Everyone needs a hobby, and if you’re reading Jalopnik, there’s a good chance your passion revolves around cars. If that’s the case, you might be lucky enough to have as nice collection of old cars. But are there any vintage vehicles you’d never add to that collection?
To answer this, we asked you what classic cars you don’t think are worth collecting. And after much philosophical debate about how you judge a car’s worth, these are some of the best answers we received.
“High-end BMWs, Benzs, and Audis from the mid-90s.
“Old enough to be collectible, but then new enough to be stuffed with aging, now unreliable electronics, which will leave you with so many gremlins to chase down that you will never get the damn thing running, like it should anyway. And after your credit card melts from the parts and labor costs so people see you tootling around town in an old-ish German-mobile, who besides you will care? (No one.) It will be a giant waste of money.”
That’s a fairly bleak outlook for anyone who might be considering adding a BMW E39 540i Touring to their collection.
Suggested by: the1969dodgechargerguy
“I know someone’s probably going to take offense, but it’s the Mustang II.”
Ah the Mustang II, the ugly duckling amongst Ford’s pony cars. Maybe one day it’ll blossom into a majestic swan, but until then we can continue complaining about its weird looks, strange Pinto-based origins and diminutive engine options.
Suggested by: jebhoge
“Here are my criteria.
“1: Very common, but not too common. It sold well enough that they were part of the fabric of American life, but not so well that there’s a common ‘my dad had one of those’ feeling.
“2: It wasn’t especially interesting from a mechanical perspective – no really cutting edge technology, doesn’t share any parts with something cooler, that kind of thing.
“3: It wasn’t particularly historically significant. Very few firsts, not really innovative.
“4: From a major manufacturer. Obscurity makes things more collectable.
“5: On that same point, not a weird special edition or country-specific model. The ‘1990s Pontiac Tempest Rule’ – even the most boring car is interesting if you could only buy it in one place.
“6: It isn’t commonly regarded as good or bad. Bad cars are as interesting as good cars, this is undeniable.
“7: Not a centerpiece in a popular movie.
“8: I, personally, don’t like it.
“The extensive list of rules out of the way, my conclusion is that the least collectible car, according to the above rules, is the 1990 Nissan Stanza.”
That’s a thorough list of options as to why you shouldn’t collect a car. I’m kind of impressed that this poster managed to find a car that fit the bill!
Suggested by: citricola
“They weren’t that great, newer generations are much better and don’t cost that much more and they’re not especially pretty. But the biggest strike against collecting them... they were produced in large numbers over many years... which works against collectability/values.
“Also since they are cheap and undesirable, some have been used for 24HoursOfLemons racing.”
It seems that every American icon has its dud generation, and for the Corvette, it could be the C4. Produced between 1983 and 1996, more than 350,000 of these bland C4 Corvettes were made.
Suggested by: manwich
“Digital cars – take your pick of platform or media but collecting digital versions of classic cars is just a waste. Now collecting the media itself is worthy (archiving media that is disappearing because of corporate abandonment or destruction is a major issue) but not the collection of classic cars ‘worth’ the DLC or other cost.”
Car collectors get a lot of stick for never driving their collections. One way round this would be to invest in cars that aren’t real. That’s some big brain thinking right there.
Suggested by: futuredoc
“There were only 300 of these striped tributes to gaudiness, all blue with white stripes. 360 horses were unleashed from under the hood, courtesy of a Kenny Bell blower strapped to the MOPAR 5.9 engine, which wasn’t a substantial leap from the stock 246hp.
“The utility of the vehicle was compromised by swapping out the rear bench for go-fast racing buckets reminiscent of your neighbors clapped-out Integra. At least the outside was tastefully modified with an aggressive front fascia and hood vents.
“The products of the era that came from the Pentastar weren’t stellar for fit/finish/quality; and it still leaves my head scratching that this thing even exists.
“Whatever the cost, no dice.”
Have you ever taken a look at family-sized SUV the Dodge Durango and thought, “nice, but what if it had more?”
Well, if that’s you, then this Shelby-tuned Durango might be the car for you. This bizarre creation was a limited-run sport SUV with a 5.9-liter Magnum V8, which was supercharged to produce 360 horsepower. Tidy.
Suggested by: Scott Pro (Facebook)
“I vote for the Chevy Chevette.
“This one here is for sale from a dealer for... $8,500!
“The last one rolled off the factory floor in 1986, making the youngest Chevette a healthy 36 years old, which definitely makes it a ‘Classic’ in age. But, for the life of me, I can’t imagine why you would want to own, restore, or show off one.”
A lot of posters in QOTD today argued that there was a car collector to fit every vehicle. But few argued with this suggestion that the Chevette should be avoided at all costs.
Suggested by: Knyte
“Four door sedans. Sorry, not sorry.
“Should clarify that I mean 4-door sedans where a 2 door coupe was also available. M5? Cool. 4-door 3 series? Not cool.”
So this argument is that there’s no point in a five-door version of a three-door car if the same company already makes a five-door car. Do you follow?
Suggested by: hangovergrenade
“I’m afraid that I’m going to throw a wide net, here, because as a lifelong gearhead and someone who spent far too long in the parts biz, I saw one trend that was truly ruinous for collectors:
“The combination of emission controls and carburetors.
“The pre-emission era is a no-brainer in terms of fun vehicles, whether you want some big-cube Detroit muscle/pony cars, lithe European sports cars, or even early SUVs. Shelby Mustangs, Ferrari Daytonas, Jensen Interceptors, early FJs, all these and more live here.
“After everyone figured out fuel injection and better ignition systems, you have the embarrassment of riches we enjoy now in terms of 300-500+ hp vehicles in wide varieties and price points and packaging.
“BUT...the middle ground...has 308 Ferraris that couldn’t stand up to a modern hot hatch or even a lukewarm one, Mustang IIs, 130 HP Z-28 Camaros, Corvettes that couldn’t get to 60 in less than 8 seconds, and a huge list of cars that had miles of semi-useless vacuum hosing added under their hoods for purposes even the manufacturers didn’t really understand. That whole era, circa 1975-1990, is iffy at best.”
Did you get that? Don’t bother buying anything made between 1975 and 1990. That’s a lot of nice cars.
Suggested by: CAMartin
“All classics are worth collecting. No matter how commonplace or boring or just plain bad, they all deserve a place in someone’s collection; and to say otherwise is just snobbery.”
Despite these excellent suggestions, the “all classics are worth collecting” mantra was by far the most popular response today. So there you go. There’s hope even for the disgruntled AMC Gremlin owner looking for a buyer.
Suggested by: skeffles