Forever young...............

[ND4SPD]

Well I got this idea from another forum but it was a pretty cool idea and got some interesting results. Pretty much post pictures of vehicles that don't look old even if they have become old themselves. I'll start off the thread with vehicles that I think seem fitting for this thread.

 

[Diablomonkey]

 

[Scaff]

Come on guys this is a potentially interesting discussion, but currently it falls flat on its face.

Posting pictures alone is just not enough, give us some reason why you think these cars qualify, that way we can actually have a discusion.

Take this for example....

....I would love to know why that fits the bill, as to me it looks firmly stick in an age that brought us this man...

...


its a box on wheels and a classic piece of '80s design. Nothing about it, for me, has aged well at all and it certainly doesn't look 'forever young'.


Regards

Scaff

 

[homeforsummer]

Audi 80:

Still looks modern today. Why? Because Audis haven't really changed that much. There wasn't that much of a leap from the 80 to the A4, to the newer A4 and it's facelifts, to the new A4. The DNA is still very clear. It helps that 80s seem to last pretty well too so they don't get old and decrepit.

I find it's the details that let older cars down and age them, things like lights that are definitely from a certain era. The 80 is a very clean design and it's details don't let it down.

 

[wrcsti]

Was and still is one of the quickest supercars ever, and also very good looking.

 

[Joey D]

GMC Typhoon, still up there as one of the fastest SUV's ever made and was the fastest up until the Porsche Cayanne came along I do believe. The design aged fairly well since the Blazer still looked similar to it when it was discontinued in 2004. GM trucks and SUV's still share similar characteristics of the design as well. If you updated the rims and put some sort of integrated headlights instead of the sealed beams in it, it would still look as if it could be sold today.

 

[Diablomonkey]

Come on guys this is a potentially interesting discussion, but currently it falls flat on its face.
Posting pictures alone is just not enough, give us some reason why you think these cars qualify, that way we can actually have a discusion.
Take this for example....
....I would love to know why that fits the bill, as to me it looks firmly stick in an age that brought us this man...
its a box on wheels and a classic piece of '80s design. Nothing about it, for me, has aged well at all and it certainly doesn't look 'forever young'.


Regards

Scaff

I guess you would have to see one in person to understand why I put that in there. I mean its an 89' way ahead of its time and still looks modern.

 

[backspace]

I guess you would have to see one in person to understand why I put that in there. I mean its an 89' way ahead of its time and still looks modern.

I've seen one in person.
In fact, I've offroaded a cressida in places where lifted trucks struggled to keep up, smashed it with golf clubs, jumped on the roof, then crashed it into a tree before dragging the miserable lump of steel to a junkyard.


http://img156.imageshack.us/my.php?image=deadcar6townofacesol4.jpg
http://img156.imageshack.us/my.php?image=deadcarxl3.jpg

Looks are subject to opinion, but I think it's safe to say that the cressida's style is not "modern"

I love 80's era cars. I own 2 myself, but I wouldn't say the style of either is modern.

 

[Perfect Balance]

That does not look like 1990.


EDIT; Neither does this:

 

[Joey D]

Dodge Stealth/Mitsubishi 3000GT, could easily be passed off today as an inexpensive sports car for 20 something year old men to kill themselves with.

I didn't know they made a targa version...that thing is hot.

 

[Perfect Balance]

That first one kind of looks like crap.

 

[Joey D]

It was the first small sized photo of the Stealth that came up. This one might be better. I think it's a good looking car, but it was heavy and FWD...not a great combination. The AWD ones were supposed to be good I guess. Not to many people still have them because all the 20 year old men who bought them either killed themselves in them or sold them to other 20 year old men, who killed themselves once they got older . In all seriousness though it seems like anytime someone dies in a street racing accident around here they were behind the wheel of a Stealth.

 

[Diablomonkey]

I've seen one in person.
In fact, I've offroaded a cressida in places where lifted trucks struggled to keep up, smashed it with golf clubs, jumped on the roof, then crashed it into a tree before dragging the miserable lump of steel to a junkyard.


http://img156.imageshack.us/my.php?image=deadcar6townofacesol4.jpg
http://img156.imageshack.us/my.php?image=deadcarxl3.jpg

Looks are subject to opinion, but I think it's safe to say that the cressida's style is not "modern"

I love 80's era cars. I own 2 myself, but I wouldn't say the style of either is modern.

Thats an MX73 that you posted pictures of. And they don't look modern but the MX83 (the one I posted a picture of) does look modern. But I guess not many of you feel that way. In japan they came as the MarkII/Chaser/Cresta/Verossa and each one looked different, some better than others but they all look modern.

 

[Muzaffar]

Ferrari 250GTO

Alfa 75

Alfa Tipo 33 Stradale

Lamborghini Countach

Venturi Atlantique

 

[TheCracker]

That does not look like 1990.

No it looks totally 1960's as it was intended to


Come on guys, i think the only car posted so far that fits this thread is the RX-7.

The rest of the cars, although most are very distinctively shaped are actually very very much cars of their era and look it.

 

[Turbo Lag]

AM DB7. 14 years old now, and IMO still looks great, and carried over to the DB9.

 

[High-Test]

<3 :tup:

Nearly indestructible, fun to drive, and they hold the road like none other. These things have a feeling while you're in the driver's seat. It's this feeling that you're connected to a vehicle that isn't going anywhere you don't make it. It's a feeling one can't get in an SUV. Get in the driver's seat, and there's this rewarding sense as you peer down the hood at the little emblem. This is really a Mercedes-Benz


On the Soarer/SC300: It has crisp styling that hasn't been copied well or imitated that I know of. It's a futuristic car, in 1992 and now. The interior molds around the occupants, and the car has fantastic highway manners. It's THE Japanese luxury rocketship.

Oh wait.. I'm talking about cars I've owned..

 

[Alex.]

I'd say out of all of those, it's only the RX-7 and the Venturi Atlantique that dont look old

 

[homeforsummer]

Thats an MX73 that you posted pictures of. And they don't look modern but the MX83 (the one I posted a picture of) does look modern. But I guess not many of you feel that way. In japan they came as the MarkII/Chaser/Cresta/Verossa and each one looked different, some better than others but they all look modern.

Disagree. I know it's your opinion, but I think it's the most dated car in this thread.

Come on guys, i think the only car posted so far that fits this thread is the RX-7.

The rest of the cars, although most are very distinctively shaped are actually very very much cars of their era and look it.

Disagree. One could argue that the RX7, being quite curvy and swoopy, is very much a car of the 90s, unlike today's quite clean cut, defined lines.

It's very hard to argue the case for any car looking "modern" because each decade has it's own distinct style. Cars can look good, or even beautiful, forever, but that doesn't necessarily mean that if you released it today it would fit in as a modern car. For example, and I mentioned the "details" earlier, but as a "modern" car the RX7 is let down by little things like the ugly licence plate mount protruding from the front, orange side repeaters, pop-up headlamps etc. It's a beautiful car but it's equally easy to argue the case against it as it is for it.

I at least tried to give some explanation as to why the Audi 80 looked modern, and I'll admit that viewed front on you can see the differences with newer Audis, but the design isn't much of a step back at all compared to today's A4. If you stuck modern Audi wheels on it it would immediately be brought forward.

 

[Jim Prower]

I think the GT40 fits, too. I mean...look at what happened when the car became the Ford GT...almost NOTHING was changed, just a detail here and there. The car still looked incredible.

 

[homeforsummer]

True, though the two are instantly distinguishable because the modern one has "modern" sharper lines. Straight lines and creases today are one thing that's immediately dated anything from an era where cars were curvy, such as the 60s and the 90s.

 

[TheCracker]

I at least tried to give some explanation as to why the Audi 80 looked modern, and I'll admit that viewed front on you can see the differences with newer Audis, but the design isn't much of a step back at all compared to today's A4. If you stuck modern Audi wheels on it it would immediately be brought forward.

Well it's funny you say that because i walked past an Audi 80 parked next to an early first gen A4 just the other day, there were only 2 registration years between the two of them but it struck me how old fashioned the 80 looked in comparison. It was quite a bold and futuristic design in it's day but that's exactly what's made it age so much now.

The ford GT40 only looks 'fresh' now because you are so used to seing the modern Ford GT - which is an incredibly retro design.

 

[Muzaffar]

I think the GT40 fits, too. I mean...look at what happened when the car became the Ford GT...almost NOTHING was changed, just a detail here and there. The car still looked incredible.

Can't agree more.

The ford GT40 only looks 'fresh' now because you are so used to seing the modern Ford GT - which is an incredibly retro design.

That actually does bring out a good point. (well, sort of really) Is a remake of an old car makes the old car look modern? I'm sure you should know what I mean, just like how the GT40 looks so modern because of the GT. I think most manufacturer do find inspiration in the older cars when the try to bring back the "retro look" into their new cars, but somehow it just fell of the mark. For example, the new Chevy Camaro and the Dodge Challenger did try to look like their counterpart, but in a way just doesn't have the same impact as the original. However, the original Camaro and Challenger does look a little modern if you compared it to the new model......

With that said....

1992 Dodge Viper RT-10

Yes, but I'm surprised that no one mentioned this car yet. I mean, even when the newer models came out, it doesn't even really aged as much as it should.....

 

[TheCracker]

1992 Dodge Viper RT-10

Yes, but I'm surprised that no one mentioned this car yet. I mean, even when the newer models came out, it doesn't even really aged as much as it should.....

Good call. Apart from the wheels the original Viper is pretty timeless 👍

 

[GilesGuthrie]

This thread's a nice idea, but I'm seeing a lot of fanboyism, and very little thought regarding the mandate. It's turning more into "what's your favourite old car?" Seriously, I should rock up with a shot of an ur-Quattro!

The RX-7, Venturi and Viper are about the only cars posted that truly fit the bill. Every other car betrays its age, but what's interesting about that fact is that there are two general ways in which it happens:

- There's clearly no structural integrity in the car. Step forward 250GTO, Tipo, Alfa 75
- The car betrays the naivety of its construction. Step forward GMW Typhoon, Lamborghini Miura.

Many of the others have simply fallen out of fashion. I followed a DB7 Vantage the other day, and couldn't get over how entirely vulgarly pointless it looked. Many of the cars (F40, NSX, Countach) still seem special because they were so far ahead of their time when they came out, but the 20-30-odd years since they were launched has ravaged them. Same with the Mitsubishi 3000GT, which was always a bit whale-like in proportion. It's difficult to cite the fact that Ford tarted-up and re-released the GT-40 as evidence for the design genius of the original, more of the fact that Ford has clearly run out of money and inspiration. The internals of the Corrado can't withstand the pace, and it's now looking tatty, even though it's still a little cracker, and the person who posted the 200SX should hang their head in shame: it was passé before it was even launched!

It's a hard one, this. Progress is so inexorable that engineering or styling statements become increasingly quiet and irrelevant as time marches ever onward.

 

[TheCracker]

I suppose the reason why the RX-7 and Viper still look relatively fresh still is because they are fairly free of the fussy detailing that can quickly age a design - and also because no other company copied their shape. Neither of them were updated much over the years they were produced either. Nothing ages a car more than bringing out a facelifted model to compare it too.

The Venturi looks fresh because it's actually quite a bland and generic mid-engined shape.

 

[homeforsummer]

Well it's funny you say that because i walked past an Audi 80 parked next to an early first gen A4 just the other day, there were only 2 registration years between the two of them but it struck me how old fashioned the 80 looked in comparison. It was quite a bold and futuristic design in it's day but that's exactly what's made it age so much now.

Just have to agree to disagree on this one then, I think the 80 is a cleaner, and therefore more modern design than the first-gen A4.

It's a hard one, this. Progress is so inexorable that engineering or styling statements become increasingly quiet and irrelevant as time marches ever onward.

This is what I would have written already if I could have worded it this well 👍

Thumbs up to the first Viper though, although again it's let down by some 90s details.

I think that's the trouble. Cars from the 90s aren't actually that old anyway, so by definition look "modern". It'd be easier to post replies to the statement "Forever old....................." and post cars that have dated really quickly!

 

[TopHat]

Most cars from the 90's look like cars from the 90's because, well they're just so curvy and rounded off. Nary an edge on that RX-7, and the DB7 was let down by the droopy-ish rear, and the undersized and matte wheels.


That's another thing. Cars are usually let down by the style of wheels they have. Cars from the 60s/70s have small wheels with high-profile tires, while cars from the 80s have big, heavy looking, near solid discs with holes cut out of them for rims. Cars from the 90s have 3 spoke wheels alot, and/or the spokes are swept back. The only new car I can think of with a 3 spoke wheel is the Saab Turbo X.

EDIT: Also, trunk lids and beltlines have gotten higher and higher the past few years. A car with with more window area is usually older. A-Pillars have gotten really thick too.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

1990-93 Celica (preferably hatchback)

This is a 93 GT-R, but I think they could have have sold this model well into the late 90's without changing much. It could probably match some of the cars sold in the early 2000s.

I was going to include the SW20, but it looks like it was in production from 1989-99. Picture:

1989-93 Porsche 964
Hasn't changed much

 

[Greycap]

This one either strengthens the "sharp and clean looks modern" way of thinking or kills it totally.

Basic design from the early eighties.