"Everything New Sucks"

[Calzone]

I guess I should have said I perfered my old retro stuff; or even better, I am happy with my old retro stuff.

All of my cars have been used. I never owned a new car. The Scrambler mentioned above I bought when it was four years old and that has been the closest to a new car I have ever had.

If I had the money and could afford a new car I might, but the fact remains I have a strong attacment to my old Jeep/stuff/gear, and regardless, even if I bought a new car, I'd keep my old Jeep Scrambler.

There are some great new cars out there and perhaps one day I will own one, but in the meantime I'm happy walking and taking the subway, while I pay storage on my old Jeep.

As far as car accidents, certainly the new cars are engineered to be safer, but I will argue there are other factors like the laws of physics and driving skill. Although my Jeep does not have ABS it has 12 inch disc brakes on all four wheels and skillfull modulation is almost equally effective. Perhaps saying a new car is a thousand times more survivable is an exageration.

On a wet winding road by a golf course I had a head on collision with a 90's Caddy. I was driving a 1980 Checker Limo (like the old cabs, but streached a foot). It seems junior in the Caddy was doing 55 mph, when he crashed into me while I was doing 30 mph. The Caddy littered the road with eighty feet of plastic. The driver wasn't wearing his belt, hit the windshield, and then was deflected into trees where he had a secondary impact. The police took him to the hospital. The Checker with its full frame and mass likely saved me from any harm and only had a seat belt. I was not impressed by the Caddy in this accident.

Although I am a Cyclotron Engineer, and have worked in research labs all my life, I struggle with digital and computers, because I am an old analog guy. As always I do what's easy for me by choice, because I kind of a slacker. I'm not so sure I could keep a new car the rest of my life like I intend to do with my Jeep.

Cal

 

[Benjamin]

Not everything new sucks, just most things.

 

[Sparrow]

New threads suck.

new clichés, they really wind me up

 

[bmattock]

As far as car accidents, certainly the new cars are engineered to be safer, but I will argue there are other factors like the laws of physics and driving skill. Although my Jeep does not have ABS it has 12 inch disc brakes on all four wheels and skillfull modulation is almost equally effective. Perhaps saying a new car is a thousand times more survivable is an exageration.

http://www.motorauthority.com/blog/1026422_video-crash-testing-old-cars-vs-new

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=AU&hl=en-GB&v=k3ygYUYia9I

http://www.wimp.com/cartest/

The fact is that crumple zones and airbags, along with three-point seatbelts, save thousands of lives. By learning to rethink the accident and putting the focus on protecting the occupants of the car over lowering the potential costs of repairs, combined with modern engineering plastics and lighter-weight but stronger materials, the safety results achieve have been amazing.

And for what it is worth, this is one of those rare instances when I will acknowledge that it took federal mandates and regulation to make safety a priority for manufacturers. They've done well, and standards continue to rise, along with survivability.

On a wet winding road by a golf course I had a head on collision with a 90's Caddy. I was driving a 1980 Checker Limo (like the old cabs, but streached a foot). It seems junior in the Caddy was doing 55 mph, when he crashed into me while I was doing 30 mph. The Caddy littered the road with eighty feet of plastic. The driver wasn't wearing his belt, hit the windshield, and then was deflected into trees where he had a secondary impact. The police took him to the hospital. The Checker with its full frame and mass likely saved me from any harm and only had a seat belt. I was not impressed by the Caddy in this accident.

If you're an engineer, you know the value of anecdotal evidence versus empirical testing.

Here's my anecdotal evidence - in the 1980's, I worked in law enforcement. I saw many a fatal traffic accident up close and personal. Nowadays, I sometimes see accidents that judging from the apparent condition of the vehicle, I'd have thought no one could possibly survive. Instead, I find that the occupants walked away with bruises. I've seen rollovers that should have crushed the roof like a paper hat. Instead, they roll repeatedly and protect the interior compartment like it was an egg, safe and sound.

Although I am a Cyclotron Engineer, and have worked in research labs all my life, I struggle with digital and computers, because I am an old analog guy. As always I do what's easy for me by choice, because I kind of a slacker. I'm not so sure I could keep a new car the rest of my life like I intend to do with my Jeep.

Nothing wrong with it. I don't see it as either/or. Not sure why people tend to want to take sides or insist that others do so.

 

[wgerrard]

Take for instance all the users on this board who've purchased some incarnation of the Leica M based on it's craftsmanship, but who can't justify spending money on one pair of shoes that will last them years when they can get 10 pair for a little more. I'm not vilifying anyone's purchasing decisions, just the rationale that quality doesn't exist because it's not 1902 anymore.

Shoes are one of my buttons. I have Unhappy Feet. I.e., they can hurt a lot. I spent most of my life thinking shoes had to be uncomfortable, if not painful. Then, I had a problem that sent me to a podiatrist. He clued me in, explained what kind of shoes I need, told me to spend the money, and sent me off. I found a store with clerks who know what they are doing, and the cheapest pair I wear is a $125 pair of running shoes.

The good stuff isn't cheap, but it's often worth the money.

 

[wgerrard]

Sure, it's called a "Standheizung" in German and is invariably made by a company named Webasto.

Thanks. It's nice to know I retain some coherent memories from the Seventies.

 

[bmattock]

Shoes are one of my buttons. I have Unhappy Feet. I.e., they can hurt a lot. I spent most of my life thinking shoes had to be uncomfortable, if not painful. Then, I had a problem that sent me to a podiatrist. He clued me in, explained what kind of shoes I need, told me to spend the money, and sent me off. I found a store with clerks who know what they are doing, and the cheapest pair I wear is a $125 pair of running shoes.

The good stuff isn't cheap, but it's often worth the money.

Mephistos are nice, but I can't afford them anymore. Now it's Rockports on sale for me. Sore feet or not.

 

[-doomed-]

Sure, it's called a "Standheizung" in German and is invariably made by a company named Webasto.

I like the 1972 cutoff. I just checked -- yep, that's when the Linn LP12 came out. Of course I'm too cheap to own one when a Thorens 150 will do 🙂

My old 69 squareback had a gas heater at one point in its life I'm sure it ended up on a cleaner one than mine.

 

[wgerrard]

If you're an engineer, you know the value of anecdotal evidence versus empirical testing.

Here's my anecdotal evidence - in the 1980's, I worked in law enforcement. I saw many a fatal traffic accident up close and personal. Nowadays, I sometimes see accidents that judging from the apparent condition of the vehicle, I'd have thought no one could possibly survive. Instead, I find that the occupants walked away with bruises. I've seen rollovers that should have crushed the roof like a paper hat. Instead, they roll repeatedly and protect the interior compartment like it was an egg, safe and sound.

Nothing wrong with it. I don't see it as either/or. Not sure why people tend to want to take sides or insist that others do so.

You're making a lot of sense, Bill, both here and over in The Daily Thread About Film's Future.

Here's another 1970's car anecdote: Friend of mine driving along the interstate at 70-75 mph in a reasonably new green Fiat 128. Changed the radio station and rested his hand on the gear shift handle. The whole thing, lever and handle, came off and fell on the floor. He got the car off the road and stopped before it stalled.

If ever a car needed to provide crash protection for passengers, it was the Fiat 128. A death trap on wheels.

 

[pachuco]

Not a practical car, but with the bumpers I made when I worked for an aerospace company your car is my airbag.

LOL!! That is awesome!! 😀

 

[Calzone]

My intent was not to take sides. I was trying to state why someone like me might remain loyal to old stuff or tradition. I was not trying to project judgement, just a POV.

In a way I was making fun of some of my own personal limitations. Like I said, I'm an analog man. As way of explaination: some people are just stuck like me. Perhaps I'm being judged for being a jerk?

I cannot argue against such extensive data and acknowlege that modern vehicles are safer than old ones like mine, but the laws of physics favor a heavier vehicle in an accident.

And as cars become smaller and lighter, while not as safe as a modern car, my Jeep offers a small margin of safety because of its weight, but then again SUVs and Jeeps like mine in particular have bad safety records. Like a motorcycle, I guess its part of the charm, and I compensate by good driving skills.

I say all this, but one day, I conceed, I will likely own a new car that will be safer in addition to my Jeep.

I have a friend who is a fireman and an expert with the jaws of life. I too have heard of remarkable survivability due to modern safety advances, but we seldom hear of the victims in burning vehicles that are trapped by the very same crumple zones that save lives. This data perhaps is undereported. I have also heard a woman scream as she was being burned by a hot engine that was against her legs. Pretty unforgetable in a bad way.

I wish everyone would use safety belts with their shoulder harness, I wish that laws were more strictly enforced about their usage, and I dislike people driving and talking on cell phones. I wish laws were strictly and rigidly enforced. This would save thousands of lives.

Cal

 

[wgerrard]

Mephistos are nice, but I can't afford them anymore. Now it's Rockports on sale for me. Sore feet or not.

I've got a pair of Mephistos. Very nice. I'm trying to nurse them into their old age.

SAS (San Antonio Shoes) are good, too, if you can find them and if someone can fit you properly. A lot of people who are on their feet all the time -- nurses, etc. -- seem to like them.

 

[-doomed-]

You're making a lot of sense, Bill, both here and over in The Daily Thread About Film's Future.

Here's another 1970's car anecdote: Friend of mine driving along the interstate at 70-75 mph in a reasonably new green Fiat 128. Changed the radio station and rested his hand on the gear shift handle. The whole thing, lever and handle, came off and fell on the floor. He got the car off the road and stopped before it stalled.

If ever a car needed to provide crash protection for passengers, it was the Fiat 128. A death trap on wheels.

You know what Fiat stands for right?
Fix It Again Tony , those cars were crap and that's why they didn't remain in the US.
Maybe with them and Chrysler well get twice the substandard crap on the market than ever before.

 

[Calzone]

If ever a car needed to provide crash protection for passengers, it was the Fiat 128. A death trap on wheels.

That's pretty funny. I owned a Fiat back then and it might of been a 128 (Spyder???). Good balanced handling, but the engine caught fire, and I was lucky to be able to smother out the fire with a denum jacket.

I just turned 52. How did I get to be so old? I appreciate Bill's time and effort in regards to my safety. Can't help but be edgy and probably why I call NYC my home. Probably one of the safest large cities, but maybe not if you are me.

Calzone

 

[Roger Hicks]

I've got a pair of Mephistos. Very nice. I'm trying to nurse them into their old age.

SAS (San Antonio Shoes) are good, too, if you can find them and if someone can fit you properly. A lot of people who are on their feet all the time -- nurses, etc. -- seem to like them.

Frances wears Mephisto, Rohde and Romika, and reckons that while Mephisto are easier to get, they're not necessarily better. I have a pair of Mephisto walking boots that aren't as good as my old Brashers (before Brashers de-specced them).

Next time we're in the UK I'm going to have a word with The Anatomical Boot Company in Birmingham. I'd like Lobb Wellingtons, but at over £4000 ($6500) a pair, I think I'd rather have an M9.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Ken Smith]

Artsy types are seldom logical and there in lies the rub. Everyone of you, and there's a ton of ya" that start your morning out by visiting Rockwell's site to find something to "b!tch" about here give him nothing but "visits" on his web site. A high number of visits make his website popular. Heck - more than half his visits probably come from RFF members - which must mean it is a popular website. Stay away from it and it might not be so popular. And as previously mentioned - he states his opinion like everyone else does here - except he states it on his own website instead of airing it a public forum for the masses to consume.

As for the the original topic. Most things that have been around for decades probably reached a stage of design perfection long ago. Once it reaches design perfection, then the manufacturer is obligated to monkey around with it till it's no longer functionally useful. Besides, most things are made for the masses who appreciate quantity more that quality. And yes - I just stated an "opinion" on the matter.

 

[wgerrard]

Frances wears Mephisto, Rohde and Romika, and reckons that while Mephisto are easier to get, they're not necessarily better. I have a pair of Mephisto walking boots that aren't as good as my old Brashers (before Brashers de-specced them).

Next time we're in the UK I'm going to have a word with The Anatomical Boot Company in Birmingham. I'd like Lobb Wellingtons, but at over £4000 ($6500) a pair, I think I'd rather have an M9.

Cheers,

R.

I suppose you've seen Lobb's site: http://www.johnlobb.com/

[EDIT: Hmm... that site may be someone else. Here's "John Lobb LTD": http://www.johnlobbltd.co.uk/main/main.htm. The Wellingtons are listed for 3507.00 quid, plus VAT, which bumps it up to the 4000 range.]

I wear the running shoes almost all the time. When a pair wears out, I order replacements online. With my orthotics, they're fine. As a result, the Mephistos don't see much use. I'm really not sure they'd wear longer than the running shoes in daily use.

Picking up a pair of shoes in the UK is a good idea if I stay long enough the next time I'm there.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I suppose you've seen Lobb's site: http://www.johnlobb.com/

I wear the running shoes almost all the time. When a pair wears out, I order replacements online. With my orthotics, they're fine. As a result, the Mephistos don't see much use. I'm really not sure they'd wear longer than the running shoes in daily use.

Picking up a pair of shoes in the UK is a good idea if I stay long enough the next time I'm there.

Didn't know Lobb did running shoes! I've only ever been to www.johnlobbltd.co.uk -- a rather more sedate site than .com.

Cheers,

R.

 

[wgerrard]

Didn't know Lobb did running shoes! I've only ever been to www.johnlobbltd.co.uk -- a rather more sedate site than .com.

Cheers,

R.

No, no, not Lobb running shoes. 🙂 We are misconstrued and discombobulated, Roger. The running shoes I wear are Brooks, pretty much standard off-the-shelf stuff over here, but one particular model works for me. I can fly to London and stay a week at a decent hotel for less than any running shoe Lobb might make.

 

[nightfly]

The obvious reply is Ken Rockwell sucks, particularly as a photographer of oversaturated, cliche postcard images but only slightly less as a writer and if new stuff didn't come out all the time he'd have nothing to blog about and no computer to write his blog on and would probably be selling insurance or "working in TV" as he claims to have done before quitting to run his blog.