Classics dwarfed by moderns
Discussion
Breadvan72 said:
blueg33 said:
Breadvan72 said:
Car design went badly wrong after the 1990s in my opinion. What use modern energy efficient engines when they have to haul vast, heavy contraptions, which you can't see out of because of the huge pillars? Then add in all the computer BS that will render a mechanically serviceable car inert because of some software whim. The car is dead, I reckon.
I disagree, my Evora is far more interesting to drive and is more fun than my Dads MGB GT. I love both cars, but there is no way the 1980's car is better than the 2010 car.
I actually plan to do a back to back comparison and write up when I have the time.
RichB said:
rodericb said:
I don't know if this one has been posted yet:
The difference would be even more massive if the classic was one of those Prince Skylines!
I don't know my Japanese cars so are they both versions of the same model? The difference would be even more massive if the classic was one of those Prince Skylines!
blueg33 said:
I disagree, my Evora is far more interesting to drive and is more fun than my Dads MGB GT.
But not more interesting or fun than his Elan +2 would have been, if he'd had one of those rather than a B. You have to maintain some sense of like for like to make a fair comparison across the ages.blueg33 said:
Ok. Taker my Evora vs my Alpine from 1988. Both are plastic, both are 2+2 cars. The Alpine is good, but overall is slower than the Evora, has worse gearchange, has embryonic electronics which are unreliable, is less comfortable and is almost certainly less protecting in a crash.
I love both cars, but there is no way the 1980's car is better than the 2010 car.
That's a much more worthwhile comparison, and shows the answer as to which is best is largely a matter of personal priorities. For someone whose selection criteria for a sports car are crash protection, straight-line go, comfort and modernity of electronics systems, then yes, an Evora is a better car than an old Alpine.I love both cars, but there is no way the 1980's car is better than the 2010 car.
However, on that basis this:
... is a better car than this:
... and while for you (and for many other people) that may be an accurate assessment, it certainly isn't for me.
Lowtimer said:
That's a much more worthwhile comparison, and shows the answer as to which is best is largely a matter of personal priorities. For someone whose selection criteria for a sports car are crash protection, straight-line go, comfort and modernity of electronics systems, then yes, an Evora is a better car than an old Alpine.
However, on that basis this:
... is a better car than this:
... and while for you (and for many other people) that may be an accurate assessment, it certainly isn't for me.
And not even a better car than this...However, on that basis this:
... is a better car than this:
... and while for you (and for many other people) that may be an accurate assessment, it certainly isn't for me.
One of the idiosyncracies I inherited from my dad, and possibly reinforced by aeroplane experience, is that I don't like leaving handbrakes on for long periods of time and prefer to leave my cars chocked (with a robust pair of plastic chocks kept in the car when not in use).
Also comes in handy when you have to jack the beast up on a slight incline and want to make extra sure that it's not going anywhere.
Also comes in handy when you have to jack the beast up on a slight incline and want to make extra sure that it's not going anywhere.
Lowtimer said:
That's a much more worthwhile comparison, and shows the answer as to which is best is largely a matter of personal priorities. For someone whose selection criteria for a sports car are crash protection, straight-line go, comfort and modernity of electronics systems, then yes, an Evora is a better car than an old Alpine.
However, on that basis this:
... is a better car than this:
... and while for you (and for many other people) that may be an accurate assessment, it certainly isn't for me.
To look at, I would agree the older car is better, even to drive on a saturday in the sunshine, but overall, for regular use the modern is IMO better.However, on that basis this:
... is a better car than this:
... and while for you (and for many other people) that may be an accurate assessment, it certainly isn't for me.
With regards to your first paragraph, the Evora is better than the Alpine in the corners, in fact the Lotus isn't about straightline speed and generally in the Lotus the electronics add to the car, as they do to the Alpine
Edited by blueg33 on Monday 7th July 20:15
Lowtimer said:
That's a much more worthwhile comparison, and shows the answer as to which is best is largely a matter of personal priorities. For someone whose selection criteria for a sports car are crash protection, straight-line go, comfort and modernity of electronics systems, then yes, an Evora is a better car than an old Alpine.
However, on that basis this:
... is a better car than this:
... and while for you (and for many other people) that may be an accurate assessment, it certainly isn't for me.
You're just saying which car you'd rather drive.However, on that basis this:
... is a better car than this:
... and while for you (and for many other people) that may be an accurate assessment, it certainly isn't for me.
I choose to ride 1920s motorbikes, but I'd be mad to try and argue that they're 'better' bikes than modern ones.
I would not argue that a car of the 1920s to approx the 1980s is better than a car from the 2000s, but I do wonder if car design has taken a backward step since the early to mid 1990s. Anecdotal reports from breakdown recovery drivers, mechanics, and owners suggest that a whole new crop of reliability and durability problems have appeared with current electronics, and there are also the penalties of excessive bulk, weight, pillar thickness and wheel and tyre size. Car parking spaces are too small, road crowding is added to by vehicle size, and so on.
thegreenhell said:
Bugatti Type 41 Royale 'Coupé Napoléon' & Bugatti 57 SC Atlantic - Restored (Ralph Lauren) & Bugatti EB 16.4 Veyron Production Car by Maarten O., on Flickr
thegreenhell said:
Bugatti Type 41 Royale 'Coupé Napoléon' & Bugatti 57 SC Atlantic - Restored (Ralph Lauren) & Bugatti EB 16.4 Veyron Production Car by Maarten O., on Flickr
thegreenhell said:
Bugatti Type 41 Royale 'Coupé Napoléon' & Bugatti 57 SC Atlantic - Restored (Ralph Lauren) & Bugatti EB 16.4 Veyron Production Car by Maarten O., on Flickr
Lost soul said:
thegreenhell said:
Bugatti Type 41 Royale 'Coupé Napoléon' & Bugatti 57 SC Atlantic - Restored (Ralph Lauren) & Bugatti EB 16.4 Veyron Production Car by Maarten O., on Flickr
RemcoB said:
Alfa 33 Stradale must be the prettiest car ever built... 904 not bad either
[url]
great picture[url]It also really highlights something which always bugs me. I love the shape and design of the 60s sportscars. Alfa romeo had some really beautiful designs, such as the 33 above, but how sad that they are unable to draw on their history with their modern cars. Their modern styling is a joke, even after taking into consideration safety aspects of new cars.
why cant anyone make beautiful cars anymore??!
talking of small sports cars, Ginetta were king of lightweight and lowness, even in comparison to lotus. Here is a Ginetta G12 in Japan (1966 midengine, 550kg) - not so keen on the gulf livery though, but the blue was one of the ginetta works colors
LotusOmega375D said:
Judging by the down-at-heel stance, I'm not sure that that particular XJ is going to offer the famously cossetting ride quality which the car was famous for.
Yes it looked significantly lowered. Saying that the Mazda also looked lowered.The Jaguar is clearly a large car, but I was surprised that it seemed to shrink when parked next to what is not even a large or modern car.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff