Discussion
Went to local Classic Car Show tonite at Renishaw Hall, Derbyshire, got me wondering what is a Classic Car??
Cars displayed at show in my top and bottom five in no particular order:
Classic Cars:
Top5
Jag E Type
Jag Mk 2
TR4
Bristol 405
Ferrari 308 (Testarossa also there)
Bot 5
Allegro
Ford Capri
Marina
Rolls Royce Shadow
MG Midget
List is subjective, but what possesses someone tp spent £5k on an Allegro restoration - they're total crap!!
Cars displayed at show in my top and bottom five in no particular order:
Classic Cars:
Top5
Jag E Type
Jag Mk 2
TR4
Bristol 405
Ferrari 308 (Testarossa also there)
Bot 5
Allegro
Ford Capri
Marina
Rolls Royce Shadow
MG Midget
List is subjective, but what possesses someone tp spent £5k on an Allegro restoration - they're total crap!!
A classic car is one that is by definition old.
But it doesn't have to desirable. A C-type Jag is a classic car - as is a Triumph Herald. I know which one I'd rather have. I think it has to evoke a certain period in automotive history or represent a certain age or breakthrough in design/engine etc to be labelled a 'classic'.
The Citreoen DS from the 50s. A veritable classic.
The Mini - again - of the age.
A 1959 basic mini is a classic car. A 1979 T reg shit brown Mini is not a classic car - IMO.
Bit late in the evening for me though so may edit tomorrow ...
But it doesn't have to desirable. A C-type Jag is a classic car - as is a Triumph Herald. I know which one I'd rather have. I think it has to evoke a certain period in automotive history or represent a certain age or breakthrough in design/engine etc to be labelled a 'classic'.
The Citreoen DS from the 50s. A veritable classic.
The Mini - again - of the age.
A 1959 basic mini is a classic car. A 1979 T reg shit brown Mini is not a classic car - IMO.
Bit late in the evening for me though so may edit tomorrow ...
I read a descrption of a 'classic car' somewhere a while back, it went something like- if a vehicle was desirable, much wanted and sought after when its was new then, it will remain so when its older and will be come a classic.
I don't entirely go with that as there are a few exceptions but its a fair rule of thumb.
I don't entirely go with that as there are a few exceptions but its a fair rule of thumb.
What constitutes a "classic" is totally subjective. Some cars, highly regarded as classics, particularly by magazines are really rubbish, yet cars such as mine which are well engineered and have racing heritage are largely ignored.
I certainly don't think that just because a car is expensive or exclusive it constitutes a classic no more than it would if it were simply over a certain age.
I certainly don't think that just because a car is expensive or exclusive it constitutes a classic no more than it would if it were simply over a certain age.
danhay said:
Classic - Cortina
See now this is how tough the whole classic car/heap of old junk thing is and this example is a tough one.
Lotus Cortina yes, but any others, hmm well not to me they are not.
Also in the future a Sierra Cozzie will be a classic in the same way the Lotus cortina is now, but all other sierra's will always be bangers to me
In my definition, a 'Classic' is something which isn't necessarily 'old', but something that has cultural, technical, sporting or stylistic significance. A Capri, for example, was an example not only of a succesful rally and touring car, but a sports coupe many could afford ('twas the British Mustang after all). A Mini is a technical packaging acheivement, and many people's first car, so I would argue all of them hold some sort of classic status, especially the Coopers. Of course, the 'blue chip' classics are the ones that fill all the above catagories and are still achingly desirable (250GTO, anyone?). I like diversity at classic car shows, but it does irk me when I see some bearded fool with an Allegro so highly polished it blinds, or a rubber-bumper MG Midget, lacqured, with a badge-bar cluttered with their Real Ale Society membership crests. The show's organisers must have a sense of humour, though, as I once saw the '70s BMC owner's club sandwiched between the Jensens and the Porsches at a show in Tatton Park last summer.
You've got to have examples of common types otherwise it looks like we all used to drive Jensons and Rollers.
When I wert lad the roads were CRAWLING with hunters,allegros,marinas,BMC11/1300s,avengers
and all sorts of proper shite. Its almost as if they didn't exist, now.
We need them to remind us of our former follies
When I wert lad the roads were CRAWLING with hunters,allegros,marinas,BMC11/1300s,avengers
and all sorts of proper shite. Its almost as if they didn't exist, now. We need them to remind us of our former follies
I can understand that, and I like a bit of everyday nostalgia (especially MKIII 2-door Cortinas that look a bit American, or the Capri's contemporary British 'muscle cars' like the Sunbeam Alpine fastback H120 or the Vauxhall Firenza/Magnum), but there is something a bit sad about spending loads restoring what general consensus deems to be an ugly, unreliable, dull, mass-produced P.O.S.
planetdave said:
You've got to have examples of common types otherwise it looks like we all used to drive Jensons and Rollers.
When I wert lad the roads were CRAWLING with hunters,allegros,marinas,BMC11/1300s,avengers
We need them to remind us of our former follies
Ford Corsair, great styling. Just how mad was it to have a car with a V4 engine !!!!!!
Planetdave - although I do not own a classic car, I count myself as part of the classic fraternity - I read the magazines, go to the shows, read the books. Why? because, despite the advances in technology, most modern cars are dull to look at and shite to drive. Don't get me wrong - I don't go for the concours-winning Allegros and delivery-milage Marinas, but when you see, say, an E-Type or MKII, you must admit the roads would be much duller places without them.
BTW - The Fred-In-A-Shed restoration jobs are normally on MGs and the like - easy to get parts for. The more desirable classics mostly have dedicated 'restoration centres' where cars such as Jensens are restored to good-as-new standard using many modern parts - it's someone's full-time job.
BTW - The Fred-In-A-Shed restoration jobs are normally on MGs and the like - easy to get parts for. The more desirable classics mostly have dedicated 'restoration centres' where cars such as Jensens are restored to good-as-new standard using many modern parts - it's someone's full-time job.
v8thunder said:
I can understand that, and I like a bit of everyday nostalgia (especially MKIII 2-door Cortinas that look a bit American, or the Capri's contemporary British 'muscle cars' like the Sunbeam Alpine fastback H120 or the Vauxhall Firenza/Magnum), but there is something a bit sad about spending loads restoring what general consensus deems to be an ugly, unreliable, dull, mass-produced P.O.S.
Maybe, but at least these people are pretty harmless, and have a hobby which gets them out of doors (a bit like trainspotters). A car, any car, has some significance as part of our social history, and I reckon we should all be grateful that some people are prepared to pour their time and money into restoring cars which will never be worth enough to justify the restoration cost. I saw a very tidy orange Hillman Imp on the way to work this morning - not a good car by any rational standard, but it made a nice change from the hordes of Vectras, Mondeos etc.
I own a 'classic' but don't read the books, go to the anal retentive shows etc.
It's an old car which will die from rust or old age @200k miles. I'm just enjoying it whilst we are both still here.
And it is MILES more fun than modern stuff.Unless someone offered me a nice Tivver or something.
Go on, you know you want to.
It's an old car which will die from rust or old age @200k miles. I'm just enjoying it whilst we are both still here.
And it is MILES more fun than modern stuff.Unless someone offered me a nice Tivver or something.
Go on, you know you want to.
I wouldn't mind doing a Capri next actually. I think you're being a bit harsh on restorers Dave. Let's face it, which is sadder, spending five years of evenings rebuilding an old car, or spending five years of evenings plonked in front of the TV? I don't really see why taking care in doing a job properly just for the sake of it is "sad".
RobDickinson said:
I'm sure classic is something 20+ years old and vintage is pre WWII or something like that.
For official classification or something...
'classic' is an oft-debated grey area. It's true that 'vintage' is pre WWII and 'Veteran' is pre-1925 (I think that's right). Some people put 'classic' at '25 years old', but most people have a better definition - some stand the test of time, others just grow old.
I asume by 'anal retentive shows' you mean the BMC owner's club meet, not the NEC show, Stars and Stripes or meets like the Ace Cafe, where cars you've only seen in books and on the telly are there in all their glory.
Also, you'll find a lot of the stuff at the shows for sale, at very competetive prices. I'm not suggesting you all go out and buy one, but as the biggest single cost on a car is depreciation, the fact that you can sell on a well-cared-for classic for more than you paid for it in the first place has to be of some financial nous.
Again, it has to be something a bit desirable in the first place, but compared to a Smart or Perodua Nippa, which will be worth £800 in three year's time, wouldn't an Escort Mexico or even a BMW 320is (Italian market M3) make more sense to a pistonhead?
se6b said:
I find it quite incredible that on a car forum someone could possibly find the thought of an enthusiast rebuilding a rare car sad. Amazing.
Yep.
6 years rebuilding an allegro.
Can't think of a sadder occupation.
I like to see one occaisionally but purleese.
Just looks like you are running away from reality.
>> Edited by planetdave on Thursday 19th June 12:27
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff