TOTALLY GEEKED!

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Classic or "Modern Classic" for a New Driver?


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Classic or "Modern Classic" for a New Driver?
Permalink  
 


Classic or "Modern Classic" for a New Driver?

  RSS
safety, safety features, teens
Dear Car Talk:

My daughter wants a "classic car" for her first car -- e.g., a 1969-'70 Cougar, Maverick or some such thing. I'm not comfortable with her driving an older car, for several reasons: (1) safety features; (2) gas mileage; and (3) maintenance/fix-up costs. What are your thoughts about a "classic car" for a new driver? Or what newer used car would you recommend? Thanks!

-- Nancy

Well, years ago, we used to recommend older heaps for new drivers, for several reasons:
1. Safety features.
2. Gas mileage, and
3. Maintenance/fix-up costs.

In the late 1970s and the 1980s, newer cars were smaller, lighter and more fuel-efficient than their predecessors. And we felt that the hulking bulk of older American cars made them somewhat safer for new drivers. Since safety equipment hadn't changed much in that time, we thought the added mass made older cars a bit safer.

And because gas mileage in those old heaps was so lousy, the teenager couldn't afford to do too much "driving around," which we also thought was a plus.

Same with the maintenance costs. There's nothing safer than a car in the driveway that won't start. The Maverick your daughter has her eye on certainly would fit that description on most days.

But things have changed. Newer cars are incredibly safer. And they have some truly spectacular safety equipment that does, without a doubt, save lives. Newer cars have anti-lock brakes, stability control, front and side air bags, seat-belt pre-tensioners, blind-spot monitors, lane departure warning and, lately, pre-accident warning and automatic braking. Those technologies really do prevent accidents and reduce their severity.

So it's hard to argue for an older car for a brand-new driver these days. New drivers do have accidents. That's a known fact. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that six teenagers a day die in car accidents. 

So I think, above all, Nancy, your first duty is to get your kid through childhood -- even if she's mad at you (and me) for saying "no" to the Maverick. At the very least, you want your daughter in a car with air bags and anti-lock brakes. I'd set that as the minimum requirement. So that means going back no further than the 1990s.

So tell her to refine her search. Let her know you won't consider anything without ABS and air bags. And that you'd give her extra points for finding something with stability control. And see what she comes back with.

I understand that she wants something that's "different." And, frankly, I admire that about her. She's got an artistic personality. She likes things that are interesting, and not the same old Toyota Camry everyone drives. Someday, she'll be a famous artist, and she can have a fleet of old cars. But in the meantime, she's going to have to settle for something a little more utilitarian.

Tell her she can get her Maverick when she graduates from art school. Besides, that'll be what she can afford on her barista's salary at that point.

Good luck, and keep her safe, Nancy. 


__________________

The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.

Always misinterpret when you can.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Permalink  
 

    Nobody wants a 69-70 "Cougar" or "Maverick". Sorry, Nancy, she wants a Cougar or a Mustang. I have to say that I am less convinced that such cars are unsafe, although the new cars are safer. But good examples of the older cars like classic Cougars or Mustangs are certainly not cheap either. All in all, I do think that a newer car is a better choice. Frankly, I wouldn't go for anything more than ten years old. Kids do crash cars.

    I restored a '69 VW bug for my daughter's first car many years ago. Had a great time teaching her to drive a stick. The neighbors got a laugh out of it too.

    9 days after she got her license she rear-ended a car. The story that I got was she told the cop that she put on the brakes but she wasn't slowing down fast enough so she pushed on the brakes harder and they just didn't work. There was a terrible noise but she couldn't stop. (I was thinking to myself....crap did I mess up the brakes?). The cop showed her the skid marks and told her she locked up the brakes. She had no idea what that meant. Drivers Ed doesn't teach about cars that don't have anti-lock brakes. To kids these days you just mash the brake pedal and you stop.
    I will admit I've gotten used to "mashing the brake" when driving a modern car. I was driving my '69 Camaro and got on the brakes - locked 'em up.

    I own and drive a classic truck of that era. Based on my experience, besides the safety issues, there's a more practical problem w/ Nancy's idea: A vintage car from that era that is affordable just won't be very reliable. It will break down all the time. That's ok if it is a second car. But it won't work for an only car. Unless the daughter is majoring in auto mechanics, I concur w/Ray, stick to the early 1990's. That's really the golden age of car design. Electronic fuel injection and disk brakes. Reliable and affordable. Sweet.

      The flip side of this point is that an unreliable classic will teach a child patience, ability to deal with setbacks, how to overcome adversity, and basic auto mechanics. All things that would prove useful in the long run.

    Nancy's daughter should look around and start noticing the number of old people with fake front teeth. Many of those front teeth were lost in fender-benders back before air bags and shoulder harnesses. Back then, if you got rear-ended by someone doing 5 mph, you could hit the steering wheel - with your teeth. If your car got hit harder, you could go through the windshield, with horrendous damage to your whole face. Classic cars aren't worth the risk.



__________________

The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.

Always misinterpret when you can.



Mod/Penguin lover/Princess!

Status: Offline
Posts: 13089
Date:
Permalink  
 

Well, some good points.

But.

Air bags aren't all they are cracked up to be, IMHO.

(I've never been hit by one. But, Mere was. When she wrecked the Mustang. The air bag hurt her. She would have been better off with the shoulder strap/seat belt..and no air bag.)

I'm not sure I'd trust ABS so much, either.

But, my old Jeep doesn't have that. So, I don't really know.

Just my two pennies worth.

Great to have you back, ed!smile



__________________

Ohioan by birth, Texan by choice!



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Classic or
Permalink  
 


My first car was a 1969 yellow ford torino with a double stripe on the side and a hump on the hood where the turn signal lights were. I hated that car!!!!!!!!!!! Little did I know it would someday be a classic.

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard