Sure looks like cars were better value the, even given inflation. Today’s cars are safer, so there’s that. Let’s also remember wages and salaries were vastly lower in those days.

Inflation is deceptive: We save (or have saved) in yesterday’s dollars and used up time we can’t get back to earn those dollars. We spend (or not) in today or tomorrow’s dollars. If the government prints a whole lot of dollars, they’re devaluing (or perhaps stealing) the hours we devoted to earning those savings.

The other side effect of inflation & aging is that we older folks remember what wages we earned as young people. Those burned-in memories may influence what wages now-older people want to pay young people today. And some young people are really p*ssed off at the wages on offer because the new dollars just don’t match the purchasing power of the old ones we knew.

Pays to not forget money is relative measure and as some call it a “mass delusion”.

Chris

 

You can make numbers say whatever you want.

 

I'll take 3....

 

^^^THIS.

Base prices then didn't include PS, PB, A/C, PW, PLocks, PSeats, or more electronics than NASA used to get to the moon in 1969.

 

Here's a couple from Chicago area in the late '60s. I understand the economics of inflation but it's still fun to reminisce.

 

Cars are more expensive but safer , they have more technology , creature comforts which modern people demand. I don't think you can blame it all on the state of the country. The population determines what sells . Like buying a car without Bluetooth capabilities and GPS. That's a big buying point. We got a great deal on my wife's RAV4 27k . It's got the nice alloy wheels , it has the adaptive cruise control. Which honestly is awesome specifically when driving through the desert and long long hauls. I work on alot of modern cars and they although complex and annoying at times in many ways are very contemporary compared to older cars. Back in the 60's an ashtray in every seat and door. Little things like that the public wanted so at the end of the day it's the consumers .

 

X2 brother Coppercutlass. Indeed so! My new 21 Challenger Widebody wont need a valve job at 50K miles or rings and bearing a little later on!

 

And yet we all worship these old dinosaurs with virtually none of those modern conveniences called Oldsmobile. Oh the irony...

 

...at least you hope not?

 

They didn't need a valve job and rings at 50,000 miles. You were on your 2nd set of brake shoes.

 

But at 60k miles you were changing the timing gear set.

 

That IS true.

 

I love old cars but my joke is..... If I was serious about going fast it wouldn't be with an olds. Let's face it. The race heros of yesterday had all the cutting edge tech they could get at that time. I really like the new mustangs and although I'm not a Ford guy I think it's the absolute best bang for the buck.

 

This is true to a point. Going fast on the cheap is a turbo LS, copy and paste 1000hp into your platform of choice. I am 99.5% I had the only Olds engine at one of our local tracks this past Saturday.An old racer (74) came over to check out my car; I never popped the hood. He had a 65 442 back when they were new, and was currently racing a different 65 442 with....... wait for it.... A BBC. He was slightly impressed when I ripped off some high 7 eighths and then a 7.46@97. His full race, trailered car only made one pass, misfiring or bouncing off the limiter, before he parked it for the day. I packed up the trunk, aired up the tires, and drove home.

 

I get the same thing when they find out it's a 350 olds in my 72.