The plus side of mechanical simplicity

[michaeld]

I mentioned some time back that I got an old Pontiac Grandville.

Over the last few months - as the schedule permitted - I replaced the carburetor, replaced the points and condenser, timed it and tuned it, and changed the tranny fluid and filter.

Total cost: about $245 (the Quadrajet carburetor cost me $190).  Total time: about 4 hours.  Learning curve: zero point-zero-two.

The old beast is humming along like a young filly.  I didn't realize what a great transmission she had (the Turbo Hydramatic 400).  It was introduced in 1964, and proved to be of suitable quality that it was used on some Ferraris, Juguars, and even Rolls Royces!  And it was so durable that it continues to be used in the US military Humvees.

And there's just something to be said for driving a piece of history.  I took it on a 120 mile round trip today and drove it on a stretch of freeway that has a lot of uphill stretches (downhill too, of course!).  Put it on cruise control, and grooved on that 7.5L 455 eating hills like they didn't exist.  The little Jap cars passed me left and right going downhill, and I passed them right back on the upside.

We've said this before on this forum, but how many cars made today - if ANY - will still be roadworthy in 35 years?  There's just something nice about being in something that was BUILT TO LAST (I like old houses too, BTW; you know, the kind with heavy beams and solid wood floors).  I see "new" homes that are falling apart after five years and wonder what on earth has gone wrong with the world.  The generation that successfully went to the moon built things right.  Our generation - which by the way CAN'T go to the moon - is based on the concept of disposability.  I get in my friends' brand new cars - which they are so darned excited about for the first month they own (well, lease) them, and I can't help but notice the cheap, plastic construction of the things.

Of course, most of our w116s are more advanced than my Pontiac, the Mercedes cars being state of the art for their day.  But still.  Open the hood of a w116, and then open the hood of a brand new model Benz.  Night and freakin' day difference.  One engine is metal and solid, and you can actually look into the engine compartment and identify one component from another.  The other is plastic-y and electronic, and its just a friggin' maze of utter incomprehensibility.

Mechanical versus digital seems like such a no-brainer.  I mean, EVERYONE prefers digital, right?  Wrong.  Mechanical stuff is built to be repaired; digital stuff is built to be replaced.  Call me a Neanderthal, but there's something satisfying about opening a hood, understanding the principles of both the whole and the parts, and being able to repair or replace just about anything that fails.  Successfully repairing your own car probably yields much the same feeling cave men had returning from a successful hunt.  And in addition to the chest-thumping feeling of manliness, it just kind of gives one a comforting, in-control, comprehensible view of the world versus the "what in the heck is THAT" mucked-up view that one gets when one opens the hood of a new car.

Just sayin'.
Michael

[Andrew280SEL]

I totally agree Micheal, which is kind of ironic because I'm quite a tech person when it comes to computers and gadgets. Y'know, I build my own computers and I'm always interested on how tech is progressing.

But I guess I don't like it so much in cars, for the reasons you state.

I want to be able to tinker with my car should something need doing (provided I can do it), rather than take it to the local MB dealer with men standing around with $ symbols in their eyes who will just replace some obscure digital controlled part.

[michaeld]

Andrew,

You raise an interesting point, which I would like to say something about.

I don't suggest that we become Luddites (i.e. people opposed to progress or technology).  It's not that there's anything wrong with computers and gadgets per se, even in automobiles (the issue at hand).  However, I think there's a couple of issues that need to be considered.

First of all, there is the issue of complexity versus the ability of the DIY to diagnose and repair.  You like computers, and build them for fun.  And there are mechanics who love new cars who have the ability to work on them, modify them, and do whatever they want to do.  Then there are the rest of us poor suckers who can't begin to understand what's going on under the hoods of late models.  New cars have largely surpassed all but professional mechanics, whereas older cars were in the realm of virtually all DIYers.  That said, on one level, new cars - with their OBD code scan technology - make a lot of diagnosis far easier.  You just plug in a code scanner to the fuse box, and whammo, you get a code that tells you what is wrong.  That is pretty darn nice.  However, that OBD code scan doesn't always come through.  And sometimes when it DOES come through, the typical DIY doesn't have a clue what to do.  The engine is simply too complex for too many people.

Secondly, there is the issue of cost of repair, and this relates to point one above.  Because cars are too complex for most people to begin to understand, when something goes wrong, it is often inordinately expensive to repair.  Good luck finding a pro to work on your car for under $60/hour US (and it's usually about $75).  Stuff gets expensive quick.  And there's just SO much stuff now; cars have SO many more gadgets that will all start to fail.  And that high tech stuff - which isn't bad in and of itself - is often embedded into the engine and transmission in a way that GUARANTEES expensive repair.  For most DIYers, the electrical system is the hardest thing to deal with.  However, today's cars are ALL about extremely high-tech electronics - all kinds of wires and computers and solenoids and relays and whatnot.  And it's all crammed into impossibly restricted and inaccessible places.

The result is that todays' cars are largely built to be disposable.  They depreciate so quickly, and it is often far too expensive to repair a new car.  By contrast, older cars actually have the ability to INCREASE in value.  Being simpler, they are easier to repair, and they were built before "disposability" became the norm.

We all WANT improvement.  It's the disposable nature of today's cars that makes me wonder to what extent today's automobiles are improvements.  Several forces have combined to cause this problem - Emissions requirements, fuel mileage requirements, the need of corporations to reduce costs in order to offset union wages and skyrocketing health care costs, and more.  The result is that cars are lighter, with more computerized monitoring to constantly micromanage fuel and emissions.  But another result is cars that are easily damaged (did you see that Nissan minivan that averages $3,500-plus for repairs in LOW-speed collisions?), overly technical beyond understanding, and - yes - disposable.

[Bandolero]

I was talking to my mechanic the other day. (He fitted a new brake master cylinder onto my car as I was too lazy!)

He said that a customer of his has a late model Merc or BMW (can't remember which) that had a flat battery and it had to go back to the dealer for the computers to be "recalibrated" or something, can't remember exactly.

I thought "Bugger that!!"....I'll stick to older cars where you can remove the battery and refit it without any problems.

Can you imagine going on holidays in the bush and accidentally getting a flat battery??

You would be stuffed!!!!!!!

[oscar]

I thought "Bugger that!!"....I'll stick to older cars where you can remove the battery and refit it without any problems.

Ditto, what's the only thing to worry about then, resetting the clock!  Too easy.


Anyway, like someone said a while back, the pros that can service and fix our cars are mechanics, the guys that fix the newer MB's are technicians.  Not their fault, just the way things have developed.  You could draw a parrallel to fly by the wire WWII fighters and the mind boggingly complicated jet fighters of today.  Compare the servicing methods.  Aviation in general, many of the tech enhancements are all about safety ie, keeping the bird airworthy.  I'm not so sure safety is the biggest influence in vehicular design as much as it used to be.  Gadgets, looks, economy and asking price is.

But I don't mind paying someone to do what I can't.  So long as they know what they are doing.  I'm very cautious about paying someone top $ to learn on the job something I could've taught myself.  I mean a qualified mech who opens the bonnet of my w116 and can't work out where to plug in the laptop.   A bit harsh?  Maybe, but I fear the day is coming.  Especially now that Aus has ratified Kyoto. 

[Brian Crump]

Can you imagine going on holidays in the bush and accidentally getting a flat battery??

You would be stuffed!!!!!!!

Well your computer would be stuffed if you jump-started a modern Benz with the key in the ignition - even with it turned off. There have been Service Bulletins advising against such a procedure.
The same applies to most modern cars. To jump start you must use a spike prtected battery pack or leads - connect them to the car and then insert the key and start. Otherwise - kaboom - and farewell battery. 
Regards,
BC

[michaeld]

I believe that there are some features that add to complexity of automobiles that has generated a significant improvement in cars, and others that ultimately will not.

Take fuel injection.  Carburetors were far simpler, easier for DIYers to repair/rebuild/replace.  But fuel injection injection has so many benefits that justify the increased complexity.  FI provides better performance, and increases engine life by keeping gasoline (a solvent) limited to a defined flow path whereas carburetors slosh it all over the cylinder walls.  Or disc brakes versus drum brakes.  Obviously, disc brakes are dramatically superior and safer.

But a lot of other complexity-increasing improvements are frankly subjective at best.  A lot of modern contributions to cars are little more than stuff that's stuck in just because somebody can stick it in and the marketing department figures it can be a selling point: mirrors that are supposed to dim when headlight beams hit them, wipers that automatically activate when moisture is sensed on a windshield, that sort of thing.  Frankly, most of this stuff (IMHO) doesn't significantly add to the quality of my life.  And it's just waiting to fail.  In some cases, failure is merely annoying; doing without some feature.  In others, it MUST be replaced (e.g. the windshield wipers), but is incredibly expensive because of the costly gizmos.  In too many other cases, the failure of a relatively inexpensive component - like a computer, or even a solenoid - is more expensive than the car is worth due to the cost of the component or the location of the component.

This is on top of the other element that I've griped about: the disposable nature of cars.  Due to fuel and environmental restrictions, everything has to be built lighter.  Look at modern fuel pumps verses the w116 units: the heft of that w116 part is reassuring.  The sucker was built to last. 

One of the things I like about the w116 is that it seems to strike a nice balance between genuine improvement and mechanical simplicity.  For example, it has fuel injection, but not all the computerized crap that make it impossible to work on.  It has four-wheel disc brakes, but not the ABS (or again, the computerized junk) that make it difficult for DIYers to maintain and repair.

[koan]

I believe that there are some features that add to complexity of automobiles that has generated a significant improvement in cars, and others that ultimately will not.

EFI and breakerless ignition have made a huge difference to reliability.

Going back a few years to days in England in the middle of winter I'm reminded that carburetors and points don't mix well with cold wet weather.

The price of electronic bits for contemporary cars is far out of proportion to the cost of manufacture though.

koan

[Mercules]

When I started mechanics I worked in a Mini workshop - no digital, electronic, injected... nothing. I was taught the ways of the force how to repair & tune just about every part on the little buggers and I believe this type of introduction to the industry is worth its weight in gold.

As time progressed and EFI found its way under the bonnet I learnt along the way and found the concepts of electronic ignition and fuel delivery much easier to understand with a good knowledge of the basics under my belt.

I feel that young apprentices these days don't learn enough of the basics and they often find it difficult to grasp EFI concepts as a result... so as a trainer, car owner and enthusiast, I feel that there really needs to be a balance these days.

When the educated enthusiast can adjust points and tinker with the carby to give the old girl a tune up and there is definately a sense of satisfaction when you get it right - after owning several Minis I can testify - but I am a big fan of EFI for its ability to manage economy, power and reliability.


I guess it comes down to what a car means to you... a mode of transport or a hobby

[michaeld]

Koan points out that electronic ignition is in the category of "useful" advances.  And I completely agree: electronic ignition has both the advantages of much greater performance as well as not adding very much at all to the complexity of repair/service.  And while I live in a dry climate, there is no question that electronic ignition offers greater reliability.

Mercules points out that - as a professional mechanic, fuel injection is something he can understand and repair/maintain.  Unfortunately, this is not true for most DIYers.  However, fuel injection is extremely reliable, and it's benefits outweigh its added complexity.  As I said in my last thread, it can help add significantly to the overall life of an engine.

I think that there are at least THREE categories of "automotive advances":
1) Advances that clearly provide a significant enough benefit in the performance or reliability of a car.  Fuel injection and electronic ignition fall into this category, as do disc brakes.

2) Advances that improve comfort, but do not add significantly to the difficulty of repair or replacement.  I would say that power windows fall in this category.  It's not a great deal more difficult to repair a power window than it is a mechanical one.

3) Then there is all the crap that goes into today's cars that make them baffling beyond belief to most DIYers.  There is also the junk that supposedly makes driving easier or more fun that adds significantly to the complexity level but not really all that much to the driving experience.  There are also components such as GPS that I like, but would rather buy separately (as it is FAR more expensive, and far more difficult to repair when it is OEM).

[Bandolero]

I agree.

The 7 things I want on a car that makes it nice to drive but are still reasonably easy to repair:

1. 4 wheel disc brakes.
2. Power steering.
3. Fuel injection.
4. Electronic Ignition.
5. Factory airconditioning.
6. Radio/Cassette or CD player.
7. Automatic transmission.

If my car has all of these, I'm happy.

PS: Number 7 is for the lazier people like me.

[Brian Crump]

Can I add 4 wheel independent suspension to the list Bandolero? It's not so long ago that Holden and Falcon did not have it......
Regards,
BC

[Bandolero]

I agree...make that 8 things...

[michaeld]

The thing that occurs to me is that our w116s actually fare pretty darn well on that list.  I don't believe that w116s can be said to have true "four wheel independent suspensions," (correct me if they do; the "four wheel" part's got me) but the zero offset concept that was developed for the w116s continued to be used by Mercedes for years - and possibly to this day.

Everything else on that list the w116 definitely has.  And the suspension - even if it ISN'T "four wheel independent) is a truly modern unit that is extremely well designed and built.  Some of the items mentioned on Bandolero's excellent list (e.g. auto trans and A/C) are more "fulfilled" in the US than elsewhere; good luck even FINDING a stick or non A/C-equipped Mercedes here!

70s cars represent an interesting nexxus.  On one hand, they represented the last years that automakers weren't overly burdoned by emssions requirements (at least in the US) that necessitated overly complicated computerized designs.  On the other, the 70s are STILL relatively simple cars for DIYers.  One last thing for many Americans: 70s cars are very likely the last ones that will enjoy the benefit of being "smog exempt" (something I love in a car).

And our w116s have some key advantages here: you've got your electronic ignition, your fuel injection, your modernized suspension, several years before most other carmakers introduced these features.  In other words, by the time the big American companies were introducing these features, cars were facing ever-steep emissions hurdles that forced increasingly complicated system into the designs.

Lastly, while I completely agree that points have their downside and carburetors have their downside, they nevertheless represent a degree of simplicity that become incredibly attractive when it comes time for repairs or replacement.  My Pontiac 455 has a "window" in the distributor that you have only to insert an allen wrench to adjust the point gap, and armed with a dwell meter adjustment becomes a five minute procedure.  And I have the option to install an electronic ignition system for $67 if I so desire!  And carburetors?  Dang, $200 and I replaced my whole fuel system with less than two hours of work!  No head-scratching, no pondering over which one of fifty issues could be causing my problem, no massive diagnostic/repair costs.  And no walking away from the car because it costs more to repair than the car is worth.  Give it to me, guys: there's something to be said for simplicity!

BTW, My gigantic 19' Pontiac cruiser, with it's gigantic 7.5L engine is getting over 13 mpg since the carb swap - a little better than my 450SEL's 12.5 mpg.  Can you believe that?

I love that Pontiac, but I've got to say, I still love my Mercedes more.  Gosh that Benz is relaxing to drive!

Happy New Year to everyone.  May 08 be a great one for all of you and your familes!

[Bandolero]

Make that 9............Cruise control.
It is so important now that the cops have all these radars on our freeways!!

I believe our 116's are 4 wheel in-dependant suspension as the front definitely is and the back is not a live axle rear end like most older cars.
My Holden (GM) has solid rear end with springs and shocks. I'm pretty sure that is called a live axle.

I agree that the 116 has all these and more.
You don't really need electric windows, electric seats and sunroof in a car, but they are nice to have.
It is just that they do play up and when they do it can be a real pain!!!!