I know we've discussed this before, but I had a neat encounter this morning. I stopped for a coffee on my way to work (in a clean e28 BMW), and 2 or 3 people immediately walked up to me and started talking about how much they love classic cars like that.
So, is a 1988 528e now a "classic car?" Or did I just meet a particularly delusional bunch of coffee-drinkers?
If you go by the 25 year rule, then yes, it's just in under the wire! Given that their basic design dates back to the mid '70's, I'd say they definitely qualify. They drive more '70's than '80's too with their upright seating and BIG steering wheels. And at least around here you see an E28 rarely if ever. I think it qualifies.
racerdave600 wrote: They drive more '70's than '80's too with their upright seating and BIG steering wheels. And at least around here you see an E28 rarely if ever. I think it qualifies.
And great outward visibility. Can't stand the nerdy (up high) beltline that's on vehicles today.
OK, I’ll take the bait. We’ve discussed this before and it’s an interesting topic. There’s no clear definition so it becomes a debate. And besides the word classic we apply the words antique and vintage to vehicles. A broad definition of a classic car is probably one that has reached a certain defined age and has so-called timeless beauty. My opinion is that a vehicle needs to at least be an antique before being considered a classic. But all antiques are not classics. In the U.S. individual states define antique status, and that seems to be 25 years old. Beauty is subjective, and individually we all have our own opinions about a beautiful car design, a mediocre design and an ugly design. As enthusiasts I think most of us recognize beauty in car design when we see it. I recently watched Ian Callum discuss the Aston Martin DB7. He was quite taken with his own design and he used the words classic, timeless beauty, intuitive design characteristics, inherently beautiful, etc. But by my definition the DB7 doesn’t meet the age qualification to be a classic yet. Many enthusiasts will agree that the DB7 is a beautiful design and will probably be considered a classic someday, but not yet. On the other hand, Chris Bangle may think his BMW designs are classic. But a lot of enthusiasts don’t consider them to be beautiful designs. So maybe majority opinion rather than professional design opinion matters when determining what a classic car is. And then there’s vintage. I’ve seen various definitions of a vintage car to be vehicles manufactured during the late-teens to the mid-thirties last century. Yet by our own definition, (which I believe is valid) vintage sports cars could have been manufactured in the 40s, 50s and 60s as well. So as I said there’s no clear definition of these terms and everyone is entitled to an opinion.
I think that if you look up the dictionary definition, it pretty well covers it since we are using as an adjective:
These are cars that have "been there, done that, and got the T-shirt" with plenty of us to watch as it walked the walk .In the end, the car will be representaitve of its era for what it did well OR horribly wrong.
I think there is more than just age to consider. Something cool and rare probably becomes a classic sooner than a run of the mill four-door Chevy sedan. The BMW is a four-door, but it was premium then and a very good car, and those values are still true today. When will the Miata have its classic day in the sun? Oddly enough, we wrote about MGBs when they were only 20 years old and we are nervous about adding 25 year old Miatas to the magazine today.
This is a question with as many answers as people who you ask.
Two weeks ago some co-workers and I walked past a 1987 Lincoln Continental. I wondered out loud whether there was ever a time that people lusted after that car's design, or whether the nameplate combined with a lack of other options drove sales. Some designs are in vogue for a time, but quickly look dated. Others were basically always stunning.
My personal definition is that the specific generation of the vehicle in question must be out of production and considered beautiful or desirable by most people.
Tim Suddard wrote: I think there is more than just age to consider. Something cool and rare probably becomes a classic sooner than a run of the mill four-door Chevy sedan. The BMW is a four-door, but it was premium then and a very good car, and those values are still true today. When will the Miata have its classic day in the sun? Oddly enough, we wrote about MGBs when they were only 20 years old and we are nervous about adding 25 year old Miatas to the magazine today.
I've always felt that the Miata's greatest sin was to continue production. Had it stopped with the NA, it would definitely be a classic. But the goofy thing just stayed around and kept getting updated.
So did the MG, sorta. But it didn't evolve. It became an old car you could buy new.
I agree, the DB7 isn't at classic level yet. The E28, I can see it. While the car in question might have been produced in 1988, it's really a 1981 design. And it's representative of a generation of BMWs that's long gone, and one that was iconic. That's what makes it classic.
You would think that low volume, a decent race history and a V8 engine would be good criteria for a classic. But if that was the case, my TR8's would have a much higher market value.
pushrod36 wrote: This is a question with as many answers as people who you ask.
True!
As I use it, "classic" refers to a good example of the class of item in question. It implies some age, only because it usually takes time to assess how well the item represents its class. Some cars are classics from the word "Go."
An aircooled Beetle is not particularly beautiful to my eye, nor is it especially valuable. It is, however, a classic.
How about this: Could you use this car as shorthand for a class of car?
Legal definitions are more about age and taxes, and have little to do with aesthetics or utility.
slantvaliant wrote:pushrod36 wrote: Some cars are classics from the word "Go."Actually, ALL classics are classics from the word "GO". In my mind, a car proves itself a classic when it makes it past the generational gap. That means your kids are going to like it as much as you do. So, if we again stick to a strict definition of a "generation" a classic car is one that continues to appeal after 30 years or more. While the recipe for classic design is elusive, what does seem to be a common denominator is some sort of going against the flow of lemmings. Commercial success seems to be the exception rather than the rule.
Did any of you ever notice the XKE when it first came out? 
On the day of the XKE's introduction any thought of age when considering whether or not a car is a classic went out the window.
Rupert wrote: Did any of you ever notice the XKE when it first came out?
I agree. The other paradigm shattering cars Lamborghini Miura and later the Lambo Countach (the original LP400 without all the later unnecessary aero add ons to lure the rubes) and before that the Ferrari 250 GTO All shapes you look at and say "Holy crap!" (even if you don't instantly fall in love with them - I'm more a fan of rounded Miura than angular Countach).
In reply to wspohn:
I would also add the real Avanti and any MG T to that list as well.
BTW: I'll never forget my one and only ride in a Muria S! Wide open for at least ten miles on a two lane each way city expressway around midnight in 1973 or 74! I didn't dare say a word because I didn't want to distract the idiot who was driving. And no, I never rode in anything with him again!
Styling plays in almost more than year of manufacture. In California, "classic" is often defined as pre-smog, yet some pre-1975 cars are more modern looking, and some dated designs stuck around for a long time. There's a huge change from e28s to the first 5-series. The e28 looks like it could have been penned in the 60s, whereas the 5-series has an almost contemporary vibe about it. As a side note, while clearly more modern, the successors to that generation of Bimmers (e30 et cetera) were significantly cheaper in construction details, and consequently age more poorly.
Tim Suddard wrote: I think there is more than just age to consider. Something cool and rare probably becomes a classic sooner than a run of the mill four-door Chevy sedan. The BMW is a four-door, but it was premium then and a very good car, and those values are still true today. When will the Miata have its classic day in the sun? Oddly enough, we wrote about MGBs when they were only 20 years old and we are nervous about adding 25 year old Miatas to the magazine today.
I think this is an interesting point and gets us near the heart of the matter. I think defining something as a classic is far more than just age. It also involves the intrinsic qualities of the car itself, as well as the time period it was created. Lastly, I think it also matters when the question is asked as attitudes and values of observers change over time. It is all very fluid.
WilD wrote:Tim Suddard wrote: I think there is more than just age to consider. Something cool and rare probably becomes a classic sooner than a run of the mill four-door Chevy sedan. The BMW is a four-door, but it was premium then and a very good car, and those values are still true today. When will the Miata have its classic day in the sun? Oddly enough, we wrote about MGBs when they were only 20 years old and we are nervous about adding 25 year old Miatas to the magazine today.I think this is an interesting point and gets us near the heart of the matter. I think defining something as a classic is far more than just age. It also involves the intrinsic qualities of the car itself, as well as the time period it was created. Lastly, I think it also matters when the question is asked as attitudes and values of observers change over time. It is all very fluid.
I agree, except this changes depending upon who you talk to. For example, I met a guy that swears a Chevette is a classic. He loves them and has a couple, and even paid $5k for one. To me, they are the worst device ever to roam the face of the earth. Depending on where the car is sold, who is looking at it, etc., can change this dynamic considerably.
wspohn wrote:Rupert wrote: Did any of you ever notice the XKE when it first came out?I agree. The other paradigm shattering cars Lamborghini Miura and later the Lambo Countach (the original LP400 without all the later unnecessary aero add ons to lure the rubes) and before that the Ferrari 250 GTO All shapes you look at and say "Holy crap!" (even if you don't instantly fall in love with them - I'm more a fan of rounded Miura than angular Countach).
I can't remember who said it, but I was watching an interview with a car designer and he was talking about this very topic. But one comment he made what that angular cars usually do not stand the test of time. Rounded cars almost always outperform them as time goes on, as their shapes age more gracefully. He's probably correct, but there are always exceptions to that rule.
racerdave600 wrote: I can't remember who said it, but I was watching an interview with a car designer and he was talking about this very topic. But one comment he made what that angular cars usually do not stand the test of time. Rounded cars almost always outperform them as time goes on, as their shapes age more gracefully. He's probably correct, but there are always exceptions to that rule.
Anyone remember the poster of a naked woman reclining, a bottle of wine on its side and at the bottom, a Ferrari? All rounded lines. It wouldn't come off as well with a picture of a Countach!
Yesterdays junk is tomorrows classic!!
thats so true its scary
In reply to ronbros:
Not always. My '02 Miata is insured with "Classic Car Insurance" and I can promise you. This model isn't nor will it ever be junk! In fact this model set standards that cars around the world are still trying to emulate.
However I do agree with your statement to some extent. A Fiero,Edsel,Vega, etc. are sometimes considered classic or at least collectable. Why? Because they were such junk when produced that no one in their right mind ever bought one! The difference is, some cars wait years and years to be called classic because they were good cars and successful in the marketplace. Others were so abjectly failures that they are collectable because they couldn't sell product from day one.
I think "vintage" and "antique" can be given precise definitions in particular contexts, such as 25 years or more old for "vintage" for a given event. "Classic" should be left infinitely debatable. It's an old car that you think it noteworthy for some reason.
BillBall wrote: I think "vintage" and "antique" can be given precise definitions in particular contexts, such as 25 years or more old for "vintage" for a given event. "Classic" should be left infinitely debatable. It's an old car that you think it noteworthy for some reason.
Or a "Classic" can also be a noteworthy new car. (My favorite example is the XKE which was and is a "Classic" before the first one was ever sold.)
What about a car's particular influence in the automotive world? Or its staying power? Not trying to tout my car because I have one, but the Civic was a hit when it came in with the rise in fuel prices. The CVCC engine was also a new thing, yes? Not to mention that this car has been around for 40 years with no interruptions. Do any of you guys think that would elevate a car to a "classic" or other related level? I personally think it is anyway, but what do you think (not just on my car, but the points I conveyed)?
Ha I just posted a blog on my blog http://www.vintageandclassiccar.blogspot.com/ about the BMW e21. I was coming over here to start the same conversation! What timing! I guess my vote is in that these older BMWs are becoming classics. Now I'm torn... I guess I won't start a new thread. This one pretty much is the discussion. Too funny.
You'll need to log in to post.
