Inspired by the "best butts" thread. What car was before its time? I mean, nobody paid it much attention when it was built and sold, yet enthusiasts hold it in high regard today?
My pick is the BMW Z8. Largely ignored when it was sold 1999-2003, yet many lust after it today, and the going price of these beauties reflect that.
(http://only-carz.com/data_images/models/bmw-z8/bmw-z8-10.jpg)
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/motoring2/2015/12/04/bmw-z8-rear-large_trans++rWYeUU_H0zBKyvljOo6zlkYMapKPjdhyLnv9ax6_too.jpg)
(http://ag-spots-2015.o.auroraobjects.eu/2015/03/02/bmw-z8-c689702032015130911_2.jpg)
(https://athirakrishnankutty.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/bmw-z8.jpg)
(http://www.bmwz8.us/galleryL/bb_1.jpg)
A pristine example would be one of my top 5 lottery cars.
'69 Dodge Daytona. Chrysler built just 438 440ci examples, and only 70 with the 426 Hemi (508 total). They languished on dealer lots, and a common practice was to remove the nose and wing, and sell them as Charger 500s. Today the 440 cars are $150,000 - $350,000, and it's just a matter of time before a Hemi car breaks the $1,000,000 barrier.
(http://blog.quartoknows.com/quartodrives/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2015/09/Blue.jpg)
Daytona factoids: it's a common myth that the wing was made tall so you could open the trunk. That's merely a bonus of the design. Understanding of aerodynamics of the time dictated the airfoil be placed in clean air... above the roofline. The horizontal airfoil was somewhat effective, but the real reason why it was such a rock-solid car on the superspeedways is the tall vertical uprights. This was the first race car to ever exceed 200 mph average on a closed circuit.
The nose sure was ugly. I guess rare trumps good looking when it comes to collector value.
Quote from: Rockraven on March 07, 2016, 06:13:37 PM
A pristine example would be one of my top 5 lottery cars.
I love the Z8, but I remember it being very well received, at least critically.
How could a car that was featured in a Bond film be completely ignored?
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on March 07, 2016, 08:51:24 PM
The nose sure was ugly. I guess rare trumps good looking when it comes to collector value.
I can think of so many cars that turn this on its head :lol:
I saw the concept of this thread and immediately thought.... EVERYTHING
Obvious one: air cooled 911s. Purists now love to thumb their nose at anything watercooled, as if 964s and 993s didn't languish on dealers lots for years and damn near drive Porsche out of business. Or like air cooling would have continued to pass emissions requirements anywhere outside of Guatemala. Etc. etc.
But the whole "everything used to be sooooo much better" line translates to everything, not just cars. That is the only reason I could see someone paying a million dollars for a 69 domestic anything :wtf: "They dont make em like this anymore" Yea for damn good reason :lol:
No, Im pretty sure most guys plunking down metric tons of cash for old cars know that modern cars are objectively "better" ( that is, faster, safer, quieter, more comfortable, more reliable...)
But that's not what they want now is it? They want something that stirs their blood in a way those flawless modern appliances don't. They want something that excited them, or reminds them of the youth they may or may not ever have had. They want something that's just plain cool- however they personally define that. They want something historical; and a lot of these guys just want an investment they can see and touch.
Pfffftttt, I thank the dear lord getting into my car for its steering, throttle cable, shifter, sightlines, and HVAC after driving new cars.
Quote from: HotRodPilot on March 08, 2016, 04:56:05 AM
Pfffftttt, I thank the dear lord getting into my car for its steering, throttle cable, shifter, sightlines, and HVAC after driving new cars.
Sight lines are one area where old cars are almost universally better; the rest, well your mileage may vary.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on March 08, 2016, 04:35:47 AM
I can think of so many cars that turn this on its head :lol:
I saw the concept of this thread and immediately thought.... EVERYTHING
Obvious one: air cooled 911s. Purists now love to thumb their nose at anything watercooled, as if 964s and 993s didn't languish on dealers lots for years and damn near drive Porsche out of business. Or like air cooling would have continued to pass emissions requirements anywhere outside of Guatemala. Etc. etc.
But the whole "everything used to be sooooo much better" line translates to everything, not just cars. That is the only reason I could see someone paying a million dollars for a 69 domestic anything :wtf: "They dont make em like this anymore" Yea for damn good reason :lol:
Well, maybe I shouldn't tell you a '71 Plymouth Barracuda Hemi convertible goes for $4,000,000+.
Quote from: MX793 on March 07, 2016, 11:53:31 PM
How could a car that was featured in a Bond film be completely ignored?
It wasn't, but it seems like people are looking back, 15 years later, and saying "holy shit that was a gorgeous car".
Quote from: Rockraven on March 08, 2016, 05:20:02 AM
It wasn't, but it seems like people are looking back, 15 years later, and saying "holy shit that was a gorgeous car".
Problem was that the Z3, in higher performance trim nearly equaled it for a fraction of the price.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on March 08, 2016, 06:09:02 AM
Problem was that the Z3, in higher performance trim nearly equaled it for a fraction of the price.
In what measure? Maybe the M Roadster could come close in straight line acceleration, but it had a 20 year old rear suspension when it was new and was a mess to drive if you had to use the steering wheel.
Quote from: Raza on March 08, 2016, 08:01:47 AM
In what measure? Maybe the M Roadster could come close in straight line acceleration, but it had a 20 year old rear suspension when it was new and was a mess to drive if you had to use the steering wheel.
:lol:
Are they really that bad? I was considering a Z3 M Roadster. I like the way they look, but they're pretty rare.
Quote from: MrH on March 08, 2016, 08:27:44 AM
:lol:
Are they really that bad? I was considering a Z3 M Roadster. I like the way they look, but they're pretty rare.
No. They aren't.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-comparison-tests/reviews/a18525/sibling-rivalry-bmw-m-roadster-vs-bmw-z8/ (http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-comparison-tests/reviews/a18525/sibling-rivalry-bmw-m-roadster-vs-bmw-z8/)
Quote from: MrH on March 08, 2016, 08:27:44 AM
:lol:
Are they really that bad? I was considering a Z3 M Roadster. I like the way they look, but they're pretty rare.
They sound like a hoot--very old school and analogue in feel, it seems.
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/bmw-m-roadster-page-2 (http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/bmw-m-roadster-page-2)
But it did finish behind the SLK32 AMG....behind an SLK. It's not a polished car, which hurt it a lot here, but that's not to say you can't have fun with it.
The BMW 8 series wasn't that well received back in the 90s. Now they are becoming sought after. I think that design has aged really well.
(http://www.e31.net/pics/850_23small.jpg)
Clownshoe
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on March 09, 2016, 05:20:53 AM
The BMW 8 series wasn't that well received back in the 90s. Now they are becoming sought after. I think that design has aged really well.
(http://www.e31.net/pics/850_23small.jpg)
Love the 8 series. They can be had pretty cheap too, but I imagine maintenance is pricey.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on March 08, 2016, 06:09:02 AM
Problem was that the Z3, in higher performance trim nearly equaled it for a fraction of the price.
And the Z8 was a special, limited production model...
Quote from: MX793 on March 09, 2016, 06:21:14 AM
And the Z8 was a special, limited production model...
It was, and it was probably worth what they were charging for it.
Still, to have your 150,000 vehicle have its heels nipped by a $40,000 car from your own stable; when they are both roadsters, is a bit of a problem.
It would be like a new ZR-1 barely keeping ahead of a cooking grade Camaro.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on March 09, 2016, 05:20:53 AM
The BMW 8 series wasn't that well received back in the 90s. Now they are becoming sought after. I think that design has aged really well.
(http://www.e31.net/pics/850_23small.jpg)
I have always loved the 8 series. That pillarless window opening is sexy as hell. The styling still looks great and puts the 6 series to shame.
Quote from: SVT666 on March 09, 2016, 11:11:34 AM
I have always loved the 8 series. That pillarless window opening is sexy as hell. The styling still looks great and puts the 6 series to shame.
The 8 series puts pretty much any BMW built in the last couple years to shame.
Pontiac G8 ;)
Quote from: thecarnut on March 09, 2016, 04:29:26 PM
The 8 series puts pretty much any BMW built in the last couple years to shame.
Yeah, but I was specifically talking about the car that is essentially the modern version of the 8 series.
Quote from: SVT666 on March 09, 2016, 04:36:21 PM
Yeah, but I was specifically talking about the car that is essentially the modern version of the 8 series.
Yeah, I had to check myself on that; because I thought you meant the E24.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/07/28/6d/07286d2826ac05ba495ad1d33cd28e3d.jpg)
Quote from: Soup DeVille on March 09, 2016, 04:39:27 PM
Yeah, I had to check myself on that; because I thought you meant the E24.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/07/28/6d/07286d2826ac05ba495ad1d33cd28e3d.jpg)
Sometimes the E24 looks awesome (like in that picture) and sometimes it look rather...stocky, I guess. Some angles just don't flatter it. But some make it look fantastic.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on March 09, 2016, 05:20:53 AM
The BMW 8 series wasn't that well received back in the 90s. Now they are becoming sought after. I think that design has aged really well.
Really? I don't remember it being poorly received when new. Criticized a little for being very heavy, but still very highly acclaimed.
I also think of the 8-series much more fondly than the E63 and whatever the new 6-series code is.
Original NSX. No one bothered to buy them when they could be had new. Now they are sought after.
Quote from: 565 on March 11, 2016, 09:18:02 PM
Original NSX. No one bothered to buy them when they could be had new. Now they are sought after.
Disagree. The NSX was loved when it came out.
Quote from: SVT666 on March 11, 2016, 09:26:06 PM
Disagree. The NSX was loved when it came out.
:hesaid:
I think a lot of old cars are liked now because of boomers looking back at their childhoods with nostalgic rose-tinted spectacles & assigning classic status to very ordinary cars. Thinking of my childhood. The only interesting car my dad had was a 1970 Renault 16TS: FWD 5-door hatchback with good handling, good ride & tons of space. Considered today to be ahead of its time for its era... and it was seen back then as being ahead of its time.
Quote from: Rockraven on March 09, 2016, 05:59:50 AM
Love the 8 series. They can be had pretty cheap too, but I imagine maintenance is pricey.
No need to imagine, it is a nightmare. Plus, while I get that performance numbers aren't everything, a same year M3 was literally as fast and more fun to drive than the top dog 8 for like 1/3 the price. I'm still working on a clever term for this, but the 8 is the kind of car best enjoyed with the eyes and ears, not through ownership.
That said, the 8 is easily, easily BMW's best design outside of a 3.0 CSL. Nothing else comes close.
As much as I like the design of the 8, I'd put it behind the 507 and Z8.
Quote from: MX793 on March 15, 2016, 09:02:56 AM
As much as I like the design of the 8, I'd put it behind the 507 and Z8.
Yeah, I'm a big fan of the 8 series, and I think the design falls behind the 507, Z8, E85/6 Z4, E30 M3, M1, 3.0 CS/CSL and E24, just to name a few off the top of my head. Wouldn't say no to any of them, really, but I think the 8 series just isn't as striking as those cars, nor as timeless.
Quote from: MrH on March 08, 2016, 08:27:44 AM
:lol:
Are they really that bad? I was considering a Z3 M Roadster. I like the way they look, but they're pretty rare.
I used to have a Z3 with the 2.5L I6 (smaller engine at the time, I think the larger engine was a 2.8L). It was a blast to drive and handled fantastically. I am sure it wasn't as buttoned down as an S2000 or a Boxster but it was a fun car than handled very well for its time IMHO. :huh:
Quote from: SVT666 on March 11, 2016, 09:26:06 PM
Disagree. The NSX was loved when it came out.
Loved by the press. Not as much by the public. All agreed it was a really well put together car, but it could be beat in most objective performance tests by cars costing a third of what it did.
They killed it with that damn long ass gearing. Would have been like 10-20% faster at street speeds with proper gearing. You can hit 80 in 2nd
IIRC, it was still a match for a 911 or 348.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on March 22, 2016, 07:01:58 AM
Loved by the press. Not as much by the public. All agreed it was a really well put together car, but it could be beat in most objective performance tests by cars costing a third of what it did.
Not so sure about that when it was released in '90. 0-60 in the low 5 sec range and mid/upper 13s in the 1/4 mile was better than most performance cars, including the Corvette, 911 and 348. One had to bump up to a ZR1 or Diablo or some obscurity (Esprit V8 Turbo) to get quicker, and even then, in many/most comparos, the NSX still won out as it was a typical Honda whereas at that time many super hi-po cars, save for maybe Porsche, still had a foot in the kit car camp. Sure as the one got into the '90s Ferraris, Lambos and even the Corvette, made ginormous strides, and the NSX was basically the same car, but from '90 - '93/'94 the NSX was a top performance contender.
Porsche and Ferrari buyers have never been about looking for a value proposition;
And the NSX was already more expensive than the vette.
However, what people wanted and expected from a Honda- well...
Wasn't the NSX known for being the first high end performance car that was easy to live with on a daily basis?
Quote from: BimmerM3 on March 25, 2016, 02:42:33 PM
Wasn't the NSX known for being the first high end performance car that was easy to live with on a daily basis?
Yup! And it was reliable....
Yeah people are remembering the NSX with rose colored glasses in terms of performance. Hence it being a good example of being better loved now than then.
But how many people remember how well it actually performed in magazine comparisons from that time?
Luckily some have been scanned to refresh our memories.
The NSX put up decent numbers when it first debuted, as it was the first of that final generation of Japanese high end sports cars to be released, but once the Z32 300ZX, FD RX-7, and definitely the MK IV Supra Turbo came onto the scene, the original 3.0L NSX quickly became nothing special in the performance department.
Look at this comparison test. NSX dead last in 0-60, slalom, midpack in pretty much everything else. MK IV Supra Turbo dominates everything, FD RX-7 and 300zx not to far behind.
(http://www.300zx-twinturbo.com/Articles/mt1/mt793_10.jpg)
And in another comparison on track, the NSX was midpack in track performance, it beat the 300zx and VR4 around the track, but was slower than the Vette (regular C4 vette, not ZR1), and the RX7 around the track
(http://www.300zx-twinturbo.com/Articles/mt3/MT920450.jpg)
Also interesting in this article was they asked the editors with 40K what car they would choose, 4/5 of the reviewers picked the 300zx, when another 25K was added, only 1 would defect to the NSX, quoting that it's his only chance to own one, and even at 100k, they would stay with the 300zx.
(http://www.300zx-twinturbo.com/Articles/mt3/MT920446.jpg)
(http://www.300zx-twinturbo.com/Articles/mt3/MT920452.jpg)
What the NSX did do well at that time was drive very well compared to it's contemporary peers. However I think that it falls into the category of better loved now than because if you asked people on the internet even today, they would say that the NSX is still one of the best handling cars of all time. In truth it handled well for that era. But because the NSX stuck around for so long, it's possible to compare it's handling directly to cars of a newer generation when both were still sold new (and the NSX was long in the tooth).
In those circumstances, the deficiencies of a car designed in the 1980s are clear.
Take a look at this comparison against a 996 911 Targa and C5 z06.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-comparison-tests/reviews/a18738/mixing-and-matching-acura-nsx/ (http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-comparison-tests/reviews/a18738/mixing-and-matching-acura-nsx/)
"However, on Laguna Seca's slippery track, it was a different story altogether. I felt that the Acura was out of its element when pushed hard on the slick surface. Intially, the car understeered heavily into tight corners, followed by the rear having a nasty tendency to swing around before you can say "Oh *%$#!" Even with the car's traction control switched on, I found myself victimized by its unpredictable nature, experiencing trouble through Turn 6 and the Corkscrew, thus seriously hurting my lap times."
"Millen, a master in the wet, felt the same way. "I found myself much more tense in the NSX than in the other two. The steering gets heavy and a bit numb, with the car developing a good amount of push. Then it can go into snap oversteer. That said, most owners will probably never experience this as it happens only when the car is pushed to its limits on the racetrack."
Compare this to the C5 Z06 , a car that I know and love. Quotes from the same comparison test:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-comparison-tests/reviews/a18740/mixing-and-matching-chevrolet-corvette-z06/ (http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-comparison-tests/reviews/a18740/mixing-and-matching-chevrolet-corvette-z06/)
"Millen and I ranked the Z06 first in the "lapping" department primarily because it did everything — accelerate, brake and turn — in an effortless manner. The Z06 was obviously developed at a racetrack as the braking and handling are really well tuned. It encouraged me to push it hard very quickly. The harder this car is pushed, the better it behaves," Steve commented.
For me, the Z06 was easiest to hustle around the track simply because it behaved so predictably. Keep all inputs smooth and the Z06 will not get you in trouble. Because of logistics I logged only one timed lap in the Z06, but it was still good enough to be my best of the day. The car did feel significantly heavier through corners than the others, but its balance remained neutral, and the tail wasn't as eager to swing around."
My recollection of the NSX back in the day (according to mags) was mediocre performance but a very nice car. My recollection of the Z06 was the second coming of jesus for only $19.95. :lol:
Of course, the NSX was over a decade old without significant update when the C5 Z06 came out (and was 7 years old when the C5 came out)...
From '90-'94, the NSX was in pretty rarefied air. Then Honda didn't do anything with it and everyone else caught up and surpassed it for less money.
Quote from: MX793 on March 26, 2016, 06:09:08 PM
Then Honda didn't do anything with it and everyone else caught up and surpassed it for less money.
Same with the S2000.......
Quote from: Rockraven on March 07, 2016, 06:12:06 PM
Inspired by the "best butts" thread. What car was before its time? I mean, nobody paid it much attention when it was built and sold, yet enthusiasts hold it in high regard today?
My pick is the BMW Z8. Largely ignored when it was sold 1999-2003, yet many lust after it today, and the going price of these beauties reflect that.
(http://only-carz.com/data_images/models/bmw-z8/bmw-z8-10.jpg)
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/motoring2/2015/12/04/bmw-z8-rear-large_trans++rWYeUU_H0zBKyvljOo6zlkYMapKPjdhyLnv9ax6_too.jpg)
(http://ag-spots-2015.o.auroraobjects.eu/2015/03/02/bmw-z8-c689702032015130911_2.jpg)
(https://athirakrishnankutty.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/bmw-z8.jpg)
(http://www.bmwz8.us/galleryL/bb_1.jpg)
Oh man, I loved the Z8 back then. They were pretty pricey or I'd have been tempted to buy one.
Three come to mind, one might surprise you.
1956 Lincoln Continental mark II
1958-60 Thunderbird
the surprise: 1963 Corvette split Window Coupe. ritics hated the rear window and for years that lowered the resale value vs. 64-67 models.
Quote from: CLKid on May 06, 2016, 06:00:04 AM
Three come to mind, one might surprise you.
1956 Lincoln Continental mark II
1958-60 Thunderbird
the surprise: 1963 Corvette split Window Coupe. ritics hated the rear window and for years that lowered the resale value vs. 64-67 models.
No surprise. Many butchered the back window to make it look like the '64.
Quote from: dazzleman on May 05, 2016, 08:14:30 PM
Oh man, I loved the Z8 back then. They were pretty pricey or I'd have been tempted to buy one.
You're the only guy here that can afford one.
Be a hero.
Quote from: 565 on March 25, 2016, 11:54:54 PM
Yeah people are remembering the NSX with rose colored glasses in terms of performance. Hence it being a good example of being better loved now than then.
But how many people remember how well it actually performed in magazine comparisons from that time?
Luckily some have been scanned to refresh our memories.
The NSX put up decent numbers when it first debuted, as it was the first of that final generation of Japanese high end sports cars to be released, but once the Z32 300ZX, FD RX-7, and definitely the MK IV Supra Turbo came onto the scene, the original 3.0L NSX quickly became nothing special in the performance department.
Look at this comparison test. NSX dead last in 0-60, slalom, midpack in pretty much everything else. MK IV Supra Turbo dominates everything, FD RX-7 and 300zx not to far behind.
I think that performance numbers become pretty much irrelevant once the cars are at a certain age. In 2016,there's no additional bragging rights to having the fastest Japanese sports coupe of 1994 compared to having the third-fastest Japanese sports coupe of 1994. None of them is competitive by today's standards, so appeal has to be determined by something other than the specs.
Quote from: Rockraven on May 06, 2016, 01:13:48 PM
You're the only guy here that can afford one.
Be a hero.
:lol:
They've gone up in value Dave. You goofed
Quote from: 68_427 on May 09, 2016, 02:51:32 AM
They've gone up in value Dave. You goofed
Yeah, I've given up my dream of owning one. I'll have to make do with an F-Type or Aston V8.
Quote from: Rockraven on May 06, 2016, 01:12:46 PM
No surprise. Many butchered the back window to make it look like the '64.
You know the history. Many younger guys might not.
Quote from: 68_427 on May 09, 2016, 02:51:32 AM
They've gone up in value Dave. You goofed
I guess I did.