Modern Supercars: Making Classic Cars more desirable?

[utgjon]

So we have all thought for a long time that with the demise of the manual gearbox, introduction of ePAS/eHandbrake etc would shore up classic car desirability.

Has this thinking actually come to fruition now?

I'd certainly argue that it has...

Not too long ago, you could buy a manual Ferrari/Porsche with limited driver aids and a fairly 'simple' DNA. For example, the differences between cars such as a Ferrari 308 > Ferrari 360 were largely in terms of how well resolved and how much power the car had. Likewise, the lineage of 911s from inception to 996/maybe 997.

Now, however, every part of the car has an acronym - PDK/PASM/PSM/PTV/ePAS ... and with each of these, an element of the connection to the driving has been arguably removed and replaced with a degree of automation.


I saw a reply to a thread earlier that said (paraphrasing) 'car enthuasiasts aren't really looking for a car that does 190mph without any meaningful input'... and I think this is largely true.

I'm a relatively young bloke at 27... and I've been fortunate to drive some wonderfully exotic machinery from a variety of eras. I find much more satisfaction in the pedalling of the simpler, older cars than just hanging on for dear life in the new stuff.


So, new cars.... are they TOO good to appeal to enthusiasts now?

[smudger911]

Broadly speaking I would agree and say 'yes' having had the newer cars while very well engineered they have lost a lot of their soul (for me anyway) so have gone full circle back to where I started with a 80's 911. If you choose to pedal quickly you need to be on your toes

All part of the evolution and meeting new (last 15 years+) of safety standards I guess....

[V8KSN]

utgjon said:

So we have all thought for a long time that with the demise of the manual gearbox, introduction of ePAS/eHandbrake etc would shore up classic car desirability.

Has this thinking actually come to fruition now?

I'd certainly argue that it has...

Not too long ago, you could buy a manual Ferrari/Porsche with limited driver aids and a fairly 'simple' DNA. For example, the differences between cars such as a Ferrari 308 > Ferrari 360 were largely in terms of how well resolved and how much power the car had. Likewise, the lineage of 911s from inception to 996/maybe 997.

Now, however, every part of the car has an acronym - PDK/PASM/PSM/PTV/ePAS ... and with each of these, an element of the connection to the driving has been arguably removed and replaced with a degree of automation.


I saw a reply to a thread earlier that said (paraphrasing) 'car enthuasiasts aren't really looking for a car that does 190mph without any meaningful input'... and I think this is largely true.

I'm a relatively young bloke at 27... and I've been fortunate to drive some wonderfully exotic machinery from a variety of eras. I find much more satisfaction in the pedalling of the simpler, older cars than just hanging on for dear life in the new stuff.


So, new cars.... are they TOO good to appeal to enthusiasts now?

Massively emotive and subjective topic but for ME, modern cars have too much insulation from all the major control interfaces.

Don't get me wrong, I love the toys on modern cars like the Bluetooth integration in the wife's X3, the heated electric memory seats, the keyless go, the 8 speed auto gearbox and the multi air bags that protect my family when travelling on days out and to the supermarket etc but I don't want them in my 'fun' car. I want the complete opposite!

For reference my 'fun' car is a 997.1 GT3 and some would say this is too luxurious and too easy to drive compared to 911's of yore but for me it strikes the perfect balance. Enough power to entertain and scare, enough involvement to feel connected, enough of a challenge for me to want to improve as a driver in order to get the best out of it and to top it off, it looks bloomin gorgeous too

[James44]

I'd also agree.

I have a 1959 Triumph TR3A, you need to be Stirling Moss to get the best out of it ... and that's at 25mph. It's way more fun than my 997T (which is less 'fun' than the 996 C2 I had before it). why have both? well the 997T is a true second car and the TR is a summer car really.

One flaw in your logic, and you are probably an exception, is that the younger generation have never had that more engaging drive so have no concept of what they are missing and therefore don't value it or seek it out.

I work on the periphery of transport and I do believe the current generation (generally) see cars and transport as a costly annoyance interfering with time that can be better spent facebooking, twittering and the likes.

I'm afraid I'm one of those that thinks the classic bubble will burst over the long term. Your £1m+ ferrari's will be fine as works of art, but those £10-£100k 'classics' may have an issue when those of us currently 40-60 get over the hill as I'm not sure the current 20-40 generation will place the same value on older cars (let alone with all of the financial issues they will have!).

J

[Alex]

Have supercars ever been designed for real driving enthusiasts?

[shoestring7]

utgjon said:

I'm a relatively young bloke at 27........ I find much more satisfaction in the pedalling of the simpler, older cars than just hanging on for dear life in the new stuff.

Good to hear (read) it; some think you're a dying breed.

SS7

[utgjon]

James44 said:

One flaw in your logic, and you are probably an exception, is that the younger generation have never had that more engaging drive so have no concept of what they are missing and therefore don't value it or seek it out.

Yeah, I think that's a valid point, ties in nicely with what SS7 says below.

Alex said:

Have supercars ever been designed for real driving enthusiasts?

Not necessarily, is that an issue though? I don't think it's about a supercar being 'designed' for the enthusiast, it's more that the enthusiast will see less of what they find enjoyable with newer cars.

You could argue that what enthusiasts have traditionally found enjoyable about supercars has merely been a consequence of it being present... or in other words, a bit of a coincidence?

shoestring7 said:

Good to hear (read) it; some think you're a dying breed.

SS7

Potentially, although I'm not sure... As with what James44 says, I'd say that given the same experiences/exposure, a great many more people my age would probably agree. It's just that by the time they have had a chance to own/drive a variety of cars, they've probably got a few more years behind them.

[dvshannow]

utgjon said:

So we have all thought for a long time that with the demise of the manual gearbox, introduction of ePAS/eHandbrake etc would shore up classic car desirability.

Has this thinking actually come to fruition now?

I'd certainly argue that it has...

Not too long ago, you could buy a manual Ferrari/Porsche with limited driver aids and a fairly 'simple' DNA. For example, the differences between cars such as a Ferrari 308 > Ferrari 360 were largely in terms of how well resolved and how much power the car had. Likewise, the lineage of 911s from inception to 996/maybe 997.

Now, however, every part of the car has an acronym - PDK/PASM/PSM/PTV/ePAS ... and with each of these, an element of the connection to the driving has been arguably removed and replaced with a degree of automation.


I saw a reply to a thread earlier that said (paraphrasing) 'car enthuasiasts aren't really looking for a car that does 190mph without any meaningful input'... and I think this is largely true.

I'm a relatively young bloke at 27... and I've been fortunate to drive some wonderfully exotic machinery from a variety of eras. I find much more satisfaction in the pedalling of the simpler, older cars than just hanging on for dear life in the new stuff.


So, new cars.... are they TOO good to appeal to enthusiasts now?

Indeed it has the market is telling us this with the right 911s going ballistic , it's a different kind of classic car bubble, much more recent machines being bid up as their replacements are disappointing, e.g 997 gt3 rs 4.0 vs 991 gt3

Now given Mr market has spoken will we see a return to grass roots sports cars, I think no, too much focus now on being the best, so these last generation may just be the peak of an era .... And that is before we even go into power plant, today it's the hybrid but it will not be long before we are full electric

And in that day, mark my words, the manual cars like 997 gt3 will be worth more than the 991 gen PDks

In 50y however what will happen when the vast majority of people simply cannot drive a stick.... So long term who knows

[911wise]

If I had the choice of driving to Monaco and back in a Mclaren F1 or a 25 year old Ferrari/Porsche etc, sorry but I'd take the Mclaren without hesitation. On the other hand If I had a collection going and had the choice of looking at a 288GTO everyday or a P1, the GTO again without hesitation.

[utgjon]

911wise said:

If I had the choice of driving to Monaco and back in a Mclaren F1

The mclaren F1 is 22 years old?

[AndrewD]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Have you ever driven a CGT, properly? A proper pure driving machine, full stop.

[J-P]

utgjon said:

So we have all thought for a long time that with the demise of the manual gearbox, introduction of ePAS/eHandbrake etc would shore up classic car desirability.

Has this thinking actually come to fruition now?

I'd certainly argue that it has...

Not too long ago, you could buy a manual Ferrari/Porsche with limited driver aids and a fairly 'simple' DNA. For example, the differences between cars such as a Ferrari 308 > Ferrari 360 were largely in terms of how well resolved and how much power the car had. Likewise, the lineage of 911s from inception to 996/maybe 997.

Now, however, every part of the car has an acronym - PDK/PASM/PSM/PTV/ePAS ... and with each of these, an element of the connection to the driving has been arguably removed and replaced with a degree of automation.


I saw a reply to a thread earlier that said (paraphrasing) 'car enthuasiasts aren't really looking for a car that does 190mph without any meaningful input'... and I think this is largely true.

I'm a relatively young bloke at 27... and I've been fortunate to drive some wonderfully exotic machinery from a variety of eras. I find much more satisfaction in the pedalling of the simpler, older cars than just hanging on for dear life in the new stuff.


So, new cars.... are they TOO good to appeal to enthusiasts now?

I think that over the last 2 years or so new cars of all ilks have already asked some pretty major questions of true car / driving enthusiasts.

There are very few cars that are truly aimed at enthusiasts these days IMHO other than the track day specials for obvious reasons.

[av185]

dvshannow said:

Indeed it has the market is telling us this with the right 911s going ballistic , it's a different kind of classic car bubble, much more recent machines being bid up as their replacements are disappointing, e.g 997 gt3 rs 4.0 vs 991 gt3

Now given Mr market has spoken will we see a return to grass roots sports cars, I think no, too much focus now on being the best, so these last generation may just be the peak of an era .... And that is before we even go into power plant, today it's the hybrid but it will not be long before we are full electric

And in that day, mark my words, the manual cars like 997 gt3 will be worth more than the 991 gen PDks

In 50y however what will happen when the vast majority of people simply cannot drive a stick.... So long term who knows

The 997 GT3 RS 4.0 has gone ballistic (but evidently recently cooled a touch) clearly not because the 991 GT3 is a disappointment but because only 28 4.0 RS UK cars were produced all manual and the 991 is DIFFERENT. The 991 is no more of a disappointment to 997 4.0 RS owners than the RS is to 991 GT3 owners.

[mollytherocker]

av185 said:

The 997 GT3 RS 4.0 has gone ballistic (but evidently recently cooled a touch) clearly not because the 991 GT3 is a disappointment but because only 28 4.0 RS UK cars were produced all manual and the 991 is DIFFERENT. The 991 is no more of a disappointment to 997 4.0 RS owners than the RS is to 991 GT3 owners.

Theres much more to it than just numbers. I am sure you know that.

[dvshannow]

mollytherocker said:

av185 said:

The 997 GT3 RS 4.0 has gone ballistic (but evidently recently cooled a touch) clearly not because the 991 GT3 is a disappointment but because only 28 4.0 RS UK cars were produced all manual and the 991 is DIFFERENT. The 991 is no more of a disappointment to 997 4.0 RS owners than the RS is to 991 GT3 owners.

Theres much more to it than just numbers. I am sure you know that.

dissappointing is perhaps an unfair word the 991 gt3 is clearly a great car, but it is different in ways that make people appreciate the 4.0. And I guess that's the point here, the spectrum of things people like in ex prodction porsches is going up. Used to be air cooled simple and light, now we have hydrolic steering, manual box and metzger combined with the limited runs means prices are under pressure.

[av185]

mollytherocker said:

av185 said:

The 997 GT3 RS 4.0 has gone ballistic (but evidently recently cooled a touch) clearly not because the 991 GT3 is a disappointment but because only 28 4.0 RS UK cars were produced all manual and the 991 is DIFFERENT. The 991 is no more of a disappointment to 997 4.0 RS owners than the RS is to 991 GT3 owners.

Theres much more to it than just numbers. I am sure you know that.

Yes M there probably is but I would suggest this very low production number for the 4.0 has been one of the major influences on escalating values notwithstanding its greater desirability over the 3.8 with over ten times more produced.......c £150k v £300k+ for the 4.0 but is it twice the car.....no.

[Slickhillsy]

Alex said:

Have supercars ever been designed for real driving enthusiasts?

stupid stupid question!

[isaldiri]

av185 said:

Yes M there probably is but I would suggest this very low production number for the 4.0 has been one of the major influences on escalating values notwithstanding its greater desirability over the 3.8 with over ten times more produced.......c £150k v £300k+ for the 4.0 but is it twice the car.....no.

Ten times more 3.8 RS than 4.0? 600 4.0s. I really don't think there are 6000 3.8 RS in the world..... And the LHD 4.0s while not having gone up on the same scale as the RHD cars are still a very significant amount over list.

[av185]

isaldiri said:

av185 said:

Yes M there probably is but I would suggest this very low production number for the 4.0 has been one of the major influences on escalating values notwithstanding its greater desirability over the 3.8 with over ten times more produced.......c £150k v £300k+ for the 4.0 but is it twice the car.....no.

Ten times more 3.8 RS than 4.0? 600 4.0s. I really don't think there are 6000 3.8 RS in the world..... And the LHD 4.0s while not having gone up on the same scale as the RHD cars are still a very significant amount over list.

I was referring to the UK production numbers and prices here.

[isaldiri]

av185 said:

I was referring to the UK production numbers and prices here.

Ok so there are 28 RHD C16 4.0s. You are saying there are 280 RHD C16 3.8 RS?