LocostBuilders - powered by XMB

Furure Classic's and restoration potential

AndyW - 9/2/12 at 12:06 PM

Hello all,

Now Ive been thinking (I know it doesnt happen often but bear with me).

whats the potential for "future" classic and restoration projects? If i look around people are restoring old cars, classics, you know the kind of thing, jag e type, mk1 escorts, capri's original mini's etc etc etc. These are all cars of 20+ years old and are seen as classics and lots out there for projects.

But, what does the future hold for the classic and restoration market? I cant see some one in say 20 years posting a new thread about restoring a ford mondeo or Focus. Or will they?

Will the cars of today with all there electrics and complicated 4 wheel drives and what not, be future classics?

Or are we going to be finding it ever harder to find a true classic old car that is worthy of restortation.

Whats peoples thoughts of cars that will be classics in the future?

What out of todays mass produced car market do we think will be worthy of being called a classic?

Thats my thought anyway, lets see what "locost" world thinks

bartonp - 9/2/12 at 12:15 PM

Scope for restoring a Sierra out of kit car parts maybe?

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 12:20 PM

You already have a lot of 90s cars being restored and loved - just check out the dedicated forums for VW, vauxhalls and pugs etc. Its not about how old the cars are really, its about what cars people grew up with. I dont doubt in 15 years time I will have another Nova.

whitestu - 9/2/12 at 12:22 PM

quote:

But, what does the future hold for the classic and restoration market? I cant see some one in say 20 years posting a new thread about restoring a ford mondeo or Focus. Or will they?

Why not? When I was learning to drive the general view of mk1/2 Escorts was that they were utter crap, and you could barely give Alfasuds away.

Even Allegros have classic status now.

All those people who's first car was a Saxo will be pining for one by the time they are 40!

Stu

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 12:25 PM

What put the kibosh on it was the government removing the tax exemption and classic tax band. Now, only pre-'73 cars will ever be tax exempt and bona-fide classics.

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 12:28 PM

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
What put the kibosh on it was the government removing the tax exemption and classic tax band. Now, only pre-'73 cars will ever be tax exempt and bona-fide classics.

Rubbish, If i like a car im not gonna let a couple of hundred pounds a year change my decision on which to choose. Ok the tax exempt status is fairer for old cars that are likely to be less often used, but its makes very little difference in the long term.
What will make diffrence is the scrapage scheme making a huge hole in the number of used cars out there.

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 12:51 PM

quote:
Originally posted by loggyboy

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
What put the kibosh on it was the government removing the tax exemption and classic tax band. Now, only pre-'73 cars will ever be tax exempt and bona-fide classics.

Rubbish, If i like a car im not gonna let a couple of hundred pounds a year change my decision on which to choose. Ok the tax exempt status is fairer for old cars that are likely to be less often used, but its makes very little difference in the long term.
What will make diffrence is the scrapage scheme making a huge hole in the number of used cars out there.

Why is it rubbish? The Status of classic is no longer possible for the cars we drive now to become classics, and as you say, they are all doomed for destruction if surrendered to the scrappage scheme. The issue isnt the cost of the tax, because as you say, we pay what we need to for the toys we want, the issue is with these cars being recognised as classics as opposed to scrappage candidates.

ETA: anyway, there no need to get all jumped up about it.

[Edited on 9-2-12 by MakeEverything]

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 12:53 PM

A classic car isnt 'defined' by its tax status! Audi Quattro is considered a bonefide classic, as is Delorean, as is S1 RS Turbo, none of those are tax exempt.

[Edited on 9/2/12 by loggyboy]

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 12:56 PM

quote:
Originally posted by loggyboy
A classic car isnt 'defined' by its tax status! Audi Quattro is considered a bonefide classic, as is Delorean, as is S1 RS Turbo, none of those are tax exempt.

[Edited on 9/2/12 by loggyboy]

Ok, but what makes them bona-fide classics? Yes, they have good pedigre, reputation but nowhere in their documentation (other than on the tax classification) will it say "Classic".

[Edited on 9-2-12 by MakeEverything]

britishtrident - 9/2/12 at 12:57 PM

Although many look good 90%+ of 1960s - 1970s era classics you see at shows are full of patches and filler and without constant workwill return to a pile of red oxide. Apart from very very low mileage cars the only exceptions are the very models with separate chassis or replacement body shells available.

The current generation of cars might fair slightly better because they have better corrosion protection (ie it takes 10 years for major corrosion to appear rather than 3 or 4) but the downside is they have very complex electronics which are increasingly becoming part of the MOT.

So what to look for ? If you look good low mileage Rover 820 Turbos and 800 coupes can be found for pennies. Some low mileage MG ZTS with petrol engines are going through the car auctions at very low prices because of the high road tax.

Benzine - 9/2/12 at 12:59 PM

Some of the newer Alfa Romeos (last 10 years) are too good looking not to become classics in the future. They're the only modern cars I'd be happy to own.

r1_pete - 9/2/12 at 01:00 PM

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything

quote:
Originally posted by loggyboy
A classic car isnt 'defined' by its tax status! Audi Quattro is considered a bonefide classic, as is Delorean, as is S1 RS Turbo, none of those are tax exempt.

[Edited on 9/2/12 by loggyboy]

Ok, but what makes them bona-fide classics? Yes, they have good pedigre, reputation but nowhere in their documentation (other than on the tax classification) will it say "Classic".

[Edited on 9-2-12 by MakeEverything]

DVLA couldn't even get that right, the taxation class for vehicles constructed before 1 Jan 1973 is 'Historic Vehicle'

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 01:04 PM

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Ok, but what makes them bona-fide classics? Yes, they have good pedigre, reputation but nowhere in their documentation (other than on the tax classification) will it say "Classic".

[Edited on 9-2-12 by MakeEverything]

Insurers are willing to recognise any car thats over 10 years old as a classic for their policies. There is no governing body on what makes a classic - its just opinion!

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 01:06 PM

quote:
Originally posted by loggyboy

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Ok, but what makes them bona-fide classics? Yes, they have good pedigre, reputation but nowhere in their documentation (other than on the tax classification) will it say "Classic".

[Edited on 9-2-12 by MakeEverything]

Insurers are willing to recognise any car thats over 10 years old as a classic for their policies. There is no governing body on what makes a classic - its just opinion!

"rubbish". As Pete says, the DVLA classify them as historic vehicles. It's not at all about opinion, just facts. If you were to sell an antique, it comes with hallmarks or markings (usually). The hallmarks on a car, is the registration and acknowledgement that it is a classic by the governing body, called the DVLA.

[Edited on 9-2-12 by MakeEverything]

britishtrident - 9/2/12 at 01:08 PM

Not an ultra low mileage but this will go for about Ł500 ---- not much above scrap value Road tax is Ł210 per year.

http://www.intercitymotorauctions.co.uk/stock_new.aspx?lot=238&site=glasgow&salenumber=2904

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 01:10 PM

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
"rubbish". As Pete says, the DVLA classify them as historic vehicles. It's not at all about opinion, just fact.

They define them as historic vehicles to define their tax status, nothing more. They dont decided what a classic is!

Yes any car 20yrs plus is likely to be considered a classic by default, but is a 90's mini in less of a classic than a 60s? in the DVLA eyes yes, as its post 73, but everyone with eyes knows the mini is classic fullstop, we dont need the DVLA to tell us!

[Edited on 9/2/12 by loggyboy]

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 01:12 PM

quote:
Originally posted by loggyboy

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
"rubbish". As Pete says, the DVLA classify them as historic vehicles. It's not at all about opinion, just fact.

The define them as historic vehicles to define their tax status, nothing more. They dont decided what a classic is!

Yes any car 20yrs plus is likely to be considered a classic by default, but is a 90's mini in less of a classic than a 60s? in the DVLA eyes yes, as its post 73, but everyone with eyes knows the mini is classic fullstop, we dont need the DVLA to tell us!

Want to buy a Rolex?

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 01:15 PM

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Want to buy a Rolex?

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 01:23 PM

quote:
Originally posted by loggyboy

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Want to buy a Rolex?

?

Reference to looking like a classic, but without any paperwork to say it is (or proof). Regardless of how convincing it is, it's still not the real thing, no matter how many people have the opinion that it is.

Similarly with cars. They have a v5, so the age and make are facts, as identified by DVLA. Pre 73 cars are designated classics by the DVLA on their taxation class. If not, then it's not a bona-fide classic.

Who would have believed that the reliant robin was a motorcycle unless the DVLA had classified it as one?

ETA: an incredibly bureaucratic way of looking at it, but I didn't set up the DVLA.

[Edited on 9-2-12 by MakeEverything]

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 01:25 PM

Best read these instructions then if you need to be told everything to believe it..

Step 1
breathe in...
Step 2
breathe out..
repeat above steps.

[Edited on 9/2/12 by loggyboy]

swanny - 9/2/12 at 01:27 PM

i thought that the OP's point was more about which cars would become classics in the broader sense rather than a tech ical definition

in that people like them enough to spend significant time restoring them, and also i guess that there are a group of like minded people doing the same thing.

not really something to be getting knickers in a twist about for me., but an interesting debate.

i'd go with the rover 75 and mgs too. great car, used car of the year several times, undervalued lots of toys, vibrant club scene, rallies etc and lots of passion aboiut them in the community

paul

scootz - 9/2/12 at 01:33 PM

I often wonder if the Jag XJS will ever be regarded as a true 'classic' (whatever that is ).

I've always thought it was stunning... particularly in the flesh! I also think that it's major problem was that it wasn't an E-type, but how the bloody hell do you follow something like that!?

I'd love to strip one right back to a bare shell and either rebuild it with a shiny V12 engine, or perhaps go for a more modern approach and use running-gear from an XKR instead.

There's an unused 'facelift' shell on ebay just now for Ł5k... probably be cheaper to buy a late model car for a couple of grand, strip it, dip it, add some Lister-esque arches and then rebuild using some of the components from the original car.

Stop it Scotty... you're getting carried away... again!

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 01:39 PM

quote:
Originally posted by loggyboy
Best read these instructions then if you need to be told everything to believe it..

Step 1
breathe in...
Step 2
breathe out..
repeat above steps.

[Edited on 9/2/12 by loggyboy]

Only if provided by a recognised governing body....

blakep82 - 9/2/12 at 01:46 PM

so if DVLA had never given tax exempt status to any cars we would never have such a thing as classic cars?
i don't buy it.

classic is usually defined by either age (10 years for insurance, but 25 years as far as i'm concerned), or popular opinion. thats it really.

thik the current fiat 500 might be a future classic, corsa b and c are a strong contender too i reckon, bmw e30s are getting that way too

cliftyhanger - 9/2/12 at 01:48 PM

Classic is impossible to define, it is more of a feeling.
I really wouldn't regard allegro's, marinas as classics, and sierras only the cossie and better still the RS500. It needs something very special if it a run of the mill car.

I expect MX5's to go down the popular cheap and cheerful classics route, a bit like my spitfires. The convertibles are always a much better bet too.

Pug 205GTi (not the others in the range) and generally good hot hatches. The focus rs500 should get there, but I am concerned too many of those are already living in carcoons waiting to go up in value
Had an interesting conversation with a mate of mine, he has owned spitfire,TR3, Stag, RS500 and sold that to release funds, Cossie escort (he regrets that, said it did nothing for him)and now a cheaper cossie (3 door rather than the less desirable sapphire) but talks of getting a focus RS500. When asked why, he looked puzzled and replied he needs to think about that. All these cars need to be driven properly, and not seen as investments

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 01:52 PM

quote:
Originally posted by blakep82
so if DVLA had never given tax exempt status to any cars we would never have such a thing as classic cars?

But they did, so we do. It's not tax exempt status, it's historical status.

I'm not saying that I agree with it, but I've had loooong conversations about this and still have yet to be shown / proven something that states that anything other than a Pre-73 vehicle is a classic.

[Edited on 9-2-12 by MakeEverything]

[Edited on 9-2-12 by MakeEverything]

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 01:55 PM

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
But they did, so we do.

I'm not saying that I agree with it, but I've had loooong conversations about this and still have yet to be shown / proven something that states that anything other than a Pre-73 vehicle is a classic.

I dont know where you getting the idea that the DVLA define classic cars. They define the taxation status of a historic vehicle. Its 2 completely different things.

D Beddows - 9/2/12 at 02:01 PM

I'm 100% with him ^^^^ !

So a Ford Escort (just for example) registered in 1972 is a classic but not an identical one registered in 1973??? just because the DVLA don't give it free road tax!?

[Edited on 9/2/12 by D Beddows]

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 02:03 PM

quote:
Originally posted by D Beddows
I'm 100% with him ^^^^ !

Careful, people will talk...

SeaBass - 9/2/12 at 02:04 PM

^^^^ Same here - the DVLA only deal with tax status.

Oh an BTW I've never seen an antique with a mark underneath saying "Antique" LOLZ.

I think the OP should have mentioned "desirable" or "valuable" classic. Most old vehicles will become classics but they won't all become desirable - Maxi is a good example!

[Edited on 9/2/12 by SeaBass]

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 02:05 PM

quote:
Originally posted by loggyboy

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
But they did, so we do.

I'm not saying that I agree with it, but I've had loooong conversations about this and still have yet to be shown / proven something that states that anything other than a Pre-73 vehicle is a classic.

I dont know where you getting the idea that the DVLA define classic cars. They define the taxation status of a historic vehicle. Its 2 completely different things.

They are two different things, but the taxation class is directly linked to the specifics of the vehicle. The specifics, drive the taxation class. See reliant example above.

SeaBass - 9/2/12 at 02:06 PM

Yikes - any minute now someone will be likened to Hitler

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 02:06 PM

The reliant is a trike, thats what makes not a car. A 4 wheel reliant is still a car!

tomgregory2000 - 9/2/12 at 02:07 PM

mk2 golf rallye

dont know how to link pictures but here is web link click on me

liam.mccaffrey - 9/2/12 at 02:14 PM

I have a Sierra P100 pickup which will get restored soon, I consider this to be in the class of vehicle the OP is referring to. Unusual and becoming rarer.

NigeEss - 9/2/12 at 02:16 PM

quote:
Originally posted by swanny
i thought that the OP's point was more about which cars would become classics in the broader sense rather than a tech ical definition

paul

It was.

To me, modern cars are all much of a muchness, similar looks and they all do what they're designed for.
There's just no character to them.

However, when they get rare enough then even a Mondeo or Focus will be lovingly restored by someone
who liked them when they had one. And regardless of the definition they will be called classics.

IMHO the modern(ish) cars that I regard as worthy are

E30 BMW, Mk 4 Astra Sport, MR2 (1 & 2). Probably as I have one of each at some point (apart from MR2-2)
and have fond memories.

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 02:18 PM

quote:
Originally posted by loggyboy
The reliant is a trike, thats what makes not a car. A 4 wheel reliant is still a car!

But the taxation class specifies it as a motorcycle (bicycle), which means you can drive it on a provisional license, and pay motorcycle tax rates.

Seabass, you're right, but just trying to get my point across. I used to say exactly the same things as loggyboy, until an insurance company asked me to prove it, before they considered a classic car policy (significant cost difference). I did a lot of research and even spent an age on the phone to DVLA themselves, and they said exactly what I say now. As far as proof goes, the only way that you can categorically say that a car is a classic, is if it's is recognised so, by a recognised governing body. The example that the guy at DVLA used, was an electrician cannot call himself such, unless having been trained and qualified by a recognised governing body. The IET and HSE say the same things for a whole range of different topics, in that it needs to be demonstrable and credible.

The result of my case with this particular car was that they wouldn't insure it as a classic, because it was a '74. Nothing I could have done could change that. Things have changed a bit now though, and insurance companies do say that cars over 10years are classics, but thats not a credible governing body.

D Beddows - 9/2/12 at 02:30 PM

Edited to say: oh never mind

[Edited on 9/2/12 by D Beddows]

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 02:31 PM

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything

quote:
Originally posted by loggyboy
The reliant is a trike, thats what makes not a car. A 4 wheel reliant is still a car!

But the taxation class specifies it as a motorcycle (bicycle), which means you can drive it on a provisional license, and pay motorcycle tax rates.

You cant drive a robin reliant on a provisional (unsupervised)- thats a urban myth. https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q504.htm
The taxation class is different to that of what the licence class is.

[Edited on 9/2/12 by loggyboy]

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 02:38 PM

Ok, fair enough on the robin, but I still haven't seen any credible definition of a classic other than that in the taxation class of historic vehicle.

iank - 9/2/12 at 02:47 PM

People were arguing/bickering about what cars should be called classics at least 10 years before they introduced the tax free historic status.
There is no definition that covers everything you or I might consider to be classic.

The classic car magazines already do features on Mk1 MX5's which some already consider to be classics.

I'd not get hung up over it, life's way too short.

MakeEverything - 9/2/12 at 02:52 PM

quote:
Originally posted by iank
People were arguing/bickering about what cars should be called classics at least 10 years before they introduced the tax free historic status.
There is no definition that covers everything you or I might consider to be classic.

The classic car magazines already do features on Mk1 MX5's which some already consider to be classics.

I'd not get hung up over it, life's way too short.

Macbeast - 9/2/12 at 05:03 PM

A Classic should be defined as a car that when introduced was significantly different to / better than the other cars of the time. Examples would be - Mini - transverse engine, front wheel drive: Ford Capri - styled to look like a race car: E-type Jaguar - performance sports: Ford Escort Mexico - rally performance.

School run / shopping trolley cars will never be classics, no matter how old.

Ninehigh - 9/2/12 at 05:12 PM

I feel this argument is the same as (insert name) is a good footballer because FIFA say so, or because we say so?

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 05:16 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Macbeast
A Classic should be defined as a car that when introduced was significantly different to / better than the other cars of the time. Examples would be - Mini - transverse engine, front wheel drive: Ford Capri - styled to look like a race car: E-type Jaguar - performance sports: Ford Escort Mexico - rally performance.

School run / shopping trolley cars will never be classics, no matter how old.

I could list a plenty of 'normal' cars that would be considered classics.
Eg
Alegro
Anglia
Cortina
Chevette
Monza
Trabant!

AndyW - 9/2/12 at 05:40 PM

My post was too see what people would percieve as "classic" in the future. Not whats classed as a classic by dvla or anyone else. Just what peoples views would be as to which of our current modern cars will be sort after projects in the future.

I still have a fondness of:

Nova 1.3SR original not chav'd up
Cavalier GSi
Cavalier Turbo

Maybe to do with my vauxhall up bringing.

I would love a bog standard car as above restored to former glory. One day

scootz - 9/2/12 at 05:46 PM

quote:
Originally posted by AndyW
Nova 1.3SR...

Be still my beating heart! 17 year old Scootz LOVED those!

gottabedone - 9/2/12 at 05:54 PM

We are talking about both rare and classic cars.
The idea that when a car became a certain age (25 yrs) it was a classic was great for an ongoing motoring history but doing away with that and introducing the scrappage scheme i think was a kick in the nuts for a whole era of motoring history.

Above we're talking about Chevette's and Cortina's but from the same era I would say that a classic cars are Firenza, Ascona, Audi Coupe.....It's down to point of view.
We associate a classic with being rare and old/expensive/exotic or a pedigree yet now you can spend Ł3k on an Allegro - not because it's classic but because it's becoming rare and unavailable.

Steve

AndyW - 9/2/12 at 06:26 PM

quote:
Originally posted by scootz

quote:
Originally posted by AndyW
Nova 1.3SR...

Be still my beating heart! 17 year old Scootz LOVED those!

my first car when I was 17, on an E plate!!

PSpirine - 9/2/12 at 06:27 PM

I reckon Mk1 TT will stop depreciating at some point due to "classic" status.

However.. I've got one and it's a rubbish car! Not that rubbishness has anything to do with successful classic status.

Last of the Hummmers, current Range Rover, Mitsubishi Evo and Subaru Imprezas may well get some sort of status depending on how much future models lose in terms of driver involvement. Nissan GTR, alongside the K11 and K12 Micras and the Figaros - all three for different reasons.

Smart cars will probably get to a stage at some point when they're considered classics as the original "squished urban car". Whether the iQ will manage to pull the same off I don't know.

Ninehigh - 9/2/12 at 06:48 PM

quote:
Originally posted by AndyW
My post was too see what people would percieve as "classic" in the future. Not whats classed as a classic by dvla or anyone else. Just what peoples views would be as to which of our current modern cars will be sort after projects in the future.

Ah, in that case:

Any vehicle which you see and think to yourself:
1. "I've not seen one of them for a long time"
2. "I remember having one of them back in the day"
3. "What the heck is that? My dad might know"

Basically anything rare due to age, being kerrap/rustbuckets/other, or great cars you just don't see much of anymore.

scootz - 9/2/12 at 06:51 PM

quote:
Originally posted by AndyW

quote:
Originally posted by scootz

quote:
Originally posted by AndyW
Nova 1.3SR...

Be still my beating heart! 17 year old Scootz LOVED those!

my first car when I was 17, on an E plate!!

How the bloody hell did you manage to insure that

AndyW - 9/2/12 at 07:33 PM

It seems strange that as a 17 year old back then (22 years ago) My fathers "mate" was an insurnace broker that did all his business insurance, and I managed to get something like Ł350 fully comp which I could not believe but accepted. Started earning no claims from there!!

If I dont get a SR then cavalier GSi will be my next project

loggyboy - 9/2/12 at 07:52 PM

the 13sr was only group 6-7 IIRC, so relatively good vaule for a warm hatch, allthough Ł350 fc is a stonkingly good deal - at 17 I was paying just under Ł500 3rd party for a T reg mk1 fiesta 1.1, that was 6 months older than me!

morcus - 10/2/12 at 04:37 AM

Anything and everything could become desirable in the future.

I reckon we've got about 6 to ten year till 90's become popular, under the 'my dad had one of those' type of thing.

Does anyone else get this where a car will come out and look completely different to everything else when you first see it but becomes very simillar to everything else it's age by the time it's replaced?

Some cars I think that will become classics of the future, The last of the light weight at the cost of safety stuff like the AX, 205, 106, ect. when was the last time you saw a new car with doors as thin as those with painted metal inside the cabin? My Panda is one of the modern equivelents of this kind of car and I don't think theres any visable metal inside.

I think the last generation of propperly proportioned Saloons will become classics aswell, like the late 90's 5 series and 3 series, The Rover 600/800 and deffinitly the XJ which is already a classic in some guises.

I don't want to get bogged down in what makes a classic car, but Classic is to me a subjective and a term that is about opinion. Not something that can be defined. To my mind anything that does use some rational method to determine if something is a 'Classic' is using the wrong word by dictionairy deffinition, unless it's in reference to ancient greek or latin culture.

britishtrident - 10/2/12 at 08:31 AM

The term classic was an import from the USA.

What is sought after as a "classic" goes in an out of fashion, post-war Morris Minors, Mk2 Jags and Capris were all hyped a few years back resulting in prices way above what thet were worth more recently Mk3 Cortinas were in vouge because of "Life on Mars".

Sooner or later reality bites Morris Minors were awfull, MK2 Jags were not that nice to drive, were rust buckets and expensive to maintain while the Fords were simply cheap flashy cars. At least one of the classic car mags are staffed by journalists who seem to know next nothing about cars, I particularly remember one the more down market describing the old Vauxhall Victor slant 4 SOHC as "wonderfully smooth" when anybody that knows these cars knows they are a smooth as the Costa Concordia's bottom.

What in future will be viewed as classic is rarely what was considered a good car to own in its hayday.