. The American car industry was caught flat footed; something so shocking and so unheard of that I think it took them some time to even realize it had happened. They were overwhelmed by poor economic conditions, unforeseen competition, government regulation, and unprecedented changes in consumer tastes. As a result, for the first time in generations, the American car industry was not leading, but rather reacting to an unfamiliar environment that they were no longer in control of. And as a result of that, American cars went through a period of being the bare minimum they needed to be and little more. The sort of cars you make when all your effort is spent putting out fires all day. When it started, who can say with certainty, but I think it first became unavoidably visible around 1974 when cars were suddenly being forced to address cultural shifts they had not been designed for. I think it then ran all the way until a bit of leadership, innovation, and competitiveness began to peak through around the introduction of the Ford Taurus, the Pontiac 6000 STE, the 4th gen Corvette, the Dodge Caravan, the turbo Thunderbird…like 84’-85’. Like you said. That’s not to say there weren’t notable attempts during this malaise time period - I think the Cosworth Vega was a little misguided but certainly interesting. The 78’-80’ Pontiac Grand Am was possibly the first successful attempt by America to make something akin to a Euro-style sports sedan. Also, theres the Mustang II; an important car which probably could have been executed better. But it was an American car that was actually paying attention to what was going on and was trying the hardest to adapt to it. I give the little II credit for effort.
the wider picture it presents of the trajectory of the car industry in relation to the geopolitics of the time is well represented, individual factual errors aside
@@citylimits8927 Ford was not the first mass produced car, that credit goes to Olds Motor Works and the Curved Dash Runabout. While not in the mass number as the Model T, few manufacturers were building more than 100 cars a year prior to the production of the Olds Curved Dash Runabout. Olds was rolling out 1500 plus cars a year on the industry's first assembly line. Plymouth was not purchased by Chrysler, Chrysler created the Plymouth brand. Bill Durant formed General Motors with the merger of Buick and Oldsmobile and later added others. As a result of where the comment appears in the video they make it sound like the brands that GM, Ford, and Chrysler purchased was during the 1950's. All of the brands mentioned became part of the Big Three long before the 1950s. The comments about how long the cars lasted and that second hand dealers ended with cars that were beyond repair is grossly exaggerated. They also mention V8 and V6 engines, American manufacturers were making mostly V8, straight 8s, and inline 6 cylinder engines. The first American V6 was offered by Buick in 1962 and other American manufacturers wouldn't start offering them until the late 1970s. The video makes reference that AMC first offered automatic transmission and tandem brakes before the Big Three offered them as options, this is false. Oldsmobile invented the automatic transmission and it became standard on many cars before AMC. Comparing a 1972 Toyota Corona to a 1972 Ford LTD is totally unfair. Ford offered a Maverick for nearly the same price as a Toyota Corona in 1972. Closer in size with both six and V8 engines available. The Ford Maverick first came to market as a 1970 model in 1969 not 1973. The first Chevrolet Chevette was a 1976 model available in the fall of 1975. Downsizing began in 1975 with the first Cadillac Seville and 1977 with GM's large cars.
@@Jetjay Yes, there were mistakes made with the V6 versus inline-6 claim, Plymouth, and the claim that the Maverick came out in 1973, but your reply also has A LOT MORE. This is still a very good video overall. I know from firsthand experience, because I lived through the malaise era and owned a couple of those cars. For starters, nowhere in the video does it say, “AMC first offered automatic transmission and tandem brakes before the big 3 offered them as options.” What it says at 7:15 is “Automatic Shift INDICATOR SEQUENCE and a standard tandem master cylinder that would stop the care in the event of a brake failure”, both of which are true. As for the tandem master brake cylinders, AMC offered them on the Rambler Classic in 1962, several years before the federal government mandated them in 1967. Cadillac was the only other car company to do so. The Rambler offered an automatic transmission with an indicator sequence that read” P R N D2 D1 L, where if one selected "D2", the car started in second gear, while "1" began in first gear. It predated the mandatory “PRNDSL” indicator that was mandated starting in 1968. Also, nowhere in the video does it say or even IMPLY that the brands that GM, Ford, and Chrysler purchased were “during the 1950s.” It merely calls the at 3:45 “a trio of firms that HAD expanded their empires through the purchase of dozens of individual car brands (obviously the word HAD means that those purchases could have been made years or decades before the "50s) such as Buick, Cadillac, Lincoln, Plymouth, and Oldsmobile were big players in the 50s. It doesn’t say WHEN they had done so, and it only implies that by the 1950’s that they were the big players. And, apart from Plymouth, these individual brands were bought. Your idea that comparing the tiny Toyota Corona with the typically enormous American big car Ford LTD sedan was “totally unfair” is ridiculous! The video maker simply needed a way to contrast the enormous size of the American V8 land barges (which was the large part of the Detroit automakers’ offerings) with what was being introduced from Japan. The Ford Maverick may have been closer in size and price and may have been started as an import-fighter, but it offered less fuel-efficient six-cylinder and V8 engines. The assembly line issue is a very minor mistake. The Curved Dash Olds was the first crude assembly line produced automobile, but Henry Ford was undoubtedly the one who perfected the assembly line. 19,000 curved dash Oldsmobiles, while Ford sold over 15 million Model Ts. Wikipedia even states: “Although credit for the development of the assembly line belongs to Ransom E. Olds, with the first mass-produced automobile, the Oldsmobile Curved Dash, having begun in 1901, the tremendous advances in the efficiency of the system over the life of the Model T can be credited almost entirely to Ford and his engineers.”
The reliability and durability of American made cars in the 1970s and 80s was atrocious. And they never implemented safety improvements unless forced by the federal government to do so.
Yes and no. The American cars of the 1970s and 80s started using a lot more plastic in the interior than the cars of the 1960s. The plastic would rattle a bit before they figured out how to screw it all together properly. Reliability wise 70s and 80s cars are very decent cars, just low on power.
AMC's connection to Renault was it's ultimate downfall. As AMC did not have the money to develop a front wheel drive platform, it turned to Renault. Renault quality was far inferior to AMC'S previous models. While the R9 was assembled by amc, the engine and transmission were imported from France. Failure rates were huge.
AMC's failure was spending all it's money developing the Pacer, which looks weird and was underpowered due to the loss of the Wankel engine they were to have purchased from GM, due to emissions and the fuel crises causing GM to shutter the project. The Chevy Monza was also to have used that engine.
@@seed_drill7135 And the 1974 Matador Coupe was a failure on its own, but doubly so as a giant land yacht appearing just when the first fuel crisis broke. Also a wasted investment for body tooling, though the underpinnings were just standard Matador.
How can that be? According to the narrator cars from outside the USA were all superior, and paragons of quality and efficiency! Of course he fails to note AMC's outdated engineering and styling, and lack of economies of scale. They were forced to find a partner to bail them out because of that.
@@ab348 Efficiency yes, quality, no. Chrysler also had to turn to its French division, Talbot, for its first FWD models. The Horizon was certainly what the company needed to limp along until the K platform was developed, but they aren't cars anyone remembers fondly (except the Shelby version).
I have that 72 LTD. I bought it new. I would buy it twice again over those crappy Japanese cars. They ran fairly well and were reliable, but if you got hit by a 70s American car, your head would be up your ass, because that WAS the “crumple zone”.
As someone who owned a 1971 Custom 500 (The cheaper version of an LTD) Equipped with the 351W 5.8L FMX Auto and 3.25:1 Gears... the 1972 302 12MPG "Average" number seems quite low, although I didn't drive much "City"... BUT, my car never returned less than 14...got 17-18 on most tanks...and on one long 3000 mile trip averaged 21 on ALL Hwy (BUT I had to keep it under 70MPH) - I would not want to take that little Toyota (or even my newer one) on that 3000 mile road trip!
15:03 Various re-workings of that Chevette were manufactured in GM factories around the world, but were all built on the same Isuzi platform, mechanicals, & engines, from Japan! Here in Australia it was sold as the GMH (Holden) Gemini!
The Chevette was based on a Opel model not a Isuzu. GM used the Opel Kadett design as a basis for the Chevette. When German manufactured Opel vehicles were no longer imported into the United States they were replaced with a Isuzu Gemini rebadged as a Opel by Isuzu.
@@madlionau The Chevette was developed from a Opel design and was manufactured in the United States. It was conceived well before GM had any partnership with Isuzu. The Isuzu Gemini used a totally different chassis and was larger than the Chevette and neither the Chevette or Kadett used any significant parts, other than the 1.8 liter diesel , produced in Japan. True the basic design was manufactured by GM in several factories around the world but it wasn't, as the original reply suggested , a product of Isuzu design and manufacturer.
Small correction to the assertion made around 2:10 -- the cars of the era you are referring to there were not powered by V6 and V8 engines; they were powered by straight 6 and V8 engines. V6s didn't become popular until much later in the US car industry, when compact cars became more popular, and the compact dimensions of the V6 became enough of an advantage to make up for the difficulties engineers always have compensating for the inherent primary imbalance in the V6 configuration. Inline 6s are inherently balanced, which is great, but they are long and narrow and make inefficient use of the space inside the engine bay, so when cars got smaller, they were out. Also, a V6 is better for transverse mounting to go with front wheel drive. When rear wheel-drive, full size cars were the hot sellers, that wasn't really a problem. and most American cars of the golden era of motoring had a straight 6 as the base model engine.
You completely overlooked how Ford, Chrysler (Simca and Routes Group) and GM’s European operations (Opel and Vauxhall) were basically scaling down there American counterparts cars some of these include the Ford Anglia and Consul (later the Mk1 Cortina), The Opel Kadett and various Vauxhalls before the Cavalier came out in 1975. These cars had small efficient engines normally below 2.0l and as a result the European cars lived on as their old selves. The only problem was that they never exported them back to the US except for the Opel Escona (known as the 1300 there) for a brief time.
I remember the import Plymouth cricket that was being sold in the early seventies at the Chrysler, Plymouth,dodge dealership. A very cheaply made car to sell to the masses with decent gas mpg. I never seen one on the road, and from what I did hear about them was that like all the other imports of that time it was just trash. After two yrs the dealership quit trying to sell them
@@johnpinckney4979 My Hillman Avenger is boringly reliable. It did break down once about 8 years ago, but it was a simple electrical repair. The Plymouth Cricket was maybe not quite what USA customers wanted. The handling is superb, you can chuck it around corners until the tyres squeal like a little sports car. But in the 1970s, USA customers were still happy with sloppy suspension cars which handled like a boat.
@@video99couk My electronics teacher didn't have his Cricket on the road long enough to comment on the handling. It was almost always in the shop! It wasn't just big cars that had lousy suspension back then. My 1974 Ford Pinto station wagon was also pretty bad. Big American cars didn't have to handle bad or get bad gas mileage. As a retired MP, my father routinely ordered the "police package" at the GM or Ford District Office. They "looked" normal. Until you saw the dual exhausts, stabilizer bars, heavy-duty cooling and electrical, etc. His last one, a 1973 Galaxie 500 with a 351C V8 gave a res[ectable19 mpg. Not bad for a 4,400 lb. car. But, he was also a professionally trained driver...
@@johnpinckney4979 I wonder what the faults were on the Cricket. The Hillman Avenger certainly didn't have a poor reliability record in the UK, it was a pretty conventional car so the technology was all well understood. Compared to other cars of the time, it was usually very reliable.
@@video99couk IIRC, the ills were a mix of electrical, but with other ills related to the automatic transmission and the air conditioning/pverheating. The a/c problems were very common on 4-cylinder cars back then. Especially with an automatic transmission. On my Pinto, when turning on the a/c, I used to say, "Firing retro rockets!"...Also, it's not unusual for British cars to have problems in this climate. Summertime temps can hit 104F/40C with humidity of 85-95% and brutally cold winters with snow measured in feet and wind chills going into the negative double digits, Now, add to the mix, traffic that ranks as among the worst in the U.S., and you have a recipe for disaster. I suggest you take a look online at the local news shows from our major TV stations: WRC-TV, WTTG-TV, WJLA-RV, and WUSA-TV to see what we have to deal with,. Tomorrow should be interesting as we're supposed to get our worst snow in a couple of years! Cheers!
A statement that will get you comments: American cars did not have V6 engines. The standard 6 cylinder models were inline-6s, which is a very different architecture. V6s did not arrive until manufacturers responded to the oil-crisis of the 70s by lopping 2 cylinders off of their V8s.
@@seed_drill7135 The Buick V6 was sold to Kaiser which used it in Jeeps. After AMC bought Jeep, AMC substituted their own inline 6s. By 1975, GM bought the V6 tooling back from AMC & put it back into production. As it was a 90-degree V6, it ran like a V8 with two cylinders missing. (I rode in one of those & it was disconcerting-felt like something was wrong.) It wasn't until GM re-engineered it a few years later with offset crank pins that it became a smooth running engine.
Mid 70's to mid 80's, the age of the 'spaghetti motor'. You couldn't eve see the engine because of the insane amount rubber hoses running everywhere connecting up all the tons of junk needed to meet the emissions standards.
My friend's Dad simply disconnected these hoses and corked them with golf tees, on the 1977 Toyota Land Cruiser that Dave inherited. 1990s California reg'ns requiring all factory smog crap to be there meant my friend had to give up his original well-running go anywhere truck.
Well America was always better at marketing, than producing cars. Those cars were like beautiful women, beautiful to look at, but impossible to live with.
You have a strange taste in women! To the British eye these cars were loud, gaudy brash and unsophisticated. The fact that as the world motor industries opened up, and the US style was dropped, shows perhaps the style was "unique" to the US in its beauty.
@@sjoormen1 they wrre dreadful. But genuinely innovative. Badly underfunded, poorly managed and built by militant workforces who didnt care. But they fit on the road and didnt suffer from petrol stayion constipation. (Ie they couldnt pass one). Some were nice looking too, we made splendid sports cars, graceful large saloons, and designs of our small cars were cute and often ftom the pen of Italian design houses. But yes, there were a few pigs.
BIG MISTAKE, which shows you aren't as much of a car expert as you'd like people to believe. The American cars of the 1950s, '60s, and early '70s used STRAIGHT six cylinder engines, NOT V 6s. The V6 did not begin to be used in U.S. cars until the change from rear wheel to front wheel drive, because they needed a shorter engine in order to fit in the WIDTH under the hood, since such engines mount sideways and make the engineering simpler for front wheel drive.
This was a very interesting presentation and an accurate one as well. It seems that there are still some lessons that must be learned; American car companies have never really been able to make money on smaller cars. This is why the large land yacht of the 60s-80s has become the pickup & SUV today, with Ford no longer even selling cars (save for the Mustang) in the US market (because they aren't profitable). If they could only sort the profitability problem, things might be better for them.
Actually, it is full of inaccuracies, especially the part of cars of the 50s and 60s only lasting 3-5 years and then being scrapped. Those cars lasted for decades. This guy has no idea about the American car market.
A minor critique -- at 2:10, you mention "V-6" engines. There were very few V-6s in American cars at that period, they were virtually all I-6s. It wasn't until the early-to-mid '70s that V-6s became a noticeable portion of the market.
@@foowashere You just reminded me of a thing Mad Magazine did around that time, a riff on the old Solomon Grundy nursery rhyme, detailing him filling his tank more than once a day. It described the car he was driving, and it might even have been this monster.
Nice video. I personally have a love affair with our automobiles from the late 30s to the early 80's. There are a few sprinkled in in other decades as well. The malaise era, I love so many. There was so much style, color and options available. Who could not love a 1977 Lincoln Mark V all emerald green - everything, including the leather interior. Oh, did I forget the wonderful deep velour and shag carpeting? Underpowered after 72 or 73 and like you say choked off with emission equipment, but I love them just the same and have owned several large ones. One has to remember that these cars were made for those that grew up with a hard life and could finally have something amazing. They were made to be driven with one finger and have very touch brakes so you didn't have to push to hard and power everything. To Hell with what Top Gear says about them. They were never designed to handle or run around track or have a manual transmission. This was a luxury and style era with an amazing ride. Top Gear wants something to take to the track and flog to death. To hell with their opinion. I, as many others, wanted to go out and drive a colorful, quiet, comfortable, stylish living room couch to wherever we wanted to go and arrive unsoiled. Thank you for the video!
Wow, there are a lot of wrong information in this video. Particularly the part in which cars from the 50s and 60s were scrapped after only a few years due to mechanical failure. Many cars from that era were on the roads for decades without any major issues. When I was a teenager in the 80s you could easily find cars from the 60s in good running order for a reasonable price. My first car was a 1967 model, and my second was from 1964. I still own several old cars, with some not having anything done to them but general maintenance. My 1968 New Yorker has over 150,000 miles on it and it is 100% original, the only thing done to the engine was valve cover gaskets replaced, water pump replacement, alternator replaced, and a new distributor (upgraded to electronic ignition). It was a friend of mines grandfathers car that he inherited and I bought it off of him about 10 years ago. All the service history came with it, and I have put an additional 30,000 or so miles on it since owning it, including several cross country trips. I also drive a 1970 Dodge truck on a regular basis. It is unrestored with a slant 6 and has God knows how many miles on it. The speedometer hasn’t worked since I bought it 30 years ago. So no, cars from that era definitely were not built to only last a few years, that is a complete lie.
An interesting video, well researched and presented. It always amazes me the way the big three, so used to having just about the whole US market to themselves, up until the late sixties,, selling huge gas guzzling cars, only to lose it so quickly, as they just couldn't get their heads around building small economical cars when needed. Unfortunately, back in the mid seventies, any American cars that got anywhere close to 20mpg was classed as economy models. They were not. If you look at video footage of a highway from the 50/60's almost every car is from one of big three and many from AMC. Fast forward 20 years, it's a very different story, plus AMC no longer exists.
American cars weren't done in 3-5 years. Most had a service life of around 15. The second hand market thrived. Yes, the upper-middle class bought new car every 3-5 years. Also, once again, great that you give credit where it's due, but you don't actually use that word "credit." "Footage," "Video," or "Audio."
Yeah, well, I remember driving 1960s and ‘70s cars and they were pretty worn out by 50 thousand miles. But the British imports of that era were even worse! Something this British documentary forgets to mention. And nearly all those Brit car makers are gone, while the American big three are doing well.
Agreed. My oldest brother's first car, bought in 1977, was built in 1948. His second was built in 1964. My first car was built they year I was born. In my whole life my father only bought two cars that were less than ten years old. And my grandfather, who distinctly favored Chrysler products, said the engines weren't really broken in until they reached 150,000 miles. These were replaced with front wheel drive models in the 1980s that came with a 5 year/50,000 mile warranty that was the best in the business, but those engines were famous for developing terminal oil pressure problems at around 60,000 miles. Which is why my uncle drove his 1975 Plymouth Scamp well into the 1990s.
The most worn-out car I have ever owned was also the one with the fewest miles on it: It was a 1973 Toyota Corolla that I bought in 1996 with 73,000 original miles. It had a 2-speed automatic and the previous owner warned me "the last time that transmission was rebuilt they said it was the last time that transmission COULD BE rebuilt."
I feel like that was the most inaccurate thing in the whole video. If you look at people such as myself that are still driving 30-60 year old American cars in 2021, it's proof they can actually run almost indefinitely with basic maintenance. It's absolute nonsense that these vehicles only had three to five years of service life.
@rustyjeep That’s what I’ve always said, if all these American cars were junk then why are there so many left being driven on the road today? But what you don’t see is many tieyotas and a lot of imported junk on the road of the same era. People scrapped them after awhile apparently, not worth keeping them around when they broke down. Probably made into a bird bath or a hammer, something useful
Just wanted to clear something up. The planned obsolescence shared by most GM, Ford, and Dodge cars did not make them unreliable. Rather what they did was simply update the design to make the old design feel dated and get people to buy newer cars. 60's cars were still very reliable cars. Also the 1963 clean air act didn't really take effect until the clean air act of 1970.
A big reason those old cars didn't last as long as modern ones simply comes down to the materials and technologies available at the time. Modern cars have the benefit of modern materials. For example, car engines used to wear out or need rebuilds very early on by our standards today (sometimes even within 50-80K miles), because lubricants of the period were so primitive. Back when I was younger, old (sometimes not so old) cars emitting varying degrees of blue oilsmoke were a common sight on the road. Nowadays it's a rarity.
Whilst an interesting film it’s filled with historical and technical inaccuracies. As an example, the EPA wasn’t formed until 1970 not as the video mentions 1963.
Still love station wagons to this day. Dating in a brand new '66 Merc wagon was always a gas and I managed to shoehorn 12 girls into it one day after high school, giving them all a ride home. Yes, really. On the way I stopped at a red light and a police cruiser stopped for the light right next to me and one of the girls yelled _"Hey girls, what grows on peaches?"_ and all 12 of them yelled *_"FUZZ!"_* at the top of their lungs. I looked at the officer and he just shook his head with a grin and drove away. I was singing lead for a local band at the time which didn't hurt my currency at school. I loved the '60s. SADARAR as real. Memories - I turn 76 in two months and now I just ride an 1100cc Yammie cruiser, a '99 Virago. My riding partner and best friend is my daughter and she rides an ' '88 1100cc Honda. Did the math on supporting a car year round and what did I really need it for vs. the bike in the summer and cabs to work in the winter and came up $3,000 to the good if I got rid of the car, which I immediately did 14 years ago. You can ride in a helluva lot of taxis for three large. Just for the record the Merc had a 240 cube straight six with a three in the tree that would out pull any stock 283 I met. Sorry about the spontaneous memoir, Rory but RHIP as we both know. Thank you and Cheers from E. Ontario, CDA
I find it unbelievable that a production of this size would identify the EPA as making regulations in 1963 when it did not exist until the Nixon Administration. EPA was born in July 1970
"The Malaise Era" seems to attach itself to more than just American cars, the post-Vietnam budgets meaning that early 1900's era slums were left unfixed, as was early 20th c. infrastructure, drugs, La Cos Nostra, Civil Rights; all highly challenging issues at the time.
Jkirk A Brit telling us about American Cars?.I don't think so, If any Brit want's to talk about some of the worst cars I think they should talk about their home country first!.
Numerous quite good American small cars with small displacement engines were available including the Willys Jeep station wagons, Hudson Jet, the Nash Metropolitan, the Ford Falcon, the Chevrolet Nova, the Dodge Dart, the Chevrolet Corvair, etc. They were poor sellers because larger more powerful cars were overall a better fit for the long journeys on highways and family sizes. Remember that the entire England/Scotland land mass is much smaller than just the state of Texas. It's a longer drive from El Paso to Nacadoches than from El Paso to Los Angeles, CA. A little VW Bug totally sucked on that drive.
Having grown up in this time period I can remember the biggest problem with the early Japanese cars was with the bodies rusting out in northern US because of road salt in winter. It was a problem because the engines would be in good shape mechanically usually longer than the bodies of the cars would hold up. I remember bombing around back roads in the 80s in a, I think, a very rusted 1971 Toyota Corona wagon. Good times. I also bought a 1986 Cavalier in 1988 that my future, well and present wife drove, while I got rid my 1987 Camaro do to outrageous insurance costs, and bought a brand new Nissan 4X4 pickup. Base as base can be. Of course I was sort of young and hadn't really cared about car payments as long as I could make them. 🤔😎
Lots of distortions here. Does not understand the late 50s demand for smaller cars with Rambler and Studebaker doing so well. Led soon after to the Ford Falcon, Chrysler Valiant and chev Corvair. All six cylinder lighter cars. Then soon after the chev nova. Except Corvair all were inline sixes. Falcon sold near as many as the Mustang in its early years and the Mustang was based on it. Quotes the largest engine option as being standard, but even full size were mostly in line sixes until the late sixties. VW Beetle impact ignored.
There was a fairly major recession in the late 50's that caused AMC to resurrect the Rambler American and Studebaker to lop several inches off both ends of it's standard sedan and create the Lark. And the big three to follow suit in 1960.
A great take on how USA's economic and political policy developments forced greater sophistication upon its own car industry and I am grateful. Machine-gun fast narration and simple research errors detract from this fine analysis - as others here have explained - but thank you!
Excellent - the Chrysler V8 was fitted in the Jensen Interceptor, a model which could be sold to people wealthy enough for 12mpg. The older Ford Pilot was a V8 from 1950, well built but heavy with 14mpg on UK roads - far too expensive for its middle manager target market. I could never understand why Chrysler did not use the Hillman Hunter from 1969 in the American market - ticked all the boxes outlined in the video. Management at the time, UK and US, not really up to speed.
Chrysler had a much more successful option with Mitsubishi sourced cars compared to Hillman. Same in Australia. Chrysler dumping Hillman and marketing Mitsubishi much more successfully. Mitsubishi did so well in Australia that they took over Chrysler the plant as the Valiants were struggling by 1980.
EPA ha!! My ‘48 Chevy has a road draft tube that funnels crankcase fumes straight into the atmosphere. We don’t need no stinking pvc valve. Also whenever I park on cement it looks like the Exxon Valdez ran aground there.
The OPEC oil embargo was really the beginning of the Middle East countries losing control of their only real export. Price increases in oil caused American car companies to produce more fuel efficient cars, and encouraged the American oil companies to develop more fuel resources here instead of importing them. In 2020, we now have some of the most fuel efficient cars in the world, including electrics and hybrids, and the country is nearly fuel independent. It's a good example of how monopolies have no long term future.
I will still take my old 1966 Lincoln Town Car any day over any of these Toys you are pumping up ... You don't find anyone looking for a Gremlin or Pacer in the Antique Car Market .
AMC did pump out one good product before their death, the 1984 Jeep Cherokee XJ, like the Dodge Caravan it basically created the SUV boom we all know today.
The car that became the Eagle Premier was engineered by AMC and Renault. It's underpinnings were the basis for all of Chrysler's "cab forward" cars that saved them once again, as they had nothing in house to replace the aging K-platform.
That maket segment was not attributed to the Cherokee in most of the world, we had been driving Subaus and even Ladas years prior, and American cars started few trends outside the US, though there were a couple.. Trouble for them is there were foreign, initially Japanese, makers who built better designs.
@@shebbs1 Not completely true in the case of the Cherokee XJ as it was technically innovative in several ways. Renault and AMC designed it to be the right format for worldwide sale and indeed the 4-cylinder and diesel versions were a planetary success. At the time, it's Selec-Trac transfer with its ability to shift between 2wd, full-time 4wd (open diff), and part-time 4wd (locked diff) on the fly was unique in world production. The Lada Niva, for example, has to come to a full stop in order to engage diff lock and it has no 2wd mode. Ditto for the Range Rover of the day. The Japanese SUVs of the time had to come to a full-stop just to switch between 2wd and 4wd, and many still required manually locking the front hubs when going into 4wd. In the end the Cherokee XJ was produced or assembled in many countries with the last one being produced in China in 2014.
In the beginning of the video you mention the inventions of technological advancements incl. power brakes and steering car travel was improved. I think automatic transmissions should be in there as well. I like your videos sir keep them coming!
BTW, not all of those worn out cars from the 50's and 60's immediately went to the junkyard. They were the source of many $50 or $100 cars that me and my buddies would drive as teenagers, and we drove them until the wheels fell off. :-) After that is when they ended up in the junkyard.
@proud 2 B Liberal Chevy what?
@proud 2 B Liberal mine was a 64 Bel air chevy i got given to me i had to make it run ! started a successful career as a mechanic
Or ended up in Sweden for renovation and now they are in better condition than new. Sweden have American car meets with up to 24 000 old Americans cars at the same time. Pretty impressive. www.wired.com/2017/03/axel-oberg-swedish-greasers-power-big-meet/
@@bokhans Finland too. I have friends from there that are very much into drag racing.
In my neck of the woods, they were turned into dirt track racers. I can remember 1955-1957 chevys and everything else being destroyed weekly during the early 1970's on a 1/3 mile clay track..
My wife and I emigrated to Canada over 30 years ago. We started collecting these 60's and 70's giants while they were still relatively plentiful. Now, driving a Colony Park station wagon makes us celebrities as people gather around in the parking lots, remembering their childhoods growing up with these giants.
We have to smile as they leave in their BMW's and Lexus, wishing they still had their old woody wagon.
An excellent documentary. Thank you Sir!
We had a Colony Park and I remember it being a most capable hauler.
I drive a 1972 LTD Country Squire. The ultimate Brady Bunch machine in original paint of olive green / woodgrain. You are right. People react like it is a Lamborghini or Bugatti...
Fantastic!
We had an '83 Colony Park when I was growing up (actually, my parents were forced to get it because of me - before that, my parents and 3 sibs could all fit into any car just fine).
When my 2 kids were little, I bought an '85 Country Squire, which I had for only about a year and a half before I was afforded the rare opportunity to upgrade to an '88 Grand Wagoneer.
It most certainly is true - you can't beat the classics!
@@LakeNipissing On National Lampoon's Vacation, that color would be called "Metallic Pea" lol
2:13 v6 engines were really rare, inline 6 was the american base engines in many cars however
slant 6 dodge dart..the best deal of the 70's
I wanted to say exactly the same 👍
All of the straight 6s were about bullet proof back then with the slant six really quite something. Until everything went to hell, nobody wanted a v6. Buick started producing them around 1976 again because of the cafe' problems but they actually had one in the early sixties. A succession of updates on the design turned it into a very tough engine that continued into the 2000s. Wonderful engine, the last version - 3800 really was - 200 to 260 hp. Used in all GM cars at one time. It was used in the Buick Grand National in the mid 80's, a turbocharged engine and quite fast.
@@montymatilda I’ve owned (and still own) cars with L8, L6, V8 and /6 and the durability of the /6 (especially its resistance to abuse) is something else. The manifolds are a different story though. :D
The stove bolt sixes from the interbellum and a decade after WWII are also very forgiving but have their power limitations.
I’ve owned (and still own) cars with their original engines still going strong after 70 odd years.
Okay, they don’t have to put up with modern abuse and mileages but it does say something about the sturdiness of these machines. The seventies were a forebode of the limitations of ICE when it comes to performance, durability and mileage. That’s where companies like Toyota stepped in.
@@RustOnWheels Gosh, you own some interesting vehicles/engines. As a child, I remember a couple of relatives that had the L8 in a Pontiac and a Buick. I was fascinated by the exhaust note being so different and nice. They were automatics. They were also factory standard. I love the sound of a V8 except when the exhaust is so loud and popping you cannot hear the engine. A buddy and I had 63/64 Impala SS 409s and we used the standard exhaust with Corvair turbo mufflers. Deep throaty sound but no crackle a popping. The 80's and up Buick v6 sounded nice. IIRC, the Honda Civic rolled into dealers about 1975. They were all the rage where I live. You couldn't even test drive one without giving them $500 and signing a contract. I won't do that with any car, so never got to drive one.
My family had a 74 LTD with a 400 V8. Despite all its faults it could eat an econobox for lunch in an accident and when gas prices plummeted in the 89's and 90's the fuel economy wasn't a problem anymore. My mom drove it on a 120mi daily commute and we had to fill up the tank every other day. Fortunately gas was only $0.75/gal in the mid 90's so it wasn't a big deal. Eventually put 380,000 miles on it before we gave up and purchased a second hand 97 accord in 1999.
@@Rick-S-6063 sorry, it was the 400. The 302 is in the 69 Mustang.
Those engines didn't have to be weak and inefficient. I bought a 1975 Dodge station wagon with a 400 V8 (6.6 liter) in 1988. It weighed 3 tons, got 28 mpg on the highway and 22 in the city, and at emissions testing had 0% unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust.
I achieved this through the simple measures of frequent maintenance, driving with a light foot (using the optional Fuel Minder system that warned when you were burning fuel inefficiently), and buying premium gas.
Sadly, I lent it to a friend and he destroyed the transmission.
My father also had an LTD. From the day it rolled off the dealer's floor (New!) it was repair after repair. US auto makers cared nothing for quality nor its customers. My father, who was bitterly anti-Japanese from his war experience, only bought Toyotas since.
They are back where they started.....except instead of land yachts it's enormous pick ups
Well two of them are. Unless Chrysler's been building pickups I didn't know about
(Note: I'm only going off commercials, in which the only ads for "Heavy Duty Pickups" are from either GMC or Ford)
And Ford are behind the curve again. They've not seen the electric vehicle revolution as a threat and they're too far behind to ever catch up now.
@@russellgxy2905 Fiat-Chrysler build pickups under the "Ram" brand...
Exactly right, 3.5 ton leather-clad chrome-plated four-door monstrosities, equipped with ubiquitous but entirely unnecessary 4-wheel drive (in most cases) and a bed free of scratched paint.
Used to be that trucks were made for work.
@@ssbn6175 Here in the UK, builders and farmers use trucks, the rest of us have cars.
Another excellent video. Thanks!
Just like your own, subscribe to both of you! 👍👏🏻
You are joking? You know about and stick to cars, this guy sticks to anything.
@@taketimeout2share so?
Video was shit
The 'malaise' fall in power outputs in the mid-70s was caused first primarily by emissions reduction requirements. The fuel efficiency drive came later & was accomplished with smaller displacements and taller axle ratios, even further diminishing performance.
It was also the switch from SAE Gross horsepower to SAE Net engines.
Before 1972, automakers basically lied about engine performance.
Forget all that “underrated from the factory” BS. No.. these engines were bolted to a stand, had a prony brake clamped down on them.. and with no air cleaner or exhaust manifold and no accessories not even a water pump they were run until the engine seized and the highest number was what went into the brochure.
Yes Boggy well said and true.
But I believe it’s still true.
Detroit, or what’s left of it is still in the midst of that so called 70’s malaise !
And it’s the fault & failure of the former ‘ big 3’ because they ignored the Japanese model of car making , and doggedly followed with cars like Pintos, Vegas and others ,
which the American buyers wouldn’t purchase.
And now isn’t GM just a shell of itself ?
Chrysler , to survive has been shoved into a marriage with French and Japanese makers,
and maybe Ford is the most alert of all these days , with innovation of electrics, the new Bronco , and their updated pickups.
I’m still stunned by the way GM cancelled the Oldsmobile and Pontiac models.
It’s still their shame because they could have revamped with some exciting news models and kept each division albeit on a smaller scale !
_"diminishing performance"_ - you had better define that. I reckon that anything that improves the chances of my grandchildren's children's existence I would define as *_increasing performance._*
The problem was that rather than develop more efficient engines they just detuned the engine worse and worse, making it eat fuel much faster and make less power but produce less emissions per litre, and pass the emissions tests. This lazy direction is why the emissions regulations ruined the power output.
@@justanotheryoutubechannel It was preferable (believe me) to adding *_tetra-ethyl lead_* to the fuel to improve its compression efficiency. Lead is poisonous to human beings - though no longer as dangerous as the use of petrol (gasoline) itself.
The video mention the EPA existed in 1963, when in fact it was created by the government of Richard Nixon, it was founded December 2, 1970.
Chrysler did not buy Jeep from AMC. Chrysler purchased AMC and promptly plan to close everything down that was not Jeep. There was a short-lived eagle brand.
THAT is correct....Chrysler bought out AMC and closed the Kenosha plant and kept the Jeep Toledo plant, as they knew that Jeep was going to be a good (or as we see today) a fabulous investment..
When John Ricardo ran Chrysler in the mid seventies, he adamantly stated that "Americans will never buy a small car".....boy was he ever WRONG!! That along with a decline in quality control, almost killed the marque....
@@SSGTA440 Chrysler kept open until 2004, AMC's Kenosha engine plant to make derivatives of AMC's 1964 straight 6 for the Jeeps. Kenosha also built a Chrysler design V6.
@@boggy7665 OK, thanks for that.
The Eagle Talon was a "sporty" rebadged Mitsubishi Eclipse.
Just one of many misstatements and outright errors in the commentary.
Cars of the fifties and sixties were works of art. I had a 1977 and a 1978 T-Bird land yacht. Full tank and I could cruise for around 500 miles before fill up.
Practically all six cylinder engines were inline -V6 is incorrect.
1
GM had V-6 engines in many of their cars and light trucks or this era. I owned a couple.
@@nomebear Yes, but not in the '50s and '60s, as the video indicated. The V6s came much later
@@e020443 Buick came out with the 3.8 V6, but sold it to AMC where it was used in Ramblers until GM bought it back in 1975.
@@seed_drill7135 The Buick V6 was sold to Kaiser which used it in Jeeps. After AMC bought Jeep in 1969, the Buick V6 was retired in favor of AMC inline 6s. As you say, AMC sold the tooling back to GM which put it back into production quickly, having never demolished or repurposed its factory site where it had been produced. AMC never used a V6 in any of its passenger cars. AMC did use a later GM V6 in the 1984 XJ compact Jeep, but soon substituted its own inline 6.
Buick V6 was a simple cut-down 90 degree V8, not good for balance.
The Italians and Ford developed the V6 properly later on but they stayed niche until the mid/late 80s with FWD adoption.
The US government did not lend Chrysler money. It did however, guarantee loans made by banks to Chrysler. Chrysler paid all the money back by itself
thank you for putting us straight - pertinent fact.
thank you for putting us straight - pertinent fact.
It also handed over the M1 Abrams tank program to Chrysler, worth billions, even though the GM prototype of the XM1 performed better in most aspects.
Chrysler’s brand name sucks so bad in Europe they rebrand the few cars that are sold there with other names like Lancia and Fiat. Lancia Voyager former Chrysler Voyager. The funny thing is Lancia and Fiat are just slightly better than the Chrysler brand, none of these names are associated with quality.
The government prints the money, and instead lending them the money, let the banks make business with the government guarantee. Capitalists always win and use the capitalist state for that.
8:12 WAIT A MINUTE! The EPA didn't come into existence until 1970, so no Clean Air Act by them in "1963"
Yes I was puzzled by that too.
I'm an American and lived through part of the American car culture history that you were talking about. I'm 55 years old and it is interesting to sit back and listen to you and take the opinion of someone not from America, I'm not offended though and much of what you say was truthful and it does make sense of why OPEC was created and has made the American peoples economy suffer! Its unfortunately true how much are American government"CIA" etc. does work against the common American citizen In their unbridled lobbyist pursuit of backing huge corporations! I believe we the people lost control of our government between the 50s and the early 60s if not even before, pretty sad just look at our recent election????
Every America hater out there is just reveling in your comment.
No I'm not disrespecting America I'm just disrespecting this overgrown government we have built by corporate lobbyists and if people feel that way that's their problem! I love my country and the people in it ! The government need's some serious overhauling for a long time now and improving is all I'm pointing a finger to! But then it goes back to we the People right to make the improvements! Jedi I wouldn't worry about it man people are going to hate anyway there's haters out there you know our government's not perfect! Peace to all my friends and Merry Christmas 🎄⛄🎄!
America, love it or improve it
It is now the BiDUHn malaise era. But it will only last a total of 4 yrs
The planned obsolescence was not that the cars would only last a few years but rather to offer new designs and new technology frequently so that the previous models would seem dated and consumers would desire more modern designs and technology.
Exactly! Glad someone else caught that. The cars were still well made very well (unless you lived in a rust belt state and then it really isn't the car companies fault), just lots of model updates.
The fuel consumption was better than my 2018 Subaru! That's a fact! The Lincolns easily achieved 24 to 27 miles per gallon on the highway, I know that because I owned several new Lincolns of this era. They were luxurious, comfortable, stable, and reliable. The only negative thing about it that I can remember is the padding on the glove compartment lid would curl over time. We lived on the sea coast so rust proofing was a must with all cars of this era.
You must’ve had a 6 cylinder or turbo model to get worse than 27 MPG highway. Subaru has always had lower than average MPG due to the design of their engines/drivetrain, though the 2011 overhaul and introduction of the CVT resolved it for the most part. My 2019 Outback easily does 35-40 MPG highway and 27 overall...
I had always heard that to own a Subaru you had to have a short haircut, wear flannel and jeans, have a wallet with a chain attached to a belt loop, and wear black motorcycle boots. Correct?
Gosh... So succinct. These distilled histories are rarely free of detail errors, but this one makes few.
Chapeau to the maker of this piece.
You have caught the essence of the social realities, the political changes and the engineering trends.
Good video.
That's a gorgeous Lincoln in the thumbnail, though.
In 1975, Japanese car maker Daihatsu, was selling a four door, sub compact, tested repeatedly giving 68 miles per US gallon. Seventy five UK gallon. So amazed were testing organisations, the tests were redone, refined and finally hidden from the driving public.
The exploding Ford Pinto's were only the "Runabout" hatchback model, and it wasn't technically a design flaw - it was a last minute before production bean-counter cost-saving scheme. The subsequent recall saw Ford installing a part that cost less than 1 dollar (1970's prices) per car - a part that the designers/engineers had originally specified to be installed on the cars.
Ford did not learn from the Pintos. In the 90's Ford had the same problem with exploding Crown Victorias and Lincoln Town Cars when hit from the rear. Again. a shield had to be installed to correct the issue.
@@nomebear They also knew the Bronco II was inherently prone to roll overs, but fudged the dimensions when reporting it to the government.
The clasdic case we learnt in law about product liability, just as its implications were coming across from the US into Europe. Sickening decision making by Ford, and the best reason for prohibitive damages.
Wasn't that exploding rear ended Pinto video staged for demonstration purposes at 14:40?
@@brettkirkpatrick464 possibly, but not the accident that killed a chap and triggered the lawsuit!
The Pinto "Exploding" when hit from behind wasn't "Location of the fuel tank", but actually from Ford trying to save 11 cents per car by not including the rubber gasket that isolated the fuel tank from the side of the car body. When the car was rear-ended, the tank moved position, and sheared off the fuel spout, thus causing sparks to ignite the gas fumes in the filler tube.
And a lot of people don’t know that Jeep had a prob with exploding gas tanks on some jeeps in the ‘80s and early ‘90s, when equipped with a towing receiver .
Wow, that was a brilliant and succinct analysis, speaking as a retired British industrial designer.
What was the name of the aliens that destroyed Earth for a galactic bypass? ("Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy") - Vogons, weren't they? Whatever . . .
SUV's, resistance to Climate Change, resistance to renewable energy transport . . . these guys are still evolving. Thanks, anyway, for resolving some of my stresses.
You are becoming my first go-to when I crack open YT. We both like a lot of the same stuff and your work is excellent.
Thank you for your hard work.
There is no malaise in my 1975 Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight with a 455. There is a little rust, and a 28 gallon fuel tank...
455 cubic inches is about 7.5 liters
193 HP out of a 455 unimpressive. But i bet it cruises nice.
@@75OldsNinetyEight The 455 went from 360-375HP in the 60's to 190-205HP by 1975. If that's not a hallmark of Malaise-era cars, I don't know what is.
IIRC, around 1971-72 they began rating HP at the rear wheels instead of the crankshaft, which caused a significant drop in numerical HP. But I can tell you that the engines in the 400 - 500 cube range even in the later 1970s could still move out those land yachts pretty well.
I had the 74 Delta 88 Royale convertible. 455/4BBl, Red, white interior and top...the cops should've pulled us over every Saturday night but for some reason never did. They'd just pull along side, nod and smile. We'd invite them to come along but they we're on duty. Funny thing is, I don't even remember selling it.
Around two minutes in, you state that they cars were powered by V6 and V8 engines, this is incorrect. Practically all six cylinder engines at this point were inline.
All the images of 50's cars while he said that... I think they might have had a V6 or 2 by the late '60's - but their heyday started in the '70's.
In 1959, the GMC V6 engine was introduced used in pickup trucks and carryalls. These were torquie engine, the Buick V6 engine was introduced in 1962.
@@nomebear Correct.
Ford has a V8 since 1932 I believe.
I think only Cadillac had a V8 in GM until the 1955 small block was made.
@@Bartonovich52 I think that Olds had a V8 in '49.
Fascinating, this video presents an exceptionally clear historic perspective of the US car market. Many thanks!
With lots of distortions due to his lack of understanding and seeking exceptions as typical.
Look at his most popular videos for his real area of interest.
You have neglected to mention the most venerable economy models of all US makers; the Dodge Dart/Plymouth Valiant 1963-1974
@@gioneraeciofi111 I did in a later comment saying -
Lots of distortions here.
Does not understand the late 50s demand for smaller cars with Rambler and Studebaker doing so well. Led soon after to the Ford Falcon, Chrysler Valiant and chev Corvair. All six cylinder lighter cars. Then soon after the chev nova. Except Corvair all were inline sixes. Falcon sold near as many as the Mustang in its early years and the Mustang was based on it.
Quotes the largest engine option as being standard, but even full size were mostly in line sixes until the late sixties.
VW Beetle impact ignored.
Although the Valiant started in 1960 I think. Darts were much larger until 1963. Saw elsewhere how the Falcon was heading to 3 million sales by 1966, so not trivial numbers, unlike the 500 cui Eldorado.
@@gioneraeciofi111 Yes
And very critical of The US, and American culture of way back then
Gigantic is still alive and well in the US in the form of midsize and large SUV's and full sized pickups.
Alive and well for the well to do. A friend just bought a nice 2020 Tahoe. $74k. Yikes. Try buying anything with a V-8 now brand new. Rare as hens teeth.
This past year has placed a dampener on car and truck sails
Agree, the new full size pick-up trucks are some of the biggest pick-up trucks ever made. They are gigantic. Not only that they are very expensive, even a 3 year old Ford F150 is selling at $30k.
Light-truck chassis should never have been exempted from CAFE regulations. >:-(
@@stevenmaginnis1965 Exactly!
This is a great channel about transportation. Another excellent and relevant vídeo. Thank you.
We now have tech driven obsolescence. Basic car perfect, too expensive to fix !
Correct. Desinged-in failure of major components around an engine that should reliably last 300k.
The folks getting burned are not those with the wherewithal to purchase a new vehicle. Pisses me off.
I will never own another big-3 auto again.
@@ssbn6175 So what are ya drivin' now?
@@chaosdemonwolf1 '14 Mazda 3, 2.0 6M. Only new car I've ever had.
@@ssbn6175 Well, everyone deserves at least one new car, lol.
@@ssbn6175 I've owned many of the big three and decided I was tired of throwing money away and the inconvenience of repairs . I have owned three Toyota's now . A Tercel , Corolla and presently I have a Tacoma and all have been worry free . You pay more up front but save in the long haul .
Great video but a couple of things. The EPA did not bring out the Clean Air Act. The clean air act was a law passed by Congress which created the EPA. Don't forget, an American gallon is about 80% the size of an English gallon.
Didn't know about imperial gallons, that sucks
@ThePatUltra yes. It's a mess. Add to that a metric ton, 1000 kg, is 2204 pounds more or less
1 Imperial gallon is equal to 1.2 US gallons.
This is filled with inaccuracies.
Name 3?
@@JerkVegas86 It would be harder to find 3 accurate thing.
"History is written by the winners."
@@JerkVegas86 I could name one, bat one would take a lot of time to explain. as short as possible.
The hatred of the Islamic world against the USA did not start with the creation of Israel, or the support of the USA for Israel.
the Barbary pirate states of the Islamic world is a topic I'd advise you to look up. As far as the Jew-Hatred in the Islamic world, this goes back to the founding years of Islam, to the time when Islam came the Jewish-Pagan settlement of Yathrib, today knows as Medina.
Yeah, some facts are plain wrong, but the overall narrative is still true.
That 61’ Continental convertible is a thing of beauty.
You should have emphasized the horrendous build quality that was a worldwide epidemic in the 1970's and 1980's...
It was.
True! To use the word quality infers that there may have been some to begin with. Many of the late 60's and early seventies left much to be desired in fit and finish. GM's low end models were sloppy. The cheap, molded plastics discolored and desintegrated smelling of ripe arm pit as they did. So, to say that they stunk would be an accurate statement.
Agreed. A friend and I were amused thinking we could see the cloth interior of a Honda disintegrate before our very eyes. So worldwide works.
He has a video about British Leyland and the terrible build quality there
@@sheevone4359 I remember a high school classmate putting his fist through the door panel of his brand new 1974 Camaro...
Funny timing I’ve just bought an LTD Crown Victoria lol. Being a 1989 model, it does have fuel injection, but it’s just a facelift of the model from 1980, downsized compared to those early 70s LTD’s in the video, but still very big, with a 302 V8 making only 150hp. At least the torque rating is pretty good. Fuel economy not so much lol. Nothing prepares you for the amount of room you feel around you in a car of that size with a bench seat, it’s really so comfortable around a town or city.
89 Crown Vic's are quite attractive, to me, even though we know it is an old platform. They really didn't change it when the new ones came out in 92. Nor did Chevy. I have an 89 Lincoln Town Car, same engine set-up and I am quite happy to get a consistent 21 mpg. I am with you on how comfortable they are. I have had mine since 94.
There were NO Minivans or Crossovers in 1975. SUV's were considered trucks and did not sell as were a fraction of a full sized car at the time allowing the exemptions
to the CAFE standards. Also many 5 litre engines in domestic cars got 15 to over 20 miles to the gallon. Inline 6 engines were getting well over 20.
No minivans in 1975? Not true - you forgot the Volkswagen Transporter.
@@stevenmaginnis1965 I heard them being called Vans , Bus or Transporter. . I am saying the term Mini was used or around then
I forgot all about Doug Henning, the magician in the mini van commercial.
Lucky you!
It’s an ILLOooooooooo-Zhun!!
Excellent indeed. I have a 1979 Lincoln Mark V and always wondered why these cars had to disappear. Now it is put in historical perspective..
This era was the last generation of distinct styling. In the 80's everything began to look the same and lost their uniqueness. It is no wonder we have alarms to find our own cars these days.
There's so much nostalgia for the styling of the golden era cars, they're being resurrected from Junkyards, barns and vacant land in order to restore them to their former appearance on the exterior with all the state of the art latest drive trains, suspension and braking, electronics and cosmetic interiors. Completed, these restomods can cost more than the newest high price range assembly line products, however, when maintained, they always appreciate in value while their assembly line competitors depreciate considerably then after time head for the Junk Yards, Barns and vacant land.
Nah. In my opinion, restomods are for people who don't appreciate vintage cars as they are enough. My perspective is that if you want to go vintage, either go all the way or don't even bother. Of course, this is just my own opinion. People can do whatever they want to their cars as long as they own them.
Unpowered drum brakes, heavy steering and poor handling is standard spec for 1970s cars
@benard
What a stupid comment. Obviously you have never owned or driven a 70’s car
Best short documentary about the economic transition of the American car industry.
I don't make cars like they use too.
Every Saturday I love seeing your videos show up! Cheers from New England!
Cheers from the original England, lol.
Lol, cheers! From one England to the OG England!
Very fascinating video essay! Good information.
Planned obsolescence is still a thing, which is why I drive Nissan's today. We had a new 1998 Ford Expedition; gorgeous vehicle inside, but so mechanically over engineered that at around 54,000 miles, parts began to fail... a lot. Our last new Ford was a 2002 Ford Ranger that began to exhibit the same problems after 30,000 miles. We also bought a new Saturn Vue that had parts literally falling off of it starting at around 12,000 miles. It totally died when it hit 76k. We tried a Honda for a few years; a CR-Z, bought new. Great gas mileage (Hybrid), and ride, but the overall fit and finish were horrendous! The paint began to crackle after a year, the interior looked equally as ragged. So not all imports are worthy. Not a week goes by that Ford, GM or FCA announce some massive recall or another. And BIG recalls, too. Where is the quality?
I picked up a 2004 Nissan Frontier with 112k miles on it to be my "dump hauler". Other than routine maintenance and general road wear repairs, the truck lasted to 200k miles! Drove it on several cross country trips; great gas mileage. We've been Nissan fans ever since. Traded that Saturn in on a 2015 Nissan Rogue. Got almost 90k miles on the Rogue now and other than routine maintenance and road wear repairs, the car has been superb. Finally drove that old Frontier into the ground last year, upgraded it to a 2019 model. Just a wonderful vehicle.
I know we're done with American cars.
I bet you burn the flag on the front lawn too.
Good for you princess
You buy Nissans to avoid planned obsolence...
Bruhhhhh
That's like trying to quit heroin by smoking crack
The EPA was started in 1970 under the Nixon administration...
The Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act were signed into law the same year.
@@edwardmiessner6502 correct😁
@@2.7petabytes Emissions controls on cars began appearing earlier, as noted in the film. I recall that 1963 cars had Positive Crankcase Ventilation, a simple technology that reduced a fair percentage of pollution. This was driven by government regulations.
@@boggy7665 you are correct as well. Except he said that the EPA put rules into affect in 1963, 7 years before the EPA was even an agency.
And no clean air act before that fact! Thank you for correcting this video's error
I think your assessment is spot on. The American car industry was caught flat footed; something so shocking and so unheard of that I think it took them some time to even realize it had happened. They were overwhelmed by poor economic conditions, unforeseen competition, government regulation, and unprecedented changes in consumer tastes. As a result, for the first time in generations, the American car industry was not leading, but rather reacting to an unfamiliar environment that they were no longer in control of. And as a result of that, American cars went through a period of being the bare minimum they needed to be and little more. The sort of cars you make when all your effort is spent putting out fires all day. When it started, who can say with certainty, but I think it first became unavoidably visible around 1974 when cars were suddenly being forced to address cultural shifts they had not been designed for. I think it then ran all the way until a bit of leadership, innovation, and competitiveness began to peak through around the introduction of the Ford Taurus, the Pontiac 6000 STE, the 4th gen Corvette, the Dodge Caravan, the turbo Thunderbird…like 84’-85’. Like you said. That’s not to say there weren’t notable attempts during this malaise time period - I think the Cosworth Vega was a little misguided but certainly interesting. The 78’-80’ Pontiac Grand Am was possibly the first successful attempt by America to make something akin to a Euro-style sports sedan. Also, theres the Mustang II; an important car which probably could have been executed better. But it was an American car that was actually paying attention to what was going on and was trying the hardest to adapt to it. I give the little II credit for effort.
Too many errors in this video to keep track of!
Quite correct.
the wider picture it presents of the trajectory of the car industry in relation to the geopolitics of the time is well represented, individual factual errors aside
You haven't even listed one mistake.
@@citylimits8927 Ford was not the first mass produced car, that credit goes to Olds Motor Works and the Curved Dash Runabout. While not in the mass number as the Model T, few manufacturers were building more than 100 cars a year prior to the production of the Olds Curved Dash Runabout. Olds was rolling out 1500 plus cars a year on the industry's first assembly line. Plymouth was not purchased by Chrysler, Chrysler created the Plymouth brand. Bill Durant formed General Motors with the merger of Buick and Oldsmobile and later added others. As a result of where the comment appears in the video they make it sound like the brands that GM, Ford, and Chrysler purchased was during the 1950's. All of the brands mentioned became part of the Big Three long before the 1950s. The comments about how long the cars lasted and that second hand dealers ended with cars that were beyond repair is grossly exaggerated. They also mention V8 and V6 engines, American manufacturers were making mostly V8, straight 8s, and inline 6 cylinder engines. The first American V6 was offered by Buick in 1962 and other American manufacturers wouldn't start offering them until the late 1970s. The video makes reference that AMC first offered automatic transmission and tandem brakes before the Big Three offered them as options, this is false. Oldsmobile invented the automatic transmission and it became standard on many cars before AMC. Comparing a 1972 Toyota Corona to a 1972 Ford LTD is totally unfair. Ford offered a Maverick for nearly the same price as a Toyota Corona in 1972. Closer in size with both six and V8 engines available. The Ford Maverick first came to market as a 1970 model in 1969 not 1973. The first Chevrolet Chevette was a 1976 model available in the fall of 1975. Downsizing began in 1975 with the first Cadillac Seville and 1977 with GM's large cars.
@@Jetjay Yes, there were mistakes made with the V6 versus inline-6 claim, Plymouth, and the claim that the Maverick came out in 1973, but your reply also has A LOT MORE. This is still a very good video overall. I know from firsthand experience, because I lived through the malaise era and owned a couple of those cars.
For starters, nowhere in the video does it say, “AMC first offered automatic transmission and tandem brakes before the big 3 offered them as options.” What it says at 7:15 is “Automatic Shift INDICATOR SEQUENCE and a standard tandem master cylinder that would stop the care in the event of a brake failure”, both of which are true.
As for the tandem master brake cylinders, AMC offered them on the Rambler Classic in 1962, several years before the federal government mandated them in 1967. Cadillac was the only other car company to do so.
The Rambler offered an automatic transmission with an indicator sequence that read” P R N D2 D1 L, where if one selected "D2", the car started in second gear, while "1" began in first gear. It predated the mandatory “PRNDSL” indicator that was mandated starting in 1968.
Also, nowhere in the video does it say or even IMPLY that the brands that GM, Ford, and Chrysler purchased were “during the 1950s.” It merely calls the at 3:45 “a trio of firms that HAD expanded their empires through the purchase of dozens of individual car brands (obviously the word HAD means that those purchases could have been made years or decades before the "50s) such as Buick, Cadillac, Lincoln, Plymouth, and Oldsmobile were big players in the 50s. It doesn’t say WHEN they had done so, and it only implies that by the 1950’s that they were the big players. And, apart from Plymouth, these individual brands were bought.
Your idea that comparing the tiny Toyota Corona with the typically enormous American big car Ford LTD sedan was “totally unfair” is ridiculous! The video maker simply needed a way to contrast the enormous size of the American V8 land barges (which was the large part of the Detroit automakers’ offerings) with what was being introduced from Japan. The Ford Maverick may have been closer in size and price and may have been started as an import-fighter, but it offered less fuel-efficient six-cylinder and V8 engines.
The assembly line issue is a very minor mistake. The Curved Dash Olds was the first crude assembly line produced automobile, but Henry Ford was undoubtedly the one who perfected the assembly line. 19,000 curved dash Oldsmobiles, while Ford sold over 15 million Model Ts. Wikipedia even states: “Although credit for the development of the assembly line belongs to Ransom E. Olds, with the first mass-produced automobile, the Oldsmobile Curved Dash, having begun in 1901, the tremendous advances in the efficiency of the system over the life of the Model T can be credited almost entirely to Ford and his engineers.”
I have a 69 Cadillac eldorado and 71 Lincoln continental mark iii
Don't forget Mercury on that list of subsidiary manufacturers, great video!!
The big V6 and V8 Engines in American cars of the 1960's where used in new powerboats until just a few years ago.
The reliability and durability of American made cars in the 1970s and 80s was atrocious. And they never implemented safety improvements unless forced by the federal government to do so.
Yes and no. The American cars of the 1970s and 80s started using a lot more plastic in the interior than the cars of the 1960s. The plastic would rattle a bit before they figured out how to screw it all together properly. Reliability wise 70s and 80s cars are very decent cars, just low on power.
AMC's connection to Renault was it's ultimate downfall. As AMC did not have the money to develop a front wheel drive platform, it turned to Renault. Renault quality was far inferior to AMC'S previous models. While the R9 was assembled by amc, the engine and transmission were imported from France. Failure rates were huge.
AMC's failure was spending all it's money developing the Pacer, which looks weird and was underpowered due to the loss of the Wankel engine they were to have purchased from GM, due to emissions and the fuel crises causing GM to shutter the project. The Chevy Monza was also to have used that engine.
@@seed_drill7135 And the 1974 Matador Coupe was a failure on its own, but doubly so as a giant land yacht appearing just when the first fuel crisis broke. Also a wasted investment for body tooling, though the underpinnings were just standard Matador.
How can that be? According to the narrator cars from outside the USA were all superior, and paragons of quality and efficiency! Of course he fails to note AMC's outdated engineering and styling, and lack of economies of scale. They were forced to find a partner to bail them out because of that.
@@ab348 Efficiency yes, quality, no. Chrysler also had to turn to its French division, Talbot, for its first FWD models. The Horizon was certainly what the company needed to limp along until the K platform was developed, but they aren't cars anyone remembers fondly (except the Shelby version).
@@seed_drill7135 And the Talbot engines were so great that Chrysler was forced to buy VW engines to put in the Horizon for the first few years.
the excess of the land yatchs is back in the US, in the form of full-size SUV and pick-ups. Will history repeat itself?
Probably, let’s get ourselves a new 2cv
@@gwyneddboom2579 I'm more of a Fiat 600 person
Been a fan of Yank metal since I was 13 and saw a photo of '53 Cadillac in a magazine and I was hooked for life. Great documentary.
I appreciate the love for AMC!
I have that 72 LTD. I bought it new. I would buy it twice again over those crappy Japanese cars. They ran fairly well and were reliable, but if you got hit by a 70s American car, your head would be up your ass, because that WAS the “crumple zone”.
The good old days when the windshield was your airbag . Lol
As someone who owned a 1971 Custom 500 (The cheaper version of an LTD) Equipped with the 351W 5.8L FMX Auto and 3.25:1 Gears... the 1972 302 12MPG "Average" number seems quite low, although I didn't drive much "City"... BUT, my car never returned less than 14...got 17-18 on most tanks...and on one long 3000 mile trip averaged 21 on ALL Hwy (BUT I had to keep it under 70MPH) - I would not want to take that little Toyota (or even my newer one) on that 3000 mile road trip!
15:03 Various re-workings of that Chevette were manufactured in GM factories around the world, but were all built on the same Isuzi platform, mechanicals, & engines, from Japan! Here in Australia it was sold as the GMH (Holden) Gemini!
The Chevette was based on a Opel model not a Isuzu.
GM used the Opel Kadett design as a basis for the Chevette.
When German manufactured Opel vehicles were no longer imported into the United States they were replaced with a Isuzu Gemini rebadged as a Opel by Isuzu.
@@williamegler8771 The platform was used amongst many GM brands doesnt really matter if originated in Germany or Japan or Aus or US
@@madlionau The Chevette was developed from a Opel design and was manufactured in the United States.
It was conceived well before GM had any partnership with Isuzu.
The Isuzu Gemini used a totally different chassis and was larger than the Chevette and neither the Chevette or Kadett used any significant parts, other than the 1.8 liter diesel , produced in Japan.
True the basic design was manufactured by GM in several factories around the world but it wasn't, as the original reply suggested , a product of Isuzu design and manufacturer.
Small correction to the assertion made around 2:10 -- the cars of the era you are referring to there were not powered by V6 and V8 engines; they were powered by straight 6 and V8 engines. V6s didn't become popular until much later in the US car industry, when compact cars became more popular, and the compact dimensions of the V6 became enough of an advantage to make up for the difficulties engineers always have compensating for the inherent primary imbalance in the V6 configuration. Inline 6s are inherently balanced, which is great, but they are long and narrow and make inefficient use of the space inside the engine bay, so when cars got smaller, they were out. Also, a V6 is better for transverse mounting to go with front wheel drive. When rear wheel-drive, full size cars were the hot sellers, that wasn't really a problem. and most American cars of the golden era of motoring had a straight 6 as the base model engine.
As I recall British cars werent all that reliable either. Whom ever wrote this seems like the kind of guy that likes the smell of his own farts!!!
You completely overlooked how Ford, Chrysler (Simca and Routes Group) and GM’s European operations (Opel and Vauxhall) were basically scaling down there American counterparts cars some of these include the Ford Anglia and Consul (later the Mk1 Cortina), The Opel Kadett and various Vauxhalls before the Cavalier came out in 1975. These cars had small efficient engines normally below 2.0l and as a result the European cars lived on as their old selves. The only problem was that they never exported them back to the US except for the Opel Escona (known as the 1300 there) for a brief time.
I remember the import Plymouth cricket that was being sold in the early seventies at the Chrysler, Plymouth,dodge dealership. A very cheaply made car to sell to the masses with decent gas mpg.
I never seen one on the road, and from what I did hear about them was that like all the other imports of that time it was just trash. After two yrs the dealership quit trying to sell them
15:50 I still love to drive my 1972 Hillman Avenger. Plymouth Cricket in USA.
One of my high school teachers had a Plymouth Cricket. He traded it in lss than a year for a less-unreliable full-size Chrysler.
@@johnpinckney4979 My Hillman Avenger is boringly reliable. It did break down once about 8 years ago, but it was a simple electrical repair.
The Plymouth Cricket was maybe not quite what USA customers wanted. The handling is superb, you can chuck it around corners until the tyres squeal like a little sports car. But in the 1970s, USA customers were still happy with sloppy suspension cars which handled like a boat.
@@video99couk My electronics teacher didn't have his Cricket on the road long enough to comment on the handling. It was almost always in the shop! It wasn't just big cars that had lousy suspension back then. My 1974 Ford Pinto station wagon was also pretty bad. Big American cars didn't have to handle bad or get bad gas mileage. As a retired MP, my father routinely ordered the "police package" at the GM or Ford District Office. They "looked" normal. Until you saw the dual exhausts, stabilizer bars, heavy-duty cooling and electrical, etc. His last one, a 1973 Galaxie 500 with a 351C V8 gave a res[ectable19 mpg. Not bad for a 4,400 lb. car. But, he was also a professionally trained driver...
@@johnpinckney4979 I wonder what the faults were on the Cricket. The Hillman Avenger certainly didn't have a poor reliability record in the UK, it was a pretty conventional car so the technology was all well understood. Compared to other cars of the time, it was usually very reliable.
@@video99couk IIRC, the ills were a mix of electrical, but with other ills related to the automatic transmission and the air conditioning/pverheating. The a/c problems were very common on 4-cylinder cars back then. Especially with an automatic transmission. On my Pinto, when turning on the a/c, I used to say, "Firing retro rockets!"...Also, it's not unusual for British cars to have problems in this climate. Summertime temps can hit 104F/40C with humidity of 85-95% and brutally cold winters with snow measured in feet and wind chills going into the negative double digits, Now, add to the mix, traffic that ranks as among the worst in the U.S., and you have a recipe for disaster. I suggest you take a look online at the local news shows from our major TV stations: WRC-TV, WTTG-TV, WJLA-RV, and WUSA-TV to see what we have to deal with,. Tomorrow should be interesting as we're supposed to get our worst snow in a couple of years! Cheers!
A statement that will get you comments: American cars did not have V6 engines. The standard 6 cylinder models were inline-6s, which is a very different architecture. V6s did not arrive until manufacturers responded to the oil-crisis of the 70s by lopping 2 cylinders off of their V8s.
Actually, Buick did that in 1962, but it wasn't a big seller for them, so they sold it to AMC.
@@seed_drill7135 The Buick V6 was sold to Kaiser which used it in Jeeps. After AMC bought Jeep, AMC substituted their own inline 6s. By 1975, GM bought the V6 tooling back from AMC & put it back into production. As it was a 90-degree V6, it ran like a V8 with two cylinders missing. (I rode in one of those & it was disconcerting-felt like something was wrong.) It wasn't until GM re-engineered it a few years later with offset crank pins that it became a smooth running engine.
@@boggy7665 I DROVE one of those for almost 15 years. 1976 Sunbird. It was the last year of the Oddfire.
Mid 70's to mid 80's, the age of the 'spaghetti motor'. You couldn't eve see the engine because of the insane amount rubber hoses running everywhere connecting up all the tons of junk needed to meet the emissions standards.
My friend's Dad simply disconnected these hoses and corked them with golf tees, on the 1977 Toyota Land Cruiser that Dave inherited. 1990s California reg'ns requiring all factory smog crap to be there meant my friend had to give up his original well-running go anywhere truck.
your right...it was the biggest problem
Well America was always better at marketing, than producing cars. Those cars were like beautiful women, beautiful to look at, but impossible to live with.
That's because underneath they were basically lard-arses!
We lived 50 miles from anywhere and these were what we drove.
You have a strange taste in women! To the British eye these cars were loud, gaudy brash and unsophisticated. The fact that as the world motor industries opened up, and the US style was dropped, shows perhaps the style was "unique" to the US in its beauty.
@@rodneylowe9526 Big and loud:-) Don't forget what junk was made in rest of the world at the time. British cars ... they were even worse.
@@sjoormen1 they wrre dreadful. But genuinely innovative. Badly underfunded, poorly managed and built by militant workforces who didnt care. But they fit on the road and didnt suffer from petrol stayion constipation. (Ie they couldnt pass one). Some were nice looking too, we made splendid sports cars, graceful large saloons, and designs of our small cars were cute and often ftom the pen of Italian design houses. But yes, there were a few pigs.
BIG MISTAKE, which shows you aren't as much of a car expert as you'd like people to believe. The American cars of the 1950s, '60s, and early '70s used STRAIGHT six cylinder engines, NOT V 6s. The V6 did not begin to be used in U.S. cars until the change from rear wheel to front wheel drive, because they needed a shorter engine in order to fit in the WIDTH under the hood, since such engines mount sideways and make the engineering simpler for front wheel drive.
Please note that when something is cheap to run, it is not “economic.” The correct term is “economical.” “Economic” just means: “To do with money.”
This was a very interesting presentation and an accurate one as well. It seems that there are still some lessons that must be learned; American car companies have never really been able to make money on smaller cars. This is why the large land yacht of the 60s-80s has become the pickup & SUV today, with Ford no longer even selling cars (save for the Mustang) in the US market (because they aren't profitable). If they could only sort the profitability problem, things might be better for them.
Actually, it is full of inaccuracies, especially the part of cars of the 50s and 60s only lasting 3-5 years and then being scrapped. Those cars lasted for decades. This guy has no idea about the American car market.
A minor critique -- at 2:10, you mention "V-6" engines. There were very few V-6s in American cars at that period, they were virtually all I-6s. It wasn't until the early-to-mid '70s that V-6s became a noticeable portion of the market.
Most car makers offered sixes from the ‘60’s and ‘70’s but most people didn’t want them
Excellent video!
Almost nothing back then used V6 engines but good video. Inline 6 was the popular engine for the torque.
06:02 Had a family saloon once. Dad drank all the profits!
The fuel bill from that 8.2 litre engine must have been horrendous, even before the oil crisis.
Ensign Cthulhu well, the fuel volume for sure. Not so sure about the cost.
We owned three and they would average between 24 and 27 on the highway. I got 28 miles per gallon once, driving the speed limit,
@@foowashere You just reminded me of a thing Mad Magazine did around that time, a riff on the old Solomon Grundy nursery rhyme, detailing him filling his tank more than once a day. It described the car he was driving, and it might even have been this monster.
Yes, but if you could afford a Caddy, you didn't worry about how much fuel you were using.
I have a triple black 1990 Cadillac Brougham d'Elegance, will replace the tiny 5.7 Chevy engine with a Cadillac 500. Keep your Cadillac all Cadillac.
Nice video. I personally have a love affair with our automobiles from the late 30s to the early 80's. There are a few sprinkled in in other decades as well. The malaise era, I love so many. There was so much style, color and options available. Who could not love a 1977 Lincoln Mark V all emerald green - everything, including the leather interior. Oh, did I forget the wonderful deep velour and shag carpeting? Underpowered after 72 or 73 and like you say choked off with emission equipment, but I love them just the same and have owned several large ones. One has to remember that these cars were made for those that grew up with a hard life and could finally have something amazing. They were made to be driven with one finger and have very touch brakes so you didn't have to push to hard and power everything. To Hell with what Top Gear says about them. They were never designed to handle or run around track or have a manual transmission. This was a luxury and style era with an amazing ride. Top Gear wants something to take to the track and flog to death. To hell with their opinion. I, as many others, wanted to go out and drive a colorful, quiet, comfortable, stylish living room couch to wherever we wanted to go and arrive unsoiled. Thank you for the video!
Wow, there are a lot of wrong information in this video. Particularly the part in which cars from the 50s and 60s were scrapped after only a few years due to mechanical failure. Many cars from that era were on the roads for decades without any major issues. When I was a teenager in the 80s you could easily find cars from the 60s in good running order for a reasonable price. My first car was a 1967 model, and my second was from 1964.
I still own several old cars, with some not having anything done to them but general maintenance. My 1968 New Yorker has over 150,000 miles on it and it is 100% original, the only thing done to the engine was valve cover gaskets replaced, water pump replacement, alternator replaced, and a new distributor (upgraded to electronic ignition). It was a friend of mines grandfathers car that he inherited and I bought it off of him about 10 years ago. All the service history came with it, and I have put an additional 30,000 or so miles on it since owning it, including several cross country trips. I also drive a 1970 Dodge truck on a regular basis. It is unrestored with a slant 6 and has God knows how many miles on it. The speedometer hasn’t worked since I bought it 30 years ago. So no, cars from that era definitely were not built to only last a few years, that is a complete lie.
And now everyone in the US drives big, gas guzzling pickup trucks and SUVs instead of cars. They'll never learn 🙄
Not just the US with the swamping of roads with SUVs.
Not all, but certainly too many that don't need either, especially with pickups.
That's a bigoted overgeneralization
Learn? They were forced to drive pickups when large sedans were outlawed. It is just an example of government communism.
@@ImForwardlook Can you elaborate on what you mean by "Communism" in this context?
Very interesting and comprehensive. Good job!
An interesting video, well researched and presented. It always amazes me the way the big three, so used to having just about the whole US market to themselves, up until the late sixties,, selling huge gas guzzling cars, only to lose it so quickly, as they just couldn't get their heads around building small economical cars when needed. Unfortunately, back in the mid seventies, any American cars that got anywhere close to 20mpg was classed as economy models. They were not. If you look at video footage of a highway from the 50/60's almost every car is from one of big three and many from AMC. Fast forward 20 years, it's a very different story, plus AMC no longer exists.
American cars weren't done in 3-5 years. Most had a service life of around 15. The second hand market thrived. Yes, the upper-middle class bought new car every 3-5 years. Also, once again, great that you give credit where it's due, but you don't actually use that word "credit." "Footage," "Video," or "Audio."
Yeah, well, I remember driving 1960s and ‘70s cars and they were pretty worn out by 50 thousand miles. But the British imports of that era were even worse! Something this British documentary forgets to mention. And nearly all those Brit car makers are gone, while the American big three are doing well.
Agreed. My oldest brother's first car, bought in 1977, was built in 1948. His second was built in 1964. My first car was built they year I was born. In my whole life my father only bought two cars that were less than ten years old. And my grandfather, who distinctly favored Chrysler products, said the engines weren't really broken in until they reached 150,000 miles. These were replaced with front wheel drive models in the 1980s that came with a 5 year/50,000 mile warranty that was the best in the business, but those engines were famous for developing terminal oil pressure problems at around 60,000 miles. Which is why my uncle drove his 1975 Plymouth Scamp well into the 1990s.
The most worn-out car I have ever owned was also the one with the fewest miles on it: It was a 1973 Toyota Corolla that I bought in 1996 with 73,000 original miles. It had a 2-speed automatic and the previous owner warned me "the last time that transmission was rebuilt they said it was the last time that transmission COULD BE rebuilt."
I feel like that was the most inaccurate thing in the whole video. If you look at people such as myself that are still driving 30-60 year old American cars in 2021, it's proof they can actually run almost indefinitely with basic maintenance. It's absolute nonsense that these vehicles only had three to five years of service life.
@rustyjeep
That’s what I’ve always said, if all these American cars were junk then why are there so many left being driven on the road today?
But what you don’t see is many tieyotas and a lot of imported junk on the road of the same era.
People scrapped them after awhile apparently, not worth keeping them around when they broke down. Probably made into a bird bath or a hammer, something useful
Just wanted to clear something up. The planned obsolescence shared by most GM, Ford, and Dodge cars did not make them unreliable. Rather what they did was simply update the design to make the old design feel dated and get people to buy newer cars. 60's cars were still very reliable cars. Also the 1963 clean air act didn't really take effect until the clean air act of 1970.
A big reason those old cars didn't last as long as modern ones simply comes down to the materials and technologies available at the time. Modern cars have the benefit of modern materials.
For example, car engines used to wear out or need rebuilds very early on by our standards today (sometimes even within 50-80K miles), because lubricants of the period were so primitive.
Back when I was younger, old (sometimes not so old) cars emitting varying degrees of blue oilsmoke were a common sight on the road. Nowadays it's a rarity.
@@LN997-i8x Exactly that too. Lubricants from the 50s and 60s were crap. Project farm did a video on that.
Very interesting, particularly happy that AMC got a mention!
Though there were mistakes in that part too, just like most of the video.
Whilst an interesting film it’s filled with historical and technical inaccuracies. As an example, the EPA wasn’t formed until 1970 not as the video mentions 1963.
Still love station wagons to this day. Dating in a brand new '66 Merc wagon was always a gas and I managed to shoehorn 12 girls into it one day after high school, giving them all a ride home. Yes, really.
On the way I stopped at a red light and a police cruiser stopped for the light right next to me and one of the girls yelled _"Hey girls, what grows on peaches?"_ and all 12 of them yelled *_"FUZZ!"_* at the top of their lungs.
I looked at the officer and he just shook his head with a grin and drove away. I was singing lead for a local band at the time which didn't hurt my currency at school.
I loved the '60s. SADARAR as real.
Memories - I turn 76 in two months and now I just ride an 1100cc Yammie cruiser, a '99 Virago. My riding partner and best friend is my daughter and she rides an ' '88 1100cc Honda.
Did the math on supporting a car year round and what did I really need it for vs. the bike in the summer and cabs to work in the winter and came up $3,000 to the good if I got rid of the car, which I immediately did 14 years ago. You can ride in a helluva lot of taxis for three large.
Just for the record the Merc had a 240 cube straight six with a three in the tree that would out pull any stock 283 I met.
Sorry about the spontaneous memoir, Rory but RHIP as we both know. Thank you and
Cheers from E. Ontario, CDA
I find it unbelievable that a production of this size would identify the EPA as making regulations in 1963 when it did not exist until the Nixon Administration. EPA was born in July 1970
"The Malaise Era" seems to attach itself to more than just American cars, the post-Vietnam budgets meaning that early 1900's era slums were left unfixed, as was early 20th c. infrastructure, drugs, La Cos Nostra, Civil Rights; all highly challenging issues at the time.
Intelligent and well presented
Jkirk A Brit telling us about American Cars?.I don't think so, If any Brit want's to talk about some of the worst cars I think they should talk about their home country first!.
I am quite sure the author will get around to British Leyland in due course
@@michaelweizer7794 Being British does not automatically make someone unable to discuss American cars. That's simply stupid reasoning.
Numerous quite good American small cars with small displacement engines were available including the Willys Jeep station wagons, Hudson Jet, the Nash Metropolitan, the Ford Falcon, the Chevrolet Nova, the Dodge Dart, the Chevrolet Corvair, etc. They were poor sellers because larger more powerful cars were overall a better fit for the long journeys on highways and family sizes. Remember that the entire England/Scotland land mass is much smaller than just the state of Texas. It's a longer drive from El Paso to Nacadoches than from El Paso to Los Angeles, CA. A little VW Bug totally sucked on that drive.
Excellent video! Well researched, well narrated, well assembled... A top-quality video like this is not easy to find! I'm subscribing right now!
Having grown up in this time period I can remember the biggest problem with the early Japanese cars was with the bodies rusting out in northern US because of road salt in winter.
It was a problem because the engines would be in good shape mechanically usually longer than the bodies of the cars would hold up. I remember bombing around back roads in the 80s in a, I think, a very rusted 1971 Toyota Corona wagon. Good times. I also bought a 1986 Cavalier in 1988 that my future, well and present wife drove, while I got rid my 1987 Camaro do to outrageous insurance costs, and bought a brand new Nissan 4X4 pickup. Base as base can be. Of course I was sort of young and hadn't really cared about car payments as long as I could make them. 🤔😎
Lots of distortions here.
Does not understand the late 50s demand for smaller cars with Rambler and Studebaker doing so well. Led soon after to the Ford Falcon, Chrysler Valiant and chev Corvair. All six cylinder lighter cars. Then soon after the chev nova. Except Corvair all were inline sixes. Falcon sold near as many as the Mustang in its early years and the Mustang was based on it.
Quotes the largest engine option as being standard, but even full size were mostly in line sixes until the late sixties.
VW Beetle impact ignored.
There was a fairly major recession in the late 50's that caused AMC to resurrect the Rambler American and Studebaker to lop several inches off both ends of it's standard sedan and create the Lark. And the big three to follow suit in 1960.
@@seed_drill7135 The recession combined with Big 3 autos that had grown in size so much that many garages in the era wouldn't hold them.
@@boggy7665 I've seen old text that parking garages had to refuse the '59 Cadillac, as they couldn't be maneuvered around the turns.
A great take on how USA's economic and political policy developments forced greater sophistication upon its own car industry and I am grateful. Machine-gun fast narration and simple research errors detract from this fine analysis - as others here have explained - but thank you!
Excellent - the Chrysler V8 was fitted in the Jensen Interceptor, a model which could be sold to people wealthy enough for 12mpg. The older Ford Pilot was a V8 from 1950, well built but heavy with 14mpg on UK roads - far too expensive for its middle manager target market.
I could never understand why Chrysler did not use the Hillman Hunter from 1969 in the American market - ticked all the boxes outlined in the video. Management at the time, UK and US, not really up to speed.
Chrysler had a much more successful option with Mitsubishi sourced cars compared to Hillman. Same in Australia. Chrysler dumping Hillman and marketing Mitsubishi much more successfully. Mitsubishi did so well in Australia that they took over Chrysler the plant as the Valiants were struggling by 1980.
Just plastic boxes full of sensors now!
You can drive something you like and possibly die or you can drive something boring and survive.
But but much safer
... modern cars are much safer, that is
but much faster, safer, and with much better technology (not only limited to electronic progress)
@@sheevone4359 Or you can learn how to drive properly and survive like I have for more than 40 years of driving . That is with Canadian winters .
EPA ha!! My ‘48 Chevy has a road draft tube that funnels crankcase fumes straight into the atmosphere. We don’t need no stinking pvc valve. Also whenever I park on cement it looks like the Exxon Valdez ran aground there.
1973 Oil Crisis. . . When the Oil companies were keeping tankers at sea while the prices were rising. . .
Because they had all been unloaded, and had nowhere to go to load up again. They were EMPTY.
The OPEC oil embargo was really the beginning of the Middle East countries losing control of their only real export. Price increases in oil caused American car companies to produce more fuel efficient cars, and encouraged the American oil companies to develop more fuel resources here instead of importing them. In 2020, we now have some of the most fuel efficient cars in the world, including electrics and hybrids, and the country is nearly fuel independent. It's a good example of how monopolies have no long term future.
We did 😭
Loved it! Can't wait for the next one! Keep up the good work 👏
I will still take my old 1966 Lincoln Town Car any day over any of these Toys you are pumping up ... You don't find anyone looking for a Gremlin or Pacer in the Antique Car Market .
AMC did pump out one good product before their death, the 1984 Jeep Cherokee XJ, like the Dodge Caravan it basically created the SUV boom we all know today.
It should be pointed out that the Cherokee XJ was designed mostly by Renault.
The car that became the Eagle Premier was engineered by AMC and Renault. It's underpinnings were the basis for all of Chrysler's "cab forward" cars that saved them once again, as they had nothing in house to replace the aging K-platform.
That maket segment was not attributed to the Cherokee in most of the world, we had been driving Subaus and even Ladas years prior, and American cars started few trends outside the US, though there were a couple.. Trouble for them is there were foreign, initially Japanese, makers who built better designs.
@@shebbs1 Not completely true in the case of the Cherokee XJ as it was technically innovative in several ways. Renault and AMC designed it to be the right format for worldwide sale and indeed the 4-cylinder and diesel versions were a planetary success. At the time, it's Selec-Trac transfer with its ability to shift between 2wd, full-time 4wd (open diff), and part-time 4wd (locked diff) on the fly was unique in world production. The Lada Niva, for example, has to come to a full stop in order to engage diff lock and it has no 2wd mode. Ditto for the Range Rover of the day. The Japanese SUVs of the time had to come to a full-stop just to switch between 2wd and 4wd, and many still required manually locking the front hubs when going into 4wd. In the end the Cherokee XJ was produced or assembled in many countries with the last one being produced in China in 2014.
If memory serves me, wasn't the Grand Cherokee (ZJ) in the works as well, which was another reason to for Chrysler to buy AMC?
I love the 1930-ish automobile keeping up with those of the 50s at (1:25)!
Great video.
Add a condensor microphone and ambient sounds/music ?
To be fair to the Pinto, as we see from the footage it primarily set fire to the car that had rear ended it.
In the beginning of the video you mention the inventions of technological advancements incl. power brakes and steering car travel was improved. I think automatic transmissions should be in there as well. I like your videos sir keep them coming!