What constitutes a classic?

[Mrotwoman]

Triumph Driver,I understand what you're saying but I honestly don't recognise the shows that you are refering too,sure some of them do have the odd modern,but they are in the very,very small minority (maybe 1 or 2 at most?) and can easily be ignored if that's not your thing,as for car stereos booming ,it's honestly something I've never ,ever encountered at a show ,only ever at informal meetings such as the Chelsea Cruise.

Maybe things are different in your neck of the woods though

[Morrisand944S2man]

Oh Mr Morrisand944S2man,I doth apologise for I have seen the error of my ways and am sending my lowly,humble,unworthy and horribly beige Maestro to the crusher.
For it matters not that it hath survived 27 years in as new condition,manages to obtain 50+ mpg on a recent economy run,can happily be pressed into service as a daily hack for my other half when the daily driver is broken,brings back many a memory for folk at shows etc etc ,it is dull and unremarkable and therefore must die.

I shall replace it with a front-engined Porker and together we can live in our compound and preach to the great unwashed,and bask in the praise of Allah! the almighty one.

Death to all infidels who dare drive Allegros!

I have nothing against you running an old car. Good luck to you.

I do, however, object to the term "classic" being applied to a Maestro and other mundane old cars. It was not a great car in it's day (neither was the allegro, I owned one) so should never be considered a "classic".

However, your other comments are more of an attempt at a personal dig, and are not constructive to the discussion......

[Morrisand944S2man]

I've got that,but I prefer the dubstep mix.

Old does not = classic. Old + Great does = classic.
A classic car has also to be a great car in it's time to be a great car when it is old.

I'm still trying to work out if thousands of MGB owners are barking up the wrong tree.

No, the MGB was clearly a classic as it was a great car in it's day- and being a performance car was not mundane. So, the MGB being good in it's day and now old definitely makes it a classic.

[Morrisand944S2man]

Classic-ness is most definately in the eye of the beholder- show a Minor to the average Focus driver or Mrs Rusty who has no interest at all in old draughty and rattly cars and they would say yes that's a classic car, no argument, show them a 944 and I suspect they would say that's most definately not a classic car, irrespective of wether or not it's in Michael Bowler's book.

Average Joe in the street probably doesn't see minis as classics either, simply because they were around for so long and to the uninterested an early one doesn't look that different to a late one. Show them some huge behometh of a chrome laden yank tank howver and that would meet the public classic test.

My Vitesse for instance, definately a classic car but at the same time it was an outmoded and backward piece of engineering even when new and not particularly good road manners to boot! Still a classic car in the public eye though. I saw an SD1 today, now to my mind that's a classic, but I can remember when you couldn't give one away, and it wasn't that long ago- I don't think the man on the Clapham omnibus would consider it a classic either.

We could argue for all eternity on this issue and never come up with an answer, but the folks who wander into an old car show for something to do on a bank holiday know exactly what a classic car is!

Cars are only old and rattly because they need some work. I've been in rattle and draught free Minors!

A 944 is definitely an emerging classic as it was a great car in it's day. The engineering gave 50/50 weight distribution and brilliant handling, then or now. Plus the engines, biggest 4-cylinder at the time and with belt driven balance shafts uncannily smooth for a 2.5 or 3l 4-cylinder, and lots of torque! Plus the unusual transaxle transmission which gave the 50/50 weight.
Plus the excellent styling, which originated in the 924 was coped by two decades of Japanese coupes. The 944 and 924 are also great enjoyable cars to drive and suffer little from rust (galvanised bodywork) compared to their contemporaries. (such as 80's and 90's Jap coupes. Fuel economy is unbelievable- for a performance car. I have achieved 36mpg on a run- amazing on a 3,0L petrol engine. Practicality as well, with the rear seats folded you can get a lot of luggage or other items in a 944. Truly a brilliant design now, a special car then and now.

If you don't think the 944 series of cars deserve to be classics, that can clearly only be from a position of ignorance. Or possibly, you don't like my definition of a classic and feel to need to childishly "have a go". Well that's up to you. In reality, the only reason the 944 is overlooked is due to being overshadowed by the 911. And more recent Porsche buyers prefer to buy the now similarly priced second hand Boxster. There are two types of Porsche owners. True enthusiasts and posers. The posers have moved on to the Boxster and at last, people are starting to restore 944's. Their day will come!

As for the SD-1 the only interesting things about that car were the Rover V8 engine and the styling which was stolen from the Daytona. These cars could have been great but were sadly from the 70's BL era of lazy design and poor quality control.

[Morrisand944S2man]

Morrisman, I think you're right that "old" does not automatically equal "classic", but your definition of greatness is, as far as I can tell, limited. From your comments elsewhere I gather you're not a fan of Eastern European stuff - which is fair enough - and I appreciate that in purely mechanical terms, they'll never be great cars in the same way an Aston Martin or a Citroen DS are. Yet Trabants (say) deserve some credit in the greatness box for being a genuine attempt to provide cheap motoring to millions of people for whom it had previously been out of reach. In this sense they're a part of history and worthy of preservation because of it.
As well as this, greatness is subjective. As I said somewhere earlier, my ex had a Minor for a while - a 1966 four door - and I thought it was awful. It'd been restored by a reputable specialist and came with a pretty hefty price tag, but it didn't feel like a great car to me. I'd never argue that it wasn't a "classic" because I don't think it's a great car though: I recognise that Moggies are just not my thing and leave other folk to enjoy theirs. Personally, I'd sooner go to a show with a load of Trabants dropping oil and cardboard body panels all obver the grass than see a whole field full of shiny Minors, but there we go. Who's to say whether it's you or me that's right?

If a Minor feels "awful" to drive something must have gone wrong in the restoration. Sadly, Minors being at the cheaper end of the classic car spectrum are sometimes not done very well. Perhaps the car simply needed new suspension bushes, the rear dampers were worn, or the spring hangers were not replaced correctly- leaving the suspension out of alignment. Or, many people make the mistake of fitting too wide tyres to the Minor- which was designed to use narrower tyres. Sadly, also I know of three "well respected specialists" who carry out shoddy work , and this can spoil the feel of a car.

You would be well advised to drive a properly sorted Minor, which IS a very enjoyable car to drive. A properly sorted Minor will steer brilliantly, give a smooth ride and feel great to drive. Don't take my word for it- see the Tiff Needel Minor Youtube clip.

As for Trabants, I can see the point of preserving those due to the iconic connection with the fall of Eastern Europe. Clearly history has had a part in elevating the position of the Trabant in the motoring world. I'd much rather run a Minor as a day to day driver though!!!!

[Morrisand944S2man]

Wasn't the 944 the one that tried to replace the 911 and failed anyway?

No, that was the 928.

Never seen anything particularly special about the 944 myself, but that's just

an opinion!!!

As is everything else on this thread.

Sorry, Luxo, but you don't know what you are talking about as regards the Porsche 944!

That is another bugbear I have with Practical Classics magazine in recent years. As well as promoting mundane old cars as "classics" they also on a few occasions took a swipe at the excellent 944 series of cars. As one of the earlier contributors used to run a 924S and liked it! I can only contribute this poor journalism to the influx of poor journalists to the magazine in the 2000's. Basically a load of career journos who did not have a clue!

Sadly, the magazine has clearly influenced the readers who believed the ill- advised comments about the 944 series of cars in PC magazine. Which is why it is so important to get a proper definition of the term "classic car" based on age AND quality. PC magazine is influential and has led the movement in the wrong direction for ten years now.

[Morrisand944S2man]

Oh FFS. Please extract your head out of your own exhaust pipe.

can we leave personal comments out of the discussion please?

[Luxobarge]

Sorry, Luxo, but you don't know what you are talking about as regards the Porsche 944!

Are you blind?

I made the word "Opinion" as easy to see as possible, yet you still seem to have missed it.

It's my opinion, not a fact, just an opinion, and as such cannot be said to be wrong. I find your attitude quite insulting, please do not tell people they "don't know what they are talking about" when they express an opinion.

You would do well and gain more friends on here if you expressed your opinions as such, and not constantly force them down our throats as facts. They are not facts, they are your opinions, and as such are therefore as worthless as mine or anybody else's on here. In your opinion the 944 is a great car. In mine it's not. Live with it!

[Morrisand944S2man]

I agree re the boredom, zzzzzz’s and general despair at this thread but couldn’t resist taking the bait on this spectacular pile of delusion. But not having the time or patience to trawl through every point I would like to pick up on a couple of the points....

I would like to re-state the simple formula for determining what is and is not a classic.

Who made you milk monitor?

-snip-

Again, just because you don't like the very valid points I'm making don't dismiss it as delusion. Unless you meant the Allegro or Sierra owner who thinks their car is a Classic is under a delusion, which would be correct. I've owned examples of both those cars.

As for "milk monitor etc" can we leave attempts to make personal comments out of the discussion please?

Despair?? I, (and many others as it happens!) despair at what is happening to the classic car world now.

[Luxobarge]

the very valid points I'm making

Very valid in your opinion, not in ours eh?