By Robert Emslie
Certain words mean different things to different people, and in fact semantics can create a grey area in communication that can cause great confusion and kerfuffle. The clarification of meaning can also offer about the only viable out when trying to explain an ill conceived statement. One of the great grey areas of the automotive world is the concept of what is a Classic, because pretty much everyone and his brother has a different interpretation of what it takes to earn that appellation.
And today, I want you to tell us yours.
You’ve no doubt seen them from time to time, the online car ad that promotes the vehicle as a classic, and the only attribute that supports that claim is that, they ain’t makin’ ’em any more. Sure, that ’98 Plymouth Breeze with its Bowery Boy of a two litre might make a good driver for someone of meager means, but the fact that Chrysler isn’t churning them out any more doesn’t make it a classic.
Thing of it is, no one can really put their finger on what is a classic when the discussion turns to cars and trucks of fairly recent manufacture. That’s why today, I want you to give us your take on what is the youngest car around today that has earned the right to that title. What do you think is the newest that you would call a Classic?
Image: photocarsonline
Jeff Glucker
Okay I'll start:
Ford Ranger. Please hear me out & don't shoot me. A solid classic bombproof design.
Most of the cars we think of as "classics" today were "bread & butter" vehicles that were used day in & day out far various things.
A few Examples:
1. Ford Country Squire: The quinessntial family truckster that god used for everything from grocery runs, to family vacations and even the run to the hardware store.
2. 50's pick ups: Again see above
I see where you're coming from and suggest that the pre-jellybean Taurus might also be a contender for what you're talking about, especially in SHO trim (the special version is always the most desirable).
<img src="http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/1992-1995-ford-taurus-sho.jpg">
I get notes on my Ranger from people wanting to buy it.
Nothing special except it's a clean truck.
loved my '94. Only reason I traded it was because the cost of getting it to pass NH inspection would equal a down payment of a newer car.
So I got an '07 Focus ZX5. Hoontastic with the stick!
POSSIBLY might be a future classic.
Classic.
<img src="http://hooniverse.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/parade-008-700×525.jpg">
nice image….
Wow, that was unexpected! ; )
A classical Vavon answer… Built from 1983 to 1999. But I'm 205% right on this one!
<img src="http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/9555/peugeot205gti.jpg" width="670/">
Off-topic, but something that's been bugging me for a while – I was in Paris in the fall, and visited the manufacturer stores along the Champs Elysees, along with another Peugeot showroom. I was chastised for opening hoods. Is this common in France?
Also, I really should've tracked down a 205 as a souvenir to bring home.
Not really, unless you were doing that with conceptcars… Did you enjoy your stay in Paris?
They actually sell a 3 inch Norev 205 GTI in the Peugeot Store on the Champs-Elysees.
<img src="http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/748175IMGP3165.jpg" width="600/">
I got in trouble for opening up the hood on a Citroen C5, and my wife tells me a Peugeot salesperson asked if I was an idiot for opening up an RCZ.
Paris was very nice, although we were only there for a couple days. We saw plenty though (at least all the touristy stuff, and then some), having walked ~40km in those two days. I did see the 3-inch models, although I ended up with a 404 and 908 (along with a number of Citroens).
I'm happy with the CCCA definition, since that's what my dad went by when I was a kid.
http://www.classiccarclub.org/grand_classics/what…
Though I've owned several cars that were registered as (or otherwise qualified as) classics for licensing purposes, I've never owned a Classic-with-a-capital-C.
I was going to say 1955, but 1948 works. I'm not sure about 1925 though, I wonder why they went with that date. Maybe they consider anything before that too primitive?
I've added the PDFs on that page to my 'do research' pile, there's quite a few brands I've never heard of once production gets down into 4 digits. Getting this sort of information out of the internet is like pulling haystack teeth though.
Needs no explanation.
<img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2011/07/01-2012-morgan-3-wheeler-fd-opt.jpg" width="600">
Pretty much any Morgan, except the cross-eyed one.
Two years ago, when Redacted upgraded to 5.0, a bunch of us started using the old Canadian address, which was still on version 4.9. It worked well for maybe three months, except that every few days it'd screw up and February 23rd us all–that is, it'd go backwards to that date, regardless of how far past it the actual date was.
Top story was Richard Hammond unburdening himself of his ugly, cross-eyed Morgan.
Given that it hasn't hit the streets yet, I would think this has to be the youngest, and taking into account the limited production run plan (5,000 units per year), I consider it a newborn classic: 2014 Chevrolet SS
<img src="http://o.aolcdn.com/os/autos/photos/20130220_chevrolet-ss_612mz.jpg">
I don't know… It doesn't have the "I'm the reserved but powerful member of the mafia" feel that the G8 had. I kind of miss that.
I haven't looked into the details at all, so I'll just be lazy and ask you guys: is this basically a rebadged G8 GXP?
Not exactly, as their are improvements on the G8 design, but it is on the Zeta platform. One major reason it may not really be a considered a classic; they are only going to offer it with an 6 speed auto (w/paddle shift), no manual transmission.
Oh, boo hiss.
While I agree with you, try and find a manual Charger SRT8. Or a RWD V8 Ford 4-door sedan (in the US).
The only 4 door V8 sedans with manual transmissions being sold in the US today are forced-induction luxury cars (CTS-V and M5). I cannot think of anyone else selling that combination.
Which is just plain lousy. Why do car makers do that? Check all the right boxes, it's obvious what segment of the market they're going for, and then not offer a stick! Stupid. You hear that Chevy? Stupid.
Every time I see an R/T or SRT8 Charger, part of me thinks how awesome that car looks, but it's accompanied by a sadness and anti-desire. The worst part? Knowing that both GM and Chrysler have the right g—d— transmission sitting in their parts bin! For the SS, I don't have to look up what's going in that car. We know what's going in that car. It's an LS-whatever. The CTS-V and the Camaro both have longitudinal manuals that would fit with probably little to no tweaking of the design.
For the Charger, the Challenger has a 6 speed manual behind exactly the same V8 on the same platform! They already did the work!
"no manual transmission"
Not exaggerating at all when I say, that factor alone would solely decide whether I consider purchasing this car or not. Now I will not.
The SS is way overhyped. No manual (as already pointed out by several), plus it looks like an overgrown Malibu. The G8 remains the high-water mark on Americanized Holdens.
Meh, didn't the G8 have the same anodyne, boring styling with a different front clip?
Ignoring the definition of “classic” in an automotive sense, I can’t quite get on board with cars as new as 1988 being considered classic. If I can remember when a car was new, I have a difficult time considering it classic, thus ruling out most cars built post ’78. There are a few exceptions – cars that could be purchased new into the 1980s – but those are mostly an evolution of a “classic” design that was penned before I was born in ’78, and also, generally, weren’t sold beyond when I became conscious of cars. I can consider the 280ZX classic, as well as 2nd gen F-bodies. Corvettes can be classic up until ’82, as can the Checker Marathon.
It just makes me realize how old I'm getting.
I can understand this, but at some point I think you have to get over it (easy to say coming from a 26 year old). Just sayin, there are guys around who remember when the last of the Duesenbergs were built…
To be fair, the last of the Duesenbergs wasn't built all that long ago.
<img src="http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5287/5268964415_565de2afd4.jpg" width="500">
Smartass.
Most of the classic muscle car guys remember when those were new. They were young and those were the cars they dreamed of owning but probably didn't until they reached middle age (or briefly did but had to let go for practical reasons generally related to young families). What i've found interesting about e30 ownership – rare where i live – is the long looks the car gets are from guys in between their late 30's and late 40's. Those are the ones who will say that they have always wanted one, remember when it was new, etc.
Makes sense, i graduated HS in 1992, and have wanted an e30 since before i was legal to drive. It just took 21 years for me to end up with one.
Just bought a Z32 slicktop 300ZX…. that counts, right?
2012 Boss 302
<img src="http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/7ca/migration_catalog/Globe_Auto/article4053778.ece/ALTERNATES/w620/2012+Ford+Mustang+Boss+302+parked" />
^^^^ Yep.
And specifically the 2012… the 2013 just doesn't look as good with that odd front-end design. If I get one, it will be a 2012.
NA Miata
i drive a classic?! yippee
Classic
<img src="http://image.modified.com/f/27452029/modp_1001_10_o+1993_mazda_rx7_and_1991_eunos_cosmo+front_side_view.jpg" width=640 />
Yes!
what is this?
The absolutely awesome Mazda Eunos Cosmo. An epic rotary powered vehicle, home of the 300hp/300lb-ft 20B-REW triple rotor.
<img src="http://sphotos-c.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/736614_10200383515020196_1732092209_o.jpg" width="600">
Classical
We'd all agree that's definitely a classic…but NOTHING newer counts for you?
With in my reach this is quit the newest I go for, yes there are Astons, Porsches, Lambo´s etc. in Brazil they will be far of the scale for me.
In the USA I could think of several cheaper cars that are close to become classics, exemple the Honda S2000 could be a good investment to save some low mile exemples in a barn.
The lead photo looks awfully familiar… I can't decide if i would consider it a classic just yet, but it definitely will be in the future.
<img src="http://cars-database.com/data_images/models/alfa-romeo-8c-competizione/alfa-romeo-8c-competizione-05.jpg" width="600" img>
sauce: <a href="http://cars-database.com” target=”_blank”>http://cars-database.com
Whoa. Good eye.
Yea too bad the Pontiac didnt look like that lead photo, otherwise it WOULD be a classic. And would probably have sold a lot more; I would have one then!
I have trouble considering anything introduced post-2000 to be a classic, but there are a couple things from the '90s I can get behind.
<img src="http://flipacars.com/pics/Aston%20Martin/aston-martin-db7-vantage-jubilee-edition-01.jpg">
<img src="http://cars-database.com/data_images/models/jaguar-xk8/jaguar-xk8-01.jpg">
Kinda blandly British, no? The more recent Astons and XK look better to me.
I believe that a clean, stock (including original cladding) and RUNNING Syclone will be one of the rarest and most valuable automobiles in 30-40 years. Probably trailing the GNX just slightly unless the rarity kicks it up in value a bunch of notches.
<img src="http://gomotors.net/pics/GMC/gmc-syclone-03.jpg" width="500/">
Dang, I had this open in another tab, ready to go, as I was scrolling through the comments…
<img src="http://i.imgur.com/auDXJlX.jpg" width="500">
Newest Design I see as classic?
2003-2005 Infiniti M45.
<img src="http://www.cstatic-images.com/stock/470×314/233121.jpg" width=500>
Not my favorite of course, but I think my other choices for classic designs predate this one, so it answers the question.
absolutely
I think I'm the only person in the world that dislikes this car
It is ugly as sin.
It looks a lot better than their current pod of whales.
Sure, and with 340hp and RWD, I would not kick it out of the garage. But I don't think it's exactly a good looking car.
I definitely don't fault you for not liking it. I think it looks weird, but it amazes me that it even exists, and for that I appreciate it.
I think I like it for the two-faced nature of the car. It's so sanitized and Japanese and then the engine and performance is so hot-rod Q-ship.
Yes. Do. Want.
Every once in a while I do have a sane thought, and I strongly believe in the CTS-V Wagon's future as a classic.
Below *was* one of my favorite articles outside of the Verse of Hoons, but the Hoomsters won't cooperate, written by a man who I once tagged "Leaverman" while I was on the terlet.
AND, intentional or not, I love the underlying story of a man of Jewish decent crushing a German track in an American car.
Johnny, you made me a Beleiberman. *Goggle the article if you care to*
<img src="http://hooniverse.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012-Cadillac-CTS-V-Wagon-lede.jpg">
http://www.motortrend.com/features/travel/1208_20…
Classic homologation specials and factory tuner cars always pull big bucks at auction, whether it's a Ferrari 250 GTO, a 1st generation Z28 or a Lotus Cortina. Therefore, orignal, unmolested early M cars, STis and EVOs will increase in value in the future.
AACA Goes with 25 years old. That seems about right. that would be 1988 and earlier right now. I might trim it down to 20 years to catch a few newer ones like the C4 ZR-1 Corvettes and all E30 M3s, Cy/Ty trucks, etc.
<img src="http://www.4-the-love-of-jeeps.com/images/1997wranglerTJ.jpg" width=500>
What?
Seriously, though, they've proven themselves to be worthy successors to the Jeep Universal, and they are the last of the AMC I6 Jeeps (with the highest tech, most powerful iteration of that engine under the hood).
A good choice, but I'd have to go with the last of the CJs for Jeeps. That or a GW. I just can't call something that new a classic, even if I get the argument for it.
The first YJs rolled off the line for the 87 MY, so the first two MY of the Wrangler qualify under the 25 year rule, and I'd totally count them.
The TJ pictured is a '97, which is 16 years old. Mine's 12 years old. So, yeah, probably still in the future-classic category, but I have no doubt they will be. They're just too good.
Grand Wagoneers are definitely classics, and there hasn't been a question on the CJs being classics for a long time.
I may also be less upset by the idea of a car I remember being sold as new being considered a classic. (Plenty of other stuff making me feel old these days, and I'm still sort-of young… Ok, maybe I just refuse to grow up.)
A classic is something deserving of replication and usually at least 20 years old. It was probably in the 60s that the set the 1940s cut off, should be 20 – 25 years rolling to be relevant 50 years later.
A farrari 250 GTO is classic. The 240z pulled from those lines but did it so well for so many that it to should be considered classic. A 280z is based on a classic design but hasn't added much to the original 240 to distinguish its self. In fact other than some rubber .4 liters displacement and a gear its almost the same car and maybe should be considered so except that much of the beautiful simplicity of the car was lost. 280zx has little to offer. Z32 300zx's are sweet, congrats.
NSX's are classic and almost 20, pulling from exotic racecar designs and delivering them to the people. It should be replicated, please.
Chevy SS 2014, what's special about that? Change the badge it could pass as a Mercedes, but not any ,Mercedes people will drool over in 20 years. The new Camaro claims to pay homage to it's arguably classic ancestor, but I have eyes so I know its a lie.
Imitation is the best flattery, but with how much companies copy other companies it doesn't count if they're current or even recent models. In 20 years you'll maybe remember a car being made right now that stands out. That's the classic and it probably won't be the SS.
End rant –
<img width=500 src="http://www.carautoportal.com/car-images/ford/ford-gt/ford-gt.jpg">
'Nuff said.
Puts the class in classic.
Hey it was made in fairly small numbers, is quick, and has some classic, timeless lines. I think 20 years from now this will be a sought after classic that'll command a pretty penny. I am, of course, talking about the M version, too.
<img src="http://flipacars.com/pics/BMW/bmw-z4-30-coupe-03.jpg">
Yeah, for me right now, its the Z3. I love that car.
<img src="https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS4GItXrVf4gDIsg1YuNQLaoZs5sLY7yxpRSIIz_j8Z9cg-d3bOYg" width=550>
The Z4 might be the better car, but i bet a good clownshoe will be worth more than the Z4 in 20 years. The Z3 M Coupe, in all of it's silly absurdity, is one of my all time favourites.
Good one, the Z3 has definitely been growing on me over the years. In the end I think they'll demand around the same price in the future, the Z3 costing a bit more, maybe. It's just a matter of personal preference, I would take either one in a heartbeat if I had sufficient funds.
I can't give much of a reason why, but this is my answer:
<img src="http://encarsglobe.com/data_images/gallery/01/buick-grand-national/buick-grand-national-03.jpg" width=500>
There's a lot of cars listed above that will one day be classics, but I think you have to reach the age where seeing one on the road is a head turning moment- not just because you like the car, not just because you think it's cool, but because it's old and there aren't a lot of people driving and maintaining them anymore. I think that happens somewhere around the 25 year mark, but that number isn't exact.
My Tuesday answer: Either the 2002 MZ900e, or if you want to include current production vehicles, the current Horex VR6. My gut feel is that the VR6 is headed that way very quickly, but it is still so new that posterity has not definitively judged it yet. The Mike Hailwood Evoluzione, on the other hand, has already transcended its time to earn the title of a bona fide classic.
[HONORABLE MENTION: Honda Valkyrie will definitely be there eventually, but that one still needs to cook.]
<img src="http://www.internettime.com/images/ducatib.jpg">
<img src="http://www.bikerszene.de/Motorradbilder/3682307/Horex_VR6_Roadster_09.jpg" width="512">
No Aprilia RS250? They're going to be the next Honda CR-X: millions of perfect little bees today, zero unmolested tomorrow.
1966.
<img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8512/8352546690_df2f63ffff.jpg" width="500">
I can't thumbs up this enough.
Newer, but Classic by name, not by nature…
<img src="http://allstarkc.net/povallstarkc/StockImages/1G1ND52FX5M163823_img_1.jpg">
GM used the name 'classic' on several cars. There was a 'Cutlass Supreme Classic' that was the last of the RWD cars after the FWD was introduced, the 'Caprice Classic' was I think when they kept making the boxy Caprices long after GM wanted to stop but there was still market.
And there's that used-to-be-a-Malibu above.
500E, my favourite Merc of all time and i would consider it a classic. It looks refined and sinister at the same time.
<img src="http://www.euroclassicmotors.com/photos/500e1992040.jpg" width="600" img>
And the 190E Cossies.. Everyone remembers the E30 M3, the 190E 2.3-16 and 2.5-16 not so much.
<img src="http://www.automotiveaddicts.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Mercedes_190E_Evolution_II.jpg" width="600" img>
That wing is positively sledgehammer-worthy. Honestly, perhaps 1% of the cars out there look marginally better with a wing, but arguably just as good without (and four-doors, IMO, should NEVER have them). The towel rack on this one looks ridiculous.
Those AMG rims look much better on my A4 than on that 500E….
I don't know, sometimes wings work on four-doors
[youtube Gw-AxiVqihM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw-AxiVqihM youtube]
This period of DTM and BTCC are my favourite motorsports. Pretty much any other touring car racing up until mid to late nineties was awesome, though. You can also play Spot the Mustang with old DTM videos 😉
[youtube H3qT3Sw-NUQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3qT3Sw-NUQ youtube]
That is a DTM homologation special so the wing is there for one purpose, to make the car faster. See longroofians video
belowabove.I know of a 190E Cossie that's been sitting at a storage facility for several years. I'm starting to try and remember to keep an eye out for when this place holds auctions, considering the owner's probably spent its value keeping it stored.
<img src="http://www.balsas.lt/Uploads/Gallery/photos/fe/48/b8/10/fe48b810415f81b2fb16d10524d35cc7_600.jpg">
So, 1980.
OOOOOooooohhh.
78 trans am!!
Anything Aston Martin is an instant classic for me.
<img src="http://hooniverse.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/2014-Aston-Martin-Vanquish-on-track-lead.jpg">
Just not in that color.
Unmolested 1st gen CRX.
<img src="http://crxcommunity.com/featured/May2009/img/pepper9.jpg" width="600">
Image Courtesy of: http://crxcommunity.com/featured/May2009/
good luck finding one though.
I see one daily near my house parked in a large carport with a 2nd gen Civic Hatchback coupe. One of these days I think I need to go have a dialogue with the owner since It never moves.
1st gen Nissan 240. Most have been mutilated, stock examples are getting tough to find. Convertibles are rare, I didn’t know they existed until last year when the neighbor’s kid started driving one, which of course is primered and fart canned.
<img src="http://cars-database.com/data_images/models/nissan-240-sx/nissan-240-sx-09.jpg" width="600">
2001:
<img src="http://memimage.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/3425/1461/33560730001_large.jpg" width=500>
via: http://www.cardomain.com/ride/3356073/2001-jeep-c…
In fairness, the chassis dates back to '84, which is definitely classic territory.
Not quite sure I can bring myself to use the word "classic" for an E39 M5, but I definitely process them through the same part of my brain as I do any other classic (as opposed to newish used car).
I know the Classic Car Club of America has their criteria, but for me a classic is any car built to a higher standard such as any Ferrari, Lamborghini, Ford GT, McClaren, Acura NSC, Gull Wing Mercedes, etc. A car that was and will be special.
<img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_BiEP-SLMxlE/TLOIGR0D7EI/AAAAAAAAAAk/O-jfuP7Ywus/s1600/sti-vs-evo.jpg">
Undeniable performance, race heritage, crazy looks, relative rarity, definite desirability, and the fact that 1/3rd of them have already been wrapped around Burger Kings and telephone poles. Plus you get the old Ford vs Chevy debate digitized for the 21st century in Mitsubishi vs Subaru.
Oh, and the fact that even though they are still in production, it's arguable that these were the high water marks of both breeds.
Granted it's not an STi, but I'd love to get my hands on an unmodified bugeye WRX wagon.
Sold mine a couple years ago to my dad…who proceeded to drop about $2500 worth of mods into it.
The 3rd Gen RX-7 (FD). Seriously one of the best looking cars ever made, right up there with the Jag E type.
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a6/Mazda-rx7-3rd-generation01.jpg/800px-Mazda-rx7-3rd-generation01.jpg" width=700>
There are other classics but this is my pick.
The early to mid ‘90s was arguably a high water mark for Japanese sports car styling across the board. The era that gave us the FD also gave us the Z32, the SW20, and the MKIV Supra (even if I happen to prefer the MKIII).
If I had the means, I'd own one of each and drive whichever one struck my fancy on any given day.
So, so worthy.
Some of the above are certainly en route to classic status, if not there already.
I'm going to add that I expect that surviving, non-thrashed examples of the below will be entering classicdom soon:
<img src="http://images.motoring.co.uk/car-pictures/images/ford-puma-2001-p0007229-e2.jpg">
Ford Puma. The first are now fifteen years old.
Are these the same basic body as the US Escort ZX2? The front is obviously different, but the lines from the A-pillar back look the same.
They're pretty significantly different – the Puma's more or less a Fiesta in sportier clothes, while the ZX2 is roughly a Mazda Protege coupe, built into the 2000's.
Huh. I'd just never seen one before and my first thought was ZX2. Thanks for the clarification.
Yep; Fiesta provided the chassis basics but the 1.7litre Zetec-SE (125hp) engine was exclusively Puma. Then there was the 160hp Racing Puma; I get slightly tingly just thinking about it.
I sort of glossed over the Wikipedia article just to confirm it was totally Euro Ford – the Racing Puma does sound bit-tingling though. The ZX2 inspires no such lust, although they're cheap (because no one who digs sport compacts wants any pre-Focus Ford), and the Mazda connection makes them not terrible to drive (and I assume you could make one pretty fun if you threw way too much money at it).
<img src="http://aussieexotics.com/forum/dlattach/attach,15874/image/Top-Gear-(UK)/Darth-Vader-Ariel-Atom-1821.0.html.jpg" width=500 /img>
I half expect Ariel to sell off the production rights to these one day, and for it to go full-on neo-Se7en.
I guess my definition skews a lot older then most. I imagine 'classic' as a specific time period, like 'jet age' or 'malaise era' or the 'half-used bar of soap period'. So, it just stops somewhere in the '50s:
<img src="http://www.coachbuild.com/gallery/d/17182-2/Chapron_Delahaye_235MS_Coupe_1954_01.jpg">
1954 Delahaye 235.
I was just punching in dates and seeing what leaps out as 'classic' to me.
<img src="http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/uploads/cars/jaguar/3110697.jpg">
1957 Jaguar XK 140.
I suppose '(almost) any Morgan' works, but that's just because they're the same cars they were to begin with. The XK really goes back to 1948. I think the Delahaye is about the newest design that I'd consider classic.
Clearly, the best classic car in the World right now, the wonderfully understated, over engineered subtly beautiful sumptuously decorated inside, Volkswagen Phaeton, the only car to bring out a rictus of joy every time you drive it, best sampled in V8 or W12 form. I am in love, so would you be.
<img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8236/8465947708_ca12c6cba0_z.jpg">
The color is even called "Classic Red"
It's in a different vain than most, here, however:
<img src="http://i394.photobucket.com/albums/pp29/mckellyb/Asperfectasitgets.jpg" width="400">
I know I'm probably commenting on this too late to really reach anyone, but I believe the term "classic car" would be relative to your age. A car manufactured before I was born would be a classic. Obviously, cars manufactured after I was born would not be classics… that makes my cutoff 1984. My 1969 Camaro is a classic car, my 1998 Trans Am is not. If, however, I had a kid and passed my TA on to him or her, then to them that Trans Am would be a classic car. It's really not that hard to fathom. I'm 28, when I got my Camaro a week before my 15th birthday it needed a lot of work (tranny, engine, rear end… the whole nine yards) It was also 29 years old at the time. My Trans Am was a brand new car.. Now if I had kid right now, when he's 16, that 1998 Trans Am would be approaching 31 years old. Definite classic in his eyes, not so much in mine.
Just you wait! Just you wait…
<img src="http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f58/rx7gs85/gertsfeditsmall.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo gertsfeditsmall.jpg"/>
Just you wait! Just you wait…
<img src="http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f58/rx7gs85/gertsfeditsmall.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo gertsfeditsmall.jpg"/>
Have you ever considered about adding a little bit more than just your articles?
I mean, what you say is fundamental and everything.
Nevertheless think about if you added some great graphics or video clips to give
your posts more, “pop”! Your content is excellent but with images and video clips, this blog
could definitely be one of the greatest
in its field. Fantastic blog!