HA!! The 5.4 F-250 just thought it could outsmart me.

[john.k]

I had a Ford in the 70s,never checked anything,plugs must have gone 200,000miles,when I finally pulled them ,the side electrodes were worn half away,gap was about 1/4".....one ignition lead was burnt away inside ,causing a miss on wet days........car finally fell to pieces with rust,one door fell off the pillar was rusted away inside ......Ford made them rust so youd buy a new one.......lots of bare metal inside a new Ford car for the rust to start in when the windscreen leaked like a sieve after the dealership replaced it ,when a mechanic broke it......Still got a Ford,its made in Thailand.....beautifully made ,not a spot of rust after 15 years,totally reliable ,and 30 MPG .all day every day.

[Winger Ed.]

Just the fact that cars last 3 times longer then they did in the 60s tells me which one i prefer. !

The basic things that wear out over time really haven't changed much.
The longevity we see now compared to years back when a car was pretty much worn out at 100,000 miles isn't really
attributed to all the modern generation electronics.

Plugs last longer because the electrodes in them are better.
Platinum plugs have been around a long time, and they were $15. each a long time ago- like they are now.
Non-leaded gas doesn't clog them up like the old fuel did.
Leaded gas would trash a new generation plug too in the same time it used to.

Oil is better, lasts longer, and doesn't break down as soon as the old stuff did.

Fuel is weaker, and has much better additive packages.
105 octane 'Ethyl' that everybody used is long gone. Along with it is all the deposits it used to leave in carbs.

10:1 compression used to be the norm for engines. A 400 horse 455 was pretty standard in 'Mom's taxi'.
Those are long gone except maybe in some real high performance applications.
8:1 compression took a lot of stress off pistons, rings, and crankshaft bearings-- which are the same as they always were.
Actually, cheaper cast Alum. pistons are the norm now-- they used to be forged like most truck engines still are.

Probably the biggest thing that added to engine life is the over drive transmission.
They typically drop engine rpm around 40% when it shifts into overdrive.
Nothing wrong with the old ones that top gear was 1:1 on the engine to the drive shaft-
I've had a couple of old GM turbo 350 out live 2 engines just by changing the fluid in them at every 50,000 miles.
Dropping from 3,000 engine rpm to 2,000 at free-way speed--- you'd expect the same engine to last longer.

So:
If oil is better, fuel is less powerful and cleaner, a lower compression engine has less stress on it,
and a engine now spins 20-30-35% less times around for the same mileage driven-----
that's why they last longer, not just because they have a shoe box full of expensive sensors and computers on them.

My '06 f-250 has a 300hp, 300cu.in engine in it, 6 speed manual trans., and gets around 12 mpg- or less.
Part of it's wizardry is over head cams with variable or phased timing gears that last about 100,000 miles.
When the phased timing gears wear out---- just the parts kit is about $600 for changing them--
and you still have an engine with 100,000 miles on it.
But; the phased camshafts do get 1/2 a mile per gallon better fuel mileage.

A 80's era Chevy 350 at around 250-260 hp with a HEI ignition, EFI, and overdrive, got 15 in a 3/4 ton trk.
For the $600 to get a couple of timing gears & chains for the 5.4- you can buy almost all the parts to over haul it.

[MaryB]

The basic things that wear out over time really haven't changed much.
The longevity we see now compared to years back when a car was pretty much worn out at 100,000 miles isn't really
attributed to all the modern generation electronics.

Plugs last longer because the electrodes in them are better.
Platinum plugs have been around a long time, and they were $15. each a long time ago- like they are now.
Non-leaded gas doesn't clog them up like the old fuel did.
Leaded gas would trash a new generation plug too in the same time it used to.

Oil is better, lasts longer, and doesn't break down as soon as the old stuff did.

Fuel is weaker, and has much better additive packages.
105 octane 'Ethyl' that everybody used is long gone. Along with it is all the deposits it used to leave in carbs.

10:1 compression used to be the norm for engines. A 400 horse 455 was pretty standard in 'Mom's taxi'.
Those are long gone except maybe in some real high performance applications.
8:1 compression took a lot of stress off pistons, rings, and crankshaft bearings-- which are the same as they always were.
Actually, cheaper cast Alum. pistons are the norm now-- they used to be forged like most truck engines still are.

Probably the biggest thing that added to engine life is the over drive transmission.
They typically drop engine rpm around 40% when it shifts into overdrive.
Nothing wrong with the old ones that top gear was 1:1 on the engine to the drive shaft-
I've had a couple of old GM turbo 350 out live 2 engines just by changing the fluid in them at every 50,000 miles.
Dropping from 3,000 engine rpm to 2,000 at free-way speed--- you'd expect the same engine to last longer.

So:
If oil is better, fuel is less powerful and cleaner, a lower compression engine has less stress on it,
and a engine now spins 20-30-35% less times around for the same mileage driven-----
that's why they last longer, not just because they have a shoe box full of expensive sensors and computers on them.

My '06 f-250 has a 300hp, 300cu.in engine in it, 6 speed manual trans., and gets around 12 mpg- or less.
Part of it's wizardry is over head cams with variable or phased timing gears that last about 100,000 miles.
When the phased timing gears wear out---- just the parts kit is about $600 for changing them--
and you still have an engine with 100,000 miles on it.
But; the phased camshafts do get 1/2 a mile per gallon better fuel mileage.

A 80's era Chevy 350 at around 250-260 hp with a HEI ignition, EFI, and overdrive, got 15 in a 3/4 ton trk.
For the $600 to get a couple of timing gears & chains for the 5.4- you can buy almost all the parts to over haul it.

The little Ford 2.0 Ecoboost direct injection engine I ave now is 10:1 compression, turbo, as much horsepower as that mid 70's Chevey 350(245hp) and almost as much torque at 270 foot pounds! Yes technology has changed engines! With a twin scroll turbo on it the little 4 cylinder is putting out some massive HP for the tuner guys, as much as 500HP and the longevity doesn't suffer! In fact they are using a stock block assembly and only tweaking the heads, turbo to gain that HP! Ford built that engine from the ground up for turbo charging instead of turbo being an add on to try and get more HP out of an existing engine. 5,000 mile oil changes, reports are that these engines are going 250k miles as long as they are maintained/the valves/throttle body cleaned on a regular basis(spray cleaner for both...).

Oh and this is at 27mpg! ^ speed paddle shifter transmission if I want to have fun, or let the computer do the shifting... yes technology has changed engines and for the better!

[john.k]

Cars certainly dont use any oil any more......used to fill the tank,check the oil ,and add a quart every thousand miles or so.......Most people now wouldnt know where the oil dipstick was ........Catches a lot of people who buy old motorbikes cause they're cool .....they dont check the oil ,and seize the motor......A Harley panhead used about a gallon of oil every 2500 miles when new.......if a car used that much now ,it would need six gallons of oil added between oil changes.

[fixit]

Add to that, some cars (certain mercedes models come to mind) don't even have dipsticks, for oil or transmission. It's almost as if they don't want you to check your own fluids!

[Winger Ed.]

don't even have dipsticks, for oil or transmission. It's almost as if they don't want you to check your own fluids!

Our '02 Explorer, and the 2000 Olds. Olero don't have trans. dipsticks either.
I guess the idea is: If it didn't leak- it hadn't lost any fluid. If it did leak---- you needed to fix it.

If they did leak, or to change the fluid, you have to disconnect a trans. coolant line at the radiator, pump it in that way,
and pull out a over fill plug to know its full.

Same thing to change the fluid, you disconnect a coolant line, and let it pump itself out, then pump in the new fluid.
I do it 2 times to empty and change the fluid in the torque converter too, not just what's in the pan.
Our '02 has a bit over 100,000 miles, and I've changed the trans. fluid 3 times so far.

It's a hassle, but old, burnt fluid is about the only thing that kills them,
and a rebuilt trans. is a couple thousand- or more, for these newer cars.
So far, this one pulls like the day we brought it home.

[Petrol & Powder]

.....A Harley panhead used about a gallon of oil every 2500 miles when new........

This reminds me of the old joke about Detroit Diesels,
If you put a picture of a Detroit Diesel on the wall, the next day there will be a puddle of oil under the picture !

Engines are certainly tighter today than they were years ago. Better tolerances, better materials, better seals.
I drove many an old vehicle than required daily attention to things such as oil level. I broke a ring in a 327 and didn't have the time or money to fix it immediately. For a while I drove that car (1967 Impala) and I would check the gas and fill up the oil !

[Winger Ed.]

This reminds me of the old joke about Detroit Diesels,!

In High School, I had a 1966 MG Midget.
I thought mine leaked oil at the rear main seal because it was old.

I was at the dealer one time getting a part, and they'd just driven a new one into the show room.
The guy shut it off, and slid a paper plate under it.

I asked one of the parts guys if that was normal. He said, "Yeah, when they quit leaking, it means they're empty".

[Lloyd Smale]

The basic things that wear out over time really haven't changed much.
The longevity we see now compared to years back when a car was pretty much worn out at 100,000 miles isn't really
attributed to all the modern generation electronics.

Plugs last longer because the electrodes in them are better.
Platinum plugs have been around a long time, and they were $15. each a long time ago- like they are now.
Non-leaded gas doesn't clog them up like the old fuel did.
Leaded gas would trash a new generation plug too in the same time it used to.

Oil is better, lasts longer, and doesn't break down as soon as the old stuff did.

Fuel is weaker, and has much better additive packages.
105 octane 'Ethyl' that everybody used is long gone. Along with it is all the deposits it used to leave in carbs.

10:1 compression used to be the norm for engines. A 400 horse 455 was pretty standard in 'Mom's taxi'.
Those are long gone except maybe in some real high performance applications.
8:1 compression took a lot of stress off pistons, rings, and crankshaft bearings-- which are the same as they always were.
Actually, cheaper cast Alum. pistons are the norm now-- they used to be forged like most truck engines still are.

Probably the biggest thing that added to engine life is the over drive transmission.
They typically drop engine rpm around 40% when it shifts into overdrive.
Nothing wrong with the old ones that top gear was 1:1 on the engine to the drive shaft-
I've had a couple of old GM turbo 350 out live 2 engines just by changing the fluid in them at every 50,000 miles.
Dropping from 3,000 engine rpm to 2,000 at free-way speed--- you'd expect the same engine to last longer.

So:
If oil is better, fuel is less powerful and cleaner, a lower compression engine has less stress on it,
and a engine now spins 20-30-35% less times around for the same mileage driven-----
that's why they last longer, not just because they have a shoe box full of expensive sensors and computers on them.

My '06 f-250 has a 300hp, 300cu.in engine in it, 6 speed manual trans., and gets around 12 mpg- or less.
Part of it's wizardry is over head cams with variable or phased timing gears that last about 100,000 miles.
When the phased timing gears wear out---- just the parts kit is about $600 for changing them--
and you still have an engine with 100,000 miles on it.
But; the phased camshafts do get 1/2 a mile per gallon better fuel mileage.

A 80's era Chevy 350 at around 250-260 hp with a HEI ignition, EFI, and overdrive, got 15 in a 3/4 ton trk.
For the $600 to get a couple of timing gears & chains for the 5.4- you can buy almost all the parts to over haul it.

I can sure argue alot of that.
Oil is better? Yup but i still remember buying my first mobil 1 synthetic for my new then 79 chev 350 4x4. It had 10 k on it then. I filled it with 10/30. checked it at 1200 miles and there was 2 quarts of oil left in it. Those motors were just to loose and thin oil would leak and blow right through them. I had to go back to my old 10/40 havoline. At least that would only use a quart in a 3000 mile oil change. Todays motors are much better. There built with alot tighter tolerances. Plugs last longer mostly because with fuel injection your dont get rich mixtures that foul them and lean mixtures that burn and melt them. Fuel is not weaker. Matter of fact your 105 octane example has less heat production capability then 87 octane sold at the pump today. Octane slows burning it does not produce more power. Put it in a low compression motor that doesnt need it and it will make less power. The way octane adds to power is it allows for leaner mixtures and more advanced timing. It was a balancing act in the 60s because we had to listen for spark knock and by then it was proabably to late. todays computers sense knock before you can even hear it and adjust timing an fuel to keep it from beating up your motor.

If going from 10 to 1 to 8 to 1 reduced stress why then are the motors from the 80s just as crappy as the ones from the 60s? Todays motors routinely run 10 to 1 and some motors even more and some supercharged motors can run compression as high as 10 to 1. Something that was unheard of back in the 60s and 70s and even the 80s. Why? again because detonation can be controlled so precisely. Bottom line is compression ratios in even toyotas are higher today then a muscle car of the 60s.

Never heard of a 300 hp 300 cu ford motor. But thats apples to oranges. My 2017 silverado got 2 mpg better them my 2020 ram hemi does. Different motors, different rear end gears different transmission gearing. But at least your not trying to compare a carbed 350 to your fuel injected ford. I had enough 350 4 barrel chevs to know that if you got 12mpg in a half ton with an automatic you were doing good with that fire breathing 180 hp boat anchor.

Overdrive transmissions?? Cant argue that one. It definitely plays a role in it. My ls6 chevelle with 373s turned about 3500 rpm at 60. My challenger with 390s turns 2k at 90!

I dont like fords but bashing one motor is kind of silly. Overall ford makes motors just as good, just as reliable and just as long lasting as anyone else. Have they made mistakes? Sure they have. Heck look back in the 80s at the 305 chev the 307 chev of the 70s. Pontiacs overhead cam 6 cyl. CHEVY VEGA heard of that one?? Chrysler made that *** 4.7 v8 right along side of the hemi and it was a terrible motor. Heck lets look back at the old muscle cars. My ls6 454 was a potent motor in its day. 450hp. They have been dyno'd in recent times and put down about 370 to the wheels stock. Back then it was common knowlege that at about 60k (if you didnt beat on it to much) they needed rings bearings and a valve job. Buddys boss 302 about the same. Both were lucky to get 10mpg. My challenger put down 428 hp to the wheels stock. Gets 25mpg and will easily go 200k before needing a rebuild. Heck if you had a 67 impala with a 327 2 barrel you that put probably a 125 hp to the wheels you were lucky to get 16 mpg and if you got over a 100k out of it you were bragging and they sure didnt have 10 to 1 compression.

Maybe your ford or some other overhead cam motor is hard to rebuild and expensive but a LS chev motor or a Hemi dodge is no more expensive to rebuild then an old school 350 chev or 351 ford. Then add to that your going to get twice the mileage before you have to open up your wallet and to build a old school v8 to put out the power a newer motor with there much better flowing heads, fuel injection ect (that bolts right back on after you build it) to the same power level as a 475 hp hemi or a 455 hp camaro motor would cost you ALOT more then rebuilding those motors stock and show me a built small block first gen chev that puts out 475 hp even with todays better parts thats going to last a 150k let alone a 100. Then like Mary alluded to.

Rebuild that boss 302 and go out cruising and have a suburu turbo or heck probably even some mini vans embarrass you at the stop light. Heck an eco boost v6 puts more hp to the rear wheels then ANY small block v8 ford ever sold at a dealership does. Marys little 4 cyl eco boost makes more then 90 percent of them and would scare the crap out of many muscle cars back in the 60s. Take a look here at what a 4 cyl will do https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...ormance-drive/ For any of you that are looking through rose colored glass a sub 14 second off the showroom floor car in the 60s and 70s was rare. It definitely took a big block to get you there. A sub 14 second quarter mile car that will get 30mpg and proabably last 200k. Now im a v8 guy all the way but that right there is amazing. I drove one of the 4 cyl turbo silverado. Again not for me but i will say it sure impressed me and i dont think a single person in a million that didnt know would think it was a 4cyl and the guy who owns it is a friend and an honest man and said he just got back from green bay and got 27mpg driving back. Bottom line is the 60s werent what we remember. the mid 70s through the 80s brought us the worse cars and trucks America ever made. THIS IS THE GOLDEN AGE OF CARS and especially muscle cars. You can buy a toyota corolla that will woop a 389gto in the quarter mile. A hellcat or gt500 mustang that will run with a 60s pro stock racer and drive home with the ac on. It boggles my mind that some cant accept the fact that your money buys you more today then it ever did in the history of cars.

[MaryB]

I can sure argue alot of that.
Oil is better? Yup but i still remember buying my first mobil 1 synthetic for my new then 79 chev 350 4x4. It had 10 k on it then. I filled it with 10/30. checked it at 1200 miles and there was 2 quarts of oil left in it. Those motors were just to loose and thin oil would leak and blow right through them. I had to go back to my old 10/40 havoline. At least that would only use a quart in a 3000 mile oil change. Todays motors are much better. There built with alot tighter tolerances. Plugs last longer mostly because with fuel injection your dont get rich mixtures that foul them and lean mixtures that burn and melt them. Fuel is not weaker. Matter of fact your 105 octane example has less heat production capability then 87 octane sold at the pump today. Octane slows burning it does not produce more power. Put it in a low compression motor that doesnt need it and it will make less power. The way octane adds to power is it allows for leaner mixtures and more advanced timing. It was a balancing act in the 60s because we had to listen for spark knock and by then it was proabably to late. todays computers sense knock before you can even hear it and adjust timing an fuel to keep it from beating up your motor.

If going from 10 to 1 to 8 to 1 reduced stress why then are the motors from the 80s just as crappy as the ones from the 60s? Todays motors routinely run 10 to 1 and some motors even more and some supercharged motors can run compression as high as 10 to 1. Something that was unheard of back in the 60s and 70s and even the 80s. Why? again because detonation can be controlled so precisely. Bottom line is compression ratios in even toyotas are higher today then a muscle car of the 60s.

Never heard of a 300 hp 300 cu ford motor. But thats apples to oranges. My 2017 silverado got 2 mpg better them my 2020 ram hemi does. Different motors, different rear end gears different transmission gearing. But at least your not trying to compare a carbed 350 to your fuel injected ford. I had enough 350 4 barrel chevs to know that if you got 12mpg in a half ton with an automatic you were doing good with that fire breathing 180 hp boat anchor.

Overdrive transmissions?? Cant argue that one. It definitely plays a role in it. My ls6 chevelle with 373s turned about 3500 rpm at 60. My challenger with 390s turns 2k at 90!

I dont like fords but bashing one motor is kind of silly. Overall ford makes motors just as good, just as reliable and just as long lasting as anyone else. Have they made mistakes? Sure they have. Heck look back in the 80s at the 305 chev the 307 chev of the 70s. Pontiacs overhead cam 6 cyl. CHEVY VEGA heard of that one?? Chrysler made that *** 4.7 v8 right along side of the hemi and it was a terrible motor. Heck lets look back at the old muscle cars. My ls6 454 was a potent motor in its day. 450hp. They have been dyno'd in recent times and put down about 370 to the wheels stock. Back then it was common knowlege that at about 60k (if you didnt beat on it to much) they needed rings bearings and a valve job. Buddys boss 302 about the same. Both were lucky to get 10mpg. My challenger put down 428 hp to the wheels stock. Gets 25mpg and will easily go 200k before needing a rebuild. Heck if you had a 67 impala with a 327 2 barrel you that put probably a 125 hp to the wheels you were lucky to get 16 mpg and if you got over a 100k out of it you were bragging and they sure didnt have 10 to 1 compression.

Maybe your ford or some other overhead cam motor is hard to rebuild and expensive but a LS chev motor or a Hemi dodge is no more expensive to rebuild then an old school 350 chev or 351 ford. Then add to that your going to get twice the mileage before you have to open up your wallet and to build a old school v8 to put out the power a newer motor with there much better flowing heads, fuel injection ect (that bolts right back on after you build it) to the same power level as a 475 hp hemi or a 455 hp camaro motor would cost you ALOT more then rebuilding those motors stock and show me a built small block first gen chev that puts out 475 hp even with todays better parts thats going to last a 150k let alone a 100. Then like Mary alluded to.

Rebuild that boss 302 and go out cruising and have a suburu turbo or heck probably even some mini vans embarrass you at the stop light. Heck an eco boost v6 puts more hp to the rear wheels then ANY small block v8 ford ever sold at a dealership does. Marys little 4 cyl eco boost makes more then 90 percent of them and would scare the crap out of many muscle cars back in the 60s. Take a look here at what a 4 cyl will do https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...ormance-drive/ For any of you that are looking through rose colored glass a sub 14 second off the showroom floor car in the 60s and 70s was rare. It definitely took a big block to get you there. A sub 14 second quarter mile car that will get 30mpg and proabably last 200k. Now im a v8 guy all the way but that right there is amazing. I drove one of the 4 cyl turbo silverado. Again not for me but i will say it sure impressed me and i dont think a single person in a million that didnt know would think it was a 4cyl and the guy who owns it is a friend and an honest man and said he just got back from green bay and got 27mpg driving back. Bottom line is the 60s werent what we remember. the mid 70s through the 80s brought us the worse cars and trucks America ever made. THIS IS THE GOLDEN AGE OF CARS and especially muscle cars. You can buy a toyota corolla that will woop a 389gto in the quarter mile. A hellcat or gt500 mustang that will run with a 60s pro stock racer and drive home with the ac on. It boggles my mind that some cant accept the fact that your money buys you more today then it ever did in the history of cars.

This article shows why modern engines are better, this is the little 2.0 in my Escape Crossover SUV. Little things like steel inserts in the aluminum pistons for strength(diesel engine tech!) and little things like forged steel crank and I beam rods... race car parts form when I was on the stock car pit crew!

https://www.full-race.com/articles/i...boost-2-liter/

[Lloyd Smale]

yup those turbo motors have come along way. Technology that indy cars would have loved in the 70s. First turbo car i had experience with was my grand national buick. There idea of high tech back then was to put a set of hypereutectic pistons in a stock 3.8 long block. Bit more tech in the first sequential fuel injection system on an american car and first intercooled turbo'd Us made car but they actually did very little to the long block. Luckily it was a very durable design from the get go and would handle up to about 450 hp maybe 500 reliably. Any more then that and you needed a full forged long block. I remember back when we bragged about a 4 bolt main chev block. My 2003 zo6 had 6 bolt caps. I remember too buicks first 3.8 turbo regals. They basicaly slapped a turbo on a 70s tech motor in 79 and they usually lasted about 60k less then that if you werent smart enough to run premium in them. Pontiac even put a turd of a motor in the firebird one year. A 305 (they called it a 301) with a turbo. Another stock motor with a turbo slapped on it and no supporting mods. There rare today because most ended up in the scrap yard. Yup those were the good old days. Wouldnt it be cool mary to have a time machine and take that little eco boost escape back into the 60s. Youd mop up on 351 mach ones 325 hp ss chevelles 389 gtos, 383 roadrunners ect. I like to see the look on there face when that little thing wooped them.

[MaryB]

It would be fun! It will set you back in the seat when the turbo spools up!

[Lloyd Smale]

I even have an mg story. When i was stationed in little creak va. one of the navy guys we trained with became a good buddy. He like mg's especialy the older steel bumper mgbs. He had a nice white one at the time and was restoring a green one. He had to go home to NY because his sister died of a brain tummor and it was winter and he mentioned he was nervous about taking his car on that long of a trip because the motor was getting tired. I told him to take my 340 duster and id drive his mg for a week. he took me up on it and left on thursday. Well saturday morning was a beautiful day and i had some buddys living in VA beach that trained with us. So i figured id take a ride. trip there went fine. Sat around drinking margaritas most of the day and we cooked up some steaks. About 8pm i figured id head back before i was a bit to intoxicated. Got about half way back and the motor started to knock. He had told me before i left that he was going to rebuild the motor so if somehting wen wrong not to worry about it so i kept going. It made it to about a mile from the front gate and threw a rod. Some buddys helped me tow it back. We all got sitting around the next day and one guy suggested we do something about it because George was going though hell about loosing his sister he was so close to so we all pitched in and bought him a new long block. I think it was like 400 bucks back then. When he got back 3 of us put it in. I think it took all of about 3 hours to do. They were fun cars. They sure werent fast but still fun to run through the gears. Had a partner at at work later in life that had a rubber bumper midget. I took it for a ride and had all i could do to get in the thing. Midget was a good name for them. Just about a go cart with a car body on them.

In High School, I had a 1966 MG Midget.
I thought mine leaked oil at the rear main seal because it was old.

I was at the dealer one time getting a part, and they'd just driven a new one into the show room.
The guy shut it off, and slid a paper plate under it.

I asked one of the parts guys if that was normal. He said, "Yeah, when they quit leaking, it means they're empty".

[imashooter2]

As for disconnecting the negative cable and touching it to the positive terminal.......I'm a little skeptical about that process doing anything.

Never mind, thought about it a bit more and with the negative cable off the battery post it wouldn’t be a short.

[Winger Ed.]

Midget was a good name for them. Just about a go cart with a car body on them.

It was a fun little car. At 60 mph, it was wound out to a little over 4,000 rpm.
It was pretty well worn out when I got it.
My Dad told everybody I spent more time under it, than I did in it.

[Winger Ed.]

Never mind, thought about it a bit more and with the negative cable off the battery post it wouldn’t be a short.

It didn't make sense to me either. It said it was to drain the computer's capacitors.
I don't understand enough about modern electronics to put in a thimble, and resent following directions- but it worked.

Several years ago, someone tried explaining to me how modern cars 'learn',
and compared it to the beginning stages of 'artificial intelligence'.

I told them, "OK, I get it. Artificial intelligence is like when a blond dyes her hair brown".
That was the end of that lesson......

[Mr_Sheesh]

Most of the time car computers would use a small battery to retain memory in static RAM, or an EEProm (Electrically Erasable Programmable Read-only Memory i.e. its usually read-only except when you intentionally change its contents.)

The battery would be something like a Lithium Coin cell, perhaps a rechargeable variant of a CR2032.

Disconnecting battery cables might tell the machine that you've done that, but wouldn't directly affect the memory state unless the Engineers who designed it made it do so, but that IS a possibility.

[john.k]

Quite a few cars drop to limp mode if the battery is disconnected/changed without a computer op.....Guarantees the owner wont forget he was sent to the naughty corner for thinking he could service his own car,and save a few bucks.

[Lloyd Smale]

It was a fun little car. At 60 mph, it was wound out to a little over 4,000 rpm.
It was pretty well worn out when I got it.
My Dad told everybody I spent more time under it, than I did in it.

up here most of them were rusted out in 5 years. But then most vehicles back then were as bad. i remember one guy that lived up here telling me his dad had an mga and a mgb covered under tarps in the barn for many years. Neither had been driven in the winter. He said when his dad died they were cleaning things out and got to the cars and the A looked like new and the B was just a pile of rust that they couldnt even restore.

[robg]

the midget /sprite etc used the BMC a series motor ,3 bearing crank ,started out as an 850cc then grew to 1275cc over the years.would do about 110mph and 35mpg .had a mk2 sprite ,same as mk1 midget .had 7 people in it when i was young and skinny that included 1 in the boot/trunk.