29th Mar 2017, 13:45
This is what I was talking about when I posted comment 04:09 six days ago. Too many different opinions on what A classic is. It's a no win situation. Somehow these back and forth debates always end with cars that are your favorites or something that you have owned or currently own. Sorry, but the world of classics and the definition doesn't revolve around you. Oh - and I knew a Corvette would be mentioned sooner or later. You claim that the vehicles I mentioned are not classics or "immediately known classics". I'm just glad to know many will disagree with you.
29th Mar 2017, 15:19
As usual everything you mention is pre-1972. Emissions and CAFE standards didn't kill everything. Just so you know, there are a lot of post 1972 cars that are considered classics.
29th Mar 2017, 17:46
Hope this clears the air... You can go into Classic Car Club of America and see if your make and year car is listed. Here's more...
If you combine the various definitions of a classic car from various classic car authorities, then you find a range of cars made from the mid '20s to 1972. Cars made before that are typically called “antiques,” while cars made from the 1983 on are considered modern collector cars, currently. So where does that leave the remainder of the '70s? It’s hard to say they are modern cars due to the impact of the energy crisis of the early '70s on car design and the depressing malaise era that followed.
29th Mar 2017, 19:30
So if a car can't be entered in the Pebble Beach Concours d'Elegance, it's not a classic?
29th Mar 2017, 20:31
Hemmings motor news also has a nice article about the first generation Monte Carlo SS 454. A car that you say is not a classic.
29th Mar 2017, 22:12
LOL! You show me someone who spent 15-20k on an '89 Brougham... If there is such a person then they must exist in a parallel universe, because I can think of at least a 1,000 other cars I'd rather spend that kind of money on versus this...
30th Mar 2017, 05:01
How about this: whether or not these cars are considered classics, they were poorly-built, slow, inefficient, gaudy, wallowing pigs.
30th Mar 2017, 13:35
Why are you guys stuck on using the word "Classic" on just about anything? I like the "Modern Day Collector Car" if it's remotely applicable. These comments are often based out on collector car shows. There are categories in shows as well. Antique Cars like at Pebble Beach or Amelia. Special Interest, Stock less than 5 mods, Modified etc etc. I have owned cars purchased new during the late 70s, 80s and 90s. And yes some were Corvettes during that period, and even reflecting now, definitely not classics. I had one at 190 HP with the ugly bumpers, but it was a 75 Convertible. That year was supposed to be its last year with the soft top. So your fretting over a Corvette is unfounded. It's not one either. I never thought of my new Monte Carlo SS as one then or in the future. Just a fun car or what cars are really about.
If we ever go back on topic, this 89 Cadillac, does anyone other than its owner consider it a classic? Not all cars are classics, no matter what they cost. Emissions, smog equipment, and insurance pressure affected cars in mid 70s and 80s. The TransAm and maybe a CanAM from Pontiac lingered on past 72. Other than that, domestic wise, including Corvette was bleak.
Fast forward to the present. It's very bright. Over the past 10 years I have been thrilled to have great performance, styling and handling. I like a number of European models; less so the maintenance aspect. If you have a modern day collector car from the 80s up like a Grand National, that's great. 89 Cadillac, let the guy enjoy his piece. It's his and have fun. I have owned a few cars that looking back today I would call a POS. Lackluster, poor styling and anemic power. At the time they were what was new. It's absolutely great today. I open my garage doors and it takes a bit to figure what the most fun one is to take out today.
30th Mar 2017, 15:16
Hi there, I posted 15:19 and can't seem to remember stating anything about somebody paying $15- $20 grand. But I can tell you this; the price buyers were paying in 1989 off the lot was well over that. There must have been a time warp in the universe back then?
30th Mar 2017, 15:20
"Poorly built"? Does that include the Olds engine under the hood that was capable of 200,000, sometimes 300,000 miles?
30th Mar 2017, 15:32
The late 70s - very early 80s were indeed odd years for the US auto industry and so that era is sort of hard to quantify. Let's not kid ourselves: That era was AWFUL. Quality control was barely existent, performance was a joke where you'd have some massive car with a big V8 that barely put out 130 horses due to all of that pre-ECU smog equipment and even the designs were just sort of bleh...
But... yes. At some point those cars along with every other era of car will become a classic and usually because whatever generation has reached their peak earning years will yearn for the "good ole' days" and start paying out the wazoo for the cars and trucks of their youth. It's already happening now. My generation - now approaching our 40s - is the generation upcoming in that bracket and guess what they're buying? Old Ataris, boom boxes, and interestingly enough vehicles like 80s Toyota trucks - like the one featured in back to the future. Why? Because this generation is just getting old enough to feel nostalgic for stuff they grew up with and they have the money to buy it.
My Aunt actually owned a Brougham. A big white four door model complete with power everything. But even as a kid the thing just looked, rode and felt like a car for old people. That was not a great era for Cadillac. That was back when Buick, Oldsmobile, Cadillac and Lincoln were suffering from a kind of identity crisis. They were more or less producing cars that were the same as the ones they had made in the 50s, and as such their buyers just kept getting older and older.
But I digress... will there come a day that cars like '89 Broughams become collectible? Possibly. But now? I just pulled up good ole' Craigslist and there were PAGES of that era Cadillac for $1,500-$2,000.
30th Mar 2017, 23:08
Many younger guys have grown up with electronics. Less mechanical toys, erector sets and building model cars. The progression in my era was building bikes, dirt bikes, go carts and finally cars. There were dads and less single mothers. Many discovered their automotive passion later in life than the previous generations. We had a TV and radio. And sat with our dads by their car at a very young age. There were less work conflicts than today with younger people in this hobby. Many of today's hot rodders are into lowered imports. Gas was high until recently, as is car insurance today. Many of the earlier muscle cars are very high. Cost is a factor.
A lot of what I am repeating came out of a recent April/May 2017 issue of Cruising at www.cruisingmagazine.net. The Spring edition on the future of this hobby. My kids have fun, but wish they had the experience of the cars, music and times driving in the 60s and 70s. It was a very special era. What a lot of us consider classics from this generation are. Future collectibles will at some point be sorted out. Not every car from my era too would be considered a classic. It had to stand out. If not that word has little meaning. Just because a car was expensive or has newer badging that is ill deserved in many cases is not either. If you love your 89 Cadillac, great. I don't see it, but it's yours. Enjoy it and drive it.
29th Mar 2017, 12:58
Basically if old enough, you could drive absolutely anything to a car show. There are those that choose classics that are totally irrefutable to the purists. I saw a PT Cruiser won best paint. Veteran motif.