What's also being missed is that safety is a marketing ploy. You safety folks are also missing the point that is truly important to most people--reliability and cost. You admit that there is nothing inherently unsafe about an old car. Let's stop and dwell on that point, because at least one guy (the extremely annoying "sorry" guy) on here has been hammering and yammering away about old cars being so unsafe. The question then becomes, are new cars so much safer that they are worth the dramatic increase in a persons gross income compared to the older cars? Is there a point at which a car is safe enough, and are we really getting our money's worth out of going farther under the tail of the curve? There is a point of diminishing returns to scale. Somebody is missing a point, but I don't think it's the guy who's been successfully driving the same car for 20 years. I think he's a lot farther ahead than you folks who continually have to trade in your car every 4 years to make sure you have the "safest, most reliable" car on the road--or so you believe.
If you admit that old cars are not inherently safe or unreliable, then why do you continue to waste your time--and ours--on a review of a '76 Volare? Maybe you need to accept that your arguments are not good enough to sway the average Volare owner (or other old car owner), or the safe driver who has never had a bad experience in his old car, to run out and buy a new car.
I have a 1974 Lincoln mark IV. It can't compare to anything you people have. Plus I am the best person ever to post. So what do you think about that eh? But seriously, cars have improved in many ways. One is the computer systems. Many would say that they don't allow us to work on the cars. This is true in the mechanical aspect, but the computer systems allow us locate the problem within the engine, with out using a wrench. Plus it also makes the cars run better since the computer systems can adjust systems to allow the car to run better. So yes cars are better than they ever have been in history.
I would direct your attention to the Ford Windstar and Dodge Durango posts (to name, but two). See how thrilled their owners are about their computer diagnostics and then get back to us about how computer systems so easily allow problems to be pinpointed and fixed, and how efficiently they make the engines and drive trains operate.
I agree, when a new car works, it works great -- smooth ride, good handling, easy starting, long life of consumables between tune-ups. But when it doesn't work -- and it's almost always the electronics -- oh man! Ha ha ha! It's like crashing after a crack high!
When the electronics have been proved to be reliable (and some cars seem better than others), that achilles heel may be removed. Hey, even I am considering buying a new 2007 Dodge Challenger or Jeep Rubicon, and I love old cars.
I can recognize that new cars have their superior points, but what a crushing let-down to pay $30k for something that won't work because of some blasted circuit or chip that you can't even see! There's a point when you start to question if you're getting your money's worth.