Jump to content

Calling the Autoshite Youth: 90's rep-mobiles, close to classicdom?


Partridge

Recommended Posts

I would always try and find space for a Renault 21 or Peugeot 405. Ford and Vauxhalls will always get a lot of support from clubs but nobody will ever drool over a Renault 21 TL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not discounting base models as such, I'd far rather have the most basic Mk3 Astra you can buy than the CD (or whatever) model. It's just that basic cars won't ever be worth as much as the go faster models, imho.

 

Good call on Saxos, they will become quite sought after as cars like them, the Fiesta ST and many others will be bought by people who had them in the day and remember them fondly. Look at Novas now, even the shit models (all of them, trolalolalol) are creeping up in value as they were very popular with boy racers. One day they will want to relive their youth, and reliving your youth equates to massive future values. For further proof of this see Lambretta, Vespa and almost any pre-1980 Japanese motorbike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1426246_202549303266648_1989008297_n.jpg

Im hoping in a few years the Cherry will be sought after, not because its a base spec with its original wheel trims, but because its a 3 door and just right for someone to pay over the odds for and drop something tasty in the engine bay to cla$$ic rally.

 

Then my lad can use the money to buy his next motor... And so on.

 

I also predict 3 door red Micra will be worth serious coin owing to its cult status.

941865_196135917241320_387715970_n.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already had someone message me on Facebook asking if my Corsa is for sale as they have a C20LET engine but can't find a solid shell to fit it to. The welding and other work I've had done to was posted up after it was carried out. Any sporting iconic car will have a following in due course and base models, whilst not fun, provide us with something to start a thread about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bloke who goes to my mates garage has a 79 or 80 Cherry. He loves it to bits. Thinks it is the bees knees. It is quite nice to watch because he's in his early 50s and he turns up regularly at the garage with things he wants fitting to it. He's got a Rev counter in a little pod on the dash, runs it on the most expensive V Power type fuel, changes the oil every couple of months, keeps it clean and tidy and it almost always has a near compete set of pound land trims o on it. It smokes a bit but he pootles about in it very contentedly. Always asks how to get more power from it "Will a K&M air filter give it more oomph, Bro? What about Magnecor leads? Can I fit a cherry bomb to make it faster? ". The temptation to let him do these things is huge - he's running some ridiculously unsuitable (but correct size) YOKOHAMA tyres after he heard someone mention they were the ideal fitment for an Integrale.

 

 

Personally. I don't see the attraction. I've driven it. It drives like a 1980 Cherry always drove. I passed my test in an 86 Cherry, I've driven one again since. It felt like a Cherry. Good on anyone who likes them, glad you're keeping them going. It's always amusing seeing them go by. There's a studenty arty type chap I often see mumbling about in an 81 Sunny. I chuckle to myself when I see it.

 

Give me old cars I can make faster and I'll be happy, or anything with a big engine and lots of leather and gadgetry.

 

To me, the name of the game is to buy cars when they're at the very depth of the depreciation curve. When they've been dying off for a couple of years. Buy the best one you can find for a cheeky budget. That's my version of Autoshiteing. When there are 15-20 tidy ones on eBay for rapidly diving prices buy the nicest one you can. In six months all the cheap ones have disappeared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the cars our parents could never afford?

They were running base spec Escorts and Marinas ect and dreaming of Triumph 2000's, Rover P6, and in my Dads case a Toyota Crown Custom estate.

 

When you have a look at those old Triumph's and Rovers you realise that nobody could build a car like that these days.

They could not afford too, by the time they had a few ready for sale the price would be unbeliveable.

 

In real engineering terms more modern cars are far less for the money, built cheaply with far less moving parts.

They had it far more "Right" around the 90's where they built proper cars that didn't need a computer operator to fix them.

 

Todays cars are going to be 10 year products, after 10 years there will be no support for the technology in them and they will become expensive

to repair and most likely taxed as polluting inefficient monsters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Base model stuff is never worth keeping in the hope it'll go up in value - if it doesn't have a shell that can be used to repair faster ones.

WORD!

 

This Im afraid.

 

Poverty spec stuff has a "nostalgia" value in so much as "I had one of those when I learned to drive / my dad had one of those" but thats about it, it will never be worth serious coin except as a shell donor for someone who wants to build a faster example. I know we bemoan the little old ladies Mk2 Auto Ezzy becoming yet another RS clone, but thats the sad fact of life where the desirability is, and where the money is.

 

And if someone wants to offer me a shitload of cash for my two door car because they intend to junk the engine and lob in something tasty, who am I to turn them down, especially when that money will pay for a month or two's mortgage payment?

 

 

Personally. I don't see the attraction. I've driven it. It drives like a 1980 Cherry always drove. I passed my test in an 86 Cherry, I've driven one again since. It felt like a Cherry. Good on anyone who likes them, glad you're keeping them going

 

Its fine, the reason I bought it is that the lad is doing a spanner monkey course at college and wanted something simple and basic to work on, he also likes old Nissans. Jobbed. He knows that if it becomes desirable and worth anything as a shell donor then it will get sold on and something else bought. So far hes had all the wheels off and the brakes stripped and rebuilt, but has left the donkey well alone so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading this thread,a recurring theme seems to be that Mk1&2 Escorts were unremarkable cars when new.

My memories of this are quite different , although they could be a bit skewed by where I lived.

As a kid I lived in Llanmiddlleofuukinnowheregogogoch, my dad had a 1956 Land Rover, my mum had a Lhd Dyane 4, so if we ever had to go to civilisation my dad rented a car. I remember Avengers,Marinas and Cortinas but a couple of times he got a 2 door 1.3L Escort , probably R or S reg. me and my brothers were so excited and my dad drove it like a rally car,lots of oversteer and inside wheel spinning on the Tregaron to Abergwesyn Pass.

We all loved it and my dad reckoned it was loads better to drive than any other hire cars he'd had, we of course thought it was just like Roger Clark's RS.

As I got older I knew they were basic and old fashioned and as a teenager had my fair share of Renaults,Citroens Jags and Audis as well as numerous old Fords ,but learnt early on the easiest car in the world to sell was a noisy Escort with a 2.0 Pinto thrown in- that's what paid the deposit on my first house.

As for 90's cars becoming classics I think that emphasis might shift from the traditional sporty top of the range models to more basic versions, as they've got less electronic crap to fuck them up and over the bridge early.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I passed my test in 87, a few of my mates had Mk2 Escorts as they were cheap as chips cars from the bargain section of the auto trader. I never wanted one then and don't really now either. I do like the droopsnoot RS2K and the white/silver Harrier special editions, Sports, mehicos etc but the Pops and pop pluses were dismal cars to be in. The newer Mk3 Escorts of the time, even the basic ones seemed so much nicer and modern to me and I guess that has stuck.

 

I certainly have a nice Mk2 now if it was cheap enough but the prices are just mental, I'd sooner have a nice HB Viva myself really.

 

I would however give my right bollock for an Olympic Blue Mk2 RS Escort....fooking gorgeooooos! Always fancied a Mk1 1300E in that metallic purple too.

 

P.s, prices and interest in Mk3 Escorts seems to be going up since I bought mine in 09 - even the more door ones are getting popular and picking up dollar on fleabay, dead easy to stick 2.0 Zetec lumps in them too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thing is, it is rarely the electronic stuff that goes wrong on moderns. I don't know anyone who's scrapped a modern because of something electronic going wrong.(Other than Renault key card immobilisers) I actually like the electronic stuff - but I know how it works and have access to the equipment to talk to it.

 

It's like my little Focus. It's a 2003 Focus ST170 with 165k on the clock. I had it on the diagnostic machine last week just to give it a check over (this is the second time I've interrogated it in six months) and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. It runs exactly as it should and all the electronic stuff works as it should.

 

Go back 21 years and I had an 82 Cortina Crusader 2.0. 60 bhp / 35 lb ft less than the Focus, no electric windows, power steering, anti lock brakes, traction control, ESP, fuel injection, heated electric mirrors, remote central locking, immobiliser, alarm, air conditioning, climate control, ABS or six speed gearbox fitted to the Cortina.

 

The Focus is faster, more reliable, quieter, smoother, safer, better handling, more economical, less rusty and a lot less likely to need fixing. The Focus needs an oil change every 10-12k and a proper service every 20k. Try doing that to a Cortina and you'll be picking bits of camshaft from the road.

 

Cars have advanced a lot in the last 20 years, and most of the advances have been good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started browsing autoshite about 7-8 years ago... Back then we were lusting and the 70s motors and looking at the 80s cars as potential classics etc. Fast forward nearly a decade and we've essentially handed over the 70s cars to the 'classics crowd', the 80s cars are well established and are becoming 'classics' and the 90s cars are next on our radar.

 

90s motors are about a decade away from being truly regarded as being classics but the high profile cars such as the GTIs, Cosworths Vauxhall Lotus Carltons etc will start to attract a lot of interest in the next couple of years. Everything has its time and it is inevitable that us lot will be at the vanguard shepherding the shit cars into safety and onto classicdom, that is what Autoshite does best!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thing is, 90% of the electronic stuff is unnecessary and causes huge grief when it, its wiring, sensors or connections fail. Like a bonnet sensor on a poverty spec A3 which cut the engine out, because the car thought the bonnet was up. I know lots of people who have scrapped cars because electronics have been playing up and have been the (rather expensive) straw which broke the camel's back. I actually like electronics, but in the right place when they are needed and do the job better than owt else.

 

Not like electronics which need to be talked to before you can change the brake pads, like the case above (and a new sensor took a week to arrive, so no car in the meantime), electronics deciding there's a fault (usually because of bad sensors, wiring connections and so on) and lighting a dashboard light which then fails the MoT, the thought at the back of your mind that if a sensor goes down, you may be stranded in the dark in a particularly rough end of a city or suburbs. Nothing wrong with the mechanical bits, just the electronics deciding it's time to stop.

 

Go back 21 years and I had a Citroen CX diesel. 30 hp and 30 lb.ft less than an Audi A6 V6 TDi, but faster on most of England's roads, totally happy at 110-120mph all day long on the motorway and much less tiring on a journey. 'Fly-by-wire' (hydraulics) steering so good it's still used by Peugeot rally teams, suspension which made everything else feel little better than a horse-drawn cart, brakes which made everything else feel like you were rubbing a block of wood against the rim.

 

The Audi’s aircon and ventilation system is better and it shouldn’t rust too easily. Otherwise, the CX was the better car in every respect, with no electronics for most models (other than the wee module which maintained a steady cabin temp), where there were electronics they were well used to make the faster petrol engines run more reliably. The Audi has several different pumps/motors to power different bits, power steering, abs,  self-levelling rear axle, central locking, power steering, headlamp levelling and so on. The Citroen had one to do everything , which not only lasted the best part of half a million miles but required no electronics for it to understand what to do and would take under an hour to replace.

 

The Audi is slower on many roads, faster above 100mph when the road isn't poor, is no more reliable than any CX I owned (many were ruined by mechanics who couldn’t get their brains round them, so like a toddler in a rage couldn’t be bothered to do things correctly) and judging from all the A6 Tdis on ebay for spares/repairs, last a lot fewer miles than any CX I ran. They carry less but do 5 more to the gallon, although replacement parts needed more than offsets this fuel saving.

 

Cheap cars have advanced a lot in 20 years, those which were decently engineered have either sent their makers out of business or been costed down like a Ford. Fundamental engineering has often gone backwards in the drive for profit. Electronics can make up for cheap mechanical engineering, and often do.

 

Not only is it a simple pleasure to have your right foot’s movement directly connected to the fuel supply without a series of computers working out what to do in best Nanny State fashion, it’s also as simple as a wire and a lever. Because that's all it is. For those with brains which work well, the best computer system of all lies in our heads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One notable difference between 'then' and now. Back when I passed my test a brand new car was an Alfa 164 or a Peugeot 405. A twenty year old car was utterly prehistoric by comparison. Look at the yawning chasm between a Peugeot 404 and a 405 or between a 164 and a 2600 Berlina. The mk4 Escort was new then but 20 years previous a new equivalent was an Anglia.

 

A 20 year old car now is '94 which to me still seems pretty modern. Styling aside, technically a '94 Mondeo is no less competent than a new one. Sure, a few toys have been added but the '94 car is hardly rudimentary, at least not in the way a 105E would be compared to a Mk4 Escort. 

 

Progress has slowed down somewhat since the 80's so I think it'll take a great deal longer for cars from the last 20 years to seem old and become cherished. I'm sure the day will come for some of them but unlike cars from the 80's and earlier, i think some may well reach extinction before that ever occurs..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ì think they've wasted a lot of time with diesels. The same effort on petrol engines or lpg would have been more worthwhile and our cities wouldn't be getting covered in soot.

 

Some of the new technology is brilliant stuff. Cars are becoming more like the machines they were always meant to be. By that I mean you go to it, turn the key and it goes until you tell it not to. They keep going for hundreds of thousands of miles often needing no more than routine servicing. Yes, they break but they break a lot less than they used to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had an Olympic blue Mk2 Capri, it was ace. Discovering that P&O Roadtanks colour scheme was exactly the same at the time made it better, as I could get enough touch up paint to last for years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with ratdat, my Mondeo is just as capable as a new one - it might not have auto wipers/headlight or a flappy paddle gearbox but it has power steering, electric window/sunroof/ air-con/airbag/side impact beams etc etc and is quiet and smooth to drive. Fingers crossed the clutch doesn't go!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One notable difference between 'then' and now. Back when I passed my test a brand new car was an Alfa 164 or a Peugeot 405. A twenty year old car was utterly prehistoric by comparison. Look at the yawning chasm between a Peugeot 404 and a 405 or between a 164 and a 2600 Berlina. The mk4 Escort was new then but 20 years previous a new equivalent was an Anglia.

 

A 20 year old car now is '94 which to me still seems pretty modern. Styling aside, technically a '94 Mondeo is no less competent than a new one. Sure, a few toys have been added but the '94 car is hardly rudimentary, at least not in the way a 105E would be compared to a Mk4 Escort. 

 

Progress has slowed down somewhat since the 80's so I think it'll take a great deal longer for cars from the last 20 years to seem old and become cherished. I'm sure the day will come for some of them but unlike cars from the 80's and earlier, i think some may well reach extinction before that ever occurs..

 

Is some of this being down to us as individuals slowing down in development as time passes? - as a kid, 10 years is similar to 30 years is for a 40 year old. I agree, a 404 seems ancient to me compared with a 405, but quite probably a 12 year old would see a 405 as from a different world and will continue to see it as such - as he gets into his 30s, a 407 will be seen as still relatively modern, the 405 as still from ancient history, irrespective of its road manners.

 

Other things matter more now that most cars have reasonable road manners - they have to be more like a room in your house, with similar connectivity to the net. The electric vehicle will be seen as a totally logical move, us old ones who like tuning carburettors and burning petrol and other liquid fuels actually onboard the car will be viewed in a similar way as I viewed a 90 year old steam engine driver, back in the late 1970s - something from a totally different era.

 

Progress has speeded up in many people's eyes, even if some of us see that it has stalled from a mecheng pov with the car, it's less a piece of mechanical engineering to be marvelled over, more just another product which does a job. Also one which is taxed, taxed and re-taxed. Loads of people in their 20s are choosing not to drive, because of the hassle and costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In answer to the OP, would an Alfa 166 with the V6 snorting away under the bonnet be an attractive buy? They're going for as little as the engine on its own is worth, they're flippin rare and have an interior of a quality which everyone else seems to have forgotten about. Jag interiors I don't like anymore, Citroens went down the Peugeot-nasty route decades ago, German ones are all a bit silly, the Americans and Japs don't really get the idea - but a 166 makes you feel like your somewhere special.

 

When it goes bang or needs too many bits to make sense, do the TG treatment - whip out the seats for your office (bound to be better than what's already there), pull out the engine and have it as a piece of art or furniture in the living room and flog the rest on the bay. The 18mpg would need a second job to fund it, though.

 

This one: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Alfa-Romeo-166-3-0-V6-6-Speed-manual-/261438762456?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item3cdef6edd8 is touted as being a tad over-priced by those on the Alfa forums. This http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Alfa-166-V6-manual-6-spd-leather-seats-108-000-full-service-history-/251498444092?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item3a8e79b53c looks ok. The red leather interiors look good, too.

 

$_12.JPG4552191338_d3a33f553f_z.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cars are becoming more like the machines they were always meant to be. By that I mean you go to it, turn the key and it goes until you tell it not to. They keep going for hundreds of thousands of miles often needing no more than routine servicing. Yes, they break but they break a lot less than they used to.

 

By 'cars', you possibly mean 'Fords'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Born '95, so I've bought what I'm comfortable with - pretty much what I grew up with. Just whatever happens to be cheap (or more or less free as the current one is), because it's what most people consider to be worthless crap. I've taken as read that 80's performance cars (Ford, Vauxhall, all manner of French stuff, etc.,) were on the up, for the years I've been interested in cars. Seems to me that their motorsport/hooliganism heritage makes them valuable. Pre 80s, it's pretty much a classic isn't it?

I'll agree with Pete-M above: it's the sensors and stuff that cause the problems, did on mine. The ECU is fine, but the crank sensor thingy needed replacing before it ran right. Running a fault code reader over it helped a lot. It says to you 'I AM ILL, PLZ HALP', what's not to like?

Also, I quite fancy a Clio 172 at some point: like mine but actually fast. What chance that I'll be able to afford to insure one, before I can afford one? Well, a half decent one that hasn't been thrashed to death?

But the OP's point about repmobiles? 90s repmobiles must be at the bottom of the curve now. There's not even that many in the scrappys, so the point where people prize what they used to have can't be far away. Then they'll be worth something, 'cos people will go out looking to buy one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amongst others, yup

 

But especially the case for Fords, surely? If you can recognise and appreciate the virtues of a Focus then you can also see how far Ford has come since the early 90s. Cortinas, Escorts and Capris may be nostalgic social fabric but as machines as effective means of transport, they depended on a strong dealership and often a social ethos and a massively limited expectation and awareness of the buyer. They were mass-produced cynicism of the highest order, designed to do nothing more than make a bigger profit than the next most profitable factories.

 

A Focus uses exactly the same ideas which one mass-production manufacturer was using to make their cars handle like nothing else (wheel at each corner, strong suspension location, stiff unitary shell, rising rate springs, front drive) way back in the first half of the 1930s. It only took very nearly 70 years for economics to dictate to Ford what was necessary to stay in profit - perhaps more the public's fault than the maker's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the choice I would much rather have RWD. That may be because I grew up driving RWD cars - Escorts, Sunbeams, Capris, Cortinas, but in a huge triumph of marketing over intelligence there aren't many small RWD cars left. MX5, GT86, 1 series being the only ones that spring to mind.

 

Ford lost the plot rather seriously in the 80s. The Sierra was good in certain specs: Cosworth, XR4x4, 2.0iS. The Escort Mk3 looked better than in it was. Capri was too old - in the rest of Europe it was killed off a lot earlier than here. Granada was acceptable.

 

Then Ford remembered what had made their stuff fun and finally put it back. Strangely enough with FWD cars - they must have been learning about them at night school or something. .. The Ka drove really well, the Puma 1.7 is a hoot and the Focus Mk1 (petrol engine) is a better drive than anything else in its group.

 

The 1930s Citroëns and the like have never appealed to me. Mainly because they're FWD. Never been a huge fan of FWD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I´m born 1984 and to me, some 90s-cars are almost classics now. "Youngtimer", as we call it here in german-language-country. But most everyday-cars from the 90s (Passat, Mondeo, CarinaE, Corsa etc. etc.) are just boring old things looking sorry for themselfes.

 

I guess, now it´s important to cherish the 80s-cars that they become well-cared-for-classics and after rescuing the 80s-stuff, we could go on to the 90s-bubbles. In 5 or 10 years time from now. :mrgreen:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought it was that fdb who suggested what you're agreeing with, didn't P-M argue the opposite?

 

What I was meaning was where Pete-M had said...

 

 

Thing is, it is rarely the electronic stuff that goes wrong on moderns. I don't know anyone who's scrapped a modern because of something electronic going wrong.(Other than Renault key card immobilisers) I actually like the electronic stuff - but I know how it works and have access to the equipment to talk to it.

 

...which is pretty much my POV.

Although I agree with you, that much of the current fancy pants gizmos are unnecessary. It'll be fine as long as workable freeware stuff gets developed to let us interrogate anything and everything, or, the rain-sensitive LED mood lit in-dash toastie maker can be bypassed to allow the car to run.

Unless we're getting into a horrendous misunderstanding loop?

Seems to me that 80s and 90s cars got the best of the tech gains, but the noughties onwards cars have started to go too far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...