Do the Intrepid/Concord/Vision get the respect they deserve?

Discussion in 'Concorde' started by David E. Powell, Jan 14, 2006.

  1. They constantly seem to be low on the resale value column, but
    shouldn't they be considered classics? Every automaker in the last ten
    years had bit off of their designs, from cab forward to their body

    Do they get underrated? I see a lot of them in good condition still out
    there (from the first couple years) and I wonder if they get enough
    respect ;)

    David E. Powell, Jan 14, 2006
  2. No.
    Daniel J. Stern, Jan 14, 2006
  3. Why? If a model introduces a revolutionary design trend that everyone
    else rips off, and becomes dominant, shouldn't it be remembered for
    that? When cab forward first came out, it was pretty huge.
    David E. Powell, Jan 15, 2006
  4. By definition, a classic -anything- is something that has stood the
    test of time and is still desired. This could be a car or a book
    or whatever.

    You need at least 25 years on a car model and year before you can
    even begin to determine if it's a classic.

    For example, my 1968 Ford Torino is 38 years old, and if I put it up
    for sale I'd still get lots and lots and lots of people wanting to buy it.

    But, my 1981 Datsun 210, which was 24 years old last year when I
    put it up for sale last year, nobody wanted.

    Thus, the Torino is a classic, the Datsun 210 was not a classic.

    Ted Mittelstaedt, Jan 16, 2006
  5. David E. Powell

    Dave Gower Guest

    It's hard to predict what will and what won't. We take for granted now that
    the 55 Chev is one (and prices sure state that) but when I learned to drive
    on one around 1960 it sure wasn't. It was a car you crouched down in when
    your friends drove by in their family Oldsmobile.
    Dave Gower, Jan 16, 2006
  6. David E. Powell

    Steve Guest

    They're a GREAT used car buy because they don't get respect. During the
    years they were built, they were among the best cars in their segment
    but simply because they are a Chrysler product they have low resale
    value. Anyone that pays triple price just because a car says "Toyota" on
    it is a fool- the Avalon is/was a piece of crap compared to the LH
    series, but it still has a higher resale just because of the name.
    Steve, Jan 16, 2006
  7. David E. Powell

    Steve Guest

    Sorry, but the last cars that have even the remotest shot at ever being
    called a "classic" (other than the Viper or maybe a C5 'vette) were the
    80s Buick Grand National, or *maybe* the Spirit R/T and Daytona IROC
    R/T. Cars have become generic people transportation devices, and even
    the Mustang and the Charger/Magnum/300C will never be "classics."

    Just my opinion, and I own an early-production '93 LH too. Taint no
    classic, though!
    Steve, Jan 16, 2006
  8. David E. Powell

    Steve Stone Guest

    I vote for the Cosworth Vega !!!
    Steve Stone, Jan 17, 2006
  9. David E. Powell

    Guest Guest

    Based on my enjoyment of my '95 Concord I'd definitely say no.
    Too soon to be a classic.
    The handling is very underrated, it's better than many newer designs.
    The reliability (except for the air conditioner) is the best I've ever
    experienced in a car.

    Given reasonable care I'm sure mine will last the 25 yrs to be called an
    official classic here. I won't still have it then, must move on by at
    least 20 yrs. <:)
    Guest, Jan 17, 2006
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.