2020 vs 1960 tech. - Page 2 - RimfireCentral.com Forums

Go Back   RimfireCentral.com Forums > >

Notices

Join Team RFC to remove these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 11-29-2019, 09:53 PM
Zorba's Avatar
Zorba
NRA Member - Click Here To Join! GOA Member

Join Date: 
Mar 2014
Posts: 
432
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)


Log in to see fewer ads
Quote:
Originally Posted by farrlarr View Post
If you cared for them reasonably, most of those things from the 60s would still be running fine today. What do you think will be the case for today's stuff?
Yep. I'm pretty much "done" with modern cars as a for instance. Yea, the metallurgy is better, the machining tolerances are tighter, and especially the lubricants are far better. BUT - all the "technology" that our overlords insist we have - PLUS - all the "technology" the CarCos insist on loading new cars with - equals a VERY overpriced, and unreliable vehicle. I want something without computers, touch screens, power "everything", etc, etc. Can't buy it in the effete North American automobile market. Even my 35 year old Mercedes has too much "junk" on it.

I collect vintage sewing machines. They'll be going 100 years from now if somebody remembers to squirt oil in their general direction every few years - unlike the technological marvels that will be obsolete in 5, broken in 10, and impossible to repair in 20!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-29-2019, 11:09 PM
IHMSA80x80's Avatar
IHMSA80x80
US Air Force Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Oct 2004
Location: 
Kentucky
Posts: 
8,911
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vee3 View Post
My all-time favorite airplane. I got to run my hand along the edges of one ~30 years ago at Edwards AFB.

Cool airplane. I got to refuel a bunch of those when I was overseas...leak like a sieve.
__________________
No man is an island. Some men are peninsulas.

≡✪≡
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-30-2019, 10:28 AM
bearcatter's Avatar
bearcatter

Join Date: 
May 2013
Location: 
VA
Posts: 
3,673
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorba View Post
Yep. I'm pretty much "done" with modern cars as a for instance. Yea, the metallurgy is better, the machining tolerances are tighter, and especially the lubricants are far better. BUT - all the "technology" that our overlords insist we have - PLUS - all the "technology" the CarCos insist on loading new cars with - equals a VERY overpriced, and unreliable vehicle. I want something without computers, touch screens, power "everything", etc, etc. Can't buy it in the effete North American automobile market. Even my 35 year old Mercedes has too much "junk" on it.
I agree. My '05 xB is as simple as I could get 12 years ago, and still has junk I could do without. The computers and sensors, power windows and locks. Not to mention the plastic headlights and Rubbermade bumpers.....Arrgghh......There isn't a single car on the market that I even like the looks of, so I hope mine will keep going, has 116K now.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-30-2019, 06:49 PM
lizardtrack
US Army Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Aug 2005
Location: 
w NY.
Posts: 
1,621
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Imagine how many of the older cars would still be running if they had the lubricants of today.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-30-2019, 08:23 PM
scooter22
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Oct 2002
Location: 
Central NY, The good part, not the rotten apple
Posts: 
7,761
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
I've heard and read from multiple sources that they couldn't build a Saturn 5 rocket today. But they built multiple of them back in the 60s/70s and they all worked.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-30-2019, 10:24 PM
Tom_in_MO's Avatar
Tom_in_MO
US Army Veteran

Join Date: 
Apr 2016
Location: 
St. Louis, MO
Posts: 
1,843
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
I like an even older period, the early 20th century as shown in the cheap novels about Doc Savage and The Shadow. It's hilarious what counted as high-tech back then! Like wristwatches! And flashlights! Aaannnddd.....gyrocopters!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-30-2019, 11:41 PM
FALPhil's Avatar
FALPhil
US Navy Veteran

Join Date: 
Mar 2008
Posts: 
724
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jinx D'jinn View Post
To have an ever expanding economy we all have to average buying a new car every 3 years, buying a new fridge every five years, et al, etc. What kind of economy would we have if, when I went off to the Army, my Dad gave me a watch that close to fifty years later I was still wearing...
Nope, all you need to have for a expanding economy is to have 2.2 or greater children per couple on average. If your dad had 2 or three kids, he could only have given that watch to one of them, and the other kids would have to obtain watches some other way in the economy.

Unfortunately, the birth rate in the Western world is dropping. By 2050, Greeks will be statistically extinct, unless those of childbearing age start breeding like bunnies, and Spaniards are soon to follow. In the USA, if you are under 50, there is a decent chance that you will not reap the benefits SS in its current form, unless you young folks start having kids early and often.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-01-2019, 07:56 AM
Jinx D'jinn
US Army Veteran

Join Date: 
Apr 2012
Location: 
Wisconsin
Posts: 
67
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FALPhil View Post
Nope, all you need to have for a expanding economy is to have 2.2 or greater children per couple on average. If your dad had 2 or three kids, he could only have given that watch to one of them, and the other kids would have to obtain watches some other way in the economy.
Thanks for that Phil. I'll be the first to admit I didn't entertain an unsustainable solution for an unsustainable problem but you are absolutely correct.

And that statistical .2 of a person would certainly slow population growth to a crawl so that many could forget our unsustainable population growth problem (some folks say it seems humans breed like vermin. Not me, but some people say that.). Unless, as a society, we built in or encouraged behavior, perhaps some ritual, that culled that .2 before they reproduced. It would be nice if that elimination round could cull dangerous tendencies, but who decides? I would but I doubt if most folks would like my criteria.

(All that being said, in 1975 Drill Sgt Waters and his guys at Basic Training would have been overjoyed to design a mandatory 8 week course with a .2 fatality rate. But we might not be thrilled with their elimination criteria either.)

I'm sorry, this is reaaalllly thread drift. My bad. _()_
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-01-2019, 09:22 AM
FALPhil's Avatar
FALPhil
US Navy Veteran

Join Date: 
Mar 2008
Posts: 
724
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jinx D'jinn View Post
I'm sorry, this is reaaalllly thread drift. My bad. _()_
Yup. Population trends should be another thread.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-01-2019, 11:17 AM
wmrike

Join Date: 
Oct 2016
Posts: 
287
TPC Rating: 
100% (2)
I used a slide rule the first 10-20 years of my career. As long as whatever you were doing did not require more than three significant places of accuracy, a slide rule is quick and accurate. Back then, few things required more accuracy, excepting maybe a moon shot.

Today, with better data inputs and manufacturing capabilities, three places won't always get the job done.

That said, in many instances we place too much credence in computer-generated math. Take the issue of significant numbers. It drives me nuts when someone uses data with one or two significant places (e.g. 7/3=2.333333333) and somehow thinks that the ten-place number that their computer came up with is more accurate than "2."
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-01-2019, 11:26 AM
wmrike

Join Date: 
Oct 2016
Posts: 
287
TPC Rating: 
100% (2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorba View Post
I collect vintage sewing machines. They'll be going 100 years from now if somebody remembers to squirt oil in their general direction every few years - unlike the technological marvels that will be obsolete in 5, broken in 10, and impossible to repair in 20!
I have a ca. 1990 wall clock that requires a professional once-over every 5-8 years. So, my wife and I are having breakfast at a B&B in Scotland a few years back, and our table is next to a gorgeous grandfather clock. I asked the proprietor if it required much maintenance. He thought for a moment and said, "Well, let me look," whereupon he opened the case and leafed through some papers. The last time the clock was serviced was in 1959. Aside from that, he said that every once in a while he squirts it with some 3-in-1 oil. They don't build them like they used to.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-01-2019, 12:18 PM
natman's Avatar
natman
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jul 2002
Posts: 
3,341
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
Our house was built in 1961. Recently the doorbell stopped working. I could tell the doorbell switch was original because it was designed to be easily taken apart. I cleaned out the old dust and spider webs, polished the brass contacts and put it back together. Works perfectly now, probably will for the next 58 years.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-01-2019, 03:29 PM
Hovannes
US Army Law Enforcement Officer NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jan 2017
Posts: 
492
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
I've got a 1958 British Ford 100E four banger, with an Aquaplane Superhead on it. It gets 70 mpg. A new Prius can't even come close.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-01-2019, 05:46 PM
jnyork's Avatar
jnyork
US Air Force Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Apr 2004
Location: 
Wyoming and Arizona
Posts: 
7,666
TPC Rating: 
100% (20)
Colt 1911 is still going strong and selling thousands.

.30-06 is still a fine hunting cartridge and selling thousands. If you can't get it done with a .30-06, maybe you dont need to do it.

Principles developed by the Wright brothers are still employed in modern aircraft.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-01-2019, 05:48 PM
natman's Avatar
natman
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jul 2002
Posts: 
3,341
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnyork View Post
Colt 1911 is still going strong and selling thousands.

.30-06 is still a fine hunting cartridge and selling thousands. If you can't get it done with a .30-06, maybe you dont need to do it.

Principles developed by the Wright brothers are still employed in modern aircraft.
There's been a tad more refinement on the last than the first two in the last century.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:24 AM.

Privacy Policy

DMCA Notice

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2000-2018 RimfireCentral.com
x