stuff these days

Anonymous-0 · Feb 17, 2010

Why is it tractors cars trucks and the like are so complicated to work on. Its not like all these sensors have made them run longer or better hell my check engine light comes on when my gas tank lid isn't shut tight. But my old 9n tractor doesn't complain a bit. Just my ranting. Why is it these days engineers go the complicated unreliable method of building things. I guess I'm just partial to the old ford engineering that was simple yet effective.

Bob · Feb 17, 2010

In the old days, the abundant tree-hugging WHACKO environmental nuts and safety nazis WEREN'T in charge!

DON'T blame today's engineers, they have to try to design something that actually WORKS, around all the WHACKO environmental and "idiot-proof" safety rules!

(As a side note, did you know it's IMPOSSIBLE to make ANYTHING "idiot-proof", as idiots are VERY clever!)

Stuart · Feb 17, 2010

I agree with in part.Some stuff is better and safer. Take your 9N out and work the crap out of it everyday.See how it does then. It will break more often. Sometimes though simpler is better. My Dad said in the 60s that cars didnt run that long before needing a tune up or some other attention. Engine technology I believe is better today. I got 300,000 miles on my Ford ranger and its a farm truck that gets abused to no end. He said that a car in the 60s with 200,000 on was unheard of for the most part. I got a neighbor who is trying to farm like its 1950 and losing his butt at it. He is a nurse to. So I asked him that if he needed life saving medical care would he rather have the new technology of the day or be treated with what they had in 1950. It shut him right up.
I have newer tractors. JD 8400, 2 JD 4455s and an 7220 magnum and I wont go back to an old tractor. But I have a couple of old ones that I play around with. I hear what your saying and see your point of view. The thing is that a farmall M wont last as long as a CIH Magnum 7220 as far as hours go. but none the less I understand where you are coming from

old · Feb 17, 2010

Well back in the day the engineer also did some of the work on what he put on paper now days they only see the paper. I have said and will keep saying if an engineer engineered something for 2 years then he should be made to work on it for 4 years. If they did that they would change how they did things. Now as for what the other guy said about taking a 9N out and working it all day every day it would probably stand up just as good as a newer tractor would. Why because it has no plastic to brake and now computer to mess up.

old · Feb 17, 2010

Sorry I can not agree with you. Many cars and trucks of the late 50s and 60s had many many miles on them. One for instance that I had, had spun the odometer over 4 times and back in that day 100,000 was all they would read but yet this can was on the 4 time when I got it. Ya I had papers from the phone company to prove it. I also had a 1963 Diamond -T that had well over 500,000 and the engine had never been opened up on it. As for the 9N if restored a true restore it would run for years with little or no problem other then the norm. Stuff now days have to much plastic and computers to last long

Anonymous-0 · Feb 17, 2010

really? Cars and trucks these days run 200-250,000 miles or more . You can hit the key at -30 and they pop right off without having to sit there with the choke out or nursing the gas pedal. ig step up over the old days .

Anonymous-0 · Feb 17, 2010

My trucks used to go 100,000 miles. Now they go 400,000. so much better.

Stuart · Feb 17, 2010

I farm for a living. Even restored stuff wont last long on a farm these days. 9n tractors are a joke, flathead backwards design. They were better than horses but thats it. so you had a few trucks that ran alot of miles but over all cars last longer now. I bought a new car and it went 100,000 miles before I did much of anything. Dad bought a 65 ford brand new and he put 3 water pumps in and 2 transmissions. What would I do with a little ford like that. For one a gas tractor does not have the durablity in hours under load compared to a gas. IF you dont like technology so much does that mean you are using a typwriter to connect to the internet. I respect the knowledge you bring to this forum. Look how hard stuff on farms gets worked these days and year round to.

Anonymous-0 · Feb 18, 2010

Ron8...Don't forget the extra $150,000 you are also paying.But there has been a slight increase in comfort and payload.

MarkB_MI · Feb 18, 2010

The 9N was a great tractor in its day. However, that day was seventy years ago. How well do you think a brand-new 9N would sell today? Don't forget that it's going to cost around $20K in today's money. The market demands powerful tractors with lots of features. If manufacturers thought they could make money today building tractors like the 9N, they certainly would do it.

mEl · Feb 18, 2010

Just reading some new literature from CIH. They have introduced a new series called the Farmall A series. It is available in four HP sizes from 45-75 hp I believe. It is a basic tractor not leaning on electronics to control everything, may be just what some folks are looking for. mEl

Anonymous-0 · Feb 18, 2010

hope it works for them. Agco built the Agcostar 4wd tractors with a st. trans, mech. tach. manual remotes ect. it was a simple workhorse that would have appealed to me then an Agco rep. told me they quit making them, buyers wanted all the fancy electronics, go figure!

ted regentin · Feb 18, 2010

All of the technology involved in todays cars, trucks, and tractors make it so much more important to have the proper tools, diagnostic equiptment, and training. I believe that the worst car made today is better than the best car made just ten years ago. (There are exceptions to this, of course.) Yes, they are infinitely more complicated, but the reliability is amazing. I see lots of rigs that go over one hundred thousand miles on the original brakes. Not very long ago, twenty thousand miles on a set of brakes would be doing well. It is just a question of perspective. Cars last much longer, BUT when they do need repair, it can be much more expensive and time consuming. Just my thoughts,,,

Birdman · Feb 18, 2010

Well there is a middle ground here to both points of views. One side is saying stuff is too complicated and over reliant on technology...the other side is saying that technology is making stuff last alot longer and is more durable.

I would remind those that are saying things last longer with all the tech that it's not the computer controls and complicated crap that makes a truck last 300,000 miles today as opposed to 120,000 40 years ago. The difference now vs then is the quality of the parts and the design of the components. Bearings that are made of far better material, metalergy advances for things like brake pads clutch disks and such are mostly to blame for the extended life of todays vehicles...NOT computer controlled junk.

Designs are far better today as well. Disk brakes over drums, valve design, transmission design. The biggest exception is EFI but even at that the computer needed to run EFI doesn't need to control fuel injection and powershift while monitoring all the other minor outboard systems. Now if an effing sensor goes out you might lose the entire vehicle use until you find the problem and replace the sensor. I've seen this in my semi.

Point is things could be dummied down and simplified and using the advanced designs of parts and metals the vehicles would still last well over 300,000 miles. Creature comforts don't have to rely on computer control either. Suspension, quality seats, heat and air, hydraulics, gauges and anything I missed..I can't see that any of them ned to be overly complicated or computer controled to work well.

Things like sattelite monitors and such are add on equip and are pretty much self contained so I don't see that they matter. Most of that stuff is prettty much plug and play. It's really like todays equipment is designed in a contest to see who can make the most complicated mess to work on. In part...thats correct too, the shop at my local dealer makes him more money than the equip sales.

Nancy Howell · Feb 18, 2010

Just my biased, cynical, uninformed opinion - the manufacturers make stuff complicated so the "average Joe" can"t fix it. That means the mftr. makes $$$ charging high repair rates. That"s why we buy the old JD tractors. Simple equipment that gets the job done.

That"s not to say the new tractors aren"t better. There"s lots of great improvements, but some of the new stuff is unnecessarily complicated.

Anonymous-0 · Feb 18, 2010

Well I do run a 9n and a jubilee everyday. Granted they have rebuilt engines and I can go out and start them no problem at negative 10 degrees due to good compression. Its hard to compare a tractor that's 50 plus years old to a new one unless its rebuilt. I gaurantee I can get more work done with my tractor then you can on a similar sized tractor. If you take in account for down time to run yours into the shop to put it on the computer to tell you it takes a 5dollar fuse to fix it. They charge you 50 if your lucky for the diagnostic test and you then spend a day tearing off all the plastic shields and other crap that's always in the way in todays machines. Henry ford built his tractors to be worked on easy to reach and dig into to repair. Granted todays vehicles can have a lot more hours and miles put on them due to advanced technology. But I think if you combined new age products into a simple mechanically inclined machined that's easy to tear into and replace parts I think they'd make a killing. I own a vw jetta as a run around car. Granted its built well by German engineers it required the taking out of the entire engine just to replace a water pump that frequently goes out 700 dollars in labor for a 110 dollar part that's the stuff that gets me.

Flurette Farm · Feb 18, 2010

Well, this is a pointless argument. As you can see some people will have older, better and faster than anyone else regardless of what it is, simply because that’s they way they are. For some this is out of resentfulness and others actually believe what they say. Older isn’t better its simply older. Whether it’s a car or tractor at the time it was built it was generally better than what came before and did the job for which it was intended.

omahagreg · Feb 18, 2010

I had to replace my old full head framing nailer couple of years ago. This new one has something in it that won't let it fire if fewer than 4 nails are in it. I understand why, because I had some near misses with the old one when the clip got empty, BUT, this is plain annoying! You look down at it, has nails, climb the ladder, no fire!!!! I guess it is better....Greg

MisterT · Feb 18, 2010

One point all of you so far have missed. One of the biggest reasons that engines accumulate more miles today before needing attention is that 90% of the wear any engine receives happens within the first few seconds after initial start-up. Now, stop and think about how many miles, or how many minutes your car runs today before you shut it off, and then realize that 50 years ago, most cars were started up and then shut off again after only about 10 to 15 minutes of running time. When you look at the big picture, you get a little different perspective. I'm not saying today's cars are not better, but all of the electronics and associated other garbage is NOT what makes them better, and I hope this whole issue with Toyota MIGHT cause the car makers to to rethink a few things.

rrlund · Feb 18, 2010

It's all to meet government emission and mileage regulations,simple as that. Manufacturers would still be making things the simple way if left to their own devices. Do you doubt that?

dmiller · Feb 18, 2010

How much of these changes have to do with customer patterns and marketing. More features (bells and whistles) mean easier sales pitch to most people.
How about patents and competition. If the competition has a feature, you better get one similar, if they did it first then your design will be more complicated in order to not have patent infringement (think early 3pt and all the varieties the different manufacturers had to compete with it prior to the patent renewal in 1952)

Crem · Feb 18, 2010

I will have to admit that I rejected fuel injection when it first came out but now I think that it is the cats meow. You can't beat not having to fool around with that choke and having spark plugs last so long. I was even slow to get a vehicle with an alternator but I always drove the older vehicles. I like the modern engine but at times it seems to be getting too complicated and that goes for all of the other computer controlled stuff on a vehicle. A lot of these things are environmentally driven and sometimes I think that they waste more energy trying to control an emission than they gain in the long run. I have a 1996 Explorer and I can go over 10,000 miles without even checking the engine oil along with never adding oil in the drive train or power steering. So that is a lot better than the older stuff. I don't even know about the newer stuff that is out there. You can see that I am behind the times. I will probably get there in a few years.

)

Goose · Feb 18, 2010

I certainly don't miss the days before EFI when you went out to start your car or pickup in zero weather and one of two things happened. Either the automatic choke didn't close and the engine wouldn't start, or the engine started and the choke stuck shut. MUCH less aggravation nowadays.

Also, when I was a kid back in the '50's, a car or pickup engine seldom made it much over 50,000 miles before needing a "ring and a valve job". Automatic transmissions didn't last any longer. I once owned a '76 Chevy pickup with 260,000 miles that was on it's fourth engine and third trans. One of today's pickups would be expected go that far without ever touching the engine or trans.

Today, it's routine for an engine and trans to go several hundred thousand miles and still be going strong when the vehicle it's in is worn out.

I just started to part out a '92 Olds 88 with 239,000 miles. The engine and trans have never been touched and are still same as new. I'm parting it out because it needs a steering rack and battery, and it's come to the point where it's basically a beater that's worth more in parts than as a running vehicle.

I, for one, greatly appreciate ABS and Traction Control. With the winter we've had this year both have gotten a real workout on my daily driver. Also, several years ago, my wife walked away from a horrendous headon collision. (Not of her creation). Even the law officers on the scene said without the air bag and belts there's no way she could have survived.

It's nice to recall how much simpler vehicles were "way back when". And they were. Would I commit myself to going back and doing without the option of modern technology? No way! It's too convenient to plug a code reader into an ailing vehicle and have the computer diagnose the problem instead of spending hours shooting in the dark using trial and error.

MisterT · Feb 18, 2010

(quoted from post at 16:01:13 02/18/10) It's all to meet government emission and mileage regulations,simple as that. Manufacturers would still be making things the simple way if left to their own devices. Do you doubt that?

Except that fuel mileage has NOT become any better. My first car was a 1960 Chevrolet Bel-Air 4 door sedan with the 283 engine and 2 speed powerglide transmission. That would car would regularly get 18 to 20 mpg. By comparison, my wife's 2008 Chevrolet Equinox gets 18 to 19 mpg.

Where is the big improvement??

Anonymous-0 · Feb 18, 2010

Back in 1960, my grand-dad decided to get out of the automobile business. He'd been a mechanic since the 1920's, and a Hudson and International dealer since the 1940's. In the '70's a longtime customer asked him why he ever got out of the car business...and Grand-dad told him, "Because cars were getting way too complicated."

Now,compared to today, the cars of 1960 were simple...but compared to 1920, they WERE a lot more complex, what with power seats and windows, automatic transmissions, automatic headlight dimmers [GM's "autronic eye"], and other such newfangled gadgetry. So it's all a matter of your perspective.

On the other hand, a lot of folks who understand fuel injection, computers, and sensors post queries on boards all over the internet wondering how to get a carbureted vehicle with a points distributor to run right. As I say, it's all in your perspective...where your background is.

Back in the "good ol' days," it was pretty uncommon to see an engine that would run 100,000 miles without a rebuild; today even the cheapest Korean and Japanese cars do that with ease. Some people just have selective memory when it comes to that...but an engine with 75-80,000 miles back in the '60's was considered a "tired" engine.

Spook · Feb 18, 2010

On average, it has gotten better.

davpal · Feb 18, 2010

Everything just seemed better because you were YOUNGER then. That is the key to everything. YOUTH! Getting old just plain s@cks. You just don't have the patience to work on things and most of us don't have the knowledge of newer gadgets or the capacity to even want to learn about it. When I get a new electronics gadget like an answering machine I just toss the owners manual and "get by" with it but never know how to properly use it. Watch a young kid with a cell phone and they know every stinking little feature of the thing because they are young and passionate about it. When you get older you just want it to work. End of story.

schmuck · Feb 18, 2010

Don't you remember the days when an engine needed a valve job at 70,000 miles and was shot at 100,000 miles? How about jumper cables and pans of charcoal under the oil pan trying to get the friggin' thing to start on a cold January day? Plugs, points, condensers, caps, rotors, carb kits, dwell meters, feeler gauges, timing lights to deal with every 10,000 miles or so and still only 18 MPG if you were lucky...No, I don't think I miss all that at all.

schmuck · Feb 18, 2010

I've got a 1995 Olds Cutlass Ciera 4 door with a V-6 that gets 30 MPG on the highway all the time. And I drive on average 3,000 miles per month. Maybe you need to look at what you drive? Not picking on you, I'm just saying there are other options available. 20 MPG in the '60 was on the upper end of the scale. As I recall 6-8 was the lower end at the time, right?

MisterT · Feb 18, 2010

(quoted from post at 19:19:13 02/18/10) I've got a 1995 Olds Cutlass Ciera 4 door with a V-6 that gets 30 MPG on the highway all the time. And I drive on average 3,000 miles per month. Maybe you need to look at what you drive? Not picking on you, I'm just saying there are other options available. 20 MPG in the '60 was on the upper end of the scale. As I recall 6-8 was the lower end at the time, right?

No, not in the 60s. Even the muscle cars of the 60s could get 18 or better if you drove them sensibly. The lousy fuel mileage came about in the mid to late 70s when all those pollution controls came into use.

JR.Frye · Feb 18, 2010

What I want to say: but please do not take it wrong: my Granddad & Pappy us ta tell me if they want to KIS, {KEEP IT SIMPLE} we can work on it
if it.If not its junk>
JR.Frye

Anonymous-0 · Feb 18, 2010

except when that don't work. Then yer screwed. Buddy's got a 2001 f150 with check engine light on and everywhere he has gone the code readers plugged into it say something like "no data" so replacing anything is a shot in the dark.

JayinNY · Feb 18, 2010

That was a walk in the park compared to todays junk. Engine shot at 100,000, you must not know how to take care of it, I have 3 smb chevys, all over 170,000 never been touched.

Anonymous-0 · Feb 19, 2010

I have a 77 C20 chevy pickup that has 250,000 miles on it.I stopped using it because of frame rust.I put about 80,000 on it.When I bought it it had new fenders and some cab floor repairs.The milage was on its second time around.Repairs on it were not bad,I put a carb flost and vacuum advance in it right off Fellow that owned it complained about poor gas milage,never tried to fix it.I put a starter,water pump and master cylinder on it.It needed a new heater core.Cost 28 bucks. Ignition module died in the driveway.Salt caused a lost of exhaust repairs.The engine was never touched.It had no pollution crap on it,always started in cold weather and hauled any thing you put in it.A half cord of fire wood or a ton of fertilizer was carried with ease.If I could buy a new one like it I would do it in a minute.I didnt need a code reader to fix it.

kossuth · Feb 19, 2010

The older stuff works good, but it can't hold a candle to the new stuff as far as effiency goes. Much of this computer stuff not only reduces emissions but also increases power at the same time. It was unheard of just 15 years ago for a 2 litre 4 cylinder to make 200 hp, today it's common place. While getting 30-35 miles a gallon while doing it. Ever since computer aided drafting and such was invented engines have exponentially become more reliable, have more power, and become more effiencent. The computers are what make this possible. The computer can adjust the air/fuel mixture on the fly taking into account air density and temperature. On a carb you would have to manually adjust it if you wanted an ideal mixture. The computer also can advance or retard the timing accordingly based on the above facts. With a mechanical unit, the advance is what it is. Yeah the older units are easier to work on but there is a huge benefit to having the computer on the engines. I'm a younger fellow, and agree the older stuff is pretty easy to work on, but the electronic stuff isn't bad eithor. You just have to know how the particular sensor works and how the computer would utilize that information it its operation.

old · Feb 19, 2010

Yep that is why I like the older stuff not computers to go bad and cost you an arm and leg to replace. Plus those code readers only work as good as the computer diagnostics work and I know for a fact asking a computer what is wrong with it self is like asking a teenager to take out the trash. You have to ask 10 time then yell at him 20 more and you still end up taking it out your self. LOL

stuff these days

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Member

Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Similar threads