I......Don't Know!

I was reading the "Sad but true" thread and I was gonna reply there but, I thought my comments might have gotten overlooked there, so I started this new one to say I.......don't know, but I think the word that's missing when we talk about, "will there be any new cars deemed classic?", is "comparable".The AACA says the last "true"classic was built in 29 and there's only one model, a Hudson. The antique insurance companies say 25 years makes it a classic, (any car). They won't turn you down if you want to drive your 1965 4 door ford fairlane that only has 15,000 miles on it, but, is it

a "classic" or just a well preserved car? I think the word classic pertaining to autos has other words built in like "special", "gorgeous","WOW","hand built",or "how many of these did they make?". A classic car should move you in some way like in the design or how well it was made or what impact that particular car had on the auto industry and just imagine if the 1965 Fairlane was a 2dr. convertible! Getting back to the word "comparable". Can new cars compare with say even 1 decade earlier? Well they seem to be made better. The engines seem to be. Double the life and triple the mileage of the 90s. The seating sure is real comfortable and and there's an overwhelming amount of amenities to be had COMPARED to older cars. But as they have advanced in some areas the designers and engineers have cheapened, (lightened) others, be it for gas mileage or cost of manufacture which is something that as you go back each year was less and less of a necessary consideration.Come one, plastic bumpers? They've even convinced us that it's as strong as spring steel that is, if you consider the ENTIRE FRONT END as being the bumper. Just tap them and you've got a 2 grand bill or more. For a bumper?. On a prius? Convertibles will always seem to be the transformation that makes any year car desirable but, does a 2007 mustang convertible compare to a 1966? Both are nice cars but with one BIG difference. The amount of PLASTIC. Although PLASTIC sounds a lot like CLASSIC, there just is no comparison to popping a machine formed one piece door panel on to a door in two seconds to a panel whose top is made of metal attached to a masonite panel covered in, two pieces of sewn vinyl, three pieces of chrome trim, a metal chrome handle, foam arm rest and screws. My point here is that older cars just had more of a human touch involved. they spent more time (even on an assembly line) building them. My 1966 Olds toronado began it's way to being a car in 1958 and was a finished product 8 yrs. later. Never...gonna...happen...again! Parts were made of solid metal .I had a 1996 jag and, I bought a 2001 with a cracked grill, I wanted to swap them, the 96 was made of all stainless, the 01 was CHROME PLATED PLASTIC. Remember when computers were heavy and expensive? Well now they're lighter and cheaper and they used them to make cars to be the same but, that dang word cheaper keeps coming around,(although not in reference too their cost!). Enough of this jibberish(or is it G). In my OPINION the last production car to be a comparable classic was the 1975-79 Mark 5 especially the Diamond jubalee edition. Big,Classic lines enormous engine and gorgeous. The last car that could be what it wanted to be just because it could was the 1994 Cadillac although, even so, it was highly plastisized and then.......poof! But then again if you grew up with nothing but plastic for your car them, HMMMMM CLASSIC, PLASTIC, I guess for them it'll be the new "solid brass". But dad, Whatta ya mean you didn't have cell phones? The smart ones that know REAL quality will buy one that's at least 40 years old. There's more to write but I can't go on. Hoping to hear some of your views Bud