Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Present and Future FWD Classic and Special Interest Cars
hpmctorque
Member Posts: 4,600
RWD is so dominant among classic cars that one could almost argue that "classic FWD" is an oxymoron. Yet, there are a few. Examples would include Citroens from the '30s and '40s, as well as some from the '50s and '60s; Cords; early ('60s) Toronados and Eldorados. In addition to the few classics, there are numerous models that could qualify as special interest cars, such as early Saab convertibles, maybe, and the early '80s Chrysler and Dodge converts. Early Honda microcars would also fall in this category, if they're not considered classics. Will any of today's FWD cars become classics? Which ones are candidates for becoming special interest cars?
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
So the young get old and now, with some $$$ in their pockets, they attempt to re-create those wonderful feelings, lusts, adventures they had.
If this theory be sound, then American FWD cars from the 80s and 90s are surely doomed. One could hardly conjure up a more anonymous unexciting type of car.
However, certain Japanese cars of the FWD persuasion, which are even now being tuned and customized, may indeed become collectible.
So that's my bet for FWD....80s and early 90s Civics, Preludes, other FWD Japanese hatches and coupes.
Never say never. Contact me privately and I'll give you instructions on where to send every penny you own. Email is in my profile. :P
So what are YOU betting against me? :P
How about a low mileage (for its age) 1968 Dodge Dart 270? Only 8667 miles per year!**
**winner responsible for pickup and removal of prize. Void where prohibited. Not responsible for wasp stings or maulings by suddenly displaced groundhogs.
Actually, the PT Cruiser may already be there! Now I doubt that it'll ever become a high-dollar collectible like a Hemi Cuda or Tri-Power GTO or some exotic Ferrari or whatever, but it'll definitely retain a cult-like status. As it is now, there's always a good turnout of them at the Chrysler show in Carlisle, PA.
And by good turnout, I'm talking like 100+, not like that picture I took with 4 Citations and 1 Phoenix representing the X-body crowd. :P
I enjoy seeing a variety of cars purely from a nostalgia, historical, and curiosity perspective, regardless of their value. My thought is that there's a good chance that some of the people who drive an early model X or K-car, Pinto, Chevette, or early Escort, or one of their badged variants, may be trying to make a statement, because there are any number of more lower and easier-to-maintain beaters (relatively speaking, of course) that can be bought for very little, but wouldn't garner the attention of one of the models mentioned above. Same goes for Ford Festivas and Subaru Justys, and Omni-Horizons, just to name a few more. The Festiva and (manual transmission) Justy were actually good, durable cars, but it's difficult to find parts now, so owning them isn't fun. Yet you still see these from time to time, so they must have their fans too.
It makes a historian throw up his hands....to listen to them using the same word for a Cadillac V-16, a Corvette fuelie, and a Dodge Omni. It strikes me as irritating and absurd to devalue the great cars of the world with this ordinary stuff that really should be melted and banged into teapots.
I mean, are we all "special" now? :P
One could rightly argue that one should be allowed to bring whatever they want to the party, but I really think some people shoulnd't be invited as participants.
Analogy? When you have a "swap meet" or "flea market" and it's all filled with 99% of the booths selling cheap watches from China and only 1% actually interesting old stuff.
Call it "elitist"...I call it "basic discrimination based on collective knowledge of our ancestors".
If thousands of people want something, hunt for it, and pay serious money for it, THAT'S a "collectible" because there is obviously a passion for it.
You could go out today and buy a Citation for $375 bucks.
Yeah, but if those five people are really having fun with their X-bodies, what harm is it really causing? I mean, I'm not exactly seeing the prices of V-16 Caddies and Chevy Fuelies plummeting simply because a small group of people really dig their X-bods.
Oh, and if you think those X-bodies were bad, well I think there were something like 15-20 Pintos at the Furd Nationals! :shades:
I fully realize that while X and K cars, etc. - and we might as well add Tempos/Topazes to this sorry list - sold in large numbers, they were failed vehicles in an important sense, because their quality problems contributed to the decline of the domestic car industry. For that reason alone they're historically significant. All I was trying to say was that I find these models interesting, or call it strangely fascinating. I'm also intrigued (no pun intended, since that failed Olds model, though better than the Xs, also contributed to the domestic industry's decline) by some of the people who choose to drive the Xs and Ks, etc. today, when there's a wide choice of better beaters available.
Correction: In my message #12 I intended to say, "...because there are any number of better and easier-to-maintain beaters..."
My uncle bought it from some guy he knew down in Virginia, for $600. The guy also had a '65 Pontiac Catalina that he wanted to sell, for about the same price. In retrospect, my uncle probably should've gotten the Catalina!
Actually, if you get a model other than the first couple of years and stay away from the turbo, the Mitsu 2.6, the later Mitsu 3.0 V-6, or the 4-speed automatic, they're not horrible little cars. The 2.2/2.5 4-cyl was designed by the same guy who did the slant six and the wedge-head V-8's, and it was designed to be fairly durable and easy and cheap to work on. And the longer wheelbase models, like the Caravelle, 600 sedan, LeBaron GTS, and Lancer, are pretty comfy, roomy cars.
I think it was mainly the turbo models that were more prone to head gasket failure. The 2.2/2.5 used an aluminum head and an iron block, and the differences in expansion/cooling rates of the two meterials could stress out the head gasket over time. So I guess any 2.2/2.5 would've been succeptible to it, although the turbos probably put more strain there. The '88 LeBaron turbo coupe I had blew its head gasket and warped the head around the 115,000 mile mark. However, I should also add that it was my ex-wife's car by that time, and I have no idea how well she maintained it. It also got stolen a couple times...both while we were married and after the fact. It turned up in the impound yard a couple times. So it very well could have been abused during those joy rides, as well.
I'd imagine that as long as you maintained it and kept up on the coolant changes, and didn't let it overheat, you could go a long time without messing up the head gasket and head.
I have a friend who had two K-car convertibles, both of 'em '86'es. One had the 2.2 and one had the 2.5. I know he took them both to around 150,000 miles or so with no major engine or transmission problems. He finally switched to a new '95 or '96 Corolla though, when he made plans to move out beyond Frederick, yet keep his job in Annapolis. I think that was about 160 miles round trip, and not something that he wanted to trust a 9-10 year old car to do regularly. I think the Corolla also got fuel economy in the mid 30's, while the LeBaron got around 25-26, so with that amount of driving, he saw a pretty substantial savings in fuel, too.
I remember our '88 LeBaron turbo got a bit better though. I'd usually get around 27-28 on the highway, and the wife could actually break 30.
I'd imagine that a 2.2/2.5 could make it to 300K miles if, like you said, it was maintained well and driven with reasonable care. I'm sure that something would go along the way, like the water pump, starter, alternator, crankshaft/camshaft seals, etc. And the service interval for the timing belt back then was 60,000 miles, at which point it's easy to get to those seals, anyway.
Oh, and one other bonus...if the timing belt does snap, it's a non-interference engine. So while you're still stranded, at least your valves aren't kissing the pistons!
I don't include engine accessories or timing belts in engine longevity assumptions, because I consider these long term maintenance items.
I agree with Shifty, that 300K is an unrealistic expectation. Now if you're talking about the Slant 6, or even the 318...
Even my beloved 300D, pushing 286K, had had a new cylinder head, (cracked, fairly common on the legendary durable 300D) so that doesn't make it a 286K engine anymore.
We had several K-cars as company cars back in the mid 80's. One I drove kept stalling at every intersection. I tore my sport coat sleeve on the ragged door trim of another one. They were pathetic, miserable cars. 150,000 miles in one should be outlawed by the Geneva convention. Would I ever collect one? Only if I could do so with a pooper-scooper.
By comparison, the Chevy Citations we got were decent cars. They were painted in a sort of hotelroom-heater beige color, and only had 85 mph speedo's but they weren't bad cars in a utilitarian Soviet-Block tool sort of way. But Classic? Uhm, no.
However, let us venture back to 1982, when the Citation was young. How much would you have had to pay for a '57 Chevy then; say a nice Bel Air hardtop with a 283. I would be willing to bet it would not have set you back much. It wasn't an especially good car, and was a typical (slightly stylish) family car. Now look at how much they are worth.
The point is, you never can tell. I still can't figure out why these cars command such crazy money, so I don't see how to predict which ones will fetch crazy money in the future. You can point at some that undoubtedly will, but categorically stating that a car will never be collectable is less certain. I am certainly not betting that a Citation will, it was just an example. But I sure am not going to predict that none of the '80s front drivers will ever be considered a classic.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
And what's that?
When they were new, 57 Chevy hardtops were *exciting* to people; on the other hand, nobody cared much about a Chevy Citation in 1982, except the poor slobs who bought one.
It is of course desire and that "ICON" status that drives classic car prices....supply and demand...and the desirability of a Chevy Citation, and its myth-making capacity, is about that of a 1980s GMC bread van.
Julia Roberts is exciting. The 4th runner up in the Dallas Cattleman's Association Bathing Suit Contest is not, even if she (he?) is passably attractive.
Even if one were, in a fit of cleverness, to point out to Shifty a plain jane, stripped-down 4 door '57 Chevy, and say "well look, that car wasn't exciting to anyone in 1957"....
yes yes,...that's true....BUT....the car's value today is BASED ON its exciting older brother, the flashy '57 convertible and hardtop. Without one there would be no value to a stripper 4-door.
The Citation has no well-dressed cousin to help it along.
It was a humble economy car back then, back when the world greeted it with a raised eyebrow of curiousity, and some modest ink in the press---all of which quickly turning into mild disgust, then apathy, when it was revealed what an tragically flawed car it was "in reality", despite what it promised IN THEORY.
So I think the Citation is utterly, totally, eternally, momumentally hopeless as a "classic" or a "collectible", unless you consider storing them in your back yard as a "collector car" status.
It's not cruel or biased, it's just how it works. Other than some vague hope, there's no evidence to support a Citation becoming anything more than it ever was---which was a common dull car that teenager ever dreamed of owning.
The Citation wasn't even a good tragic hero like the Edsel or Delorean. It just rolled over and died quietly.
The DeLorean saga is actually a pretty cool story! If you ever get the chance, pick up "Stainless Steel Illusion" and you'll see how close it came to working.
Be well, and Live the Dream!
-Rob
Some unique types of automotive "failures", with the drama and personalities that go with them, are far more interesting to me than run of the mill cars that just died of apathy or boredom.
The Edsel is a great story about corporate hubris, human blindness and the chicanery of "market research" and bobbling of statistical data.
The Delorean is a great story of bribery, corruption, some bad luck, some twists of fate, once again that 'ol human blindness, individual hubris, and even peripherally the tragedy of Ireland's economic morass of the times (they are in much better shape now).
As far as FWD is concerned, there were FWD cars built for innovation and to advance technology, and then there were FWD cars built because it was just cheaper to build small cars that way.
The original MINI is the former, the Citation, IMHO, is the latter---and that difference will make a world of difference to the two cars' collectibility I believe.
However the Citation represented a whole new breed of family car, and basically set the pattern for the way cars are built today (albeit much more reliably!) People flocked to the Citation in droves, enough to push sales in that extra-long 1980 model year to roughly 811,000 units, toppling the record set by the 1965 Mustang for first-year popularity. The Mustang sold about 680,000 units in its extra long first year, IIRC.
Had the Citation been a more reliable car, it would've definitely helped GM maintain its dominance, although I guess over the years, they still would've found other ways to shoot themselves in the foot. But instead, the Citation ended up being the most recalled car in history, and only helped accelerate the avalanche that was GM's slide from grace.
Now, I'm not saying that any of that warrants the Citation ever commanding a high dollar price, but I find it to be an interesting footnote in automotive history.
And I guess in the long run, there was some success in the Citation, after all. In 1985, 3 of its offspring, the Celebrity, Cutlass Ciera, and Century, were among the top ten selling cars in America. And had it not been for more stingent side impact standards that were adopted in the late 1990's, I'm sure GM would've found a way to keep building the things, even today!
It just sits there like a Big Nothing in the automotive history books. I've got "Collectible Cars 1930-80s", I've got "Cars of the 1980s", I've got classic and collectible car price guides in 6 different versions, I've got Hemmings "Classic Cars" magazine in every issue, and the Citation is in none of these books or magazines. Nada. Nothing. Zilch. Zero.
So I am apparently not alone :P
New Complete Book of Collectible Cars 1930-90 by the Auto editors of Consumer Guide
subtitled:
"60 years of Blue-Chip Auto Investments"
LOL!
But there are 80s cars in there, definitely. For Chevy, for instance, they have the Monte Carlo SS and the Camaro IROC-Z
It's a big book with some debatable entries but even THEY didn't have the nerve to put a Citation in there.
:surprise:
I appreciate the loyalty and generosity of such a point of view, but sooner or later, you have to call a bad car a bad car---based on the great big THUD it has on both history and our present desire to own one...which is about nil.
what was unique or innovative about them? stainless steel body? nope.
i remember one of my neighbors father's bring home one of these: stainless bird
What's some piece of crap plastic Star Trek doll worth? If it's the right item of the right age, probably a lot!
Maybe the late model Preludes will have some collectability, since they were very competent cars at the end of their lifespan?
Regarding the GM X-cars, I totally agree that they were lousy cars, and that they're worthless, and will probably remain worthless. All I'm saying is that they're interesting from a historical standpoint, as the Gremlin, Pinto, and Vega - all bad cars - are. As Andre said, they represented a turning point for the domestic industry. And for all their faults, they also had some attributes, such as good fuel economy for their class, space efficiency, good rust proofing, and decent styling for their day. Further, although they didn't pioneer FWD, they were the first domestic compact-midsize cars to offer it. Finally, were the Dasher or equivalent Renault any better than the X-cars? As I recall, they were junky too. I mention these, rather than the Japanese models, because Toyota and Nissan converted their compact-midsize cars to FWD after GM did. Not that one bad car excuses another, but it seems that virtually all car manufacturers built junky cars in the late '70s-early '80s. Well okay, by then Honda, Nissan, and Toyota were building somewhat better cars, after building junky cars a few years earlier, but even the Japanese cars weren't really good until the mid-late '80s, as I recall. Better, but not very good.
We did have the Cord here in America, but that car is so far back in the dustbin of history most people wouldn't even remember it as a FWD car.
INTERESTING QUESTION -- if rear/engine, RWD is so collectible (porsche, VW), why not front engine FWD? It seems only the MINI got away with it, and that's because it was one of the most influential cars in modern history.
In the final analysis, "you can't save everything" and some cars really just need to be junked, melted and totally forgotten---the Citation is no big loss to history or mankind, and if it never existed, no one would have noticed.
Ditto a whole encyclopedia of uninteresting cars. Even the Smithsonian or the Henry Ford museum knows what to hold and what to fold.
Now of course, FWD isn't considered "freaky" in America anymore, but whether it can make the jump to collectible is hard to say.
There are, in fact, very few FWD genuinely collectible cars in the entire world, from vintage 1900 to today. You could name them on one hand.
Actually FWD first hit Olds in 1966 and Cadillac in 1967, and was considered to be quite a novelty at the time. At least on the domestic front.
Now by the time the smallish 1985 FWD Devilles came out, it was considered a humiliation. However, that was more a result of a car designed for 1982 fuel prices and scarcity being released in 1985, just as big cars were back in full swing again. FWD had less to do with the humiliation than the small size. That, and the Lincoln commercials of the era that showed the valets at the country club getting their members' Cadillacs, Oldsmobiles, and Buicks mixed up.
It's the same beef consumers have today on the subject I think.
The FWD Olds of the 60s were cool cars, you're right. And let us remember as well that a 66 Toro could put its money where its mouth was--or where its tires were. It was a very credible performer---awesome car and a technical breakthrough.
And...lo and behold...an early 60s Toro IS collectible---because it is a) exciting; b) powerful, c) innovative and d) good-lookiing.
Of which the Citation is none of the above.
The cars are good looking, light, and have a good basic suspension. They're good candidates for an easy Integra engine transplant.
So, Shifty, I think they meet your critera for collectibles - popular when new and with a continuing following 20-some years later.
I also favor the slightly smaller first genration CRX to the later ones, Shifty, but I think all CRXs were two seaters.
Trust me - neither of us will be looking to recapture the days of driving (or pushing) those things!
the bad news: it's yellow. I can deal with the wing (take it off and fill the holes and paint the trunk---easy).
And better yet, my friend's M3 will now have to live in fear. Performance specs are just about identical up to 100 mph at least and an EVO will pull close to 1g.