We are entering the era of true Modern Classics

Something positive to think of with 2021. I believe this year marks the beginning of an era of true Modern Classic automobiles.

Most states set 25 years old as the point when a car is "classic". Freeing it of many restrictions. 1996 saw the universal introduction of OBD-II.

I believe OBD-II marked a chapter representing the last really revolutionary technological shift in passenger cars. There has certainly been continued evolution in technology - safety, power, efficiency, infotainment, etc. - but that there has not been a major technological shift since OBD-II ushered in the universal system of computer managed engine systems and the ability to monitor and control them. In 1996, manufacturers also understood and were implementing the standards of modern automobiles - antilock brakes, crumple zones, airbags, self-tightening seatbelts, how to manage emissions *and* make power.

2021 is the first year you can own a car that is built in a modern way with these modern philosophies and have it be a classic. As the years go on, more modern cars will cross that threshold.

Yes, cars from 1996 are old. An average car of that vintage will show its age and not feel new. But that will purely be a factor of the wear and tear of usage. It will still be modern in a way that my dad's '79 Fiat X1/9 was decidedly not modern in 2004 despite having only 40,000 miles on it.

Yes, there are models that bridged the introduction of OBD-II. And a '95 E36 is probably not substantively less modern than a '97 E36. Yes, there are cars that saw what was to come and moved ahead of the tide. Yes, there are cars now that are pioneering new technologies that will shape the next major shift that will define a new "modern" era.

But on the whole, OBD-II and 1996 stands as a marker of when Things Changed, and the automobile industry shifted as a whole and moved into a new modern era. And now, we can drive classic cars that are modern. It's good to be a gear head.

Some areas use OBDII as the dividing line between "needs an emissions inspection" or not.

Question: can something be really modern and a classic? Classic in this case being something that has reached a certain age, not something that is representative of a specific era or a high point in design as that's how it's being used here. I would think they're mutually exclusive.

I don't view OBD-II as a turning point. It's an easily defined line and it certainly makes it easier to troubleshoot and monitor the powertrain, but models that straddle that line didn't really change at all as you've noted. ABS, crumple zones, airbags - none of that has anything to do with OBD-II. Since then, there have been massive improvements in emissions, power, efficiency and safety - none of which are due to OBD-II.

I think the introduction of hybrids and then full EVs counts as a major technological shift that's taken place since - and independently of - OBD-II. The move to automobile as mobile computing platform with fully integrated systems could arguably have been hastened by OBD-II, but that's a massive change since 1996. Instead of an ABS module and a powertrain module and a stereo, you have everything chattering to everything else over the CAN bus so the wipers inform the behavior of the 4WD system and the power top talks to the transmission and the radio. I've mentioned it before, but the steering rack in an ND Miata informs ABS, stability control, the headlights, the lane departure system and even the tire pressure monitoring system.

Hmm, did OBD-II make the CAN bus more of a standard? That might be a good point.

What OBD-II really did was make it easier to maintain cars as there was now a defined and standardized way to identify problems, and of course there was likely a step change in actual emissions output as the emissions system was kept in better condition.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

There is a difference between Classic and Vintage. Plus Vintage and Victorian. 
Im willing to accept 1996 as that dividing line and think EV's should be considered Modern. 

The word "classic" is related to class, as in exclusivity. To be a classic car there needs to be a very small production number, as well as some other special attribute. Anything else is simply antique.

Brett_Murphy (Ex-Patrón) said:

Some areas use OBDII as the dividing line between "needs an emissions inspection" or not.

Yep.

Thanks to Delaware law the Manic Miata (1996) will always have to pass an OBD-II plug-in test, even though it will be a Classic this year and gets driven just a few thousand miles a year.

Beer Baron is using "classic" as defined by most states for registration purposes. It's very simple, it means a vehicle that is over 25 years old. 

There is sometimes also a line for "antique". There is rarely a line for "victorian" when it comes to vehicle registration :) Although the Victorian Era is also very clearly defined. Vintage  simply means "old", whereas classic (in the non-registration definition) usually denotes both old and a standout in some way. It's possible for something to be vintage but not classic (see any junk store), but classic and not vintage is far less common.

I just looked at the CO DOT page for special license plates and if I read the law correctly, I can register my Cadillac as a "horseless carriage" :) 

NC defines a classic as 35 years old but when a car turns 35 your life gets easier. No inspections of any kind. Also you can run an embossed year of manufacture license plate. However, buying a "classic" in NC requires a Licensing and Theft inspection where all VIN tags are scrutinized. Thankfully I bought my ACVW when it was 34. My W116 had a non-matching vin tag on a junkyard replacement core support that held my title up 6 months.

Keith Tanner said:

I think the introduction of hybrids and then full EVs counts as a major technological shift that's taken place since - and independently of - OBD-II.The move to automobile as mobile computing platform with fully integrated systems could arguably have been hastened by OBD-II, but that's a massive change since 1996. Instead of an ABS module and a powertrain module and a stereo, you have everything chattering to everything else over the CAN bus so the wipers inform the behavior of the 4WD system and the power top talks to the transmission and the radio. I've mentioned it before, but the steering rack in an ND Miata informs ABS, stability control, the headlights, the lane departure system and even the tire pressure monitoring system.

Sorta disagree on EV's. Electrical vehicle technology is not new. It was actually pretty popular in the early 20th century as I understand. There has definitely been a resurgence, and the Hybrid technology is an interesting one.

I also see that sort of thing as interesting technological innovation, but not something that represents a really paradigmatic shift. Many cars utilize hybrid technology, but we haven't switched over to that being THE way we make cars.

I know it's a nebulous thing. I think there are cars that predate OBD-II that are "modern", but that OBD-II really represents a paradigm shift. We've advanced, and figured out how to tie *more* systems into being centrally controlled and talking to each other, but OBD-II is kinda when the decision was really made that systems *would* become centrally controlled and talk to each other.

Yeah, going between an older and newer car, you notice features the different features that are or aren't available. But stepping into a 1996 car today still feels modern in the way that getting into a car made in 1976 would not have felt 20 years ago.

Brett_Murphy (Ex-Patrón) said:

Some areas use OBDII as the dividing line between "needs an emissions inspection" or not.

 

New York is like that. There is also basically zero advantage to historic plates in NY. They cost the same, are subject to the same inspections and can technically be only used as pleasure/parade/car show vehicles. Dumb. 

I have a few issues of Modern Classics magazine that are fun reading, but I think they folded and quit publishing.

In reply to Beer Baron :

There is almost no way possible to confuse an early Baker with a Tesla. So I believe it still stands as a defining difference.  
 As for Hybred,  well customers needed a way to learn to accept Electric so Hybred was adapted. Is it an accurate definition between era's?  Not unless you feel an automatic transmission option  defined one era.  

With regard the OBD2 one year cars had EFI and the next the same EFI with a standardized way of trouble shooting. So it's really not a big deal, except before that people yanked off EFI and replaced it with carbs. ( because it was too big a change for most. ) The next parts were replaced that failed. So basically OBD2 made EFI acceptable and we could continue to improve and change. 
    
 

"Classic", "Modern", "Antique", etc. - All just labels with no real consistent definition. Who cares?

There is only one type of classification that I care about and that is "Fun" or "Not Fun".

And yes, some cars blur the line. They can be "Fun" to drive and "Not Fun" to maintain or license. But in the end, they will all balance out as "Fun" or not.

Just my 2 cents... and just  for fun of course.

Keith Tanner said:

What OBD-II really did was make it easier to maintain cars as there was now a defined and standardized way to identify problems, and of course there was likely a step change in actual emissions output as the emissions system was kept in better condition.

Side note on this. Keith, I think you're also old enough to remember people saying that OBD2 was going to be the end of performance modifications for cars. "The computer won't let you change anything" and all that. It's something I try to keep in mind whenever people decry techonological advances.

I agree with the sentiment that a mid 90s car can feel fairly modern in terms of driving experience, barring infotainment. As opposed to driving a late 70s car in the early 90s felt like a wholly different era. I kind of find it also the platonic ideal of modern enough to be reliable and efficient, but not so computer controlled that you can't DIY. I also can't shake the probably untrue feeling that many modern cars are designed to last through warranty and that's it. 

Beer Baron said:

Keith Tanner said:

I think the introduction of hybrids and then full EVs counts as a major technological shift that's taken place since - and independently of - OBD-II.The move to automobile as mobile computing platform with fully integrated systems could arguably have been hastened by OBD-II, but that's a massive change since 1996. Instead of an ABS module and a powertrain module and a stereo, you have everything chattering to everything else over the CAN bus so the wipers inform the behavior of the 4WD system and the power top talks to the transmission and the radio. I've mentioned it before, but the steering rack in an ND Miata informs ABS, stability control, the headlights, the lane departure system and even the tire pressure monitoring system.

Sorta disagree on EV's. Electrical vehicle technology is not new. It was actually pretty popular in the early 20th century as I understand. There has definitely been a resurgence, and the Hybrid technology is an interesting one.

I also see that sort of thing as interesting technological innovation, but not something that represents a really paradigmatic shift. Many cars utilize hybrid technology, but we haven't switched over to that being THE way we make cars.

I know it's a nebulous thing. I think there are cars that predate OBD-II that are "modern", but that OBD-II really represents a paradigm shift. We've advanced, and figured out how to tie *more* systems into being centrally controlled and talking to each other, but OBD-II is kinda when the decision was really made that systems *would* become centrally controlled and talk to each other.

Yeah, going between an older and newer car, you notice features the different features that are or aren't available. But stepping into a 1996 car today still feels modern in the way that getting into a car made in 1976 would not have felt 20 years ago.

EV technology at a high level isn't new. But the sort of batteries that give us the potential (hee hee) for a current EV (har har) are relatively new, and certainly the mass market adoption of EVs indicates a pretty significant shift. We can throw around numbers to argue if they're really "mass market", but the Model 3 outsells the BMW 5 series pretty handily so I think we're at the point where we can consider them to be a real thing. If they were popular 120 years ago and then completely disappeared for 100 years before coming back hard, I think we can call that a shift.

I think the reason a 1996 car feels modern today is more a reflection of us. Ask someone who's 20 years younger than you are what they think :) I get the chance to drive NA Miatas and ND Miatas back to back and they really don't feel like they're from the same era. The MG obviously feels even older - but is it a bigger difference? I don't think so, I think that's just because the MG was old when I grew up but I remember the introduction of the Miata.

I think UX (user experience) design and bundling of interior controls into a single touchscreen (more or less as Keith mentioned earlier) is a major shift on par or greater than OBDII. My newest vehicle is a 2000, and even the lowliest new rental cars are absolute spaceships in terms of technology compared to anything in my fleet.

Now if someone says "Reatta did it in 89" or whatever fine, but I'll stand by my point.

fatallightning said:

I agree with the sentiment that a mid 90s car can feel fairly modern in terms of driving experience, barring infotainment. As opposed to driving a late 70s car in the early 90s felt like a wholly different era. I kind of find it also the platonic ideal of modern enough to be reliable and efficient, but not so computer controlled that you can't DIY. I also can't shake the probably untrue feeling that many modern cars are designed to last through warranty and that's it. 

The ideal age for a car is 15 years. Always has been :) Anything newer is untested and scary and can't be modified, anything older is too old. Like Tom said, 25 years ago we thought that performance modifications were over. Now we plug a cheap box into the data port on a turbo diesel truck and press a button for 100 hp.

Will said:

I think UX (user experience) design and bundling of interior controls into a single touchscreen (more or less as Keith mentioned earlier) is a major shift on par or greater than OBDII. My newest vehicle is a 2000, and even the lowliest new rental cars are absolute spaceships in terms of technology compared to anything in my fleet.

Now if someone says "Reatta did it in 89" or whatever fine, but I'll stand by my point.

My comment was more about the underlying platform and the communication between the modules than the UX design, although that's obviously undergoing a major shift. It's always interesting to compare the E39 and the Model 3 in this regard.

Case in point: to turn on the reverse lights in an ND Miata, the reverse switch on the transmission signals to the powertrain control module that the car is in reverse. The powertrain control module sends a note to the body control module, which tells the electrical control module to light up the little light in the tail. This seems ridiculously complex, but really the car ends up simpler. You could have a dedicated circuit for the light itself like the "modern" 1996 Miata did, but the BCM uses the reverse information to turn on the reverse camera and to tell the power top not to move. I'm not 100% sure what the PCM does with the information, but it could do things like remap the throttle pedal for more precise throttle control and/or throw in a speed limiter or even run the speedo backwards. You could run a wire from each of those units to the reverse switch but you'd end up with a much more complex system than simply having everything on a network. So maybe the introduction of CAN as a vehicle-wide protocol is more important than OBD-II, but of course that was a gradual evolution instead of a hard cut like ODB-II was.

Keith Tanner said:

The ideal age for a car is 15 years. Always has been :) Anything newer is untested and scary and can't be modified, anything older is too old. Like Tom said, 25 years ago we thought that performance modifications were over. Now we plug a cheap box into the data port on a turbo diesel truck and press a button for 100 hp.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

For clarification, SCP was the early OBD II communication standard.  CAN started coming into cars in that time frame, but it wasn't until the early 2000's until it became the cominication standard for OBDII.

But OBDII was a pretty major step in emissions, which also impacted the durabilty of cars quite a bit- the standard of full useful life was much closer looked at, and emissions targets had to be met at 100,000 miles.  That's a really big deal.  These are reasons COP is now common.  It's why the high speed tone wheel is common (thanks to misfire detection).  It's why catalysts are far more durable, and why engines run so much better.

It was a big deal, and everyone had to take note for 1996

Keith Tanner said:

My comment was more about the underlying platform and the communication between the modules than the UX design, although that's obviously undergoing a major shift. It's always interesting to compare the E39 and the Model 3 in this regard.

Case in point: to turn on the reverse lights in an ND Miata, the reverse switch on the transmission signals to the powertrain control module that the car is in reverse. The powertrain control module sends a note to the body control module, which tells the electrical control module to light up the little light in the tail. This seems ridiculously complex, but really the car ends up simpler. You could have a dedicated circuit for the light itself like the "modern" 1996 Miata did, but the BCM uses the reverse information to turn on the reverse camera and to tell the power top not to move. I'm not 100% sure what the PCM does with the information, but it could do things like remap the throttle pedal for more precise throttle control and/or throw in a speed limiter or even run the speedo backwards. You could run a wire from each of those units to the reverse switch but you'd end up with a much more complex system than simply having everything on a network. So maybe the introduction of CAN as a vehicle-wide protocol is more important than OBD-II, but of course that was a gradual evolution instead of a hard cut like ODB-II was.

It's interesting to see how that kind of communication evolved over time in vehicles.  Looking at 2 of my own, the Jeep (98 ZJ Grand Cherokee) has a PCM, BCM, and basic Chrysler CCD bus links between those and a couple of other things (like the climate control, memory seats, etc.).  But it's still pretty basic in an electrical sense.  And even then, it only gained CCD bus, the BCM, etc. in 96 with OBDII and a facelift.  The early years of them were even simpler. 

The second case study is the BMW (01 E38 740i).  It's much more electrically complex with multiple communication buses (I-bus, K-bus, P-bus, M-bus, D-bus, and CAN).  It's got modules for just about everything as well.  And it had this complexity when the model started in 95, although a few things changed over the years. 

In a lot of ways, I consider the BMW architecture pretty modern, especially considering you can swap in a bunch of things from newer BMWs (up until they started changing the communication buses in the mid/late 2000s).  So you can add a newer (but still old) factory nav, factory integrated bluetooth for phone calls, factory satellite radio, etc.  You can even set up a backup camera that integrates and comes on automatically in reverse and displays on the factory nav display.  Keith's E39 is pretty much the same electrically.   In terms of modern car features, about the only thing that matters and is lacking in the E38 is radar cruise control.  But even then, it's not really lacking, as it existed in the Euro version of the car, so it's theoretically possible (although apparently extremely challenging) to retrofit that. 

Will said:

I think UX (user experience) design and bundling of interior controls into a single touchscreen (more or less as Keith mentioned earlier) is a major shift on par or greater than OBDII. My newest vehicle is a 2000, and even the lowliest new rental cars are absolute spaceships in terms of technology compared to anything in my fleet.

Now if someone says "Reatta did it in 89" or whatever fine, but I'll stand by my point.

I think putting all of the controls in a touch screen is a disaster in many implementations. I don't want to change menus to deal with the radio or the climate control. I just want to push a discreet button. 

Brett_Murphy (Ex-Patrón) said:

I think putting all of the controls in a touch screen is a disaster in many implementations. I don't want to change menus to deal with the radio or the climate control. I just want to push a discreet button that I can find by touch without taking my eyes off the road.

Fixed that for you.

Discreet or not, I want to be able to find and adjust my climate and stereo controls with no more than a glance.