I’d argue the imported ones do meet all applicable standards, since they’re exempt.
Well, yeah. That is the loophole being used.
As for 25 year old vehicle, my daily driver is 21, has satellite navigation, California LEV (low emissions vehicle), 5-star safety rating.
There hasn’t really been some revolutionary advancement in safety in the past 25 years other than slapping some more computers, cameras and design tweaks. Actually, the beeping sensors in the bumpers are pretty nice. I like those.
We had good tech back then that stands up well to modern-day cars. It may not have the nagging of modern safety systems, but I don’t get false warnings either.
Being highly equipped and rated for 2004 standards does not make it highly equipped or rated by 2025 standards. Standards and expectations are constantly changing. That’s being disengenius to the fact that all 3 of your perks were not typical in the market at all, not even with options. In 2004, the corvette still had popup headlights, ABS was not required, the IIHS had just introduced the side crash test, the rollover roof crush test did not exist, there was only the 40% frontal overlap test and not the 25% overlap test, the test was not performed on the passenger side at all, the Mustang had not entered the retro phase yet, neither the Challenger nor the Camaro were active nameplates, the 2nd gen Prius, the one everyone knows, was an infant. Just because you witnessed the slow evolution of technology doesn’t mean 21 years isn’t a massive jump - especially if it’s any kind of SUV/crossover since they were just seething into the general public’s preference, making rollover a much more serious threat, statistically.
Totally agree there have been some advancements, more tech added, and tests and expectations have changed a bit.
I was pointing out there hasn’t been a massive safety revolution in the past 25 years beyond gadgets and gizmos. ABS, airbags, backup cameras, radar assisted cruise control… they existed back then; it’s great adoption is higher now.
Seatbelts, disk vs drum and antilock brake systems, crumple zones, backup cameras, suspension design (wishbone, progressive spring rate) for handling.
I will concede the backup sensors. Those have worked pretty well, though still give false alerts occasionally. Auto headlights/wipers are also another plus, but more of a gimmick.
Other than that, there are better electric/hybrid/engine efficiency which is all good. New models and styles which can be interesting, and cars got fat, which isn’t too good. But the actual technology for safety features used to keep people safe today, is basically the same as almost 25 years ago. Old cars from today’s perspective are not like the old cars from the 1990’s perspective.
3-point Seat belts go back to the 60s, disc brakes even earlier, anti lock was the 80s along with crumple zones, wishbone suspension goes back decades (including original Mustang) while being less commonplace now than the peak (90s?) where even BMW has gone with McPherson today. The biggest change in hybrid tech was the switch to lithium cells for appropriate power density, while there’s not much else new about electric motors and generators. See: diesel trains actually being diesel-electric. Maybe solid state components making DC voltage stepping feasible. There’s not anything actually wrong with drum brakes at this point. Modern pad material is the big thing, being able to withstand much more heat.
I do not see how you consider those things major changes but not what has developed beyond that.
Well, yeah. That is the loophole being used.
As for 25 year old vehicle, my daily driver is 21, has satellite navigation, California LEV (low emissions vehicle), 5-star safety rating.
There hasn’t really been some revolutionary advancement in safety in the past 25 years other than slapping some more computers, cameras and design tweaks. Actually, the beeping sensors in the bumpers are pretty nice. I like those.
We had good tech back then that stands up well to modern-day cars. It may not have the nagging of modern safety systems, but I don’t get false warnings either.
Being highly equipped and rated for 2004 standards does not make it highly equipped or rated by 2025 standards. Standards and expectations are constantly changing. That’s being disengenius to the fact that all 3 of your perks were not typical in the market at all, not even with options. In 2004, the corvette still had popup headlights, ABS was not required, the IIHS had just introduced the side crash test, the rollover roof crush test did not exist, there was only the 40% frontal overlap test and not the 25% overlap test, the test was not performed on the passenger side at all, the Mustang had not entered the retro phase yet, neither the Challenger nor the Camaro were active nameplates, the 2nd gen Prius, the one everyone knows, was an infant. Just because you witnessed the slow evolution of technology doesn’t mean 21 years isn’t a massive jump - especially if it’s any kind of SUV/crossover since they were just seething into the general public’s preference, making rollover a much more serious threat, statistically.
Totally agree there have been some advancements, more tech added, and tests and expectations have changed a bit.
I was pointing out there hasn’t been a massive safety revolution in the past 25 years beyond gadgets and gizmos. ABS, airbags, backup cameras, radar assisted cruise control… they existed back then; it’s great adoption is higher now.
What massive safety revolutions occurred in 2004 that can’t be as easily dismissed as you’ve dismissed those since then?
Seatbelts, disk vs drum and antilock brake systems, crumple zones, backup cameras, suspension design (wishbone, progressive spring rate) for handling.
I will concede the backup sensors. Those have worked pretty well, though still give false alerts occasionally. Auto headlights/wipers are also another plus, but more of a gimmick.
Other than that, there are better electric/hybrid/engine efficiency which is all good. New models and styles which can be interesting, and cars got fat, which isn’t too good. But the actual technology for safety features used to keep people safe today, is basically the same as almost 25 years ago. Old cars from today’s perspective are not like the old cars from the 1990’s perspective.
3-point Seat belts go back to the 60s, disc brakes even earlier, anti lock was the 80s along with crumple zones, wishbone suspension goes back decades (including original Mustang) while being less commonplace now than the peak (90s?) where even BMW has gone with McPherson today. The biggest change in hybrid tech was the switch to lithium cells for appropriate power density, while there’s not much else new about electric motors and generators. See: diesel trains actually being diesel-electric. Maybe solid state components making DC voltage stepping feasible. There’s not anything actually wrong with drum brakes at this point. Modern pad material is the big thing, being able to withstand much more heat.
I do not see how you consider those things major changes but not what has developed beyond that.
Uh, I think we’re arguing the same side here.
Edit: I thought of one: auto braking systems. That’s one significant safety system invention since 2000. It’s a bit more than just a nag or gimmick.
Lol those nagging systems are now required safety features as of 2023, so any vehicle without them doesn’t meet today’s standards.