Classic Car Design

caprikid1 wrote: »

No one has mentioned some of the smaller stuff ???

Fiat 500
Classic Mini Cooper (Early or Late)

NBLondon wrote: »

I've been trying to think of a post-2000 car that could be a future classic and would still look good (not including super cars and hypercars). The original Smart Car will always be recognisable but for originality not looks.

A colleague suggested the Smart/Brabus Roadster was a potential future classic and undervalued (about 18 mo ago). They have a few issues though IIRC.

David_Aston wrote: »

I don't think that small cars can be designed to have the sweeping lines which enable some cars to continue to "work", for us through the years.
Having said that, I think the original mini looks better than it's replacement.

I'd generally agree that it's sleekness that keeps a car looking good and not dated - and that can either be sweeping curves or sharp edges and wedges. Plus I'd agree that below a certain size, you can't get that - you either have to have radical design to be distinctive or "cutesiness" which works for some and is anathema to others. So exactly, Classic Mini is more interesting to look at than BMW New Mini. New Mini Roadster was awful to look at and the Paceman was obviously thought up by marketing people who didn't actually like cars...

Now BMW have produced some (IMHO) really good lookers: BMW 507 from the late 50s; M1 and 635 CSi from the 70s; the Z1 was smaller so went for unusual. But I'd say most of their output from the 90s onward (apart from the Z8 mentioned above) has gone for function over form. The M3 and M5 might be great cars in many ways, but looks are meh as far as I'm concerned. The current 6-series and 4-series coupes are better with a hint back to the 8-series of the 80s but the 1-series is bordering on ugly.

Robisere wrote: »

That is one I had forgotten, should not have as I spent 8 years in Germany. Lovely lines, very powerful especially in the last , rear wheel driven* 2.5 L M44/52 turbocharged I4, with 250 PS (247 hp) A monster of its time, but I am informed that it was very controllable, by a former owner, and very well screwed together.



I would find room in my Euro-Lottery won massive vehicle warehouse, for one of those! Dreaming on...


*RWD as they all were of course.

Brother had one, in red, in the early 90's when he was a young, free and single engineer working in Germany.

Drove it over a few time loaded up with beer. :beer:

Took me down a local dual carriageway at a sedate feeling 140mph :A

David_Aston wrote: »

Just noticed that a local dealership has an XJ Super V8 4.2 08 model for twelve grand. Looks as nice as all the others I have discovered in the last few weeks.
Ah well. I could walk down and have a closer look, maybe.

A Super V8 is quite rare I think - so will hold value if you get a good one and look after it.

trailingspouse wrote: »

Where to start.

For looks it would have to be the E-Type Jag - but having had the huge privilege of driving one, it's not for the faint-hearted.

Really? I've driven a Series III and was amazed at how easy it was. Looks wise - definitely, both roadster and 2+2 coupe.

Used to think the X-type jag looked good, but one day it suddenly looked dated.

Really? I always thought it was dumpy-looking - just not sleek enough to be a Jag; It's about the proportions of bonnet, passenger compartment and boot and some Mercedes C-class have the same problem. Possibly about striking the balance between interior space and exterior dimensions.

Now have an XF, which I'm hoping will stand the test of time looks-wise. It certainly still looks like a Jag.

I agree; it was time to take a bold step away from the retro S-type. I like the Sportbrake as well and I'm surprised that they wouldn't do an XFR version of it to go up against Audi RS and AMG etstaes.