Ferrari F40 - apparently not a classic?
A quick thumb through the latest editions of the classic car press will reflect the increasing amount of "modern" classics; this doesn't just mean the archetypal MK2 Escorts or Esprit Turbo, there are owners clubs for everything from Austin Allegros to Ferrari F50s, claiming classic status. The reason for this is that there are certain tax advantages to having a classic car as well as different mindset to owning a cherished rather than simply old car.
Gordon Brown. Evil.
The current UK definition is that any car that predates 1973 is a classic and is therefore exempt from road tax. This ruling has been in place for many years and was a rolling date until Tony and the evil* Mr Brown came into power and froze it.
(Editor's note: *The views expressed by contributors is not necessarily the same view held by DriveWire Publishing Ltd. However after careful consideration, the view that Mr Gordon Brown is evil is in fact correct as far as we can tell.)
There is a different classification for those run as company cars which allows a later year but with different tax benefits as they are more likely to be used regularly.
2CV - apparently not a classic?
With governments around Europe proposing a cull on old cars similar to the Irish one in the early 90s it is important that a decision is made of what makes a classic to ensure that they don't get wiped out by a standard '10 year then scrap' policy. With a stagnant motor industry and the modern excuse of environmentalism they are keen to force people into buying newer cars by getting rid of the older ones.
With this in mind FIVA (Federation Internationale des Vehicular Anciens) has put together a definition which it will use for lobbying both the EU and the Member States on their decisions regarding classic cars. These may include exemptions from road tax, MOT-style tests, exemption from compulsory scrapping orders, through to topics such as ensuring the cars are kept in original condition.
Austin Maxi - a classic?
The all important definition is that the car must be 30 years old, preserved and maintained in a historically correct manner and not used as daily transport.
This definition is set in such a way that only a small percentage of cars qualify in order to help budge governments' stance on set years.
Here are some examples of what WON'T qualify as classics:
>My Citroen 2CV
>Fiat Panda
>Lancia Delta Integrale
>Austin Allegro
>Aston Martin Volante Lagonda
>Porsche 959 and 924
>Ferrari F40
>Ferrari 400i
>MK1 Golf GTi
>MK1 Golf diesel
Aston Martin Lagonda Volante - undeniably ugly but should be a classic.
I appreciate that there is no way of knowing what is destined to become a classic; who would have thought that the MK5 Cortina or the Austin Maxi would be as coveted as they are now? They have to make the definition flexible.
I'm just a bit miffed that my 2cv is not classed as classic. The XR3is and XR2s that are starting to surface definitely have a bit to prove yet.
Basil McCoy of the Northern Ireland vintage car club recently told DriveWire that he believes it's a step in the right direction giving more credence to the condition of the car, effectively making it like a listed building, whilst still being flexible enough to welcome fresh models every year. As a regular user of vintage cars he is concerned about how it will make them disappear from public view as they aren't permitted for daily use.
Mark 5 Cortina - opens the debate "Is it beautiful or ugly?" - wise up it's a munter
On the other side of the coin, anyone interested in an '80s 'yet to be classic' might see the values fall within range as they miss out on the benefits for a few years, so an '82 Silver Spirit in need of a little work might become even more of a bargain than it currently is.
So the question is - what do the readers of DriveWire believe should define a classic? Should it include some place in the collective conscience through competition, social mobilisation and desirability? Should it have had some significant historical effect on a culture? Should it be something that is simply rare but largely unidentifiable?
Should a true classic car be one that catches interest and imagination simply by being a step or two away from the modern computer-controlled boxes and badge engineered clones?
Post your comment
Bob Hume
Seriously - an F40 isn't a classic but a Maxi is? Something needs done.
One of the points listed at the end of your blog asks if a car should be a classic if it's had "a significant historical effect on a culture". To my mind this is exactly what everything from the Model T, Fiat 500, Mini and, yes the 2 CV did. These and many more were all cars that influenced the working class and brought mobility to the workers.
Historically, anything that had such a profound effect on the development of a nation has always been protected by some kind of elevated status so why not cars.
There's also the argument that the term 'classic' stands a good chance of becoming diluted by rubbish (I'll not go any further in case I'm accosted by Leyland fanatics).
maso
For cars like the original 500 and 2cv, small light flimsy cars unlikely to meet modern regulations this is quite important, they do need an equivalent of "listed building" status to ensure their survival. There is a precedent with the AC Invalid car (you remember the old blue 3 wheelers) where the car was recalled for compulsory destruction on the grounds of being unsafe. Classic recognition would protect some of the more socially valuable cars from any future regulations which could put them in a similar situation
maso
The problem is that Evans is a true car nut and cant resist playing with it, by using it as his transport (much to the horror of the collectors) he has placed it beyond the FIVA definition
Captain_Grumpy
GTA Turbo
There is no way they'll ever make me scrap it! There was only ever 341 RHD examples built and I'm fairly sure that there's much less of them around now (partly due to the 'exciting' handling and partly due to the fact that it's a french car with a fair few electrics :lol: ). I've personally witnessed 10s of them being broken for parts, and I know of a few that have been stolen or completely written off.
How can they justify their reasons/guidelines for what can and can't be a classic? Surely the definition of a classic car is one that somebody wants to keep :roll:. I reckon that should be the long and short of it.
PS. I also have an '88 Merc 300E Auto, and I would consider it to be a classic as well!
Post your comment