What defines a classic?
Discussion
Well, there are a few.
A lot of people go with "tax-free" which means anything before 1973.
Then there are people who go with "made before I was born"
or "I had a picture of it on my bedroom wall"
or "I remember when dad/grandad brought one of those as his very first new car"
I guess for me it's when the surroundings of the vehicle make me look at it as something other than a consumer durable. So for something like a Ford Sierra, it's only just getting there because they've become pretty bloody rare over the last couple of years. For something exotic like a Ferrari Italia, it's more or less a classic before it's on sale.
A lot of people go with "tax-free" which means anything before 1973.
Then there are people who go with "made before I was born"
or "I had a picture of it on my bedroom wall"
or "I remember when dad/grandad brought one of those as his very first new car"
I guess for me it's when the surroundings of the vehicle make me look at it as something other than a consumer durable. So for something like a Ford Sierra, it's only just getting there because they've become pretty bloody rare over the last couple of years. For something exotic like a Ferrari Italia, it's more or less a classic before it's on sale.
Caddy93 said:
Just wondering what some of you fellow PH'ers reckon qualifies a car as a 'classic'. Including age, car 'personality', and whatever else you feel to be important.
There isn't and never will be a definitive definition of what makes a classic car. Its much the same as asking what is a sports car or what is rock music.However, for me I think a classic can be most things. But the key points would have to be:
-not new
-of interest or interesting
The 2nd point is one that will confuse people no doubt. But that's because most people are highly biased and can't see past the end of their nose.
Some cars are easy to define as they are "interesting" to most people and all car enthusiasts, such as an original AC Ace or Ferrari 250GTO.
However more mundane cars like a MK1 Cavalier or Morris Marina are much more niche. Personally I say they are as much a classic as anything else, because to some people such cars as these are of interest and interesting to them.
Dictating a "before" date is in my opinion a pretty daft and stupid way to define a classic. This is on two counts.
- each year said fixed date gets further away from today
- how can a 1974 Mini not be a classic when a 1973 one is despite being identical?
RW774 said:
The definition `Classic` is a term applied by the owner of said vehicle, whatever that maybe.
Sadly that appears to be true. In the old days it used to be the true definition: "of the first or highest quality, class, or rank: a classic piece of work" but these days it seems to be any car with an MoT. Age should make no difference so any Alvis or McLaren is a classic and a Ford Focus will never be anything more than a run of the mill hack.JR said:
RW774 said:
The definition `Classic` is a term applied by the owner of said vehicle, whatever that maybe.
Sadly that appears to be true. In the old days it used to be the true definition: "of the first or highest quality, class, or rank: a classic piece of work" but these days it seems to be any car with an MoT. Age should make no difference so any Alvis or McLaren is a classic and a Ford Focus will never be anything more than a run of the mill hack.You personally percieve an Alvis as the highest quality. But is it really? And just because the Focus was mass produced how does it not meet requirement. I'm fairly sure all Focus's are built better and to a higher level and sophistication than any Alvis ever was. In fact by your definition age has nothing to do with it. Therefore almost all old cars can therefore not be classics as new ones are always of a higher standard, dynamically and technologically.
300bhp/ton said:
JR said:
RW774 said:
The definition `Classic` is a term applied by the owner of said vehicle, whatever that maybe.
Sadly that appears to be true. In the old days it used to be the true definition: "of the first or highest quality, class, or rank: a classic piece of work" but these days it seems to be any car with an MoT. Age should make no difference so any Alvis or McLaren is a classic and a Ford Focus will never be anything more than a run of the mill hack.You personally percieve an Alvis as the highest quality. But is it really? And just because the Focus was mass produced how does it not meet requirement. I'm fairly sure all Focus's are built better and to a higher level and sophistication than any Alvis ever was. In fact by your definition age has nothing to do with it. Therefore almost all old cars can therefore not be classics as new ones are always of a higher standard, dynamically and technologically.
Something special for me are 50s/60s and seventies Fords. All very affordable for a teenager. Saturdays with mates pulling out engines and going up the scrappy,getting them ready for a night out at Room at the Top, Tots, Tiffanies, the Goldmine Canvey Island etc etc etc. Great days, great bench seat bunk-ups.
Elderly said:
johnnywas said:
..... rare .....
Rarity alone does not denote 'class' ; a car may be rare now because they were so poorly made initially, that most fell apart years ago - I await candidates to be suggested .johnnywas said:
well to be a classic i think it has to be rare as why would it be classed as a classic if their were thousands of them,
Say a DB5,johnnywas said:
if a certain car was poorly made and all but 10 had fallen apart but the 10 were still in good contition they would be classed as classic's would they not?
No, say an early Lada.johnnywas said:
Elderly said:
johnnywas said:
..... rare .....
Rarity alone does not denote 'class' ; a car may be rare now because they were so poorly made initially, that most fell apart years ago - I await candidates to be suggested .Everything else (with some exceptions) is just old or rare. Some will disagree of course.
hot metal said:
So a Model T, a Beetle, Austin 7 ,2CV , Mini etc are not classics in your opinion. These were all massively popular
Due to price not engineering excellence. You just chosen low priced cars from various countries. Classics would be a Duesenberg, Maybach, Lagonda, Delahaye, Bentley Continental.RW774 said:
The definition `Classic` is a term applied by the owner of said vehicle, whatever that maybe.
I'm sure this comes up every year, last year someone said a classic car where someone spends (too much) money on it. We run a local vintage and classic meeting on New Years day. (Nearly 30 years ago some one realised all the vintage cars were at least 50 years old.) Space is at a preimium so moderns are asked to park elsewhere. Tack has to be used when deciding if the car is a classic - or is just Shed of the Week. I then have a different classifaction - would I if I had the cash and lots a garages give it space in my garage. However after a lifetime going to VSCC Prescott I find my taste to be very rarified. Many cars come in the nice to see, but wouldn't want it class.
Cars at the meet ranged from a kermit green Allegro estate to a nice 3 litre bentley to a blower restored as a "hotrod". From a 1910 Darracq to a White/La France monster. To keep JR happy there were 11 Alvis - 5 Speed models, a Silver Eagle and 5 12/50's, including mine!
JR said:
johnnywas said:
well to be a classic i think it has to be rare as why would it be classed as a classic if their were thousands of them,
Say a DB5,johnnywas said:
if a certain car was poorly made and all but 10 had fallen apart but the 10 were still in good contition they would be classed as classic's would they not?
No, say an early Lada.johnnywas said:
JR said:
johnnywas said:
well to be a classic i think it has to be rare as why would it be classed as a classic if their were thousands of them,
Say a DB5,johnnywas said:
if a certain car was poorly made and all but 10 had fallen apart but the 10 were still in good contition they would be classed as classic's would they not?
No, say an early Lada.Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff