Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-05-2012, 12:22 AM   #533
Moderator
 
HiHoAgRV's Avatar

 
1991 34' Excella
1963 26' Overlander
1961 26' Overlander
Central , Mississippi
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,326
Images: 29
Blog Entries: 49
As bad as I hate it... Google "59 Chevy verses 2009 impala" and watch the you tube video. The older 'mass' verses the newer designed crush zones is absolutely incredible.

It burns my buns that a 59 had to get crushed to make that video!
__________________

__________________
Hi Ho Silver RV! Vernon, Sarah, Mac the Border Collie -
A honkin' long 34' named AlumaTherapy http://www.airforums.com/forums/f205...num-54749.html
and a 26' '63 Overlander, Dolly http://www.airforums.com/forums/f109...ome-71609.html
HiHoAgRV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2012, 12:40 AM   #534
Rivet Master
 
Diesel1's Avatar
 
1967 24' Tradewind
Wickenburg , Arizona
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 546
I work on & around new cars a lot. From what I've seen the new cars are way ahead of the old kool cars in terms of safety. That being said I will continue to drive the ole dogs..... I just like em. Kinda like riding a motorsickle, they ain't safe but it sure is fun!
What I don't understand are the safety minded people who think nothing of welding/ bolting large hunks of iron to the rear of their cars to prove that they will tow as good as a pickup. They effectivly destroy the crush/crumple zone as they happily flit about. If one of those modified vehicles ever gets rearended they are in for a grusome surprise.
__________________

__________________
Diesel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2012, 01:04 AM   #535
Rivet Master
 
Diesel1's Avatar
 
1967 24' Tradewind
Wickenburg , Arizona
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 546
As for the video I'll believe it is real when Mythbusters replicate it. I worked for an outfit that made training video's, quite easy to make the camera lie!
__________________
Diesel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2012, 01:04 AM   #536
2 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Thousand Oaks , California
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel1 View Post
I work on & around new cars a lot. From what I've seen the new cars are way ahead of the old kool cars in terms of safety. That being said I will continue to drive the ole dogs..... I just like em. Kinda like riding a motorsickle, they ain't safe but it sure is fun!
What I don't understand are the safety minded people who think nothing of welding/ bolting large hunks of iron to the rear of their cars to prove that they will tow as good as a pickup. They effectivly destroy the crush/crumple zone as they happily flit about. If one of those modified vehicles ever gets rearended they are in for a grusome surprise.
Couldn't agree with you more about the fun. Power ,safety, efficiency, not so much. I learned to drive at 9 in a '50 Ford F-1 pickup. One of my neighbors has a nice restored '51, in it you're lucky to hit 45 mph by the end of a Freeway ramp and the old flathead is wound to the gills. It will pull a trailer alright but I don't want to be driving it.

I spent a bag of money restoring a '69 Z-28, fun car. We took it on a trip from Boston to Florida by the time we hit New Jersey on I-95 I was ready to leave it along side the road. It was uncomfortable, no ventilation, noisy and it used a lot of gas. I also thought it was kind of 'fun" to ride a 650 BSA from Boston to San Francisco and back in the summer of 67, too. I forgot how bad I felt everyday when I climbed off the Road Rocket and unrolled my sleeping bag.
__________________
SoCal Drive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2012, 01:10 AM   #537
2 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Thousand Oaks , California
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel1 View Post
As for the video I'll believe it is real when Mythbusters replicate it. I worked for an outfit that made training video's, quite easy to make the camera lie!
Check it out: Thoughts on the Impala Crash - 1959 vs. 2009 V8TV - YouTube
__________________
SoCal Drive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2012, 09:34 AM   #538
Rivet Master
 
FreshAir's Avatar

 
1966 24' Tradewind
Placerville , California
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,327
Images: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel1 View Post
I work on & around new cars a lot. From what I've seen the new cars are way ahead of the old kool cars in terms of safety. That being said I will continue to drive the ole dogs..... I just like em. Kinda like riding a motorsickle, they ain't safe but it sure is fun!
What I don't understand are the safety minded people who think nothing of welding/ bolting large hunks of iron to the rear of their cars to prove that they will tow as good as a pickup. They effectivly destroy the crush/crumple zone as they happily flit about. If one of those modified vehicles ever gets rearended they are in for a grusome surprise.
No matter the advantages/disadvantages of 'crumple' zones on the new vehicles driving old iron is great fun. For many years, and I have 70+ of them, I am surprised that I haven't heard of concerns of towing with a converitible. I am comfortable driving my mass of iron and more than adequate power. I've made it this far with great fun....and not ready to park 'it' yet.

Neil
__________________
Neil and Lynn Holman
FreshAir #12407

Avatar;
Kirk Creek, Big Sur, Ca. coast.

1966 Trade Wind

1971 Buick Centurion convertible
455 cid

1969 Oldsmobile Ninety Eight
455 cid
FreshAir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2012, 08:50 PM   #539
Rivet Master
 
Globie64's Avatar
 
1964 19' Globetrotter
The Sea Ranch , California
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,377
Images: 18
Blog Entries: 3
The later "iron" ie your Centurion had more safety stuff, collapsable steering column, the engine was designed to go under the passenger compartment in a crash, stuff like that, that the '59 didn't have. When I look at my Dart, I'm kind of amazed that those big fenders have nothing behind them- there are inner fenders in front and the parts of the unibody the suspension bolts to, but that's it. The trunk has less metal, just the exterior fenders, and the gas tank is the trunk floor, and no steel between the trunk and passengers. I love old cars too, love driving them, love the way they smell, but sitting here with a broken rib and bruises makes me more cautious. At the same time, driving the Dart makes me more careful, because it doesn't stop or steer the same as my Honda. The new cars lull you into inattention, while the older ones required more input and more thinking ahead. I am glad I had shoulder belts and an airbag hit my face instead of the pot metal convertible roof fasteners.
__________________
Wherever you go, there you are
Globie64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2012, 08:54 PM   #540
Rivet Master
 
Globie64's Avatar
 
1964 19' Globetrotter
The Sea Ranch , California
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,377
Images: 18
Blog Entries: 3
Oddly, my accident last week was on the anniversary of being rear ended on Highway 17 in Santa Cruz 33 years earlier. My '68 VW Squareback was totalled, we (two 17 year olds) walked away. That car had a lot of steel in the rear- I cut it apart with a air chisel, I know, and I used the engine in another car afterward. Glad the impact wasn't to the front, and the gas tank.
__________________
Wherever you go, there you are
Globie64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2012, 02:40 PM   #541
Vintage Kin
 
slowmover's Avatar
 
Fort Worth , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,598
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by vswingfield View Post
Big block Chryslers are not heavy engines. They are closer in weight to a small block Chevy. They're actually even easier to work on than a small block Chrysler (or Chevy for that matter). For instance, changing a water pump is a piece of cake compared to most engines.
Sorry . . they are about the heaviest (short of International). A "B" block (383) weighs a good deal more than a 454 Chev, and an "RB" (413 & 440) weighs just that much more again (75-100/lbs). Don't ask about a Hemi with those ginormous cylinder heads.

The external dimensions also need to be checked.

As to design and "work-ability", yes, they are outstanding. Materials in blcok and other internal components was also of higher quality than Ford or GM, generally (always better than Chevy). Will last longer in general service and be easier to re-build (but more expensive as "cheap" is the main Chevy virtue).
__________________
1990 35' Silver Streak Sterling; 9k GVWR.
2004 DODGE Cummins 305/555; 6-manual; 9k GVWR.
Hensley Arrow. 9-cpm solo, 15-cpm towing
Sold: Silver Streak Model 3411
slowmover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2012, 05:35 PM   #542
2 Rivet Member
 
2011 23' International
clovis , California
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 86
The highway death rate has dropped dramatically in the past decade largely due to the improvement in our automobiles. At a vintage auto show I will look lovingly at 57 Chevys and 66 Mustangs. I won't drive anything without an airbag.
__________________
jgerardi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2012, 06:33 PM   #543
Moderator dude
 
Action's Avatar

 
1966 26' Overlander
Phoenix , Arizona
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,067
Images: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgerardi View Post
I won't drive anything without an airbag.
While bags were made madatory in the US in 1998 and were an option on some vehicles prior to that, raw numbers don't indicate that air bags have made any difference.

List of motor vehicle deaths in U.S. by year - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From that initial year in 1998 to 2007 the fatality rate has been a little over 40,000 each year. This changed dramatically in 2008 with an almost 10,000 drop from 2007 to 2010.

Based on this I would suggest the economic down turn was deployed not an air bag. And the unintended result of a poor economy is less people died on the roads.

I don't know this as a fact, however I have heard that one of the driving habits of a person with a vehicle with air bags is to drive with less caution because of the protection the bag is thought to render.

Anyway I will get off of this detour. I really like my vintage rides! Including a motorcycle I just picked up that doesn't have a belt or a bag. And I do wear a helmet even though it isn't required in Arizona.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Action
__________________
1966 Mercury Park Lane 4 DR Breezeway 410 4V, C-6, 2.80 - Streamless.
1966 Lincoln 4 door Convertible 462 4V 1971 Ford LTD Convertible 429 4V Phoenix ~ Yeah it's hot however it's a dry heat!
Action is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2012, 09:50 AM   #544
Rivet Master
 
2007 25' Safari FB SE
Suburbia , Sunny So Cal
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,756
Thoughts and opinions on a 1973 Chevy

Considering a 1973 3/4 4X4 Chevy truck. 350/auto. It'll be towing a 25 foot FB.

I'd like to dodge CA's smog laws and go with an extremely simple truck to repair. I look under the hood of our 2002 Suburban and I am lost.

Can this truck haul the trailer at Fwy speeds and up a hill?
__________________
I'd rather be boon docking in the desert.

WBCCI 6731 FCU
AIR# 13896
CA 4
Goin camping is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2012, 10:07 AM   #545
Moderator dude
 
Action's Avatar

 
1966 26' Overlander
Phoenix , Arizona
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,067
Images: 13
What axle ratio?
Is the drive train in good condition?


In 1973 this vehicle has some emission controls if it is a 1/2 ton rated. (Not so much if over 1/2 ton)So you may be good with the 3/4 ton rated truck. I am not sure about CA, most other states are going to require all of that emission equipment to be present and the vehicle pass some performance test.

In AZ vehicles built prior to 1966 model year are exempt from any tests or inspections. Part of the reason I have 2 1966 vehicles.

>>>>>>>Action
__________________
1966 Mercury Park Lane 4 DR Breezeway 410 4V, C-6, 2.80 - Streamless.
1966 Lincoln 4 door Convertible 462 4V 1971 Ford LTD Convertible 429 4V Phoenix ~ Yeah it's hot however it's a dry heat!
Action is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2012, 11:52 AM   #546
Rivet Master
 
Diesel1's Avatar
 
1967 24' Tradewind
Wickenburg , Arizona
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goin camping View Post
Considering a 1973 3/4 4X4 Chevy truck. 350/auto. It'll be towing a 25 foot FB.

I'd like to dodge CA's smog laws and go with an extremely simple truck to repair. I look under the hood of our 2002 Suburban and I am lost.

Can this truck haul the trailer at Fwy speeds and up a hill?
It won't pull with the same gusto as your 02 Suburban. However if you don't mind a slower pace it will do just fine. I have found that a lot of people don't like the slower pace required with an old vehicle. There is also a bit of tinkering inherent with the old dogs.
I heartily recommend it! It is good fun!
__________________

__________________
Fortune cookie say....."Prudence keeps life safe, but does not often make it happy."
Diesel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.