Last post on May 15, 2002 at 2:22 PM
You are in the Classic Cars - Archived Discussions
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost In The Town Hall... discussion.
What is this discussion about?
May 13, 2002 (10:48 am)
Well, no I don't chuckle so much at the TYPE of cars we all speculate on, but more at the fact that any "classic" status takes a long, long time to achieve. So those of us sitting on cars we feel are special COULD be right, but we still have a long wait. I have no crystal ball about new cars and how they might fare as classics, of course.
On a 1999 car, there is no way to know how people may view the car in 25 years. But when folks are sitting on say a 1980 or 85 car that has no value today but insist that their ship is going to come in, I have to point out that if there isn't any action on the car after 15-20 years, you can pretty much give up on it as a "classic".
As a rule, low production, great performance and a reputation as a "winner" are good pointers toward some future collectible or classic status. Take away one or more of those three criteria, and you have that much less of a chance. Also classics can't be ugly, of course, which is why cars like a '59 Cadillac will never get there while I can lift a finger to prevent such a tragic declaration.
We have some FWD classics -- Cord, Auburn, and some modern FWD "collectibles", like the Saab Monte Carlo 750GT/ But of course these were interesting cars in their own day.
#44 of 52 I know you are right Mr. Shiftright...
May 14, 2002 (11:05 am)
As for my situation, I'm going to keep telling my self that I have a potential domestic classic....at least until I get rid of it and take a huge bath on it's depreciation....Aahahaha!
Thanks for the words of wisdom.
May 14, 2002 (11:20 am)
...your SVT may never become a "classic", but I'm sure it'll hit collectible status somewhere along the line, even if it hasn't already. I just checked Edmund's used car prices, and they list the more basic LX and SE around $7500-7600, while the SVT is around $12,000 (using Edmund's parameters, whatever they may be, for mileage, options, etc). Of course, the SVT was a lot more than a regular Contour when new, so as a percentage of the original price, they may have depreciated the same.
Back in '97, I worked with a guy at Little Caesar's whose dad bought an SVT. I remember him saying it cost something like $25,000, and that it caused a fight between his Mom and Dad! Big change from their previous car, which was a '93 Taurus wagon!
May 15, 2002 (6:45 am)
No one has mentioned the Buick Reatta. If memory serves me right, these vehicles were produced in relatively small numbers and represented a radical departure from the "typical" Buick. They should, at some point, be a desirable collector car.
#47 of 52 Not a FWD car, however.
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
May 15, 2002 (8:35 am)
Reatta does have a kind of "second or third tier" collectibility, as a curiosity, but its prices have been very stagnant and are likely to remain so. Nobody really cares about these cars except a very few people. Coupes are cheap, just used cars, but the rarer convertible, if pristine, can theoretically bring $12K if you can find anybody to buy it.
Not really much radical about the Reatta, but I guess for Buick at that time anything would be radical. It has a transverse mounted V-6 with RWD. It was built on a Rivera floorpan, offered no manual trans and until the convertible came out, was not thought to be attractive.
Reatta tried to pick up the Fiero market, but to me at least the Fiero had a lot more spirit, especially in the last 5-speed V-6 editions.
Sports car for a Vegas chorus girl.
May 15, 2002 (9:29 am)
And nobody has mentioned the nice-looking 1986-91 Cadillac Eldorado/Seville (the baby Caddies).
May 15, 2002 (9:38 am)
The Reatta has a transverse V6 with RWD? Huh? You may want to check the specs on the Reatta. I believe you will find that it is a FWD car.
May 15, 2002 (10:31 am)
...Shifty probably meant to say FWD. Basically the Reatta was the corporate E-body (Eldorado, Toronado, Riviera) with about 9.5" removed from the wheelbase. I think it even shared the same dashboard as the Riviera.
May 15, 2002 (10:38 am)
Shifty clearly meant to say RWD - check out the title to his post.
May 15, 2002 (2:22 pm)
Oops! I guess I was reading about the GM concept car specs or something. That's what it says in my book "Sportscars A-Z", RWD, transverse V-6, but it's clearly not right on the production car.
Yep, FWD, you are correct.
Otherwise, the collectibility opinions, etc., remain the same.