Future Classics?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Well, this is the most I have ever seen someone defend a Ford Ka for!

Less in defence of the Ka. More trying to make the point that it isn't some capable but cold hearted silver painted German uber performer that makes classic status, but rather it is something that offered something new in its day and with which the public can engage with.

So your grandmother would know the difference between performance sports cars of a period, but that is my interest.]


The point is Grandmother would want to know... She wouldn't give a rats ass about some AMG or other.

It takes more than headline statistics. Schumacher won more than double the championships Senna did, but we all know he isn't twice the driver...

Really this thread should be renamed In Praise Of AMG.

Some of the future classics i believe will emerge from recent times will include the following:

1. the VW Lupo.

2. the modern facelifted G wagons (upto 2008, as the recent facelift have pushed it to look a little trashy with the led dotted light etc)

3. The original SLK - like my blacky blue one

4. I think some of the TVR's will start to appreciate

5. the w124 cabrio ofcourse

Much more plausible candidates.
 
Absolutely right regarding the Dolomite engines, that was why I was highlighting the Buick V8 (conversion) It was only that engine that was any cop in the Stag in my view, that engine transformed it into a proper proposition that the car so shoul've been. :)

Ah, I'm with you now, although personally I would only consider a Stag with the original Triumph engine to qualify as a classic. As long as they were looked after correctly, they were lovely engines with a fantastic V8 burble.

Trouble is that when they were new cars, the idea of leaving anti-freeze in all year and changing the oil every 6,000 miles was alien to most motorists, resulting in engines regularly failing at 60k miles simply because they hadn't followed the instructions!

I had one for six years and she ran like a dream, always started first time and no overheating problems.
 
I know its in classic years already but......the 190e cosworth 2.3 16v :D what a car. the one from wheeler dealers is on our garage at the moment looking all pretty. its 1987 and still holds its own against the modern cars. :D
 
Ah, I'm with you now, although personally I would only consider a Stag with the original Triumph engine to qualify as a classic. As long as they were looked after correctly, they were lovely engines with a fantastic V8 burble.

Trouble is that when they were new cars, the idea of leaving anti-freeze in all year and changing the oil every 6,000 miles was alien to most motorists, resulting in engines regularly failing at 60k miles simply because they hadn't followed the instructions!

I had one for six years and she ran like a dream, always started first time and no overheating problems.

Fair point re original engined car. Still a handsome good looking car though in my book. I used to lust after them in my earlier youth, a mum used to drop off her son daily in one when I was at school. I must';ve been 13 or 14 at the time. :)
 
Not sure the figure of 349 is correct in terms of BHP for the stock SLK32AMG. Accordng to my owners hand book (Technical Data Section) which was determined in accordance with the relevant EU Directories It develops 354 BHP at the flywheel in stock trim. ;)

Hey, that 6 BHP makes all the difference :):D

MOCAŠ is spot on. The figure quoted by the manufacturer is PS rather than BHP.

Are you sure this isn't just down to conversion factors? 349HP (or bhp) = 354PS. ;)

Out of interest, my C32 shares the same engine as your SLK32 and I had 299 BHP (or was it 296BHP?) at the wheels when I ran it on a chassis dyno, which means that it's either a "healthy" example (which I believe many are) or the drivetrain is super efficient for an auto (15% losses).
 
Less in defence of the Ka. More trying to make the point that it isn't some capable but cold hearted silver painted German uber performer that makes classic status, but rather it is something that offered something new in its day and with which the public can engage with.

....SNIP

Really this thread should be renamed In Praise Of AMG.

Much more plausible candidates.

If you think it’s about AMG I give up. :wallbash:

I was simply answering the original question as to what I thought was a future classic, I listed a few cars. I assumed it was in respect of the Mercedes models, (being a Mercedes forum), not Fords or whatever, I also qualified it is a subjective subject.

I was simply putting a case forward for why I feel my car was a candidate, I’m in a good position in that I own one of the cars in question, and felt qualified to answer or respond to points being made.

If you don't agree, fine, lets just agree to disagree, but don't try convince me the Ford Ka is a better solution or better engineered than a VW Polo, or it was designed for the benefit of mankind therefore warrants Classic status. Where is the argument or evidence the KA is better? So far you have spouted but with nothing other than statment. The polo has 5 star NCAP rating. The Ka has 4 star rating.


As for suggesting it better than a “cold hearted silver painted German uber performer” as you put it, that is simply BS. You cannot in all seriousness in any way shape or form, be comparing a motorised shopping trolley with a Mercedes of any description. :crazy:

Speaking as an engineer, the Ford Ka, by definition is a mass produced insult to engineering. It simply fulfils the market requirement for Ford to provide a reasonably cheap, about town car for the masses. It is because of this fact, Ford design team tries to compensate with its quirky design accents. This strategy has incorporated three key elements, a design to set it aside from the competitors, but in doing so, they also take the focus away from the cheap product it is, and shortcomings it clearly has, interior room. Where is the ground breaking engineering achievement in that. That is not a question it’s a statement.

In the great scheme of things, the Ford is a crap car, end of. If you need convincing, go buy a Ford KA, A Mini, and a VW Polo (The Socially classless car in my book), line them up and ask people to go and stand by the car that most appeals. Somehow I don’t think or see the Ka as being a runaway winner in that test for the masses. And before you argue, you can buy a very up together mini for the same price of a new Ka, and I know what I’d rather have than a new Number plate. :)
 
MOCAŠ is spot on. The figure quoted by the manufacturer is PS rather than BHP.

Hi Bobby, it says in my hand book and I quote: Rated output in bhp - 354
From memory I think PS rating is slightly higher.
As a rule of thumb, you can knock off one PS for every 100PS to reach a rough bhp figure. If you want to be completely accurate, multiply the PS figure by 0.9864 to reach the bhp total, or bhp by 1.0139 to get back to PS.

Out of interest, my C32 shares the same engine as your SLK32 and I had 299 BHP (or was it 296BHP?) at the wheels when I ran it on a chassis dyno, which means that it's either a "healthy" example (which I believe many are) or the drivetrain is super efficient for an auto (15% losses).

Interesting, I'd say you have a very healthy engine there. Though I've not done this with my car as yet, I might if I elect to get the ECU mapping done at some point. :)
 
Speaking as an engineer, the Ford Ka, by definition is a mass produced insult to engineering.
So was the model T, the Mk1 escort, the capri, etc. It's not about engineering standards, it's about nostalgia.

Where is the ground breaking engineering achievement in that. That is not a question it’s a statement.
I think you'll find it IS a question, simply poorly punctuated.


In the great scheme of things, the Ford is a crap car, end of.
How many will be future classics vs how many AMGs?

If it's not about AMG, how come your R170 makes the grade but my R170 doesn't? When we think of a mini or a range rover as a classic we don't tend to discuss exact engine sizes.

RH
 
I will go with the 190 E Cossie
and C32 AMG


SILVER ARROW Special Edition in the ranks as well
 
The reason I think more AMG's would become classics over standard models is simple - they are the ultimate version of a particular range usually.

If you think of an older ford escort, say mk3/4 - I bet you'd want an RS Turbo or XR3i over a bog standard one. It's the same for a lot of other brands.

They are the "Specials", and tend to outlive the standards.
 
Speaking as an engineer, the Ford Ka, by definition is a mass produced insult to engineering. It simply fulfils the market requirement for Ford to provide a reasonably cheap, about town car for the masses. It is because of this fact, Ford design team tries to compensate with its quirky design accents. This strategy has incorporated three key elements, a design to set it aside from the competitors, but in doing so, they also take the focus away from the cheap product it is, and shortcomings

Speaking as an engineer...Not an insult to production engineering.
For the masses... As was Model-T and original Mini.
Quirky etc..... Yes what we call design.

In all my posts I am referring to the original Ka only.
 
Um...

Peugeot 205GTI.

The Mk1 MX-5. Still a great car after 20 years, hugely popular but rust is killing them at an alarming rate (sound famiiar?)

Honda CRX, Accord Type R.

Can't think of any recent MBs, unfortunately. :(
 
Hi Bobby, it says in my hand book and I quote: Rated output in bhp - 354
From memory I think PS rating is slightly higher.
As a rule of thumb, you can knock off one PS for every 100PS to reach a rough bhp figure. If you want to be completely accurate, multiply the PS figure by 0.9864 to reach the bhp total, or bhp by 1.0139 to get back to PS.

We're agreed on the conversion factors and the fact that PS is slightly higher than hp/bhp.

I think the confusion arises from the fact that US-spec SLK32 AMG is rated at 349hp (or 260kW) at 6100rpm, which happens to translate into 354PS (sometimes referred to as 'metric hp').

If the European-spec SLK32 AMG is rated at 354hp, that would equate to 359PS.

(All figures rounded to the nearest integer.)
 
I think its likely that lots of large engined pre 2001 weekend cars will appreciate in value as it gets harder and harder to find nice examples that beat the huge road tax increases.
 
I think its likely that lots of large engined pre 2001 weekend cars will appreciate in value as it gets harder and harder to find nice examples that beat the huge road tax increases.

Actually, on a related issue, I expect a lot of big-engined classics to fall from favour completely over the next 10-20yrs. China and India haven't even got started on buying and running cars yet, and as they do, ordinary motorists here will not be able to afford the petrol for big-engined cars.

So it's the small-engined classics that will have greater demand and appreciate more (bit like the 16V 190s versus the 560SEC right now).
 
In most cases, economy isnt really much of a consideration when running a classic car as the mileage per year is generally very low.

What you dont want is to have to spend a grand a year on road tax when you only drive the car a few days a year when the sun is shining.


In only 10 years Toyota will no longer be making any cars that run on fossil fuels and I'm sure other manufacturers will be the same. Demand for petrol or diesel will be in decline.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom