"Classic" Vs old banger.

[mattblack]

A comment on another thread about cars not 'ageing' so quickly now got me thinking. My Rover is 19 years old, and while I look after it, plan to tidy it up a bit and keep it for a while, most people would see it (and treat it) as an old banger. Now thinking back to 1990, a 1971 car would be pretty firmly in "classic" territory.

 

Any thoughts? Comments?

[dollywobbler]

One man's classic is another man's old banger. Not sure there's much to discuss. Some people still think anything that doesn't have chrome bumpers and wire wheels can't possibly be classic while others are much more open minded.

[Guest]

It all depends who your talking to really. Some see a 5/6 year old car as an old banger - some saw any car as an old banger when the scrappage scheme was on as that is what they were brainwashed into. Me - well I would happily drive a 105e Anglia or a 1997 corsa as its more about what I like than the age of the vehicle*

 

 

* unlike the other half.

[Mr Lobster]

Its very much down to an individuals perception of it.

 

To some people, an E Type Jag / MGB / Stag is a classic, any 1980s car is a banger and thats it. Different people will stick different lables on things mainly because of their own preferences and perception of what is and isn't a classic.

 

Also, a 1971 car in 1990 would have been relatively rare even then as cars just didn't generally last as long.

[BMC Dan]

I'm guessing it's due to the vast amount of changes that happened to new cars during the 70's and 80's that made 20 odd year old stuff look prehistoric back in the early 90's- the gradual switchover to FWD for family cars, plastic and painted metal replacing chrome etc.

[scaryoldcortina]

I'm not sure I agree that a 1971 car in 1990 was considered "classic". My memory of it (as a young driver with no money) was that late 60s and early 70s stuff was worth nothing at all (except Minors, MGBs and "proper" jags - XJ6s you couldn't give away) Mk1 scrotes were £50 a go unless "modified" with a pinto and some capri wheels - this made them worth £300 instead.. Mk3 tinas were totally worthless except as kitcar/escort donors. In fact, Mk3s were buttons cheap right up to early 2000s and the nescaf ad and Life on Marsbars.

 

Same applies if you go back further, a mate of mine bought a 19 year old FB victor in the sales back in 1984, paid £20 for it. His missus still uses it as a daily.

 

I guess I'm saying it takes a lot longer for run of the mill stuff to become interesting.

[dollywobbler]

Here's a thought I've been chewing for a while. It was easier for older cars to become classics, because they were so individual. Yes, ok, you had badge engineering, but a Peugeot was a Peugeot in the 1960s, and a Citroen something totally different and both were pretty different to BMC (well, Pug 404 excepted...). In 1956, Citroen built a huge DS or a shed on wheels called the 2CV. Malaysian cars weren't even produced yet and the Japanese were only building other people's cars, or rather feeble versions of their own. Mercs came in a handful of flavours. Even Ford UK only had three model ranges (Popular 103E, Anglia 100E, Consul-Zodiac).

 

By the 1980s, Peugeots and Citroens were sometimes exactly the same car. Taking 1982 as an example, Citroen now built the 2CV, Dyane, Mehari, LN/LNA, GSA, CX. Now, Citroen builds even more models, including 4x4s. In fact, most manufacturers build cars for most of the common classes. Cars are produced all over the world by a daft number of companies.

 

What I'm trying to get at is that a ridiculous number of different models have been produced since 1980. I reckon that makes picking the classics quite difficult. I think it also makes it very likely that quite a few models will just vanish entirely. There will be too much variety and not enough collectors - despite the efforts of Mr Bol, Torsten and Bickle.

[fiatdaft]

^the car industry has always been like that though,only there were more independant makers that could concentrate on the niche market,now the mainstream do it to fill niche's that might or might not be there.

 

with regards to the o.p.'s point point i can remember buying a 1971 herald 13/60 in 1989 when i was 14 (i started young) it really was old fashioned,i suppose the modern equivilant would be a k reg rover 214,that doesn't seem quite so old!

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

Here's a thought I've been chewing for a while. It was easier for older cars to become classics, because they were so individual. Yes, ok, you had badge engineering, but a Peugeot was a Peugeot in the 1960s, and a Citroen something totally different and both were pretty different to BMC (well, Pug 404 excepted...). In 1956, Citroen built a huge DS or a shed on wheels called the 2CV. Malaysian cars weren't even produced yet and the Japanese were only building other people's cars, or rather feeble versions of their own. Mercs came in a handful of flavours. Even Ford UK only had three model ranges (Popular 103E, Anglia 100E, Consul-Zodiac)... a ridiculous number of different models have been produced since 1980.

 

You're kinda contradicting yourself with this. Until the mid-seventies, model ranges were pretty small, and most countries were mostly buying home-made stuff. Therefore, by definition, cars back then had to be LESS individual than they are now.

 

Oddly enough, that lack of individuality could make them MORE popular as "classics" after a certain amount of time, because more people would've been able to relate to a well-maintained example in the usual "my dad used to drive one of these" manner and been prepared to pay more money to, in a sense, re-live their youth....That's much harder to do nowadays!

[Albert Ross]

I consider my 1989 Sapphire a classic, simply because they have just dropped off the edge of the Earth. When was the last time you saw a totally stock, un-Barried Sierra? Most of them became kit cars or "Cossy lookalikes" much to my annoyance at first, but my pleasure now. It's gaining in value weekly. I recently turned down an offer of £500 for it..... as the bloke wanted to make a "Replica 4x4" out of it. Oh right, lower it and fit big wheels and a spoiler? No ta, find another victim please. He smiled when I told him no, and he said, "that'll be worth a stack if you keep it standard". Exacketally mate.

 

Scorpio? NO, not a Classic, but interesting nonetheless. Give it 10 years, when the rest have given all their running gear up for the surviving Sierra 4x4 Replicas, then it might make Classic status.

 

Land Rovers before 1984 with leaf springs? Instant cult appeal. Can be used as a car/van/scrap wagon/working vehicle/weekend toy etc. Covers all bases.

 

The Mk1 Focus should be a classic soon. Expecially the 4 doors in high spec trim. I can't think of a current modern that will achieve classic status, they're all so similar.

[Guest]

I drive stuff which would generally sit quite neatly in "banger" territory and only the thickest of people tend to think of my stuff as being old bangers. If you keep something in clean condition and really look after it, only the thickest people will think of it as an old heap.

[Guest Leonard Hatred]

I really couldn't give a shit if cars are 'classic' or 'bangers', I just like what I like.

The mongs who go on about "THIS CAR WILL NEVER BE A CLASSIC", "THIS CAR WILL BE A CLASSIC IN 9 YEARS, 5 MONTHS AND 3 DAYS" can fuck right off.

[Albert Ross]

It matters come the annual insurance rip-off. If it's considered a Classic, then you get insured a shitload cheaper. And the envelope with the certificate in comes with a redemption voucher for discount off a pair of string-back driving gloves. Of course, we have to ask ourselves, in a deep searching way, does anyone actually give a shit about what we all think? Is the internet real? Are we just figments of our own imaginations? Is there Life on Mars?

[Des]

It's all in the eye of the beholder, if you find an old Datsun or Toyota charming and characterful then to you it is a classic. The average MGB / Stag / TR type may dismiss it as trash, but if you're looking for an 'classic' for the good reasons, it's something you can love, enjoy, cherish, then the car you fall in love with is a classic to you. If you feel the need to comply with the great unwashed pointless opinion of what a classic is, be it to win trophies in a field, climb the ladder of status according to how 'correct' or 'more desirable model' or whatever other meaningless crap determines the pecking order, then to be a 'classic' your MGB must have chrome and spokey wheels, your Stag needs the original V8, and if you're in a TR7 you can piss right orf.

Car design peaked about 20 years ago, not really improved since. Up to this point car makers were largly into cars bigtime, they were innovative and enthusiastic, did the hard work, they built cars that would work for Mr and Mrs bland with their 2.4 brats that would also keep young Mr. Hooligan happy, genius. Now all seems dull, uninspiring and harshly designed with marketing the sole motive, mode of transport is now a low priority feature. Pondering which cars of the last couple of decades qualify as classic seems to myself like trying to apply the term fine antique furniture to stuff made from chipboard. Not that I care, if you fall in love with a BINI, (I'm sure they function perfectly well as a car) that's your business, and if it's your choice rather than peer pressure, social ineptness and whatever sad reasons drive fat lasses into crippling debt to get one, more power to you.

[Conrad D. Conelrad]

MEDIA STUDIES GCSE

 

Random old Practical Classics - June 1983

Cars featured Maximum/minumum possible age of car

Austin 7 (60 / 43)

E-Type Jag (21 / 7)

Morris Minor (34 / 11)

MG B (20 / 2)

 

Reader's Cars Age of car

NSU Prinz (10)

1936 Hillman Minx (46)

Sprite or Midget (16)

 

 

Recent issue: March 2011

Cars featured Maximum/minumum possible age of car

Escort MK1 (43 / 37)

Escort MK2 (37 / 31)

Elf / Hornet (50 / 42)

Lotus Elan/Eunos/Elise (49 / 0)

 

 

Reader's Cars Age of car

Saab 900 (20)

Hillman Super Minx (45)

Cortina (30)

Jensen Interceptor (40)

Rover P6 (34)

[Lord Sterling]

Personally I couldnt give a flaying toss what classic or not. I dont care whether people think my cars are classic or not, I drive them simply because I like them, something that seems completely lost on todays society. People think you drive something old because you think its a classic, they cant seem understand that some people actually do like driving old cars that arent neccessarily "classics" More fool them.

 

I consider my 1989 Sapphire a classic, simply because they have just dropped off the edge of the Earth. When was the last time you saw a totally stock, un-Barried Sierra? Most of them became kit cars or "Cossy lookalikes" much to my annoyance at first, but my pleasure now. It's gaining in value weekly. I recently turned down an offer of £500 for it..... as the bloke wanted to make a "Replica 4x4" out of it. Oh right, lower it and fit big wheels and a spoiler? No ta, find another victim please. He smiled when I told him no, and he said, "that'll be worth a stack if you keep it standard". Exacketally mate.

 

+1

 

Thats an interesting point. Most Rover 800s these days seem to be turning into late 'Vitesse Turbo Sport' lookalikes (Lowering, big wheels, spoiler etc...) I like keeping my cars pretty much standard, not a very popular decision, but its my car and its a laugh turning up to meets where most cars tend to have the same mods where as yours looks different because its standard!

[Pete-M]

Oh dear, the 'c*****c' thing.

 

Bollocks to that. If you like it, then who cares?

 

This is Autoshite. This is where people who like old (and apparantly unfashionable) cars hang out, no matter what others think of 'em.

 

Not everyone likes the same cars, so why worry? Who cares your car is a 'c*****c' or merely an old banger? It's an old car and you wouldn't have it if you didn't like it. Whether it be utter shite (MGB) or a genuinely superb bit of kit (MX5) it's still a car.

 

Sometimes they're a brilliant thing, sometimes they're shite. Occasionally even a Vectra is better than walking.

[mk1_4dr]

...Occasionally even a Vectra is better than walking.

 

Are you feeling OK pete?

[garethj]

I think someone's hacked Pete's account

 

In the public's eyes, anything over 5 years old is a banger. I'm happy for them to continue thinking that.

[mattblack]

I didn't mean this to become a 'what's a classic?' thing, honest guv....

 

Maybe my memory is playing tricks when I think back to the sort of stuff that was in banger territory in 1990, thinking about it it would have been around then that someone at work asked me if I ran my 1965 MK1 Sceptre 'as an old banger, or a classic car'... which I remember thinking was a strange question. Mind you, someone did seem genuinely suprised last year that I was venturing all the way to Cornwall in my 'old banger'.

 

The thing is, I'm on new ground for me with the Rover. I've previously either run 'classics' or 10ish year old 'bangers. I've never really planed my motoring before. I've always tended to buy on a whim, and sell quickly when I realise I've bought a shed/got bored. The fact that I only paid £275 for the Rover actualy makes me want to look after and improve it more, in a strange way. If I had a car in the past that was on the cusp of "classicdom" I usualy sold it just as they all dissapeared and prices went up...

 

I think that the styling of the car comes into it for me. The look of the Rover 200 is the tail end of the previous era to me, with it's grey plastic bumpers and squared off lights. A 1992 Mondeo (say) was much more an indicator of what was to come. So the Rover stands out more. Plus there's the fact that it's a make that has dissapeared, and the fact that to the great unwashed they are tainted by the problems suffered by later models.

[Richard]

In 1990 I was 21. Late 1960s/early '70s cars were childhood memories for me and anything older was exotic. Now I am 42 and it simply isn't possible for me to see even a 30 year old car in the same way.

[Dick Cheeseburger]

I agree with Dollywobbler on this one. When I was 18, back in hazy '93, I had a 25 year old Morris Minor to replace my 15 year old Golf. The Golf was older than a lot of my friends cars at the time, and cost £350 - banger money. I had hankered after a Moggie for ages and when someone offered to swap theirs for my Golf (unusual I know!) I gladly accepted their offer.

The Moggie was undoubtedly a classic car and it was so different to drive to the Golf. Dynamo powered lights, no synchromesh on first gear, rwd and very tail happy, distinctive exhaust note on overrun, no provision for a stereo - the list goes on. I loved the car as it was so different.

Fast forward to now and I appreciate both cars for what they were. The Moggie remains firmly in classic territory and early mk 1 Golfs are now retro. I can't see the Golf as classic though, despite the fact it would now be 34 years old. It was way more refined and modern in every way and is much more comparable to current cars.

Edit - comedy finishing note... Just asked swmbo her thoughts on the matter. The official verdict? Golf is classic! Apparently modified 80's cars are retro....

Now as women are 'always right' I guess I'd better sign off here

[Cavcraft]

More concerned about people describing Sherpa Sports/MInors/TR6s etc as 'collectors cars'. A collectors car is surely something really rare, not the sort of thing you see thousands of at very bleeding classic car show you go to.

Sorry Albert but if the Focus becomes a 'classic' then there won't be a show worth going to in 25 years time. They (like most of their contemporaries) WILL become a focal point/object of interest but only in the same way stuff like ADO16s/Cambridges/etc are now because they were very popular in their day so lots of people remember them. Worth a glance at a car show in future years? Yes. Classic? Never in a million years.

[CIH]

More concerned about people describing Sherpa Sports/MInors/TR6s etc as 'collectors cars'. A collectors car is surely something really rare, not the sort of thing you see thousands of at very bleeding classic car show you go to.

Sorry Albert but if the Focus becomes a 'classic' then there won't be a show worth going to in 25 years time. They (like most of their contemporaries) WILL become a focal point/object of interest but only in the same way stuff like ADO16s/Cambridges/etc are now because they were very popular in their day so lots of people remember them. Worth a glance at a car show in future years? Yes. Classic? Never in a million years.

 

It wil be a classic evetually. All cars carry some notalgia value to someone, even if it takes 30 years. Either that or car design will continue downhill and 2040 cars will be just as awful as a 2011 car is to a 70/80/90s car.

Remember when RWD escorts, corintas etc were cheap old shitters no really cared about ?

[wuvvum]

It's supposedly "Drive It Day" today. I've been out this morning in the Renault 6; not seen a great deal about to be honest, the usual Sherpa Coupes / Roadsters and VW vans, plus a convoy of Daimler SP250s and a TR3; only vaguely interesting (to me) cars I saw were a lowered Imp, a tidy gold SD1 and a '73 Range Rover. None of them deigned to acknowledge the Renault 6, although the Imp driver did turn and stare as I passed him. Obviously it doesn't count as a c*****c in most people's eyes, despite being nearly 40 years old and far rarer than any of the other c*****cs I've seen so far today. I might take it to a couple of shows over the summer and see what reaction it gets - my guess would be none.

[Guest Leonard Hatred]

OMG IT WILL NEVA B A CLASSIC

 

[Des]

Actually, using the C word with regard to vehicles is cringeful, it's a term that's filtered down from the lazy need to label everything. If, like me, you find the unfashionable quality of a particular car an attractive feature, you can be a proud banger pilot, but it gets painful when the proles suddenly decide it's cool and you're labelled as someone into the C word, This has happened to me, run an old crate bought for almost nothing well past its use by date, look around for another to replace it and they now start at twelvety grand for a binbag of rust.

 

For those with an obsessive need to apply labels may I offer this old chesnut.

 

[Mash]

Peter's Practical Classics demonstration is quite telling actually. I've read early 80s copies of PC and the age of the cars in does have a trend to the more recent (at the time). I have one from about 1984 where there's a feature with a 1975 Rapier H120 in it for example. A lot of the accepted 1960s candidates were only 20 years old by this time. 70s cars were starting to be more regularly featured when I started reading Popular Classics in the early 1990s.

 

It's definitely got something to do with the changing pace of car design. As others have said, the gap between a mid-60s family car and a mid-80s one is greater then between an early 90s and current one. The increased lifespan will be a big factor too I agree.

[Guest]

The Horsey Horseless will never be a classic.

[Alexg]

It could be argued that its now hard for a 20 year old motor to be considered a 'classic' because people today are snobbier. Its not a brand new Audi or 3 series Cabrio, therefore its an old shitter