- Joined
- Mar 31, 2019
- Messages
- 814
- Reaction score
- 803
- Points
- 93
- Location
- FL
- Vehicle Year
- 2001
- Make / Model
- Ford Ranger
- Engine Type
- 4.0 V6
- Engine Size
- 4.0 SOHC S/C
- Transmission
- Automatic
- 2WD / 4WD
- 4WD
- Total Lift
- 0
- Total Drop
- 0
- Tire Size
- Just the right size to touch the ground.
Y'all do realize one of the biggest reasons 60's & 70's cars didn't seem to last a long as newer vehicles is the overdrive transmissions that weren't available back then, right?
There's only so many revolutions in any internal combustion engine before failure. Reducing that number by nearly 33% makes 'em last a bit longer. Reducing the rpm at cruising speed also adds life. Of course we do have better alloys and lubricants along with other advances, but the overdrive transmission is the major reason in my opinion.
FWIW, I'll take a post 2000 car/truck any day over an older one for everyday use. I like "most" of the newer electronic capabilities. Love cruise control. Not a huge fan of lane keep assist, but lane departure warning I have no problem with.
I'm not saying I don't like older muscle cars or 1978 F-150's, etc., but as a daily, I'd rather have the modern conveniences.
There's only so many revolutions in any internal combustion engine before failure. Reducing that number by nearly 33% makes 'em last a bit longer. Reducing the rpm at cruising speed also adds life. Of course we do have better alloys and lubricants along with other advances, but the overdrive transmission is the major reason in my opinion.
FWIW, I'll take a post 2000 car/truck any day over an older one for everyday use. I like "most" of the newer electronic capabilities. Love cruise control. Not a huge fan of lane keep assist, but lane departure warning I have no problem with.
I'm not saying I don't like older muscle cars or 1978 F-150's, etc., but as a daily, I'd rather have the modern conveniences.