• CaptainPedantic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    9 months ago

    Sure, the Versa is a crummy, low trim model. But look at what you get in the Versa compared to the Pontiac despite that:

    • Fuel injection
    • Front disc brakes
    • Power brakes
    • Automatic transmission
    • FM radio
    • Bluetooth
    • Backup camera
    • A damn rear view mirror (Wikipedia says this was optional on the Pontiac)
    • Air conditioning
    • Power steering
    • Airbags
    • Crumple zones
    • Seat belts
    • Traction control
    • Anti-lock brakes
    • Same power, but vastly improved fuel economy
    • 1,000 lbs of weight savings
    • Radial tires
    • Halogen headlights
    • Reverse lights

    The list goes on I’m sure. It costs more because you get so much more stuff, a lot of which is for safety.

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Yeah, these older cars went slower and were death traps. The passenger cabin was the “crumple zone”. People went flying through the windshield in a crash that would be easily survivable by the 80s.

      • Pirky@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        On top of that, the odometer only went to 99,999 before resetting. Implying they didn’t intend the vehicles to last much longer than 100k miles.

        • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          And you had to do more service more often such as tune ups for adjusting points ignition. And I think in some engines, adjusting valve lash since hydraulic lifters didn’t become ubiquitous until later?

          • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Yup, and king pins, suspension joints and pretty much every other moving part needed greasing constantly since sealed rubber boots, and tough plastics hadn’t been invented yet (let alone ball/spherical joints).

            On the plus side, if you or kept up maintenance the joints would last a longer time, but back then the engines weren’t usually as reliable, and relied on leased gas to prevent detonation and valve wear. Now if a ball joint or wheel bearings fail, you just realize the whole assembly. So more waste, but less maintenance.

          • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            And I think in some engines, adjusting valve lash since hydraulic lifters didn’t become ubiquitous until later?

            Many engines even up to the mid 2000’s also needed valve adjustments. Honda F-series engines are notorious for it. The only difference is improvements in metallurgy mean the valve seats no longer recess nearly as much, and thing like the Honda F22’s only need the adjustment every 60k or so rather than every 10.

            • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Interesting. I thought I vaguely recalled some modern vehicle needing it. Every 60k isn’t too bad though. I think my 60s Datsun needed it more often.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The Nissan is indeed an objectively “Better” car, but compared to it’s market (as the Pontiac is comparing itself to it’s own market) it is still a crummy car.
      The fact is that all those (legally mandated) improvements do make them more expensive overall.