Cars you are too young to ever love/understand
Discussion
I'm 29 and feel the same, although I do like some Rovers... fond memories of an old 220 coupe turbo and I do appreciate the SD1.
MG, Triumph, Morris, Austin Healy do nothing for me. Im also the kind of pervert that prefers the new mini to the old one...
Morgan probably falls somewhere close to MG etc but I like them... old French stuff interests me too - Citroen DS, Renault Alpine etc...
MG, Triumph, Morris, Austin Healy do nothing for me. Im also the kind of pervert that prefers the new mini to the old one...
Morgan probably falls somewhere close to MG etc but I like them... old French stuff interests me too - Citroen DS, Renault Alpine etc...
Edited by ColdoRS on Tuesday 14th February 00:14
pretty much all british cars before the 90s with the exception of the Mini.
Don't get the hype for TVRs before the griffith/cerbera
don't get the love of 80s porsches that aren't the 991 (like all the ones top gear have bought in group challenges).
although its not an old car, I wont get hte love of saabs.
Don't get the hype for TVRs before the griffith/cerbera
don't get the love of 80s porsches that aren't the 991 (like all the ones top gear have bought in group challenges).
although its not an old car, I wont get hte love of saabs.
ColdoRS said:
Im also the kind of pervert that prefers the new mini to the old one...
Get the f**k out!!
I never saw the attraction to a lot of old jags. The MK2 jag and the like. Also e types. I appreciate they are pretty but I drove one once and it was an awful thing. Like a boat complete with the massive steering wheel. It felt like steering a land yacht! Not my thing at all. But each to their own.
Also land rovers. The older series models especially. Just why do people get so fond of them? I've driven loads of them and I fail to see anything enjoyable with owning or driving one. To me they are nothing more than a piece of farm machinery. But again, each to their own.
AdamIndy said:
I never saw the attraction to a lot of old jags. The MK2 jag and the like. Also e types. I appreciate they are pretty but I drove one once and it was an awful thing. Like a boat complete with the massive steering wheel. It felt like steering a land yacht! Not my thing at all. But each to their own.
I'm 22, honestly I struggle to think of anything, there are plenty of modern phenomenon that have arrived in the last 2 decades that I can honestly say I don't get but nothing from the more distant past, the majority of things I've seen from the 60s through 80s seemed functional more than anything we have today. Although I must admit my mum was taking the mick out of me only a week ago for for having the car tastes of an old man (this is whilst I was oogling 'hot' estates on autotrader), although if I where to really think:
Land rover defenders, we have one in work. They just seem to be 'old fashioned' for the sake of being old fashioned, everything they do a modern pickup can do better, and for a much lower price, they are loud, uncomfortable with awful ergonomics, I would much rather drive our L200 or Ranger any day of the week. And before anyone tries the 'simple, easy to fix' argument, their not any simpler than a ladder framed 4d56 mistubishi L200.
My only other one is a bit grey, because I understand it but I just don't agree, which is the resistance to forced induction within older car enthusiasts. Turbo tech (and to a lesser extent supercharger) has moved on leaps and bounds in the last decade, with twin scroll and variable geometry units you can make a turbo engine feel like a bigger N/A unit with minimal lag and progressive power delivery. With forced induction you can get the same power and power delivery from a much more efficient power plant. (i.e Merc 6.3 vs 4.0 turbo)
Land rover defenders, we have one in work. They just seem to be 'old fashioned' for the sake of being old fashioned, everything they do a modern pickup can do better, and for a much lower price, they are loud, uncomfortable with awful ergonomics, I would much rather drive our L200 or Ranger any day of the week. And before anyone tries the 'simple, easy to fix' argument, their not any simpler than a ladder framed 4d56 mistubishi L200.
My only other one is a bit grey, because I understand it but I just don't agree, which is the resistance to forced induction within older car enthusiasts. Turbo tech (and to a lesser extent supercharger) has moved on leaps and bounds in the last decade, with twin scroll and variable geometry units you can make a turbo engine feel like a bigger N/A unit with minimal lag and progressive power delivery. With forced induction you can get the same power and power delivery from a much more efficient power plant. (i.e Merc 6.3 vs 4.0 turbo)
AdamIndy said:
Also land rovers. The older series models especially. Just why do people get so fond of them? I've driven loads of them and I fail to see anything enjoyable with owning or driving one. To me they are nothing more than a piece of farm machinery. But again, each to their own.
That's exactly what they are, a piece of farm machinery; in the case of series LRs they're farm machinery designed in 1948, and that as a gently improved version of something that was lashed together in a hurry in 1940.caelite said:
I'm 22, honestly I struggle to think of anything, there are plenty of modern phenomenon that have arrived in the last 2 decades that I can honestly say I don't get but nothing from the more distant past, the majority of things I've seen from the 60s through 80s seemed functional more than anything we have today. Although I must admit my mum was taking the mick out of me only a week ago for for having the car tastes of an old man (this is whilst I was oogling 'hot' estates on autotrader), although if I where to really think:
Land rover defenders, we have one in work. They just seem to be 'old fashioned' for the sake of being old fashioned, everything they do a modern pickup can do better, and for a much lower price, they are loud, uncomfortable with awful ergonomics, I would much rather drive our L200 or Ranger any day of the week. And before anyone tries the 'simple, easy to fix' argument, their not any simpler than a ladder framed 4d56 mistubishi L200.
My only other one is a bit grey, because I understand it but I just don't agree, which is the resistance to forced induction within older car enthusiasts. Turbo tech (and to a lesser extent supercharger) has moved on leaps and bounds in the last decade, with twin scroll and variable geometry units you can make a turbo engine feel like a bigger N/A unit with minimal lag and progressive power delivery. With forced induction you can get the same power and power delivery from a much more efficient power plant. (i.e Merc 6.3 vs 4.0 turbo)
I am also 22 with the car taste of a old man. I might be older than just hot estates age having bought a rusty old Roller haha. Land rover defenders, we have one in work. They just seem to be 'old fashioned' for the sake of being old fashioned, everything they do a modern pickup can do better, and for a much lower price, they are loud, uncomfortable with awful ergonomics, I would much rather drive our L200 or Ranger any day of the week. And before anyone tries the 'simple, easy to fix' argument, their not any simpler than a ladder framed 4d56 mistubishi L200.
My only other one is a bit grey, because I understand it but I just don't agree, which is the resistance to forced induction within older car enthusiasts. Turbo tech (and to a lesser extent supercharger) has moved on leaps and bounds in the last decade, with twin scroll and variable geometry units you can make a turbo engine feel like a bigger N/A unit with minimal lag and progressive power delivery. With forced induction you can get the same power and power delivery from a much more efficient power plant. (i.e Merc 6.3 vs 4.0 turbo)
I had a 1987 Defender (technically a 90 but with a 300tdi) and it was incredible off road. Even better than my Mums L200 on 35" wheels with a 6" lift. They are awful on the road though, most owners do take them off the roads I would imagine so they make sence. They are easier to fix compared to the same L200, as long as its not rusted.... like most are.
I do see the whole NA v turbo v supercharger argument and I think it is just personal preference. Ive had a Datsun Cherry Turbo 1.5 which made around 170 bhp before it blew the head gasket and boost got turned down low. I absolutely loved the nothing... nothing... nothing... WARPSPEED aprouch that it had. Curently have two 200+ bhp NA cars and I really miss the shove - E46 330i turbo kit anyone?
Slow said:
I am also 22 with the car taste of a old man. I might be older than just hot estates age having bought a rusty old Roller haha.
I had a 1987 Defender (technically a 90 but with a 300tdi) and it was incredible off road. Even better than my Mums L200 on 35" wheels with a 6" lift. They are awful on the road though, most owners do take them off the roads I would imagine so they make sence. They are easier to fix compared to the same L200, as long as its not rusted.... like most are.
I do see the whole NA v turbo v supercharger argument and I think it is just personal preference. Ive had a Datsun Cherry Turbo 1.5 which made around 170 bhp before it blew the head gasket and boost got turned down low. I absolutely loved the nothing... nothing... nothing... WARPSPEED aprouch that it had. Curently have two 200+ bhp NA cars and I really miss the shove - E46 330i turbo kit anyone?
Roller, hah yeah I'm not their yet, have had a volvo, Mitsubishi Shogun, a caravan(yup...) and Skoda's are my favourite VAG brand. My recent venture was into a 'young persons car' in the form of a 207gti but I have never bonded with it, which may be for the better since it was written off last week by an old boy in a land-rover driving into it. I had a 1987 Defender (technically a 90 but with a 300tdi) and it was incredible off road. Even better than my Mums L200 on 35" wheels with a 6" lift. They are awful on the road though, most owners do take them off the roads I would imagine so they make sence. They are easier to fix compared to the same L200, as long as its not rusted.... like most are.
I do see the whole NA v turbo v supercharger argument and I think it is just personal preference. Ive had a Datsun Cherry Turbo 1.5 which made around 170 bhp before it blew the head gasket and boost got turned down low. I absolutely loved the nothing... nothing... nothing... WARPSPEED aprouch that it had. Curently have two 200+ bhp NA cars and I really miss the shove - E46 330i turbo kit anyone?
Defenders in my experience (as a mechanical technician by trade) really aren't any easier to work on, suspension is the same idea with a front strut & spring assembly with rear leafs, engines are the same idea, high pressure fuel rail turbo diesels with emissions guff tacked on, the smaller old style body doesn't offer any more access than a modern pickup, although is slightly easier to tear down. I do agree a defender 90 is awesome off road, this is the only place where I see their market niche. The defender 110 is simply outclassed by every single Japanese competitor.
With turbos I'm the same, had various old Subaru's and other cars with the torque mountain power delivery which I love. However with modern turbo tech they can be tuned for both progressive delivery (like old N/As) and turbo kick style delivery.
caelite said:
Defenders in my experience (as a mechanical technician by trade) really aren't any easier to work on, suspension is the same idea with a front strut & spring assembly with rear leafs,
No Land Rover Defender ever has had a combination of coil and leaf springs....caelite said:
The defender 110 is simply outclassed by every single Japanese competitor.
Not really. To start with it can tow the full 3500kgs when the back is loaded to full payload capacity which almost none of the jap (or ford) dual cabs can.i.e. latest NP300 Navra.
Payload is 980kgs
Tow capacity is 3500kgs
However if you want to tow 3500kgs the legal payload is reduced by 500kgs! so including passengers you can only have 480ks on board.
The current ranger is worse.
Payload is reduced from 1000kgs to 300kgs (including passengers) to be able to tow 3500kgs.
There are plenty of other reasons why a Defender 110 is better than the dual cabs and plenty where it is worse but to say it is outclassed everywhere is just not true.
I have no love for 50's cars at all, soprts cars aside. My dad loves the exotic hand-built Mercedes of that era but they do nothing for me. He doesn't share my enthusiasm for the Japanese monsters of the 90's but we can both understand our respective tastes.
However, being 29, I just don't have an interest in most motorbikes pre 1980. Indeed, I love the sports bikes of the late 80's and beyond but I'm just too young to really be wildly passionate about the fizzies and two strokes that slightly older blokes cut their teeth on. The sportsbikes of the 90's are the ones I really love, as they were what I saw when I was growing up, hence why my favourite of the lot now sits in my garage.
However, being 29, I just don't have an interest in most motorbikes pre 1980. Indeed, I love the sports bikes of the late 80's and beyond but I'm just too young to really be wildly passionate about the fizzies and two strokes that slightly older blokes cut their teeth on. The sportsbikes of the 90's are the ones I really love, as they were what I saw when I was growing up, hence why my favourite of the lot now sits in my garage.
Psimpson7 said:
Not really. To start with it can tow the full 3500kgs when the back is loaded to full payload capacity which almost none of the jap (or ford) dual cabs can.
i.e. latest NP300 Navra.
Payload is 980kgs
Tow capacity is 3500kgs
However if you want to tow 3500kgs the legal payload is reduced by 500kgs! so including passengers you can only have 480ks on board.
The current ranger is worse.
Payload is reduced from 1000kgs to 300kgs (including passengers) to be able to tow 3500kgs.
There are plenty of other reasons why a Defender 110 is better than the dual cabs and plenty where it is worse but to say it is outclassed everywhere is just not true.
Uhhh, I can say with some degree of certainty our ~12 year old LWB defender closed cab has rear leafs and front coils. i.e. latest NP300 Navra.
Payload is 980kgs
Tow capacity is 3500kgs
However if you want to tow 3500kgs the legal payload is reduced by 500kgs! so including passengers you can only have 480ks on board.
The current ranger is worse.
Payload is reduced from 1000kgs to 300kgs (including passengers) to be able to tow 3500kgs.
There are plenty of other reasons why a Defender 110 is better than the dual cabs and plenty where it is worse but to say it is outclassed everywhere is just not true.
Defender has its load bay capacity lowered when towing a fully nose loaded trailer, that's just the nature of axle and gross train weights. If I remember right our defender is plated for 6 ton train with 3.5 ton trailer, and tare weight a hair over 2ton, leaving just under 500kg for people+load. Our ranger 3.2tdci matches those numbers almost exactly (slightly higher tare weight, but slightly higher train if I remember right) . The L200 has a lesser towing capacity of a bit under 3ton but allows about 800kg of payload, I know the Dmax has similar numbers to the ranger.
However in the real world when laden with a 4-5ton trailer, 3 guys and ~300kg in the bed (3900kg generator assembly on 800kg trailer and about 500kg of testing equipment, then 200L of diesel and tools in the bed) the ranger is by far the most pleasant vehicle to drive, wider tyres and a much more substantial engine and somewhere to put my right arm makes for the better drive, returns better economy too as you don't need to be flat out the whole time.
The L200 doesn't carry weight as well but trashes both trucks in economy with a light load, easily matches the defender on soft stuff whilst having the most 'car like' handling on the road.
Never used a Dmax but I hear they carry weight well, last Navara I used was a D22 but I know many swear by the np300s
Psimpson7 said:
caelite said:
Uhhh, I can say with some degree of certainty our ~12 year old LWB defender closed cab has rear leafs and front coils.
Not from the factory it doesn't. Not unless someone has converted it or its some random 6wd conversion with load sharing rear.My point still stands though, the payload differences between a 110 and a modern pickup is minimal however the latter is nicer to drive, more efficient, cheaper to buy and in my opinion handle less than legal weights better on the road. The 110 handles mud well but honestly their isn't much in it even off road.
But you have to remember that cars which often tow + fully loaded + go offroad get crashed/bumped alot - nature of the work really. Defenders are like big lego toys, lad at my old job tipped his onto its side, straightened the windscreen suround and roof using a jcb and just fitted a new windscreen. Big metal bumpers which save you smashing up your plastics/headlights. Easily changable lights on defenders too so when they do get hit (as often happens) they are cheap and quick to swap.
For real heavy duty work I think they are the best vehicle bar a unimog.
For real heavy duty work I think they are the best vehicle bar a unimog.
caelite said:
You know I've just Google it and you are entirely correct. Ours is definitely riding on rear leafs though, I have vivid recollections of them actually as we have had to reseat them after a knock. It could have potentially been modified, I know the boss has commissioned some choice modifications in the past and this LR has been here since before I worked here.
My point still stands though, the payload differences between a 110 and a modern pickup is minimal however the latter is nicer to drive, more efficient, cheaper to buy and in my opinion handle less than legal weights better on the road. The 110 handles mud well but honestly their isn't much in it even off road.
I absolutely agree they are better on the road, especially on their own, but towing at full capacity they aren't, apart from for power. One of the major magazines over here pretty much said the np300 should not have a 3500kg tow capacity as it didnt feel totally safe. They also said it didn't handle well with 800kgs in the tray.My point still stands though, the payload differences between a 110 and a modern pickup is minimal however the latter is nicer to drive, more efficient, cheaper to buy and in my opinion handle less than legal weights better on the road. The 110 handles mud well but honestly their isn't much in it even off road.
https://www.4x4australia.com.au/reviews/road-tests...
Anyway I think I have derailed this thread enough!
My interest in cars is strongly biased to classics, most of which are from long before I was born, that for me disproves the argument that people are too young to appreciate cars from a certain era. There is an element of nostalgia to it though, I have an Audi 80 Quattro, and it still brings back memories of the quality of these cars compared to the Fords and Vauxhalls of the time. It's sad to see how worthless and neglected most that are left are now, but I still remember a family friend's 1990 H reg Audi 90 20v Quattro in vibrant Laser red and that beautiful sounding 5 pot. It was just in a different league to my Dad's Cavalier 1.6L. However, I also own multiple cars from the 60s and 70s as I just love how much character and how varied they are. Also they are so enjoyable to drive and easy to modify. I often feel it was the best era of motoring and regret that I never got to experience it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff