Cars that where better 10 years ago then now

Conor_M1990

Nissan is the one that stands out in Mind since the alliance with renault they have gone down hill big time. Im not on about the performance cars but the normal stuff they sell has gotten worse

ottostreet

Most manufacturers really I think, with the exception of Fiat & Renault I think.
Maybe Opel as well.

I much preferred 90s cars, particularly offerings from Honda, Mitsubishi & BMW. I'm not really a fan of their modern stuff.

lomb

Much of the modern stuff is worse than the old. Numerous worse cost savings/environmental savings are present such as electric power steering as opposed to hydraulic, lightening and cheapening the carpets, using water based paint, ugly designs for fuel efficiency/pedestrian safety that take the character out, putting in aluminium that cant be easily repaired if crashed if at all even on cat D cars, diesel particulate filters etc etc

Id rather an old nineties BMW 3, 5 or 8 series to any of their current offerings looks wise for starters.

MetzgerMeister

lomb wrote: »

Much of the modern stuff is worse than the old. Numerous worse cost savings/environmental savings are present such as electric power steering as opposed to hydraulic, lightening and cheapening the carpets, using water based paint, ugly designs for fuel efficiency/pedestrian safety that take the character out, putting in aluminium that cant be easily repaired if crashed if at all even on cat D cars, diesel particulate filters etc etc

Id rather an old nineties BMW 3, 5 or 8 series to any of their current offerings looks wise for starters.

AFAIK, this wasn't something manufacturers decided themselves but more so it was a directive or something like that to keep pollution down.

I think the modern 3 series (2007 on) is gorgeous compared to what went before it. One of the few modern (mainstream) cars I could see myself buying over the next few years.

Owen

The 3 series stopped being interesting to me when the e46 went off the Market. I hate the e90's cheap and nasty designed-with-a-ruler dashboard, how the door cards don't sit flush with it, or how the centre console doesn't join it correctly. I hate the cheap feel of the steering wheel and plastics used. Even the higher spec cars have inferior leather compared to the older models.

Older cars were made to last, new ones are made to be recycled.

lomb

einheisserschre wrote: »

AFAIK, this wasn't something manufacturers decided themselves but more so it was a directive or something like that to keep pollution down.

Probably was, but I didn't vote for that directive or any of the other co2 nonsense either. Now in the UK they are saying drivers of low co2 diesels are driving car that pollute more so will have to pay more tax! Get them hooked by telling them lies and then screw the public anyway.

Fact is newer cars are more fuel efficient but repair costs and longevity is questionable as are look and quality feel. As paintdoctor says older cars were built to last with standard wear part replacement, new ones are built to be recycled. Sums it up..

peasant

German cars peaked in the late 80' to early nineties (Merc W124, Golf Mk II and consorts) the Japanese about 5 years later.

Ever since cars have gotten cheaper (both to build and to buy (in relative terms to average incomes)) and they suggest better value with the additions of toys and electronic gimmickery that just fails and breaks all the time.

Testament1

The whole environmental issue has really killed car design IMO. Back in the 80's, 90's it was all the rage with manufacturers to be offering affordable, reasonably high performance cars with great character. Nowadays its all about fuel economy, safety, hybrid technology etc and the actual car design suffers greatly as a result. Also far too many cars look alike these days, they seem to be becoming very androgynous.

Pretty much all of the cars which interest me the most have been discontinued which is why when I go to buy again it'll most likely be another 90's car (unless I can somehow find the money for an Evo 7,8 or 9 )

PaintDoctor

PaintDoctor wrote: »

The 3 series stopped being interesting to me when the e46 went off the Market. I hate the e90's cheap and nasty designed-with-a-ruler dashboard,

Yeah, I mentioned a few months back that the e90s interior was pretty horrific for what the car cost. The exterior is much improved on the e46 though I reckon. When/if I buy either they'll be sub €10,000/€15,000 purchases anyway.

johnos1984

RoverJames wrote: »

Yeah, I mentioned a few months back that the e90s interior was pretty horrific for what the car cost. The exterior is much improved on the e46 though I reckon. When/if I buy either they'll be sub €10,000/€15,000 purchases anyway.

That budget has risen a lot for how much you said you'd spend previously.

Do I detect the wheels turning in your head and the immanent departure of the ZT

Nissan doctor

IMO its the globalisation of all the manufacturers that has caused the reduction in quality as everything is standardised and made with cost in mind.

johnos1984

FWIW I think small cars have come on in leaps and bounds in the past ten years, more so than their bigger counterparts

challengemaster

Car styling has really gone to shíte cos of newer safety standards all the time.

af_thefragile

I love the BMW 5series E39.
I feel its so much more sleeker and good looking than any of the models that came after that. Especially the previous model just look big bulky and heavy. The new one doesn't look too bad but still I feel the E39 5 series is the best looking 5 series.

I'm actually seriously considering buying one as my next car. They're selling fairly cheap and look super comfortable...

johnos1984

johnos1984 wrote: »

That budget has risen a lot for how much you said you'd spend previously.

Do I detect the wheels turning in your head and the immanent departure of the ZT

Nope, ZT will be staying for another year at least I'd say. I would fancy an E46 M3 though and I'd also fancy an e92 from 325 up so I wouldn't be saying never to splashing out. €10,000/€15,000 isn't out of the way really for a car, I sold the Celica for half that 3 years ago. I reckon the way things are going 2007 325i will be going for not much over €12,000/€13,000 in 12/18 months. That's a lot of 5 year old car for the money. As an aside if the default comes about they'll be going for less (me being speculative and I'm far from an economist)

Although if I was spending €10,000 ish a part of me would hate not to have a V8 ZT :cool:

bazz26

Nothing is built to last these days. Cars like most appliances are no different. Upto 15 years ago it was common to have a CRT TV in a house that was 10 years or older, if it broke it could be repaired. Look at LCD TVs now, if they break you just buy a new one. They don't want them to last decades, they want you to keep buying them frequently.

johndaman66

PaintDoctor wrote: »

Older cars were made to last, new ones are made to be recycled.

Maybe I'm being pedantic here but is it not fair to say that this change did not happen within the last 10 years...for the very most manufacturers anyway.

johnos1984

RoverJames wrote: »

Although if I was spending €10,000 ish a part of me would hate not to have a V8 ZT :cool:

You know you want to....:cool:
OR a ROVER 75 V8

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ROVER-75-V8-CONNOISSEUR-SE-/270719259909?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item3f08201505#ht_602wt_1139

johndaman66

bazz26 wrote: »

Cars like most appliances are no different.

Its very apparent that a car is an appliance when you see that energy rating indicator on it or in the brochure.

VolvoMan

I think Rovers were better cars ten years ago than they are now, because they existed then. Now; they don't.

johnos1984

VolvoMan wrote: »

I think Rovers were better cars ten years ago than they are now, because they existed then. Now; they don't.

I wonder will we be saying the same about SAAB in 10 years time

The PHOENIX concept has an unfortunate connection with ROVER and its take over by the PHOENIX 4

Eric Cartman

yeah too true op

BMW e38/e39/e36 - miles better than the f10 and whatever other models the new ones are , everything was nicer about them

honda civic - the new one just looks wrong , triangle exhausts - havin a laugh

other cool things like popup headlights , massive bonnet scoops , really bitchin cars like the bmw 850csi , DC2 integra , mk2 lexus gs300 (ant the toyota aristo too - what other decade could that possibly exist in) , the propper e39 M5 , the mitsubishi evo (up to mk6 if im not mistaken) , - all made in the 90s
the mid-late 90s landcruiser amazon , the discovery 2 (not for its mechanics but I think they look bitchin) , the boxier volvos like the 750 , great great cars

VolvoMan

johnos1984 wrote: »

I wonder will we be saying the same about SAAB in 10 years time

The PHOENIX concept has an unfortunate connection with ROVER and its take over by the PHOENIX 4

Possibly, but it doesn't hurt to be optimistic. I'd like to see SAAB survive.

Regarding an actual car; I reckon the V70 of ten years ago was a better car than today. The present one we have really feels like a Ford product and doesn't have the cost no object engineering of its predecessor. You can tell that before it was signed off that a Ford accountant went all over it.

BrianD3

10 year old cars better? People have been saying this for decades. The Rover SD1, P6, P5 and P4 were all at various points hailed as the "last of the real Rovers". I recall plenty of comments about how the Avensis was worse than the Carina, the Primera was worse than the Bluebird, the Sierra was worse than the Cortina. The BMW 8 series that everyone seems to love? When it was new, similar negative comparisons to the old 6 series were made. The 8 was called vulgar, too heavy and its handling was criticised

I've found that car enthusiasts are often very conservative, pessimistic, lash out at anything new, glorify the past and generally spout stuff that you'd expect from a moany taxi driver or ould giffer who reads Classic Car Weekly.

There is little basis for saying that cars are designed to be disposable these days whereas previously they had character and were "built with passion by engineers not accountants". IMO that's naive thinking and seems to be based on a feeling rather than logic.

There are a small number of cars that I'd prefer to their successors (eg Mk1 vs Mk2 focus) but the successor is still better in many areas.

In general the further back you go, the worse cars get. Rust resistance, safety, warranty, 3-5k service intervals, economy, spec. Failure to start in the cold or damp. Engines badly worn by 100k miles (ever wonder why 100k miles is such a big deal for many car buyers, it's because years ago, that was huge mileage. But that sort of thinking is about as relevant today as the idea that Fiats have rust problems)

I'll concede that modern cars with common rail etc. can get very expensive if they go wrong and maybe not are suited to the Irish owners many of whom regard cars as tractor substitutes. Should we drive around in 1985 VW Jetta diesels to avoid these technologies then.

Also, some manufacturers that were once top of the pile (or at least marketed themselves as such) in various areas are no longer top, not because theyve gone backwards but because others have caught up. Eg Volvo and safety. While Volvo might have lost its advantage, a modern Volvo is still far safer than an old one - yet this doesn't stop clowns saying they'd prefer to be in a crash in an old 240 than in a new S80.

VolvoMan

Nah, I still don't agree. I think around the mid to late nineties was the golden period of automobiles. Today we just have garbage that is filled with heavy safety technology on the inside and plastered with LED's on the outside.

peasant

VolvoMan wrote: »

Nah, I still don't agree. I think around the mid to late nineties was the golden period of automobiles. Today we just have garbage that is filled with heavy safety technology on the inside and plastered with LED's on the outside.

I think this is directly related to affordable computer power.

In the 60's and 70' (and earlier of course) cars were designed and built by hand. In the 80's there was enough affordable computer power around to automate the manufacturing and assembly, bringing on precision in big leaps, robot welded seams, CNC controlled machining and all that.

In the 90's the first computers were involved in the design. You still couldn't design a whole car on a computer, but you could use it to check and improve certain details that mere humans simply could not compute. This is the golden period where quality reigned because previously iffy parts/methods could be simulated on the computer and improved.

Then came the decline. Not only was there enough computer power to design the whole car ...there was enough excess capacity to try several different approaches. Component by component could be checked for cost savings, wear and tear could be calculated, and the cost from design to showroom could be tweaked over and over again before the first prototype was ever built and the accountants got a look in not only at the overall cost, but at the cost of every component.