Last Years For Decent Analog Cars?

californiamilleghia said:

When did they stop offering good old "stupid keys"  and start using Smart keys which cost $100s ?

I am really bad with keys !

My 2005 express van still uses a "Stupid" key

Welp, recent Hyundai and Kia models didn't. Turns out due to some other errors of design they are easy to steal as a result. https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/06/who-are-the-kia-boyz-how-tiktok-fueled-an-epidemic-of-car-thefts/

That said, my 97 mustang has some intelligence in the key.

Insofar as other stuff. Regulations required things at certain times.

• Tpms -roughly 2007
• Backup cameras - about 2018
• Traction control and ABS - 100% in 2012
• Automatic braking - soonish, there is a notice of proposed rulemaking out

Thing is, the requirement for including these systems all have some amount of blood written in. Each has its own regulatory analysis indicating lives saved per year with research to back it up. Now, this is across all drivers in the country, so, counting dumb people.  We still see deaths from people leaving kids in the back seat on hot days all the time and that's another thing the government is looking at trying to stop from happening.

That all said. I have a decent sliding scale in my fleet and vehicle history.

1. 1961 Austin Healey - ignition points. No power steering. Non boosted brakes.  Inarguably analog. Most complex thing on it is a facet fuel pump.
2. 1995 miata- OBD1, power steering and power assist brakes (no abs). Likely still analog to some, but the power assist features may not be considered that.
3. 1997 Mustang - power steering, abs power assist brakes, OBD2. Power door locks and trunk release, chipped key... Adds a few things to #2
4. 2007 expedition - adds tractions control, stability control, tpms, and a dash screen including which door is open to #3
5. 2023 Maverick - I can start it with my smartphone. I opted for the package with blind spot detection and lane keep assist. It has a backup camera and automatic climate control features. 

I mean, #1 is inarguably analog, but where is the line? And what is the biggest concern? Maintenance? I have the driver skill that I drove the Miata in Appalachian mountain winters, but I'm past begrudging the assists. I drive around DC, other drivers having AEB gives me some comfort that the likelihood of being rear ended is reduced. 

I'll admit, I've sold out on my new DD. I like the features for that. Hell, I found a long time ago that I really appreciate a decent ABS system (without ice mode concerns) for an autocross car if just to prevent flat spots. 

Yeah, my race car is somewhere between 1&2 (electronic ignition and temp sensors), but then again, my arms get a workout and if I'm not careful with the brakes I can flatspot a $1000 set of Hoosiers. So you start wondering how much you would begrudge some systems if cost wasn't the big concern. That said simplicity helps with maintenance...

Too many different definitions of 'analog' in this thread.

There are pluses and minuses to each phase of technology. While I like OBD-II generally, the P0420 code in our Subaru Forester that would simply not go away was annoying. (Yes, it got the $5 fix, among other things). My OBD-I truck is more of a PITA than a diagnostic dream.  A true analog vehicle will have that dreaded device called a carburetor.  I think it's really all about one's comfort level with tech and diagnostics.

I draw the line at CANBUS. This link will take you to a video that gives a prime example of what I've seen in the last few years. I totaled an under 10 year old Mercedes because a rodent chewed the wiring harness. Even the dealer couldn't tell us where the bill might stop because of all the potential interconnected componentry that could have shorted out. We are now in the era of truly disposable cars. 

Too many different definitions of 'analog' in this thread.

Yes indeed!   Different years, different manufactures and even different models of the same vehicle could change the definition of analogue.

And a reply to Cordus:

I agree that would be the literal definition (although you could make a case for EFI controlled by an analog computer -- not that I know of anyone who's ever designed that).

Bosch D-Jetronic.  It was on 1968 and up VW Type III models in the states.

In reply to SV reX :

After Toyota decided to drop the V6 Tacoma for 2024, I decided to buy a 2023. However, after a ride in the neighbor's 2023, I am keeping my 2013 Tacoma.

I am also casually looking for a used Wrangler. I am looking at 1996-2005 because of coil springs and 4.0 L engine.

My 99 NB1 continues to be a fun drive with low maintenance.

Next new purchase may be a Mazda 3 hatch because not CVT. 

So do we define an analog vehicle as anything that is drivable after an EMF burst or as one where the digital features do not try to take over the driving duties?

I still have that toddler response where I automatically say NO to everything new until I understand the benefits of the feature. I have come to embrace most of the engine and road holding features. As a bonus I was forced to learn a lot about the technologies.  The safety nannies and infotainment systems, not so much.

Keith Tanner said:

In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :

To me, that makes the 60's cars easier to own because the parts bins are so deep :) It doesn't make me want an 80's car with 60's tech, though.

Yeah, but it makes me want an 87 Cutlass with a Caddy 500 :)

In reply to NOHOME :

Technically, I think it's the former.  But if the original intention of this thread was the latter, maybe we need a new term.  Non-intrusive cars?  Un-nannied cars?

In the made-for-TV movie "Atomic Train", a nuke is accidentally detonated near Denver.  Our hero Rob Lowe is driving around in a TR6 because it's the only car that will start.  I think that's hilarious, because it probably wouldn't start for so many other reasons.  Terrible movie, BTW.  You've been warned.

Uncle David (Forum Supporter) said:

Seriously, people? Analog means non-computerized carbs or mechanical FI. So 1980 or so. I consider my '77 Grand Prix to be just about peak analog. If you don't like 70's smogger performance then peak analog has to be 1970, maybe a little bit later for some Euro stuff.

Problem I have with 1970 "power" numbers is that it's not net.  That 425 hp big block in a 1970 Chevelle actually makes about 350 by today's standards.  The other problem is that it achieved that power with leaded fuel and 10.5:1 compression under heads that were incredibly inefficient, meaning you practically need race gas to drive it.

The thing that keeps me buying mid 70s-mid 80s smogger stuff is that it was the same architecture, they just neutered the compression and cam.  I can't think of a single American-made smogger car that isn't a head/cam swap away from glory.

ddavidv said:

I draw the line at CANBUS. This link will take you to a video that gives a prime example of what I've seen in the last few years. I totaled an under 10 year old Mercedes because a rodent chewed the wiring harness. Even the dealer couldn't tell us where the bill might stop because of all the potential interconnected componentry that could have shorted out. We are now in the era of truly disposable cars. 

Ironically, CAN bus actually simplifies the wiring instead of making it more complex. So you're drawing the line at the absolute worst spot, the maximum wiring complexity.

I think the original intent of the term "analog" is "unfiltered". Cars where the driver feels as if they are directly in control, and receive direct feedback. This can happen with things like DBW if it is programmed correctly, and CAN is invisible to the driver. The driver wants to make some decisions (such as when to shift gears) but not all decisions (manual spark advance, anyone?). Where that line lines is where it turns into a pub discussion.

Keith Tanner said:

ddavidv said:

I draw the line at CANBUS. This link will take you to a video that gives a prime example of what I've seen in the last few years. I totaled an under 10 year old Mercedes because a rodent chewed the wiring harness. Even the dealer couldn't tell us where the bill might stop because of all the potential interconnected componentry that could have shorted out. We are now in the era of truly disposable cars. 

Ironically, CAN bus actually simplifies the wiring instead of making it more complex. So you're drawing the line at the absolute worst spot, the maximum wiring complexity.

I think the original intent of the term "analog" is "unfiltered". Cars where the driver feels as if they are directly in control, and receive direct feedback. This can happen with things like DBW if it is programmed correctly, and CAN is invisible to the driver. The driver wants to make some decisions (such as when to shift gears) but not all decisions (manual spark advance, anyone?). Where that line lines is where it turns into a pub discussion.

Well, I can read wiring diagrams. I know a lot of people struggle with that. Learning to wrench on old Fiats made it a necessity. But I prefer isolated systems to everything linked together where one short can eradicate 11 control modules (in my Mercedes example. No lie; and each were $800 and up).

Chris_V said:

Nockenwelle said:

Domestics in the 90s were a frustrating mix of trying too hard to modernize old E36M3 while not being smart enough about the new tech they were rolling in, plus not giving a damn about interiors or build quality. Reference: GM's OBD 1.5 and the ubiquitous pile of plastic panels as an excuse for a creature space. Plus, the new cars didn't last any longer than the old stuff yet. By the time the garbage was removed from the offerings in general, time had passed and tech took over, making them too "new" for me. Therefore, my interest stops in the late 80s because newer gets you nothing enticing.

My OLDEST vehicle is my 2002 Suburban 2500 8.1 liter tow rig. It's about as old a vehicle as I want (I've been driving since '78 and have had over 130 cars, some as old as the '30s so I have a pool of comparisons to go by). The Suburban has over 150k on it and simply works. I've had older trucks as tow rigs, and I'll never go backwards. So you're arbitrary stopping point of the '80s is, while a fine choice for you, misguided and factually flawed. You do get a lot as you go newer. But even the Suburban is too old and thirsty to be used as a daily driver. I don't know how much longer I want to keep it.

In fact, for daily driver cars, I'll definitely never go backwards. Even basic new(er) cars handle, stop, and accelerate better, more reliably, safely, with less fuel usage than old "analog" cars that have to be constantly tinkered with. Some here say the tinkering is the good bit and that they aren't scared of dealing with points and carbs with all their problems. I say, the moment I HAVE to tinker with the daily driver again to get to work the next day, it's sold. Yeah, weekend cars and project toys can be anything. (though for me, even my weekend car should work when I want it to, not when IT wants to. Too many years of project cars sitting waiting for this week's failure point to be addressed before driving it again...). But daily driver cars? After 45 years of driving, my EV is the best at being a car I've ever had. Comfortable, quick (instant throttle response is addictive), good handling for what it is (a practical crossover), cheap for a new car and damn cheap to own and operate/fuel.

I love good analog cars, too (I love all cars, of all eras) but I'm also realistic about them.

You make a very valid point about the need to work on a daily to get to work. 
   That's why my vintage cars are toys not transportation.  If it needs work it can sit until I  feel like working on it.  It's a toy.  Yes I enjoy setting points by hand.  Tuning a set of carbs.  Adjusting brakes.  And yes using a clutch to shift.  
  But getting to work is part of working.  I don't want to have to work, to get to work, to work.  ( hopefully you can follow that full statement).  
    That's one of the reasons to buy an EV.  No oil changes. No transmission work. Brakes last a very long time with regenerative braking.  It's a simple motor,  reverse polarity  and it runs backwards. So no transmission is required. 
     The batteries last 200, 000 + miles normally many go 300, 000 +. People in their late 50's will likely never need another car.  
  Federal government and states will pay a lot of the cost of them. Plus no more trips to the gas station. 
       Most people take one or two long trips per year. Some take no long trips.  Even so, most will spend less than what  a months worth of gas costs  for a years worth of electricity. Neighbors with them report they only spend $10-20 a month compared to over $250 a month for Gas.  
  In short your life gets simpler and cheaper. 

This thread did better than I thought.

I figured everyone would have a different definition and I appreciate that an old car is not everyone's cup of tea.

I pretty much decided that the early 2000s are my definition. My Tacoma being the reason.

The wife's VW is great for her but it may see 2000 miles a year tops as she works from home and, most of the time, has the choice of other vehicles to drive if it is a long trip or needs specialty body style.

But, man, nanny stuff and subscription heated seats etc can get the berkeley off of my lawn.

I've struggled with the same question and I'm not sure there's a clear answer. I feel like some new cars, specifically the ND, feel pretty analog. I might even throw the BRZ86 into that category, even though both of those cars have EPS (blasphemy!). 

Not counting my wife's cars, I own 4 cars at the moment, with the newest being a 2008 (technically 3 of them): 2008 Honda S2000, 2008 BMW 128i 6MT w/Sport, 2008 Nissan Xterra and 1996 Acura Integra GS-R. I would say they all feel some flavor of analog (yes, even the BMW). 

I suppose it's hard to quantify what "analog" means and there are some newer features I think are absolute upgrades. Before I bought my Integra, which I consider very analog, I had a 1988 CRX Si, which is essentially built on the same chassis (I consider all the 4th-6th gen double wishbone cars to be pretty much the same). Some might consider the CRX the more pure, more analog car. I prefer the Integra. While the CRX had great steering feel (manual rack), there's no doubt in my mind, in a parking lot, I'll take power steering any day of the week. The Integra is also OBDII and has ABS... I prefer not locking up brakes on track or in the snow in an emergency. Speaking of which, the Integra had an ABS fault code- I was able to do the simple blink test (completed the test circuit in the car) to determine which sensor was going bad and replaced it with ease. Problem solved. I'm of the opinion that some of the electronics are absolutely worth it. 

I'm also of the opinion that some features added in previous decades make cars better to drive, like power brakes, fuel injection, ABS and power steering. I don't see any of these features taking away from the driving experience, but adding to it. 

And while I generally prefer hydraulic power steering, I can recognize that some of the modern EPS racks really aren't that bad. My S2000 has EPS and honestly, I've always felt that the chassis communicates with the driver very well, in spite of the slightly muted feel through the wheel. I would say the S2000 does a better job communicating than my 128i, despite the fact that the S2000 has EPS and the 128i has a hydraulic setup. 

I would say for me, the least of the more "analog" BMW's was the E82/E90, even though others might argue it was the earlier E36/E46, or even the E30. My biggest issue with the E82/E90 is the eLSD and other "driver's aids" that take away from driver involvement. Thankfully, they can all be defeated with aftermarket (or OEM) wizardry/coding. Fairly annoying that they have to be toggled off through electronic means, but the option of making it a more satisfying, analog vehicle is there, you just have to dig a little deeper. 

I'm also on the fence about some modern features... like electronic water pumps... I like having a simple thermostat, like my old Honda's... they're simple, cheap, easy to replace and easy to understand... with that said, the electronic setup on my BMW can be bled without even turning on the car and the ECU/DME is smart enough to kill power to avoid popping a motor. Same with having a traditional dip stick... but the oil level sensor is smart enough to also tell you when there's a problem that you might not have been privy to otherwise. So, there's pros and cons. I don't like the complexity of the hi-tech gadgets, but I do like their ability to notify me when there's a problem I can pre-emptively fix before it turns into a more expensive problem. And having replaced cooling systems are preventative maintenance on most of my cars, I 100% prefer electronic cooling fans- the mechanical fan on my Xterra leaves my hands looking like they've been in a knife fight- electric fans are generally reliable, more efficient and far easier to service IMO. 

I think I draw the line with lane-assist (I've had it in a few cars and it annoys me to no end), most EPS racks (some aren't bad, but most are terrible- especially in snowy conditions), touchscreens, idiot-light only TPMS (I don't mind the TPMS that actually gives a PSI reading, but detest dummy lights), etc... and if we're being honest, I'm not terribly fond of disconnected manual gearboxes- I prefer a mechanical linkage and some feedback- my BMW's shifter feels like I'm stirring a bowl of jello compared to my Honda's. So I suppose I would say I'm not a big fan of most cars made in the last decade or so, but there are a few exceptions. 

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:

Uncle David (Forum Supporter) said:

Seriously, people? Analog means non-computerized carbs or mechanical FI. So 1980 or so. I consider my '77 Grand Prix to be just about peak analog. If you don't like 70's smogger performance then peak analog has to be 1970, maybe a little bit later for some Euro stuff.

Problem I have with 1970 "power" numbers is that it's not net.  That 425 hp big block in a 1970 Chevelle actually makes about 350 by today's standards.  The other problem is that it achieved that power with leaded fuel and 10.5:1 compression under heads that were incredibly inefficient, meaning you practically need race gas to drive it.

The thing that keeps me buying mid 70s-mid 80s smogger stuff is that it was the same architecture, they just neutered the compression and cam.  I can't think of a single American-made smogger car that isn't a head/cam swap away from glory.

And a lot of it was just a numbers game.  I remember in the '80s when my grandfather would lament the fact that he'd gotten a '72 Ford LTD instead of the '71 right beside it at the used car lot.  He said the '71 had 80 or 100 hp more.  Then I got my hands on one of the big "Motor" manuals that covered all domestic brands for about a 10 year period.  I looked up the specs on the 400M that grandpa had.  Compression: same as '71.  Timing: same settings as '71.  Cam & Valves: same size as '71.  The difference in the engines: the decal on the air cleaner.

And just what have we learned?

Last Years For Decent Analog Cars?

The answer is different for almost everyone!   Carburetors, points, electric windows, cruise control, EFI, electronic ignition.  No problem.

However, I do draw the line at Chrysler's Lean Burn.  (That's a joke.)

Noddaz said:

And just what have we learned?

Last Years For Decent Analog Cars?

The answer is different for almost everyone!   Carburetors, points, electric windows, cruise control, EFI, electronic ignition.  No problem.

However, I do draw the line at Chrysler's Lean Burn.  (That's a joke.)

I guess that's why when I posted what I posted, I stated I consider analog to mostly be unassisted driving (electronic nannies).

Is it the digital car you dislike or the manufacturers implementation?  There are cars with eps that still have good road feel, cars that you can turn off the nannies & cars the the display screen does not look like someone glued a tablet to the dash.

I dislike many of the "features" found on new cars, but there are cars with better implementation than others.  

2005 Mustang GT

OBD2

Fuel Injection

ABS

Cruise

Air

Stereo

Full Steada Suspension

Yellow Konis

GT 350 R Recaros

Upgraded (OEM Brakes) Baer rotors

3.73s on Torsten

It doesn't get any better than this for analog

140 MPH at the track with the stereo blasting "I can't drive 55" by Sammy Hagar

YRMV

2004-2005 S2000 might be the last true analog car IMO. Even that's a stretch with EPS, individual coil packs, and an ECU. You do get a real throttle cable, no traction control, 3 pedals and a shifty boy, a convertible top, VTEC noises, and a very minimalist cockpit. Yes, the Miata is also an answer but you don't get an exciting powerplant like the S2000. 

The 8th gen Civic Si is up there too. 

One question on the analog part- why is EPS bad whereas traditional power steering is ok?  

Personally, I would much rather have EPaS as it can be retuned with a simple computer instead of trying to tune fluid power steering.  It also removes an accessory that hangs off the front of the motor- making it simpler and neater to look at.  Let alone, you don't have to worry about any of the fittings leaking (which was a constant problem on one of our cars).

alfadriver said:

One question on the analog part- why is EPS bad whereas traditional power steering is ok?  

Personally, I would much rather have EPaS as it can be retuned with a simple computer instead of trying to tune fluid power steering.  It also removes an accessory that hangs off the front of the motor- making it simpler and neater to look at.  Let alone, you don't have to worry about any of the fittings leaking (which was a constant problem on one of our cars).

You are 100% spot on. I just meant from an "analog" standpoint. I love the EPS, one less thing to leak everywhere. 

In reply to DirtyBird222 :

The thing about power steering- it's hard to find cars without it.  You *can* get a Miata without it, but not many other available Mazdas don't have power steering of some type.  And while cars like the CRX don't have it, finding those has gotten to be a true struggle.  Older cars are more likely to not have it, but they are also harder to find.

Part of drawing a line for a car is the ability to get one.  

Closest thing I can think of to a modern vehicle that is extremely analog would be a 1997 Ram with the Cummins and the 5 speed manual

Manual engine (12 valve, no computer)

Manual gearbox, no skipshift or other crud

Hydraulic power steering with no real complicated assit or anything

Cruise control with a simple computer

AM FM CD or Cassette depending on the package

Available with manual windows and locks and mirrors.

Cable actuated HVAC

Resistor based blower control

Manual shift transfer case

1 Channel ABS that can be eliminated if needed and doesnt really control anything.