New "retro" cars....good or bad?
Discussion
This thread isn’t intended to have a pop at retro style cars. Live and let live I say and certainly affordable new retro cars like the MINI and Fiat 500 have brought a level of personalisation available to the new car buyer that were previously only available to buyers of luxury and supercars. This can’t be a bad thing. I’m not sure which car started the current fad for retro: was it the new Beetle or the Chrysler PT Cruiser but with the exception of the aforementioned Beetle and Fiat 500 (and possibly the Mercedes SLS), it seems to be mainly a British and American obsession.
There seems to be two distinct groups from what I can see. Cars like the PT Cruiser, Chrysler 300C and Rover 75 which look retro but don’t appear to be based on any one specific model from the past and then the obvious pastiches of previous models such as the MINI, Fiat 500, VW Beetle and the “new” generation of American muscle cars: Mustang, Camaro, Challenger etc.
Now in purely objective terms these “new” cars have got to be better. Faster, safer, more reliable, better equipped etc but does PH prefer the “new” retro cars or the classic models on which they are based?
For me, this is a difficult question to answer. For me, buying a new VW Polo was a very joyless way of spending £12000. The only choice that I was given was black or silver. My wife’s Fiat 500 on the other hand was good fun to buy. We got to choose all our options: red paint, red and ivory interior, rear head restraints, chrome door mirrors and leather steering wheel with Bluetooth! We didn’t get any money off but did get £2000 for my wife’s purple R-reg Daihatsu! The 500 has been a great little car but some would argue that it’s just a Fiat Panda underneath yet less practical and has lost the character of the original (although the TwinAir engine may have gone some way to addressing that). The Fiat 500 IMHO is a good retro car and has certainly helped Fiat in its financial recovery.
I also like the MINI (although I’m not a fan of the different variants: Clubman/Countryman/Coupe etc and the Cooper S is the only one that really interests me) and the latest Beetle is supposed to be pretty good to drive and you could probably make a convincing argument for choosing one over a Scirocco. However, the classic mini and Beetle still appeal to me more despite their shortcomings. The Mercedes SLS is certainly striking but a bit vulgar and lacking the elegance of its 1950s forbears.
The “new” muscle cars with their 60s and 70s inspired styling probably drive better than the old ones and cost the same if not less than a tidy example of a classic example but are they the real deal? I believe that the “new” Mustang still has a live axle, which may put it at a disadvantage compared to the more sophisticated competition. Do the Camaro/Challenger have more modern suspension?
Others have chosen to be more forward looking. The Corvette has always evolved rather than looking back. Jaguar seem to have abandoned their retro styling after the dog’s dinner that was the S-Type and Citroen have had some success in producing a truly modern MINI/Fiat 500 with the DS3 (a modern design but with a historical name).
So do we like the new wave of retro cars on PH or are the classics on which they are based still the best?
There seems to be two distinct groups from what I can see. Cars like the PT Cruiser, Chrysler 300C and Rover 75 which look retro but don’t appear to be based on any one specific model from the past and then the obvious pastiches of previous models such as the MINI, Fiat 500, VW Beetle and the “new” generation of American muscle cars: Mustang, Camaro, Challenger etc.
Now in purely objective terms these “new” cars have got to be better. Faster, safer, more reliable, better equipped etc but does PH prefer the “new” retro cars or the classic models on which they are based?
For me, this is a difficult question to answer. For me, buying a new VW Polo was a very joyless way of spending £12000. The only choice that I was given was black or silver. My wife’s Fiat 500 on the other hand was good fun to buy. We got to choose all our options: red paint, red and ivory interior, rear head restraints, chrome door mirrors and leather steering wheel with Bluetooth! We didn’t get any money off but did get £2000 for my wife’s purple R-reg Daihatsu! The 500 has been a great little car but some would argue that it’s just a Fiat Panda underneath yet less practical and has lost the character of the original (although the TwinAir engine may have gone some way to addressing that). The Fiat 500 IMHO is a good retro car and has certainly helped Fiat in its financial recovery.
I also like the MINI (although I’m not a fan of the different variants: Clubman/Countryman/Coupe etc and the Cooper S is the only one that really interests me) and the latest Beetle is supposed to be pretty good to drive and you could probably make a convincing argument for choosing one over a Scirocco. However, the classic mini and Beetle still appeal to me more despite their shortcomings. The Mercedes SLS is certainly striking but a bit vulgar and lacking the elegance of its 1950s forbears.
The “new” muscle cars with their 60s and 70s inspired styling probably drive better than the old ones and cost the same if not less than a tidy example of a classic example but are they the real deal? I believe that the “new” Mustang still has a live axle, which may put it at a disadvantage compared to the more sophisticated competition. Do the Camaro/Challenger have more modern suspension?
Others have chosen to be more forward looking. The Corvette has always evolved rather than looking back. Jaguar seem to have abandoned their retro styling after the dog’s dinner that was the S-Type and Citroen have had some success in producing a truly modern MINI/Fiat 500 with the DS3 (a modern design but with a historical name).
So do we like the new wave of retro cars on PH or are the classics on which they are based still the best?
I don't. The only hint of retro I've ever liked was VW using the old school seat patterns on the newer Golf GTis.
Or if Peugeot ever made a good car again, that'd be kinda retro. Not holding out much hope though!
Don't like Minis, Chargers, new Mustangs and 500s etc. Cars are supposed to evolve and bring something new to the table each time. Going with the older stuff rehashed shows you're out of ideas to me.
Or if Peugeot ever made a good car again, that'd be kinda retro. Not holding out much hope though!
Don't like Minis, Chargers, new Mustangs and 500s etc. Cars are supposed to evolve and bring something new to the table each time. Going with the older stuff rehashed shows you're out of ideas to me.
I think retro's heyday was a few years ago. I doubt whether there are any new retro designs in the pipeline of most manufacturers. The few successful retro designs will probably be milked for years to come though.
I would love a return to clean lines and elegance in modern cars - that would be a useful effect of the retro era.
I would love a return to clean lines and elegance in modern cars - that would be a useful effect of the retro era.
Lemonyfresh said:
Oh god, put that away and do us all a favour! Whenever i see one of these i have to ponder WHO would have bought it new? I still havent thought of the answer yet.
Who? The Japanese - they love retro, and it was only ever sold officially in that country. Any one you see in the UK is a "grey" import. The ladies love it, as far as I can see.nicanary said:
Who? The Japanese - they love retro, and it was only ever sold officially in that country. Any one you see in the UK is a "grey" import. The ladies love it, as far as I can see.
I've seen quite a few over here, there must have been a lot imported.The thing is with those, there are many people that actually think it's a classic car if they see it on the road.
Retro cars - the modern versions - are fequently just a nice marketing excercise - for example the "new Beetle" which was based on the Mk 4 Golf. What a waste of time of a car.
But "retro" can be good when youve got a modern version of the original that makes a decent effort of maintaining key features of the original.
For example the X350 version of the Jaguar XJ - stays true to the virtues of the original - and then you have the Range Rover - yes it evolved ionto a luxury car.
Yet it retains the off road ability - and you can tell its a Range Rover.
But the Mk 4 Golf based Beetle - sorry but no - just a hopeless marketing excercise.
Sir Fergie
But "retro" can be good when youve got a modern version of the original that makes a decent effort of maintaining key features of the original.
For example the X350 version of the Jaguar XJ - stays true to the virtues of the original - and then you have the Range Rover - yes it evolved ionto a luxury car.
Yet it retains the off road ability - and you can tell its a Range Rover.
But the Mk 4 Golf based Beetle - sorry but no - just a hopeless marketing excercise.
Sir Fergie
Sir Fergie said:
Retro cars - the modern versions - are fequently just a nice marketing excercise - for example the "new Beetle" which was based on the Mk 4 Golf. What a waste of time of a car.
But "retro" can be good when youve got a modern version of the original that makes a decent effort of maintaining key features of the original.
For example the X350 version of the Jaguar XJ - stays true to the virtues of the original - and then you have the Range Rover - yes it evolved ionto a luxury car.
Yet it retains the off road ability - and you can tell its a Range Rover.
But the Mk 4 Golf based Beetle - sorry but no - just a hopeless marketing excercise.
Sir Fergie
I think you have hit the nail right on the head there! I'm not sure if these cars such as the Jaguar XJ, Range Rover and Porsche 911 are deliberately retro though, as they have been in continuous production and the design has evolved. You could argue that the Ford Mustang has also been in continuous production but the "new" one is radically different to the previous one and yes it does look better but the styling is a pastiche of the late 1960s Mustang. I guess my question is, is the new one better? Objectively yes, subjectively and in terms of desirability, I'm not so sure! Which one would you rather have in your garage? (And I'm not just singling out the Mustang here but old Mini or new Mini, old Fiat 500 or new Fiat 500, old Beetle or new Beetle etc).But "retro" can be good when youve got a modern version of the original that makes a decent effort of maintaining key features of the original.
For example the X350 version of the Jaguar XJ - stays true to the virtues of the original - and then you have the Range Rover - yes it evolved ionto a luxury car.
Yet it retains the off road ability - and you can tell its a Range Rover.
But the Mk 4 Golf based Beetle - sorry but no - just a hopeless marketing excercise.
Sir Fergie
nicanary said:
Who? The Japanese - they love retro, and it was only ever sold officially in that country. Any one you see in the UK is a "grey" import. The ladies love it, as far as I can see.
I know about the import side of things, but it still strikes me as odd that anyone would WANT one in the UK, let alone go to the trouble of importing the thing!Anyway, modern retro;
Good = Stratos, Fiat 500
Bad = Beetle (god i hate them, more than Figaros!), newer shape Minis
Appalling = Chevrolet SSR
The 500 is in there purely as it is a decent take on the old one, without shouting about it TOO much.
-prepares underground bunker for comment bombs of mass destruction-
viggyp said:
I love the retro cars but I'd always have the originals over the copies.
Shame the retro Lancia Fulvia of a few years back was only a concept
Yep - a real missed oppurtunity there. Such a pretty thing, and done right would have been the most appealing of all of the new-retro cars.Shame the retro Lancia Fulvia of a few years back was only a concept
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff