How Will The Classic and Collector Car Hobby Differ In 10 Years?

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

It's not your imagination, you may be hallucinating---LOL!

Well no, you may have a point with some of the muscle cars, but really even plain ordinary big block Camaros were highly thought of. But 327 automatic Camaros were not highly thought of, and they STILL aren't worth very much.

As for Tucker, all reports, newspapers etc of the time suggest that the public went NUTS over this car. It IS true that for many years after the collapse of Tucker they were not worth very much. Like all "classics", it takes time for them to grow in value. But they were a) always interesting cars to people and b) always very rare (only 51 made).

So they had:

celebrity status
interesting engineering
rarity

Perfect characteristics for a collectible, of which a Citation and Ford Escort have ZILCH. :P

I have car magazines even from the late 80s, selling plastic models of some of the famous muscle cars, like the Daytona, etc.---so even 20 years ago people were hot for these cars. Not hot enough to pay huge bucks, but they were a lot hotter than Dodge Darts of the same era.

andre1969 · December 2007

Heck, if you want an even more modern rags to riches story, just look at the 1970-74 Challenger and Barracuda. When they were new they were considered latecomers to the party. And worse, a party that was about to wind down very quickly as emissions regs tightened up, the insurance companies started to take notice, and then the Arab Oil Embargo put an end to it all.

They were considered too big, too fat, and too out-of-date. They bore a strong resemblance to a 1967-69 Camaro, which isn't a bad thing IMO, but when you're trying to build a new car, the last thing you want to hear is that it looks like yesterday's news.

They sold tolerably well for the first year or two, but once the Hemi was gone and the big engines started losing their power, any Mopar lovers who wanted performance just went for a 340/360 powered Dart or Duster, or a big-block B-body, which was a lot like a Challenger with a useful trunk and back seat.

Sure, today the E-body is loved and lusted over, especially the big-block and Hemi models. But there was a time when that wasn't the case.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

yeah but it's the engines they want and only up to about 1972 or so. A 1971 Challenger 6 cylinder convertible would be lucky to get 1/4 the price of the exact same car as a 4-speed big block.

And after 1972, the market isn't interested anymore.

So my theory is that the Big Block Challengers brought attention to the body style, not the other way 'round.

grbeck · December 2007

Mr. Shiftright: I don't think the real "muscle" cars were EVER just used cars. They were revered when new, and revered now They were raced, bragged about, admired and sure....used up in a blaze of glory.

I was in high school in the late 1970s, and those muscle cars - even the hemis - were just used cars back then. They were dirt cheap because only teenagers who had no real expenses aside from gas, tires and insurance wanted to pay for them. They were dogs on the used car market.

I remember going to the Hershey meet in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and the 25-year-old rule meant that those cars couldn't even be driven on to the showfield. And few people would have thought of doing so - it was all Model Ts, Model As, 1930s Ford V-8s, the first Lincoln Continentals, custom-bodied Lincolns, Packards and Cadillacs from the prewar years, along with two-seat Thunderbirds, postwar Chrysler Town & Countrys, early Corvettes and the 1955-57 Chevrolets.

By the mid-1980s, when Detroit was making the switch to front-wheel-drive, gasoline prices had declined in real dollars, and time had given those cars a rosy glow, their prices started rising.

grbeck · December 2007

Mr. Shiftright: As for Tucker, all reports, newspapers etc of the time suggest that the public went NUTS over this car.

At that time, the public had been without new cars for four years, and the first postwar cars were merely warmed-over 1942 models. The public went nuts over virtually anything that even looked new. I've seen photos of Hudson dealers when the stepdown was first introduced - it was literally wall-to-wall people. The cars could barely be seen on the showroom floor because of the crowds. When the 1949 Ford was introduced, it generated as much excitement as the debut of the Model A, and the 1949 Ford only caught up to the competition mechanically (although the styling was very fresh for the time).

How many deposits did Tucker have from bona fide customers? How many people were willing, as Harley Earl used to say, back up their approval with a check? That is the real test of how excited the public was about the car.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

Well step down Hudsons bring a pretty penny today, because of their racing prowess, so the rule still holds. Nobody much cared about the new 49 Chevy or the 49 Packard and they still don't.

As for big block Mopars, they were always dearly loved because they were street raced and drag raced. They were celebrity cars in their day, and nobody ever forgot them.

There WAS no collector car hobby in 1970---it was just Model As and the heavy iron of the 1930s. That was the hobby back then, small and very careless about restoration.

Given the survival rate of both Hemi cars and Tuckers, I'd say people definitely treasured them. I think 47 Tuckers survive out of 51!!! That should tell you something.

I grew up in that era. You drove a Hemi Mopar, you were like GOD on the streets.

andre1969 · December 2007

Well step down Hudsons bring a pretty penny today, because of their racing prowess, so the rule still holds. Nobody much cared about the new 49 Chevy or the 49 Packard and they still don't.

Well now it sounds like you're picking and choosing who cared and who didn't. The 1949 Chevy was a popular car on the market and sold well when it was new. The '49 Hudson was also a pretty popular car, when it was new. But the styles changed quickly, and it wasn't long before that thing was considered a loser car, especially once the brand went defunct and people were stuck with orphans.

When I was a kid, there was this guy down the street who worked on and collected those stepdown Hudsons. We all thought he was a nerd back then in the 70's, and I think he's still kind of a nerd now. But that's because the last time I went down that way, it looked like he traded all those Hudsons for...gasp...AMC Hornets and Concordes and Eagles! But then, if he ever drives past my house and sees my lawn ornaments, the first thing that probably goes through his mind is geeze, what a redneck! :P

And while yeah, those Hemi cars ruled the streets for awhile, once the 70's rolled around and gas became expensive and scarce, they were just about sale-proof. Just about anything that guzzled gas was. And with some cars that drew too much attention to themselves, like the Superbird and Charger Daytona, it was actually a common sight for dealers to get these things in trade, yank off the wing and the nosecone, replace the front with a regular Charger or Satellite front-end, in the hopes of making the thing more marketable.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

By "caring" I mean noticing an exceptional car. The '49 Hudson was exceptional, a real race winner, and a celebrity car. The '49 Chevy was a nothing car, just a utilitarian car sold in large numbers to a car-hungry public. The 49 Packard was thought of as ugly.

Big difference.

Where do you see '49 Hudsons today? At the car shows rotting away? Nope---they're being raced as Pan-America clones, etc. You won't see a 49 Chevy or '49 Packard in a vintage car race.

But you are right, the Daytonas were often modified by the dealers because they couldn't sell them. But that was the hideous styling and high price. People wanted the cars, but not THAT badly. The minute they modified them, BAM they sold right away.

Now of course they are worth a lot of money because of engine + rarity.

ALSO---the eligibility of a car for vintage events greatly increases its value. This is a factor to consider for future collectiblity. Raced now, raced in the future. Not raced now, probably of no interest to future vintage racers.

So M3 yes. Miata yes. Camry, no.

andre1969 · December 2007

Where do you see '49 Hudsons today? At the car shows rotting away? Nope---they're being raced as Pan-America clones, etc. You won't see a 49 Chevy or '49 Packard in a vintage car race.

Well, I see a fair number of them at shows like Hershey and Macungie, PA Of course, it remains to be seen what's going to happen to them once their owners rot away. :surprise:

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

Ah but that's the difference. You can bring anything to Hershey but you can't bring anything to a vintage car race. So that notch up in exclusivity translates into the supply and demand equation for current and future collectibility.

Some cars jump in value if they are a '57 rather than a '58, even though it's the same car both years....why? Because '57 is the cut-off for a great many European vintage racing and rally "re-creations" or "storias". They aren't even races per se. So if you have a '58 Alfa instead of a '57 they won't let you enter, no way.

grbeck · December 2007

Mr. Shiftright: Well step down Hudsons bring a pretty penny today, because of their racing prowess, so the rule still holds. Nobody much cared about the new 49 Chevy or the 49 Packard and they still don't.

People cared enough about the 1949 Chevy to make it the second best-selling car in the country (the 1949 Ford debuted early, in June 1948, so Ford had the benefit of an extra-long model year).

But your original point was that the Tucker caused a sensation, which is why it is collectible today - but virtually every all-new car caused a sensation in the late 1940s, because people were excited to be able to buy ANY brand-new car. All-new models were even more exciting. When the 1949 Ford debuted in 1948, well over 20,000 orders were taken the first day, and that was at a time when credit standards were much tighter, and the total population much smaller, than they are today.

Mr. Shiftright: As for big block Mopars, they were always dearly loved because they were street raced and drag raced. They were celebrity cars in their day, and nobody ever forgot them.

No doubt those Mopars were widely respected, but the bottom line is that by the time I graduated from high school (class of 1980), they were available for a song, because no else one wanted them. It wasn't uncommon for my fellow classmates to drive late 1960s Road Runners and Chargers, and they weren't the rich kids in school. There weren't any Hemis, true, but there weren't that many Hemis sold when they were new. I recall someone telling me that the local Chrysler-Plymouth dealer refused to stock them, because they were tough to sell even when new.

Mr. Shiftright: There WAS no collector car hobby in 1970---it was just Model As and the heavy iron of the 1930s. That was the hobby back then, small and very careless about restoration.

I was referencing the Hershey Antique Automobile Club of America (AACA) shows from about 1979-1983. They were already big events even then, and there were plenty of cars recognized as collectibles in that era beyond Model As and prewar custom-body cars. People just were not collecting muscle cars at that time. They were just old used cars, even the Mopars and various Chevys.

grbeck · December 2007

Mr. Shiftright: You can bring anything to Hershey but you can't bring anything to a vintage car race.

While it's true that any type of car can be entered in an AACA meet (including Hershey and Macungie), to be allowed on the showfield, a car must be at least 25 years old. If the car is to be judged, it had better be in good shape and either all original, or restored to originality, if the owner wants to take home any sort of AACA recognition.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

Yes but best-selling has no relation to collectibiity or excitement. They bought '49 Chevys because they were cheap and good. No serious collector cares about a /49 Chevy. It's as dull as a rock. Dull then, dull now. Same rule applies.

Again, I think you may be confusing true muscle cars with common 318 Road Runners or Chargers, etc. Not the same thing at all.

A 440 Charger R/T 4-speed is worth $70,000. A 318 Charger is worth maybe $12,000.

You and your friends got what you got because of supply and demand. Lots of 318s, just a handful of 440 4-speeds.

The big block Mopars were always respected and coveted because they were the only thing that had any HP in the late 1970s. They never went out of "classic-dom". Just like a 55-57 T-Bird or early Corvettes. These cars got smashed up but were rarely junked. Always found a home I guess you'd say.

That's why they bring what they bring today. it's not like someone just "woke up".

People even wrote songs about muscle cars. Don't recall any songs about '49 Chevys or "Giddy-up, giddy up.....Charger 318---woo, woo!"

One thing for sure---the rather anemic cars of the late 70s really did stimulate the collectible market.

The collector car market is very very discriminating. It's not like it was in 1979, when really few people knew what they were buying and selling---or to put it more fairly, it was strictly a hobby then, with careless restorations and not much regard for dollar value.

No everybody knows what's valuable and what's not, pretty much.

hpmctorque · December 2007

"Dull then, dull now..."

I only agree with the second part of your statement, Shifty, because the late '48 introduction of the first all new post-war Chevy was exciting stuff. It may not have featured ground breaking technology, but people loved the new exterior and interior styling. Even the all new '49 Plymouth was exciting. Remember, most households didn't even have TVs yet.

The first post-war redesigns were generally well designed and well made products, in their day, better than their predecessors.

The one thing that would have made the '49 Chevy and Plymouth better would have been a 4-speed, or overdrive. The top (third) gear was just too low. Ford and the independents offered overdrive as an option. I think Plymouth began offering it in '51 or '52, but it wasn't until '55 that Chevy gave buyers the choice of a manual overdrive transmission.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

They used to say that in 1949 you could sell people a barrel with baby carriage wheels nailed to it. People were so desperate for cars and of course with steel rationing most automakers kept building 1941 cars through 1948. In 1949, cars started to look a bit more modern. The pontoon fenders were disappearing and the fenders and trunk started to melt into the body.

Engines were still primitive for Chevy however. Only Olds I think got people's attention with the Rocket 88, but really how exciting is a 216 cid stovebolt six with babbitt bearings and 15 lbs of oil pressure?

"Excited" sounds like wayyyyy too strong a word for a '49 Chevy. Same old engine, same old dashboard, same old colors. Just a little swoopier.

I don't recall reading about people tearing the hinges off the doors at Chevy dealers, or camping outside to buy one, starting bidding wars or fistfights over them, like with the sensation caused by the '55 Chevy or '65 Mustang. That simply did not happen.

The exciting and modern American car had still some time to be born. 1955 changed everything.

lemko · December 2007

When I was in high school in the early 1980s, there was student who had a 1969 Pontiac GTO Judge and another with a 1970 Dodge Super Bee. I also recall somebody's older brother had a 1970 Chevelle SS 396. Hope those guys all hung onto those cars.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

Well those guys were noticed, right? Wasn't that prestigious machinery for high school?

andre1969 · December 2007

Well those guys were noticed, right? Wasn't that prestigious machinery for high school?

Probably not by the early 80's. I remember when I was in high school, 1984-88, I think the coolest car in the student parking lot was a '57 Ford. I forget which series, but I'm thinking it was a Fairlane 2-door sedan...the swoopier style that basically looked like a hardtop with a B-pillar welded on, rather than the cheaper, more upright looking 300/Custom 300 series. I don't think it was a true hardtop, though.

Also in the running for coolest car was this kid whose parents bought him a brand-new '86 Trans Am his sophomore year. It was black with a gold chicken. The kid was a total nerd without that car, but I'm sure that because of that car and that car alone, he was getting some. Moreso than the other nerd who drove a 2-tone burgundy/red St. Regis (and no, that nerd wasn't me...I had a 1980 Malibu back then, although I wanted to buy my 12th grade English teacher's 2-tone burgundy 1978 Catalina 400). I remember a kid in my class who had a nice black '72 Riviera. He was short and could barely see over the dashboard.

Otherwise, most kids were either getting their parents' hand-me downs, mostly late 70's/early 80's cars, or if they were new cars, they were bottom feeders like a stripper Lynx, Chevettes, Tercels, or a Yugo. I think there might've been a few late 70's Camaros out in that parking lot too. But really, nothing exotic.

One of my friends who's a few years older than me had a 1971 or so Pontiac T-37 hardtop coupe when he was in college. This would've been early 80's. He told me about one time when it got hit in the parking lot. And then he discovered that the car next to him had damage that matched up to his! The driver admitted fault but had the nerve to say "Yeah, but that was just an old car so I didn't think it mattered!" :mad:

fintail · December 2007

Back when I was in high school (1991-1995), I remember what I thought was the coolest car was a 64 Impala 2 door HT, black on red, I think it had a 327. The kid kept it immaculate, and I drooled whenever I walked by it. He graduated when I was a sophomore, so it wasn't around all the time. He wasn't especially nerdy or cool, just a normal guy. He was good at taking car of his car.

A few kids who tried to be cool were able to con their parents into new Toyota 4x4 trucks - seemed like a big fad back then, and the little lowrider pickups came and went quickly. A really geeky guy I knew got a new Toyota 4x4 extra cab in 1993, and a few months later destroyed it on an icy morning. You don't live down something like that.

There weren't many old cars at the school - the kids just didn't care for them I guess. Lots of crappy 80s compacts and small pickups, S-10s being very popular. I knew a kid who had a ca. 84 Firebird, all decked out with the tacky trim. He hated it, it was a hand me down. I thought that was funny as most 16 year old boys would want such a car. My best friend in school had a Mitsu Precis...I nicknamed it the 'Zero'. I think a few kids liked my Galaxie, as it was big and loud with the 390 and dual straight pipes. After it got hit, I drove the old Tempo for a bit, and then got the fintail right before high school days were over. Many people thought I must have inherited that car, always amused me.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

I think one good point to make would be that in the future the Collector Car Hobby is going to be much more discriminating in the next decade than it was in the last decade previous to this one (1990s).

Due to the degree of same-ness about modern cars, they'll be more hair-splitting as to what is really special and unique.

hudsonthedog · December 2007

I disagree. I think there has been quite a bit of "hair-splitting" in the recent past and it will continue to be that way.

I tend to agree with your point about "sameness" but its more that there are fewer cars people want as kids that they'll finally be able to get as adults. While GM, Ford, and Chrysler made a number of these vehicles in the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s, you can't name too many of them from the 1980s or 1990s.

Perhaps Vipers like the 1992 (no fixed windows, no air, etc) or special editions, and Prowlers, and particular Corvettes (ZR1s and Grand Sports). But there aren't too many of those SS-like or Hemi-type vehicles from this particular generation of cars. Engineers were just trying to get past regulations and not working too hard at making special editions.

Even the special editions (IPC, Shelby models, etc) were made in far greater volumes than those of the past.

My limited list of potential collectibles in the future includes:

Chrysler's TC by Maserati (first year with the Maserati head)
Dodge Daytona IROC and Spirit R/T (Lotus 16-valve head)
Early Ford Taurus SHO
Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme Convertible
Last generation Mazda RX7
Chevrolet Impala SS (GM300)

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

We didn't disagree I don't think. I implied that this decade has already seen the hair-splitting that the next decade will exhibit more fully. It's the 1990s that people were not discriminating. The hair-splitting relates to the behavior of hobbyists in that period, not the cars.

The Mazda RX TT might have a chance, as prices are holding, and the Impala SS has held up very well indeed for a 4-door car, but only the 1996 model (again, the hair-splitting, as it has the floor shift console). Might be something in the future for the Dodge Daytona if they haven't all blown up yet. First SHO, very limited audience but could struggle into collectible-dom. Has the Taurus curse on it though. Hard to say.

The Cutlass and Maserati TC are total dead ducks IMO. Write them off.

But I don't see any of the cars on your list as top-tier collectibles in the future---more like Datsun 240Z status or MGB, that level of value. In other words, if they aren't too far gone, people will save them.

hudsonthedog · December 2007

I was avoiding the "top tier" collectibles like the F50, Enzo, McLaren F1, XJ220, and the like. And I don't know of any mainstream vehicles from this era that could reach the same arena as the old Hemis or other such rare-Big3 models.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

I was trying to project that very thing into the future myself and I couldn't come up with any vehicle.

I think the hobby will break down into:

1. Top tier extremely expensive collector cars (most of which we know already)

2. second-tier cars that might be restored for love, not money (as we discussed above)

3. Curiosities, such as one-offs, race cars (unrace-able race cars, probably)

4. Survivors -- ordinary cars in a pristine original state (grandpa's 2007 Buick)

5. Cheap and cheerful old beaters (the Dodge Darts of tomorrow? A 40 year old Corolla?)

andre1969 · December 2007

In that type of category, what would something like my '57 DeSoto or '67 Catalina convertible fall into? Second tier?

I would say some Dodge Darts, like the convertibles, GTS, and Swinger 340, would be something more than just a "cheap and cheerful old beater". And a '68 Hemi Dart would be top tier, I'm sure. But something like an old slant-six Dart 4-door will probably be little more than an old used car, no matter how nice.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

yeah, they are 2nd tier collectibles at best.

The modern day "Dodge Dart" wouldn't have any derivatives like a 340 or a Hemi---modern cars are pretty much all the same, so in the future there will be less variety upon which to base differences I think.

saabgirl · December 2007

An interesting theme I've noticed in car mags that seems pertinent to this thread is the preservation vs. restoration debate. If you watch the auctions, some cars are described as restored to a "better than new" condition while others are criticized for minor flaws in chrome or paint. To me there's something sterile about the "better than new" standard. In contrast, the preservationists follow a "get it running" tactic and are willing to accept with enthusiasm, not just a bit of patina, but rust and other inescapable signs of honest aging. I think Automobile mag ran an article on the topic and, in the January issue, page 123, has a photo of a 1911 Oldsmobile in fairly atrocious shape that sold for $1,650,000 at Hershey and the buyer "plans to get the car running and fit new tires." I think I'm with the preservationists in the debate, but I have to confess that I was startled at this example of preservationism in practice. I mean if you were to write a one-word caption for the pic of this old Olds (perfect brand) it would be "entropy."

qbrozen · December 2007

Problem is, we can't predict what will happen in car manufacturing. Muclecars, by and large, became collectible because, thanks gas and emissions issues of the '70s and '80s, they were forced from mainstream for a long time. Many fell into disrepair during this time; written off as gas-guzzling monstrosities by the general public. At least, this is my perception.

It really is relatively recently that manufacturers have gotten back to producing these high-powered variants. Now, what would happen if fuel becomes $6-$7/gallon and the new CAFE scare forces all the manufacturers to return to fuel-sipping econocars? Then we go through 15 years of 300Cs, Mustang GTs, and G8s falling through the cracks, winding up in the crusher, and being thrashed by Junior in the high school parking lot? We could very well see a repeat of history and things we never thought would be collectible suddenly are.

The short of it is anything is possible.

All that being said, I agree with the aforementioned RX7 TT, and would add in the Supra, as well. Seems to me the latter already is a collectible, based on prices and demand I've seen.

fintail · December 2007

That's a very good sidenote. I think preservation will become much more common as time goes on, both as it is financially easier to maintain an original car than to do an all-out restoration, and because more people are becoming aware that a car is only original once, and there's something special to that. There's something about old paint and old upholstery that just doesn't seem to be repeatable.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

That Olds sale was pretty shocking--- I mean, it's true that there are only 3 of these cars left in the world, and it's true that this one was completely original, but still---it's only a 1911 Oldsmobile. Bizarre result. I'd love to know the story behind the bidder, etc. and what plans he has. I mean, even in a museum that's a whole lotta admission tickets.

Why wouldn't a completely original stage coach bring this much? I bet a Roman chariot could barely bring this price. That's a LOT of money.

hpmctorque · December 2007

Hey, the market for Roman chariots is red hot right now, especially the ones with gas-electric hybrid powerplant conversions. Less reliable than the horse drawn ones, but also less polluting.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

Oh man, I remember when I was a little kid growing up in Rome you couldn't GIVE those things away. Had I only known! :P

Hey, here's a book y'all might like:

Auto Opium

hpmctorque · December 2007

Incredible memory, Shifty!

lemko · December 2007

I guess the coolest car in high school at that time was the new blue 1982 Trans Am some student I didn't know very well had. His father owned a furniture store and bought the car for his 16th birthday. There was another guy a few years older than me who had a 1967 Corvette. Don't know if was a big block. Of course I thought the coolest car was my then-girlfriend's white 1969 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

I just HAVE to see your high school yearbook picture--LOL!

hudsonthedog · December 2007

The difference with the muscle car era and the cars of today is that the collectible cars of the 1960s/1970s were rare THEN. On the whole, the Hemi option or SCJ option wasn't ticked by many people...relative to the entire production of the associated vehicles. Chrysler's modern Hemi is relatively more popular today. A larger proportion of all Chrysler 300s have 5.7L engines today. Especially when Chrysler is producing somewhere around half a million such engines a year today.

qbrozen · December 2007

yes, but you also had several variants back in the 60s and 70s and only the real rare ones pull the bucks today, correct? So while a 300C might not be a big deal, neither is a V8 Lemans, right? But what about an SRT8? That MIGHT be more akin to the expensive muscle cars we are referring to, wouldn't it?

And you also have to remember population numbers. OK, so maybe only a couple thousand special purple Y-motors big block 4-speeds were made in 1968, and those are now wanted by 20k people in today's population, thereby driving the price to $X. But then you have, let's say 10k SRT8s made in '05, but 30 years from now, you have 6k on the road and 60k people in the world's increased population who want it .... I don't know. Its way too many variables for us to have a definitive discussion about, I think.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

We can predict supply but predicting demand is harder--and we need both predictions to make any kind of crystal-ball gazing.

But high supply would probably screw the pooch for future collectiblity. There are a few instances of high supply AND high demand, like the early Mustangs, but that causes a lot of hair-splitting and tends to disfavor low-optioned or 6 cylinder Mustangs or causes them to be modified to higher specs.

I'm expecting a much higher survival rate for modern cars for one thing, and so the nit-picking and hair-splitting is going to be pretty ferocious for cars in big supply. You can see this in the 94-96 Impalas, where a mere floor shift and console adds 30% or more to the price. Why? There are fewer of them and they look nicer.

Another hair=splitting decision that goes on in high supply cars is "purity". The earlier Mustangs are preferred to the 71-73, the 240Z Datsun preferred over the 260 and 280 and 300Z, and the early Vipers over the mid 90s cars.

All of the above are still quite plentiful cars.

hudsonthedog · December 2007

I agree with your analogy. The modern Hemis are too plentiful, but the SRT cars (Dodge SRT4, Dodge Charger/Magnum SRT8, Chrysler 300C SRT8, Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8) may fall into the "rare" category...perhaps rare and desireable enough to be collectible. Sr Shirtright's call on the later Vipers (SRT10) may be correct, which is why I earlier called out the 1992 Viper (no fixed side windows, no A/C, etc) as being different from the later Vipers. And the Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 MIGHT catch a backdoor collectible market because of the connection to the brief and ill-fated Chrysler/Mercedes-Benz tie-up.

I like truly rare cars, many of which are not collectible. Vehicles with unique body panels (not just added scoops or wings) and/or unique powertrains. Vehicles like the Ford Taurus SHO which had engines not shared with any other car/truck (and the especially unique 60-degree DOHC V8), Pontiac 6000 STE AWD (all-wheel drive system not shared with other A-bodies), 190hp Oldsmobile Calias (high-output Quad 4), Chrysler DOHC 2.2L fours (Maserati head or Lotus head), and Twin Dual Cam GM cars with 5-speed manuals.

With today's emissions regulations, it's very tough to build one of these vehicles. I wish GM had taken Oldsmobile or Chrysler had taken Plymouth out in a blaze of past glory with a unique powertrain setup. My dream was for a final run of Plymouth Breezes with 3.5L SOHC 250hp V6s (pipedream: mated to manual transaxles) and called it the GTX or "Road Runner" or Duster or Barracuda or some such name.

grbeck · December 2007

Mr. Shiftright: Again, I think you may be confusing true muscle cars with common 318 Road Runners or Chargers, etc. Not the same thing at all.

A 440 Charger R/T 4-speed is worth $70,000. A 318 Charger is worth maybe $12,000.

You and your friends got what you got because of supply and demand. Lots of 318s, just a handful of 440 4-speeds.

No, these were 440-equipped (and, in the case of one 1969 Road Runner, equipped with a 383 and floor-mounted four speed) Mopars from the late 1960s and early 1970s. We knew very well what was under the hood, and the distinctions between the high-performance engines and the "regular" V-8s.

They were available for a song - at least, judging by the people I knew who were driving them. Those people were not rich, nor were they collectors. I don't disagree that these cars are worth a lot today, but they weren't in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

andre1969 · December 2007

No, these were 440-equipped (and, in the case of one 1969 Road Runner, equipped with a 383 and floor-mounted four speed) Mopars from the late 1960s and early 1970s. We knew very well what was under the hood, and the distinctions between the high-performance engines and the "regular" V-8s.

Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if, once the oil embargo set in, a slant six or 318 Satellite or Coronet might have been worth more than the 383, 440, and even the Hemi models! Nobody was thinking about performance by the mid 70's; it was all about fuel economy. The first and second oil embargos actually sent a lot of those old musclecars to an early grave, as people could hardly give them away, so they'd just scrap them.

I'd imagine that the Hemi might have been the hardest sale of all. Usually they were little more than street-legal racecars, with no air conditioning, stick shift transmissions, very little in the way of creature comforts. Not exactly a winning formula for a used car back then.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

That's not how I remember it at all :P

Any car with that much HP is never ever going to be ignored. I don't wish to arm wrestle in a friendly bar but I think some Hot Rod magazines from the 70s and 80s would prove the point.

lemmer · December 2007

I was a kid in the '70s, and I remember people putting blowers and anything else they could think of on their underperforming V8s. Gas mileage didn't seem to be a concern.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2007

Especially since any American muscle car from the late 1960s looked better and ran faster than anything made anywhere in the world from 1972 up to the GNX I'd guess.

So there were at least 15 "dry years" when nothing new could touch an old Hemi or Big Block car.

That's why they never were out of the collector's eye.

hpmctorque · August 2008

In reviewing the comments of this discussion, there's minimal mention of Japanese cars. We're supposed to be looking forward in this discussion, but we seem to be stuck in the present. Given the rising popularity and market share of Japanese cars in the last few decades, and the fact that collectors are attracted to the cars of their youth, it seems like a no brainer that, as we look forward a decade and a few years beyond, Japanese cars are underrepresented in this discussion.

I have no idea which cars will be in the top tier or even second tier classics categories in 2018, because the air up there is too rarefied for me. Therefore, I'll leave the predictions about the high end classic cars to those of you who are much more knowledgeable about this segment than me. All I know is that these won't be Japanese. However, when it comes to affordable collector and special interest cars, I have little doubt that the Japanese cars of the '70s (the very few that remain), '80s and '90s will be much more prominent at car shows than they are today. I mean, how could they not be?

The Hyundais and Kias of the world will have to wait until 2038, and the '48 classic car shows will be sprinkled with models from Tata, Chery and Brilliance Motors, etc. Chery and Brilliance et all will have luxury divisions to compete with Tata's Jaguar and Land Rover by then, and maybe Toyota, Honda, and Nissan will be the new Detroit 3, struggling to survive against the mighty and creative Chinese brands. Looking further ahead, the Brialliance Century and Roadmaster, and Chery Corvete (new spelling), Impala and Malibu will be the stars of the '58 new car shows, and the Tata Camry will debut in '68.

hpmctorque · January 2011

I think the classic and collector car hobby will shrink in the coming years. Look at the ages of the attendees at the shows. While I have no statistics to support my perception, there seem to be fewer people under 40 that are really passionate about cars than there used to be. The reason, if that's correct, may be that there are too many competing distractions, mainly of the digital kind. Add to this the fact that cars have become much more electronically complex in tha past 20 years, and you have the explanation for my hypothesis. There are increasingly fewer repair and restoration tasks that can be tackled by owners, making it ever more difficult to justify the expenses associated with this hobby.

Is this view realistic or overly pessimistic?

Sorry if this post recycles some of the arguments made when this discussion was introduced, but maybe it'll prompt some new perspectives on where this hobby is headed.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2011

There is no doubt that the bulk of the collectible car hobby is fueled by an aging population. Younger people have *some* interest in cars, but they are much more into tuning, driving, drifting, customizing....and those forms of car interest tend to wane with age. You don't see too many 40 year olds driving slammed or bagged Japanese imports.

Also, once the aging population starts to die off, their cars will all appear in the marketplace within a decade or so, put there by disinterested family members who have neither the space nor budget to maintain fleets of old cars.

Of course, it has to be said that the creme de la creme of the classic cars--the truly rare classics, will always be treasured.

But I agree, the hobby is going to shrink in the next 20 years or so, and aside from the very top of the heap cars, the prices will probably drop as well.

Added to this, restoration costs are pretty staggering these days, so I think that end of it will also shrink.

euphonium · January 2011

"fewer people under 40 that are really passionate about cars than there used to be.". Agree. The under 40 men are more in tune to "family" activities i.e. their kids Soccer programs. The average under 40 guy's interest is accumulating funds for his kids education if not trying to keep up with his health insurance costs. Spending priorities for the under 40 are not the same as they were for the under 80. The under 80 men worked on their cars because they could. The under 40 is handicaped by not having the electronic and sophysticated tools required to work on today's cars.

Mr_Shiftright · January 2011

The car hobby is certainly tied up to the concept of "discretionary income" and given that America in particular seems to be racing towards a huge gap between rich and poor, I suspect that as the middle class shrivels up into oblivion, along with the inevitable drop in the American standard of living that seems to be unavoidable in the 21st century, that "playing with cars" will once again return to its roots as per 1900--as the toy of the very wealthy. You know, like private jets and Riva speedboats are now.

lemmer · January 2011

The problem for me as I get older is that I've pretty much already owned all the beloved cars of my youth. I think Generation X has been much less likely to deprive themselves of things so there is less of a need for a reward as we age.

Well, maybe we'll still want a reward. But for me it won't be a pain in the butt car that I've already owned.

How Will The Classic and Collector Car Hobby Differ In 10 Years?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles