[goatless]

Originally Posted by The Champ

Just what about a Ford Model T or A that would be considered to be of the highest quality or outstanding?

Some cars are just old cars. Some are desirable old cars. Some are true classic cars.

Just because the state of Connecticut doesn't understand what a classic car is, doesn't make any old car a true classic. Connecticut doesn't even use the "certain level of desirability" that you used in your definition of classic.

It just has to be an old car to have "classic" status in your home state. They really aren't "classic" plates, they are "collector" plates.

Ok. You and U47 must be great fun at parties.
Maybe you should go around and correct everyone who uses "classic" to incorrectly describe every old car that isn't on a list that was created by a room full of snooty old guys 60 years ago.
You can start right here on this website. Notice that the headings for the different sections say "classic". Perhaps you should lobby to switch them to "old"?
Next you can hit the insurance companies, car dealers and every other business that uses "classic" in their marketing.
Then, hit all of the state agencies which improperly use the "classic" language in their description of old cars.
Finally, you can post a representative at every car show, cruise night and any other place where people congregate with their old cars, so they might be fined every time they use the word "classic" to describe a car not on the officially approved list.

Talk about burying your head in the sand?!

[The Champ]

Just because I understand the difference between "classic" and "collector" doesn't make me a snooty old guy....

[The Champ]

Just remember when I first learned that the early GTO's were Milestone cars.

Back in 1994, Ron Miller was invited to show his '64 Convertible at the Milestone Society show in the Twin Cities.

He won best of show (over Duesenbergs and Bugattis) in a car he drove to the show....

[goatless]

Originally Posted by The Champ

Just because I understand the difference between "classic" and "collector" doesn't make me a snooty old guy....

Next job for you... start correcting everyone, everywhere that says "motor" when the word that they really mean is "engine". It's ok, I'll wait...

[Goatracer1]

I don't like LS swaps but it's not my car. Do what you want to your own car. Neither of my old Pontiacs are stock. They have Pontiac engines but I still get crap about not leaving them original. Neither are rare so, so what? Don't like new engines in old cars? How many people pulled out straight 8s and installed 389/400's?

[jerry455]

I am pulling a Chevy engine out of my Pontiac. It is an '86 Grand Prix 2+2. It originally came with a 305 4 barrel Chevy but it just seems to me that a Pontiac will be a better engine. Everyone has been trying to get me to do an LS swap into it but every G-body it seems is getting a LS these days. Don't get me wrong I love the LS family of engines but when I think back to the best times of my automotive life there was a Pontiac engine involved. I am putting an Edelbrock headed, 455+, roller cammed Pontiac in it. I may try to keep the 200r4 in it for a while but when that goes I will put a turbo 400 in. I know this car is what many here would not call a real Pontiac anyway because it did not come with a Pontiac engine but that is OK. This will be how I would have made the car if I could have ordered it. It will have some newer technology built in because I want to drive the heck out of it even some drag and autocross. Everyone should enjoy their car what ever they want to call it. It is what makes you happy that is important.

[Formulajones]

Motor motor motor motor motor motor motor

Classic classic classic classic classic classic classic

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by goatless

I'm not burying my head in the sand. I like my old cars to have old motors. I like my old cars to look and feel like old cars.

Some people like the idea of an old car. They like the styling. They like to tell people they like old cars. But then they want to get rid of any of the inconveniences of an old car. They want to have the looks of an old car, but they really want a new car.

All of my old cars are full of old tech. And yet I drive them all the time, everywhere. They start every time. They handle and stop well enough to drive in modern traffic. What would I gain by trying to stuff them full of "new technology"?

I see guys all the time- stuffing their car full of tubular control arms, big brakes, ridiculously big tires and wheels, LS motors, etc., etc. What do they gain over my "out of date" "head buried in the sand" old school car? Nothing. Most of them use their car less and drive them slower than I do.

All the great new technology has a place. And I'm glad to see that hot rodding is still alive with the newer cars. For while in the '80s and '90s it looked like technology was going to kill hot rodding. Just don't think that people are "burying their head in the sand" if they don't want to use it.

Originally Posted by goatless

I guess I don't really understand the point of the original post then?


So are you saying that even though I don't like something, I have to admit that is better than original? Using your example, I strongly disagree. First, I actually like the seats in my LeMans. They are quite comfortable, despite not having huge side bolsters and 15 way adjustability. Additionally, the new seats I often see retrofitted into old cars are usually quite a bit bulkier than the old seats forcing them to make the passenger compartment more cramped. As a 6'1" guy, I don't need to make the seating position any tighter. So, upgrade? Not to me.

Yes, there are things that I do consider upgrades. Better stereo, front disc, overdrive, among others. But not when they're taken to stupid levels, ie: Speakers molded into every surface and a trunk full of amps, or six piston calipers and rotors so big you need to use 19" wheels just to clear them.

I won't even get into why I don't think the LS swap is an "upgrade".

New best posts of the year!!

[LEGACY_GN]

I have love 60's and 70's classic muscle cars and their out of control driving characteristics. Makes them exciting to drive always feeling like your handling a caged beast that could kill you at any moment.

Having said that I also own a 1987 Grand National that the only thing original on it is the engine block, which even that is bored over. I built it to handle and perform like my CTS V, while retaining the original motor, albeit heavily modified for more power.

They are different completely different experiences both of which I absolutely enjoy. I just never saw the Grand National as a muscle car in the sense that I see older cars so it handling bad just didn't fit the persona especially with an automatic transmission and turbo 6.. However, I see no problem with anyone modifying their car the way they want. Only thing I don't agree with is putting Chevy LS1 engines in a Pontiac, (or a Grand National) but to each their own.

[Nickv]

Good for you. Just because I'd rather see a real Pontiac engine in my classic Pontiac instead a me too Chevy, makes me an Ostrich so be it.. I also hate when some hotrod dude with a 32 Ford coupe has POS Chevy in it or vice versa.. I call it lazy.

[U47]

Originally Posted by goatless

Ok. You and U47 must be great fun at parties.
Maybe you should go around and correct everyone who uses "classic" to incorrectly describe every old car that isn't on a list that was created by a room full of snooty old guys 60 years ago.
You can start right here on this website. Notice that the headings for the different sections say "classic". Perhaps you should lobby to switch them to "old"?
Next you can hit the insurance companies, car dealers and every other business that uses "classic" in their marketing.
Then, hit all of the state agencies which improperly use the "classic" language in their description of old cars.
Finally, you can post a representative at every car show, cruise night and any other place where people congregate with their old cars, so they might be fined every time they use the word "classic" to describe a car not on the officially approved list.

Talk about burying your head in the sand?!

OK you win. If you want to call a pair of ski's a snowboard or a paddleboard a surfboard or call a bi-plane a mono plane, a rocket engine a jet engine, or a boy a girl. I get it.

[ho428]

I tri nos tu nevur cerekt othars languge scills, is jus knot perlite an no won id purfek.

[skullbucket]

I've met several "classics" at car shows and they were not cars!

[Bob Hall]

Originally Posted by Nickv

I also hate when some hotrod dude with a 32 Ford coupe has POS Chevy in it or vice versa.. I call it lazy.

It's ok in a 47 Ford Coupe though, right?

[salem1912]

Yep

A true Classic!

[tripower]

Originally Posted by U47

OK you win. If you want to call a pair of ski's a snowboard or a paddleboard a surfboard or call a bi-plane a mono plane, a rocket engine a jet engine, or a boy a girl. I get it.

As long as you are good with the idea that a "classic car" is subjective, and is based ones opinion, he wins. If you are going to use the list you copied from the AACA as the de-facto standard for determining IT IS, or, IT IS NOT a classic car, then I guess we loose. We loose because many of us who decide to have our own opinions on something forgot to refer to a list already created by the claimed expert group. So much for recommending a favorite movie or a song to a friend, if it is not on the list of Oscar winners from the Hollywood types of the MPAA or on the list of Grammy award winners, it must suck!

[The Champ]

I guess MN is a little smarter than CT when it comes to licensing old cars....

The Minnesota DPS offers:

Pioneer plates for vehicles made before 1936.

Classic plates for vehicles made from 1925 to 1948.

Collector plates for vehicles: Vehicle at least 20 years old. AND Made after 1935.

Street rod plates for vehicles: Made before 1949. OR Made to look like a vehicle from before 1949.

I guess I consider calling a "collector" vehicle a "classic" the same thing as calling a Pontiac engine a "big block". ...

In MN, we also have the option of running Year of Manufacture (YOM) plates.

That is what I run on my toy cars ...

[ho428]

No doubt this is an extraordinary build but there is little to nothing left that makes this a 1969 Firebird, so is it a better 1969 Firebird, or is it even a better car?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqGfChxp32E

[goatless]

Originally Posted by The Champ

I guess MN is a little smarter than CT when it comes to licensing old cars....

If you say so. This pulled directly off of the Minnesota DVS website- "Collector vehicles are to be operated only as a “Collector’s Item” and may not be used for general transportation. Generally driving to and from collector events (shows, parades) is acceptable."

Here in CT, I can legally drive my "classic vehicle" whenever and wherever I like. I like CT's rules a little better.

BTW, thank you to you and U47 for taking this discussion so far off course because you disagree with a commonly accepted usage of the word "classic". I think I've made my point and I'm done wasting any more time on it. You can keep going, if you like...

[skullbucket]

Originally Posted by jerry455

I am pulling a Chevy engine out of my Pontiac. It is an '86 Grand Prix 2+2. It originally came with a 305 4 barrel Chevy but it just seems to me that a Pontiac will be a better engine.

But, two wrongs don't make a right.
Replacing the stock Chevrolet engine with a Pontiac engine is the same as replacing the stock Pontiac engine with a Chevrolet engine.
Its just not the same if the Chevrolet is the stock engine, kind of like a 403 Olds small block in a 79 Trans Am is OK if it came with it.
Anyone with a pulse would know an 86 G-body came with a bow-tie under the hood.