Just musing really. Maybe it's just me but I find cars can go from being contemporary to looking old fashioned really suddenly.
If you take some commonplace models such as Mondeo mk3s, Peugeot 406s, Previous model Passats etc. they all were and still are a daily sight on the road. So commonplace as to disappear against the roadscape. The latest one to look old fashioned in my opinion anyway, is the Mondeo Mk3. Strange thing is though, it has happened since Christmas. Before that they looked OK. Now they suddenly look old. Shame really.
Some cars stand the visual test of time better than others whereas others age very quickly when their production run stops.
For example, I think a Volvo 850 estate still looks reasonably modern where another maker's early 90s model might look positively antidiluvian.
It's the speed at which it happens I notice. One day a car looks OK or even modern, the next it's yesterday's child.
I suppose that's the good news for the canny second hand buyer really. Buy something which has lost its youthful looks and you might be getting a very good car for sweetie money.
I'll stop rambling now and give others a chance.......
|
|
it's all subjective really. Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder but I agree some cars date faster than others. There are also some models which look better than their successors. I think a mark 4 Golf looks better than a 5 and I don't like the latest Mondeo compared to its predecessor.
|
The more common a car becomes, the more you see of it so it bores very quickly. A rare car not seen very often always turns heads.
|
|
this is true. I saw a Yugo the other day and was amazed. Amazed it was still going in this day and age. Had I seen it 10 years ago I wouldn't have given it a second glance.
|
|
|
Aye true, the other related musing is how long do cars stay in the wilderness of oldfashioned-ness before they start to generate nostalgia and imminent classicism ?
Nothing whatsoever to do with still wondering how long I should hang on to my old Mondy at all you understand......
Although another 25 years or so should crack it I s'pose....
;-)
|
I always get nostalgic when I see a car from the 70's. They just bring back memories of my child hood. I suppose rareness breeds notsalgia to a point. Occasionally I'll see a car and think "blimey, I haven't seen one of them for years".
It can still bring a smile to my face even if I hated the car at the time it first came out.
I also have a wierd form of admiration for anyone driving a slightly off-beat, old, deeply unfashionable/unpopular car.
|
|
|
|
|
"I don't like the latest Mondeo compared to its predecessor"
I agree, I'll never tire of waxing the curves and angles of mine, I think the new one looks too much like the old Renault Laguna mated with a Saab! The Mondy 3 sure is a unique piece of design with its triangles and circles in the rear light cluster and that aggressive front end, I think Ford did themselves proud with it compared to the mark I and II versions!
|
|
|
|
|
It's the same old story, familiarity breeds indifference. There are certain mainstream models that appeared stunning when new but lost their shine through sheer volumes sold. I thought the current Astra and Mondeo mk3 looked terrific when new but soon became just part of the scenery. As I've highlighted in a previous thread, most modern cars have incredibly bulbous front ends to accommodate for pedestrian safety legislation so I'd say that the more slender designs are now looking old-fashioned, although not necessarily in a bad way.
|
I like and need estate cars. Always had a quiet hankering for a Citroen DS Safari or a Volvo 121 Amazon estate. They would probably both be rubbish by modern standards but I just sort of like them. It is almost certain that I shall never know for sure which is probably for the best.....
BMW E39s look old now too to me anyway. Wouldn't stop me having one. Fine cars, but suddenly ageing.
|
I think Honest has nailed it by stating a lot of cars look similar these days due to safety design contraints.
I can't think of the last time I saw a car that absolutely blew me away with its design apart from the Sierra replacing the child like drawing that was the Cortina mk5.
|
|
|
|
Know what you mean, the Mondy 3 suddenly looks out of date because it doesn't have the current wedge shape that all the mainstream designers have decided we shall have.
And doesn't it look odd having decent size windows and good visibility?
If you think about it all the makers now copy one another once one of them starts a trend.
If you debadged the latest Avensis, Insignia, Mondeo, Mazda 6, Audi's, Passats, etc you'd have a job to tell them apart.
Same with the previous generation of cars from the same makers, they all looked fine until one of them came out with a new wedge shape and that was it, overnight obsolescence.
I find it all rather amusing with estate cars now on offer from those makers, the previous models were usually very good, cavernous sensible load carriers replaced by stylish coupe style estates that have nowhere near the loadspace of the previous generation.
And as for visibility, especially to the rear with the current crop of motors, forget it, the peculiar shaped door mirrors don't help but they do look nice..;)
You single out Volvo, and rightly so, their larger models don't follow anyone else's style so they aren't subject to this fashion change, so their cars take much longer to age.
If you see a top range 960 24v estate in the right colour its still a very handsome vehicle.
(is this like Cheaney for example boots/shoes, timeless quality, fashion not needed or wanted, compared with all those cloned imports?)
IIRC didn't Volvo start the trend for massive rear lights going up to roof line with the 850 estate?
From a personal point i still like older MB's as they had their own unique design, didn't try or need to copy anyone else.
Almost hear them saying 'this is how we think a car should look, if you don't like it buy something else'..
But they've gone the same way and joined the merry trendy cloned look, pity.
|
|
Yes old Mercs can still cut a dash. I passed a P reg Audi estate on the motorway the other day. What would that be, 10 or 11 years old ? Bright red bodywork and obviously well cared for car. Still looked handsome.
|
There are certain cars that are classics (e.g. the original Merc C-class or a mid 90s Audi A6) that as long as they are well cared for almost don't date.
There are cars that date before they come out. The Insignia has that dreadful falling boot line that reminds me of a 1990s Buick. I reckon it won't last long like that.
And then there are the cars that are simply fine when they come out, date slowly and then you don't see them for about ten years. When you do see them, you see them in a different light. Where a line looked fine, it now looks weak, a boot lid you thought was flat, now droops. Something like the last Vauxhall Viva, which was no worse looking than anything else, but now looks too thin.
All subjective of course. I don't expect you all to agree.
|
|
I had one of the Volvo 9 series estates a long while ago. Not a posh one such as you describe GB but a humble 2.0 SE. Fantastic load lugger but handled like a brick. Also had a couple of 850s, one of them was a TeeHee5. Different animal.
Edited by Humph Backbridge on 26/02/2009 at 21:59
|
but handled like a brick.
I'm almost certain the last of the 9 series gained the rear suspension of the 850 in higher specced models and this helped the handling.
Of course i might have misread that somewhere.
My sister still has our old 940td estate and there's still no rust on it.
Does anyone remember Volvo's superb 240T saloon race car affectionately known as ''the flying brick''.;)
|
Does anyone remember Volvo's superb 240T saloon race car affectionately known as ''the flying brick''.;)
IIRC that was a rally car from the seventies.
Lots of talk here about the Volvo 940 Estate, I notice. (Never the saloon!)
I quite often pause to admire mine and think how elegant it looks - in a Volvoish sort of way.
|
|
|
|
Its all down to the purity of the orginal design and looks. If its designed right it will last
|
|
IME cars tend to look outdated about a week to 10 days after I buy them. Doh!
|
I think it's a hard question to answer as there are no hard and fast rules. The Peugeot 205 still looks as good 25 years after it appeared as the day it was launched. The original Mini hasn't aged at all, and I couldn't agree more with the comment above about the original Audi A4 which is still a very handsome beast, particularly in Avant guise. There's also the original Renault Laguna and the E46 3 series which still look fabulous over a decade after they appeared IMHO. For the latter two, I wonder if it's because they are both more attractive designs than their immediate replacements.
The other thing is that all these designs are fairly simple, and without any unusual detailing. But then that doesn't explain why the mk1 Focus and Megane II still look so good
|
"The other thing is that all these designs are fairly simple, and without any unusual detailing. But then that doesn't explain why the mk1 Focus and Megane II still look so good."
I think that explains exactly why the MX-5 and Z3 still look good, whereas the Z4 looks (and probably is) contrived.
If you mean the Megane with the rump, DP, that will have to be a matter of beauty being in the eye of the beholder!
|
Yesterday I saw a Daihatsu - don't know what model but the name may have ended with 'ia' - that has to be just the ugliest car I have ever seen. And it was brand new. Huge slabby sides, tiny windows and a front end that looked like it had been designed with a hammer and chisel. All in some weird metallic pastel shade that defied description. I had an almost overpowering urge to kick it.
But I guess any car that looks as horrendous as that is outside the norms of fashion and style and will sell steadily, new and secondhand, to the sort of people who genuinely do only want something mechanical and practical to take them from A to B.
There must be something in this because the last car that excited in me the urge to kick it was a Daihatsu as well - the 'Move', more than 10 years ago...
|
Yesterday I saw a Daihatsu - don't know what model but the name may have ended with 'ia' - that has to be just the ugliest car I have ever seen.
Yes, Daihatsu seem to enjoy endowing their cars with bizarre names that leave you thinking they must have confused their Rs with their Ls like in the apocryphal story about the naming of the Mitsubishi Starion. Maybe it's to distract from the horrible styling as with the Terios, though I actually quite like the one you refer to which is the Materia.
Mercedes generally seem to achieve timeless styling, the old SL and the W126 (late 80s S-Class) being favourites of mine along with the W124 Coupe. There are obviously exceptions such as the W210 which to me just looks cumbersome. BMWs seem to slide from fashionable to sink estate incredibly quickly. Maybe the E60 will change that. I'm on my second and I still find the styling and especially the detailing (shoulderline, headlights, rear lights) as fascinating as when it appeared 6 years ago despite being widely copied.
|
|
|
"ugliest car I have ever seen"
That would be the Materia, then! Maybe it's so bad, it's good, but I quite like it. Reminds me of something American and customised, but I suspect it's quite practical. Who wants a blancmange, anyway..?
|
|
|
|
If you mean the Megane with the rump DP that will have to be a matter of beauty being in the eye of the beholder!
I agree it's contentious and "different" rather than beautiful, but I don't think it's aged much.
Someone mentioned Bangle's Beemers. To my eyes, the E90 has dated far quicker than the E46, particularly from the rear (the new Audi A4 has similar problems - the back looks like something from the 70's) , but the 5 series is the opposite. To my eye, the E60 has made the E39 look very dated, which really is as it should be I suppose.
Cheers
DP
|
|
|
|
|
"a boot lid you thought was flat, now droops"
Probably just the effects of age. It's the same with people.. :-)
|
|
|
|
|
IIRC didn't Volvo start the trend for massive rear lights going up to roof line with the 850 estate?
>>
They made them popular in Europe, GB, but Pontiac were first with the Transport
tinyurl.com/brayb6
|
Pontiac were first with the Transport
thanks i think for the link CC, a reminder of just how dreadful some US vehicles used to look.
I remember quite a few odd looking US motors around, not living too far from Molesworth or Alconbury.
My Camaro came from Alconbury when the servicewoman owner returned home, purely out of interest.
Haven't lights got just silly now though, Pugs headlight clusters will soon be back to the A pillar, and SW's tail lights to the rear door frame, and the Nissan Note's rear lights go a good way forwards along the roof, absolutely ridiculous and i'm sure will date very quickly once the fad has hopefully passed please.
A few mentions of how the E60 BM has made the E39 look old.
I don't agree, the back of the new car looks neat, but go round to the front and the whole grille/headlamp treatment looks unfinished.
The E39 was a handsome saloon car from any angle, especially in standard form before being chavved up with fairy lights, probably one of the nicest looking German saloon cars of all time to me.
And look at the hideous replacement for the 7 series (not sure of designation but big brother to E39), looked like it sported a shelf from Ikea stapled atop the bootlid, and blowed if MB didn't do the same shortly after.
For some reason BMW estate's just don't look quite right even when new, the new 5 series is no different, and the complete new 3 series looks awful and ungainly compared to the E46.
|
|
|
|
|
It's a good test of style, IMHO. The Chris Bangle stuff will look idiotic in a few years (if it doesn't already) but there are plenty of older designs that hold up OK. Deliberate fashion statements usually don't.
My favourites include the NSU RO80, Citroen GS estate and Ferrari Daytona. I'm pretty taken with my Mazda Xedos, too - a bit anonymous perhaps, but very nicely proportioned, and doesn't seem to have dated at all.
|
The classic case for me was when Rover replaced the 600 model with the 75. Both quite nice looking cars but the 75 looked more dated than the 600 it replaced.
|
|
|
I think it helps when a model is replaced with something uglier. I think the last Mondeo looks much smarter than the overstyled new one. Similarly, the first Skoda Fabia was a great-looking little car (provided it was the hatch), whereas its replacement is a complete mess. As others have said, simple shapes and pleasing details (the Mondeo's tail lights; the curves around the Fabia's rear wheels and tailgate) do a lot to create a pleasing whole. Same could be said of the Citroen Xantia, from which the Mondeo took its basic silhouette.
And I especially like the 1986 W124 Mercedes E saloon, which looked fresh at the time but didn't try too hard to be cutting-edge, and still looks the business today.
|
> It helps when a model is replaced with something uglier ...
That may be why I still think the 306 is a nice tidy-looking car, a shape inherited from the 205 with very little adaptation. Elegant and free from excrescences. It may be that pedestrian impact legislation was partly behind the design of the 206 and 307, but in the prettiness stakes it was a step backwards IMHO.
|
That may be why I still think the 306 is a nice tidy-looking car
I agree. For what is now a 15 year old design, how good does it still look?
www.306gti6.com/forum/attachments/7286_306_neww_(small).jpg
|
I agree in principle, but in your example I dont;
The phase 1 (up to N reg) looks the best (but only in DTurbo or XSI spec)
I had a phase 2 Vivant and it looked dumpy with minimal extra trim despite having same 5 spoke alloys as above car.
|
|
|
|
I agree it's the simple looking cars that look nicest.
Stylists tend to go through phases where they fiddle with certain aspects of styling to spoil the overall shape. Until recently it was headlight shape, with incongrous and excessively large slashes of blobs cut into the body shape. Now it seems that stylists are spoiling styling with fussy exaggerated wheel-arch sculpting - Mercedes in particular.
70's 'Coke bottle' wingline was a previous manifestation of styling aberation.
Edited by Sofa Spud on 27/02/2009 at 11:10
|
Re. the Peugeot 307.
I quite like the 307's shape. It is one of the few cars that was improved by a facelift.
Usually facelifts look worse than the original - in particular what they did to the Ford Transit a couple of years ago.
|
Re the Mondeo, think the pre facelift models (up to 53 plate IIRC) look very dated now, but bizarrely to my mind post facelift models (before they put the red stripes on the rear lights) still look very fresh and good looking. It was the recessed grille, round fog lights and prefer the wheel trims and alloys of the later models.
Likewise the previous generation Passat, was fantastic looker when launched, but the facelift dated it horrendously to my mind, and for some reason always view the cars as two seperate entities.
What may be an interesting example for this thread could be the Seat Exeo, as is a warmed over last generation A4. From the pics I have seen I do like the look of it, but wonder which will age first- the new blinged up A4 or the fairly restrained Seat (although guess with the Audi familiarity may breed contempt as not sure how well a junior exec Seat will sell).
|
|
I think the new A4 - at least as a saloon - looks duff already. All the lines seem to curve downward, which reminds me of Droopy from the old MGM cartoon. Perhaps I just don't get Audis these days; I used to find them discreetly appealing, but they've gone off in a direction I don't like at all. Volvo is the new Audi. Discuss [somewhere else].
|
|
|
|
I think it helps when a model is replaced with something uglier. I think the last Mondeo looks much smarter than the overstyled new one.
Well said, Sir! I got a "last off the line" Mk 3 Mondeo in preference to the new one (though I had only seen pics and specs) and haven't regretted it for a moment. I think there are quite a few examples of the new model dating faster than the old one, and certainly of the new one being uglier than the old one. I suppose the classic case for me was our Alfa Romeo 164, which was simply perfect in its own way. It seemed inevitable that anything they would do to "freshen it up" would spoil it; and it did!
|
|
|
|
|
Some immediately - e.g. Jaguar, Beetle, Mini and that ludicrous 'cruiser' thing. It's called 'retro', I think - a sort of cop-out automotive designer equivalent of a tribute band.
Others look modern after more than 10 years e.g Audi A6 when parked next to ancient-looking Merc E class and BMW 5 series of the same era [can't think of French or British equivalent]
|
I think the "new" Beatle and the original Audi TT aged the most rapidly
The Jaguar XJ & XKs on the other hand seem timeless
I guess you don't realy find out which are the great designs until a few years have passed
MVP
|
|
Saab too for timeless styling - like it or not. An "aircraft" look (do they still design planes?) and cabin feel about them.
|
Anything slab sided from the 1980s looks ancient:
W124 Mercedes
Peugeot 205/305
Rover 800 (none left tho)
Volvo 740/760
|
Three of madf's four still look pretty good to me - and I was never a great admirer of the Volvo 760 when it was new. I thought the original 800 saloon (not the gawky Fastback) and the family look that extended to the 200 and 400, looked spot-on; conversely, the 1991 800 re-body marked the beginning of Rover's slide into heritage-grille olde-Englande theme park irrelevance.
Jaguar seems at last to be climbing out of that pit. I hope it's not too late.
|
|
|
|
I guess you don't realy find out which are the great designs ...
Are great designs great because lots of people think they are, and therefore buy them, or are some great designs intrinsically great despite not selling very well?
|
|
Maybe a Porsche 911 is a great design because it's been around forever and hasn't altered much. I'll always give a gleaming Porka a second glance.
|
|
|
|
|
and that ludicrous 'cruiser' thing. It's called 'retro'
It always reminds me of a London taxi.
|
|
And yes, there are still Saab aircraft ( tinyurl.com/djztrz ) but it's been quite a few years since the aircraft and car companies shared any more than a name. Not that the car marketing people have let that put them off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I really like the exterior styling of my recently departed Saab 9-3 saloon. However - when you see it next to a 1992 Vauxhall Calibra you wonder if GM lent them more than the parts bin.....
|
Do you not think that colour plays a part?
I have a Mk 3 Mondeo which is Y reg and in excellent condition. It's colour according to the owner's manual is 'Nantucket Grey'. I look after it and keep it as clean as I am able.
Today at my golf club I was parked next door but one to an identical model in a metallic gold finish (similar to the old Ford 'champagne gold'). My car was immaculately clean (I washed it yesterday). The other one was grubby. They looked like two different models. Mine looked reasonably modern, the other looked reasonably dated.
But I suppose that they are both worth about the same (a couple of grand?).
|
|
I agree that older Mercs have a timeless look about them. The Xantia is also a particularly pleasant shape unless with weedy wheels - how Citroen could replace it with the C5 (Mk 1) is beyond me!
|
|
Re Scouseford question on value of a Y reg Mondeo "But I suppose that they are both worth about the same (a couple of grand?).". Glass's guide via Vauxhall values a Y reg Mondeo (depending on model and miles) around £500-600 as a trade in. For £2k you are looking at a 2003 - again trade-in and only very approximate. Not good news if you're selling but of course cost to change is what matters. I think too it re-infoeces what others have said in this thread - some models have dated badly and good cars though they are old Mondeos - whatever the colour - do look old-fashioned
|
Question for me now is ( re my 2002 Mondeo estate that is ) how long do I have to wait until it's a classic and people go misty eyed over it.....
Might be a while I suppose....
For example, I think Cortinas are probably classics by now but Sierras are maybe still just old cars ?
;-)
|
|
Skoda Fabia, immediately.
|
|
Have to agree with the Fabia comment Bintang. Guy across the road has just got a brand new estate one. Probably a fine car but looks horrible. In my opinion anyway. However, if he's happy......
|
I'm glad its not just me then with Skoda's.
Apart from the original Octavia especially the VRS, i find the styling of Skoda's somehow just not right, even the new Superb though a very fine car just doesn't look good, and i dislike new Fabia even more than the previous.
Not trying to cause offence to owners (but managing very well..;), we all like different things.
Is this the VW parent making sure that the better value range doesn't take all the sales from the more expensive.
One might say the same for the downgrading and 'uglying' of replacement Camry approx 2001/2, previous models every bit as good as Lexus and good value, so had to go.
Did the first Octavia sell too well, and cause grumblings at head office, out of all the cars on the Golf chassis i liked original Octavia the best, somehow nicer to drive.
Edit....i saw my first Clio estate yesterday, now thats a boring bland looking car too.
Edited by gordonbennet on 28/02/2009 at 10:52
|
"previous models every bit as good as Lexus"
Agree with you there (actually prefer to Lexus, which look as though they're trying too hard) and with earlier general comments about the recent revised Mondeos and Fabias, which replace much better-looking versions.
I wonder if the sudden fallout from the credit crunch will improve (extend) model lives, as car makers have less R&D money to play with? Most car designs are pretty well sorted now, and the constant upgrade cycle seems to be one of those things that companies do because everyone else does. Is there any good reason why car designs have to be changed rather than just improved? It's generally accepted that the end of a production run is a better bet than the beginning of a new one, so presumably it's just marketing...
Edited by J Bonington Jagworth on 28/02/2009 at 11:58
|
The styling of Skoda's somehow just not right ..
Perhaps this is very crafty work by the stylists, so that buyers who let their hearts rule their heads pay extra for the 'nicer looking' car? (and badge, of course)
|
Walking through that loveliest of London squares, Bedford Square the other night there were two Merc SLs, of early eighties vintage next to each other and both in pristine nick and they just looked fabulous, albeit helped by the elegance of the surroundings.
Clive James once noted that the design of old Mercs made you believe that the steel in the bodywork was an inch thick and these SLs achieved the amazing trick of not only doing but that but also being effortlessly elegant.
No wonder they were/are the plutocrat's car of choice when the mistress need placating.
|
"the steel in the bodywork was an inch thick"
'Carved from solid' is the phrase here, although I'm not sure that isn't more to do with the careful application of paint! As an occasional model-maker, I sometimes muse on the thought that a true scale model car would have a skin not much thicker than foil...
|
the secret of ageless styling is proportions and basic shapes and lines (for example a front must always look "happy" with mouth and eyes turning up the right ways) If you muck about with the basics adding slanting lights and kinks and lines that go the wrong way then it will age badly.
|
the secret of ageless styling is proportions and basic shapes and lines (for example a front must always look "happy" with mouth and eyes turning up the right ways)>>
Yes, as proved by the new Laguna which takes the opposite route, and looks terrible as a result.
|
|
|
"Sierras are maybe still just old cars"
For me, the Sierra went from looking odd straight to old-fashioned. The 3-box version looked quite handsome in some colours, IMO, but I never got on with the jelly-mould one...
Mind you, if you could find one that hadn't oxidised itself, it might be worth something!
Edited by J Bonington Jagworth on 28/02/2009 at 20:20
|
|
|
|
|
I think that cars have become significantly 'bulkier' in recent years with taller bodies, larger overhangs and higher waistlines. Because of this, manufacturers feel the need to fit larger and larger wheels to keep things in proportion. For example a last-gen Vectra or Insignia would look decidedly weird with anything less than 16'' wheels, with 17'' and now 18'' alloys commonplace on mildly sporting models. In the past, 15'' wheels or 16'' at a push would be fitted to high-performance cavaliers and sierras and still look pretty big.
|
|
It's all in the mind of the person with the money to buy the next model.
|
I think the problem now is with the car companies that keep updating the same basic shape.
Most Audis, VW Golf and Passat, BMW 3-series are recognizable descendents of cars that where around 20 years ago, and when the design is updated the one that has gone before is immeadiately old hat.
I long for the days when you could get excited about a new model coming out, rather than knowing with some accuracy what it will look like.
|
" the same basic shape"
One of the few sensible things attributable to Clarkson was his remark that BMW didn't make different cars, it just made the same one in different sizes. Ford seem to have picked up the same idea, lately...
|
One of the problems when trying to answer a question like this is that when you look at a older car, your judgement tends to be clouded by the fact that you know it is not a current model. Even if you try to put this out of your mind, the fact is still there in the subconscious, well for me it is anyway.
One example is the Mazda 6. I was considering buying one about a year ago, before the current model appeared. I thought it was a good lookiong car that looked pretty much up to date. The day I saw the new one, the old one looked dated in my mind, but it wouldn't have had the new model not been around.
One car that has aged well in my mind is the Alfa 156 which in my book is one of the best styled saloons ever.
|
"your judgement tends to be clouded by the fact that you know it is not a current model"
Works the other way for me!
|
|
|
|
I prefer the looks of my 04 plate mazda 6 to a new one. To me the new one is ugly, which is a shame as I am in the market to purchase a new vehicle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
To me a car never looks old fashioned style-wise. What I notice is that after a couple of years they look (and are) old fashioned technology-wise.
Edited by L'escargot on 02/03/2009 at 15:26
|
I was wondered about this about the Astra
Years and Years ago someone on our street had a brand new Mk2 GTE, it was around a G plate ( I think) and i always thought it looked brilliant very modern.
Then the Mk3 while it looked modern, came out, and I still prefered the look of this Mk2 GTE -
I see lots of MK3's now that are simply looking very old and tired - and sometimes when I see another MK4, I compare it to the Mk5 (Astra H) im sometimes worried that mine is going to look the same way but i cant make my mind up.
Ive seen some Mk4's in this mushy pea green colour, and it makes it look dated -, but some astra's in Silver, Red, Black, Dark Blue seem to look still modern - I have to admit i dont think the style of the rear lights helps - that the bit i least like lookswise on the Mk4.
Now that the Astra 6 is coming out soon i often wonder how dated my Astra G is going to look
|
The Astra B is probably the best looking Astra ever, by virtue of it being a close copy of the Alfasud, with a bit of Citroen GS at the front!
They drove terribly though. SWMBO had a basic 1300 which she replaced with a lovely looking special edition GTE 16V in metallic burgundy, black leather, BBS wheels and Recaro seats. Very quick in a straight line but terrible damping and a bit scary round the bends as the steering was so vague. Went the way of so may others - joy-riden never to be seen again!
But still, lovely looking!
|
The Mk2 Astra GTE that was on our street - was absoultly brilliant, it was a metallic silver/grey - it had not smoked lights on the back but fine black lines through the lens, so it looked different - im very sure that the bumpers where colour coded as well - and this was a brand new Astra it was fantastic, and I always thought that was about as modern as you could get.
But when I first saw the Mk4 (G) I again thought you could not get more modern, ( I never really took to the Mk3 shape although i thought it was modern looking i just thought boring, but now its not modern looking at all) - and although i think the Mk4 (in the right colour) is standing to the test of time pretty well I just hope it wont look as tired, and "old" as the Mk3 does which has done very quick IMO
|
The mk2 GTE is still a good looker in my opinion, and has aged very well. When cars get to this age, you have to look past the fact that most of the ones you see are tatty, or tastelessly modified. On the rare occasion I come across a tidy, standard one in that lovely metallic aubergine colour, it makes me want to do something stupid, like buy it!
Someone posted a photo of theirs 'back in the day' on Pistonheads. Scroll down to the first pic. See what I mean?
tinyurl.com/ddq5mj
:-)
|
them pics look brill - I agree one in a good condition has aged very well - but on the basis of that
Do you think the Mk4, is somehow based on the Mk2 where Vauxhall "going back to their roots" after the bland looking Mk3
Therfore the Mk2 does not look that much out of place - and do your remeber the deawoo cars that where made using the same tools as the Vauxhall Astra Mk2 but sold when Vauxhall where making the Mk3 (and possibly) the Mk4
|
|
|
|
I again thought you could not get more modern
Reading these comments brings home to me how difficult it would be for makers to sell cars if so many people weren't sucked into buying the 'modern'. Nearly all of them know that in about 5 years the car will look stale, so they go out and repeat the cycle. A few models sell because they are really good cars (to drive, that is), but not many maintain that aura indefinitely.
The Astra comments illustrate that a car can look great but not be worth driving ...
|
|
|
|
|
