Sign In Join 

You are here: [F] Forums / Classic Cars / What Will Be a Future Classic?



What Will Be a Future Classic?

588 messages,  Last post on Sep 06, 2009 at 3:54 PM

You are in the Classic Cars Forum. Your Host is mr_shiftright

What is this discussion about? Future Vehicle, Coupe, Convertible, Sedan


Messages Page 50 of 59
1
...
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
...
59
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#488 of 588
Re: Modern T-Birds [Mr_Shiftright] by berri
Dec 29, 2008 (9:42 am)
Reply

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Dec 29, 2008 7:56 am)

I still think styling was not the main reason for Edsel's flop. The 58 was out there a bit, but there were lots of less than pleasing 58 models. It wasn't a good year for style after the great 57's. The 59 Edsel was much more conservative in its looks. I don't know why they bothered with the 60. Ford built Edsel up big time before revealing it to the public, but other than its somewhat unique looks and a few electronic gimmicks like pushbutton transmission in the steering wheel hub, it didn't really live up to all the hype. Then, having Rangers and Pacers built off Ford specs and Citations and Corsairs off Merc, the car was confusing to the marketplace. Finally, the lousy quality rep of the 58 killed off any chances of a come back with the much more conservatively styled, and simplified models, of the 59. The 59 was actually a decent quality car, but it was too late to save the brand.
#489 of 588
Re: Modern T-Birds [berri] by Mr_Shiftright HOST
Dec 29, 2008 (9:44 am)
Reply

Replying to: berri (Dec 29, 2008 9:42 am)

Well perhaps that's part of it but I'm a believer in the simplest answer being the best, and the most obvious answer---the car was unbelievably bad-looking. Nobody wants to own the ugliest car in the world.
 
Perhaps you're over-thinking it, just like Ford did?
 
It's like the "clearance" items you see in clothing stores---you know, the orange Mickey Mouse sweatshirts and the boxer shorts with "I'm Hot" and chili peppers all over them.
#490 of 588
Re: Modern T-Birds [Mr_Shiftright] by berri
Dec 29, 2008 (9:59 am)
Reply

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Dec 29, 2008 9:44 am)

Funny! I do agree that 58 Edsel's look pretty odd today, particularly the shorter wheelbase Ranger and Pacer models. Taste changes with the times, and today car design is somewhat conservative in general, probably because new model designs are expected to stick around for 3-6 years with litttle change and must meet aerodynamics and safety targets.
#491 of 588
Re: Modern T-Birds [Mr_Shiftright] by andre1969
Dec 29, 2008 (11:00 am)
Reply

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Dec 29, 2008 9:44 am)

Well perhaps that's part of it but I'm a believer in the simplest answer being the best, and the most obvious answer---the car was unbelievably bad-looking. Nobody wants to own the ugliest car in the world.
 
How do you explain the 1958 Oldsmobile, then? Seriously, I think it looks almost as bad as the Edsel, yet its sales were actually pretty strong. I think Olds was down about 20% compared to 1957, but when you figure domestic sales as a whole were down around 30%, that's pretty impressive. I think Rambler and Metropolitan (counted as a separate brand) were the only two nameplates to see sales increase for 1958.
 
However, Olds had a lot going for it, that Edsel didn't. For one thing, it was a well-established brand with a good reputation for quality. It had a strong brand loyalty. The 1958 Oldsmobiles, for all their wretched excess, were actually well-built, sturdy cars.
 
If anything, I think Chrysler shows that it takes more than a pretty face to sell cars. The '58 Dodges, DeSotos, and Chryslers were gorgeous cars that made their competition look like dogs. Yet they had horrible build quality, and word got out fast. As a result, in a market where sales were down 30% on average, Chrysler and Dodge got whacked to the tune of about 50%, while DeSoto was down about 58%.
 
Buick also took a hard hit, but it was on its way down in 1957 as well. Supposedly, the 1954-56 Buicks were too popular for the assembly lines to reliably keep up with demand, and that caused quality problems that surfaced just about the time the 1957 models came out, and that rap would hurt them in '58 as well. Perhaps that's why Buick decided to come out with all-new model names for 1959, to erase memories of the past?
 
Anyway, yeah the 1958 Edsel was an ugly car. But if, say, Oldsmobile had come out with that car instead, I'm sure it would have been a strong seller. Heck, back then they used to call the Edsel an Oldsmobile sucking a lemon, so there is a kindred spirit there.
#492 of 588
Re: Modern T-Birds [andre1969] by Mr_Shiftright HOST
Dec 29, 2008 (2:27 pm)
Reply

Replying to: andre1969 (Dec 29, 2008 11:00 am)

In my eyes, the 58 Oldsmobile is the Mona Lisa compared to the Edsel. It's that NOSE, that FACE...it's the first thing you see.
 
With the Olds, you can pick it apart bit by bit, but there's no one item that so grossly offends.
 
I guess what I mean to say is that there is a distinct difference between an average-looking person who is dressed badly (the Olds) and a really unattractive person with a face that no clothing, cosmetics or surgery could temper.
#493 of 588
Re: Modern T-Birds [Mr_Shiftright] by boomchek
Dec 29, 2008 (4:00 pm)
Reply

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Dec 29, 2008 2:27 pm)

The Edsel is indeed ugly. The Olds is kinda ugly too, but the Edsel looks it's making a fish face.
#494 of 588
What about the Honda S2000 by lokki
Dec 30, 2008 (7:42 am)
Reply
Will the Honda S200 be a collectible car? I think it meets the Shiftright rules:
 
1. Popular when new
2. Convertible
3. Fun to drive
4. Good looking
 
Note that I don't call it a classic, so let's not go there...
#495 of 588
Re: What about the Honda S2000 [lokki] by Mr_Shiftright HOST
Dec 30, 2008 (9:55 am)
Reply

Replying to: lokki (Dec 30, 2008 7:42 am)

It'll be as collectible as say a Datsun 1600 roadster maybe--that is to say, people will definitely like to have one, but they won't pay you a lot of money for it.
 
One has to face the sobering reality that only one or two Japanese cars in history have ever broken the $20,000 "collectible car" barrier. (Toyota 2000GT and Supra Turbo) and of those two, the Supra's future value is in question as the car ages.
 
The 240Z was "supposed" to go up in value but tanked instead.
 
I don't know what it is, but there is a soul-less character to most Japanese cars that makes the older ones rather boring. For some reason, age does not serve them well, and unlike say old British cars, where their faults become "charming", with old Japanese cars, their faults remain faults.
 
Go figure.
#496 of 588
Another 'collectible' non-classic by texases
Dec 30, 2008 (11:36 am)
Reply
Actually saw a clean one just like this moving under its own power today!
 
#497 of 588
Re: Another 'collectible' non-classic [texases] by Mr_Shiftright HOST
Dec 30, 2008 (11:42 am)
Reply

Replying to: texases (Dec 30, 2008 11:36 am)

That's a hard sell unless you're asking Daewoo money for it.

Messages Page 50 of 59
1
...
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
...
59
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

You are here: [F] Forums / Classic Cars / What Will Be a Future Classic?

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement