Generational change

6 replies [Last post]
drubie
Offline
Joined: 2011-06-01

The e-type discussion and the "how old" discussion reminded me to ask a question of other readers of Classic and Sportscar:

If you're generation X, do you care much about 1960s dross like Gordon Keebles, ropey Mark II Jags and things like GTOs?  None of these were really part of my childhood yearnings.  As a kid I wanted a 512BB / Countach / XJ-S.  As a young man when I first got my drivers license it was Alfa GTV6 / Sierra Cosworths / HDT Commodores.  The MGB was largely regarded as a rusty joke whose only saving grace was the folding roof, but it's become revered and sought after for reasons that still escape me (I mean, it's still slow, leaky and unreliable).  The MX-5 made it irrelevent to guys my age.

I suppose the reader demographic for C&SC skews toward the geritol / denture set but I find it harder to justify buying it to read another story about "oh goodie best british sportscars".  I suppose the UK industry having died sometime in 1990 doesn't help matters but where are the long, rambling articles on the Cosworth cars, the crazy Skyline GT-R story, the Toyota Supra, the "forgotten Ferraris" from the long and (ok, kinda boring) 1985-1995 era?

Where, more importantly, is the coverage of all the bonkers Japanese hot hatches (the Suzuki Swift GTi, the Toyota Corollas, all of these hold seeds of things like the WRX and the Mitsubishi Evo).   The sillier US cars (the Jeep Wagoneer story remains largely untold despite having been in production from 1963 to 1991), The death of the muscle car is a fascinating story nobody has published in C&SC.

C'mon, make me want to buy it again!

Dinsdale Piranha
Dinsdale Piranha's picture
Offline
Joined: 2011-05-24

I can see where you're coming from but I'm not so sure that it's as simple and clear cut as you imagine.  I started driving 25 years ago and so I have a particular attachment to those cars that I either owned or lusted after at that time, however, my passion for classic cars covers a much wider time span.

I really don't think that every generation the magazine should dispense with a whole selection of cars and replace them with the equivalents from 20 years later.  Just because I grew up with them it doesn't follow that I want to pick up C&SC each month to read about Capri Lasers, MG Maestros and Astra GTEs.  I used to have no real appreciation of, or enthusiasm for, pre-war cars, but having read and collected the magazine since the very first issue I have developed that interest by reading features that brought them to life for me.  Should future readers be denied the knowledge and insight of Mick Walsh talking about a 1905 Darracq in order to make room for more recent and familiar metal?

Even as a devout reader I find that C&SC can't cover everything that interests me and so for my love of American muscle cars I subscribe to a couple of US magazines and for my '80s Ford obsession likewise there are other publications.  If a classic is well loved or interesting, or historically important enough then it can pretty much be guaranteed a place in C&SC at some point, but lets not disregard 80 years worth of vehicles just because they belong on someone else's bedroom wall. I read the magazine to learn about cars that I don't know about rather than those that I already do.

Mind you, I'm with you on the MGB loathing, hateful, hateful things.

MrBenovich
MrBenovich's picture
Offline
Joined: 2011-04-12

@ drubie (and referencing Dinsdale Pirahna) - What he said...

drubie
Offline
Joined: 2011-06-01

OK, I didn't mean throwing out the baby with the bathwater - the pre-war car stories are always interesting.  What I think needs to be done is for the C&SC staffers to buy a new Top Trumps card set.  Have a look at these flickr pictures of a 1980s Dubreq top trumps "supercars" game and tell me the cars haven't been done to death?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/retromotoring/sets/72157600004835322/

Now I'm pretty sure it isn't done consciously, but wow!

Dinsdale Piranha
Dinsdale Piranha's picture
Offline
Joined: 2011-05-24

Maybe I'm missing the point here.  There are a small number of the cars featured in that Top Trumps deck which have made a number of appearances in the magazine but surely the reason for that is that they were, and remain, iconic vehicles.  There is obviously something special about them which many years ago deemed them to be worthy of making the final cut for Top Trumps glory and since then they have been the subject of magazine articles because of the following they have.

Surely some cars get greater coverage than others on merit rather than because they were around when the editorial team were going through puberty?  If it was a generation thing then as well as Maserati Boras and CSLs we would have a magazine full of Hillman Hunters, Vauxhall Vivas and Austin Maxis. 

Later cars are often covered, just by chance I'm reading the Feb 2007 issue and that has a feature on BMW M5 Touring v Audi RS2, both cars which were only 12 years or so old at the time.  There are numerous examples of more modern cars being written about but they need more than just being over an arbitrary age to justify space in C&SC.

James Elliott
James Elliott's picture
Offline
Joined: 2011-03-11

Apologies to Greasmonkey. Your post complaining about the spam sadly was a victim of collateral damage in removing it.

Hope you are not too offended.

n/a
GreaseMonkey (not verified)

James Elliott wrote:

Apologies to Greasmonkey. Your post complaining about the spam sadly was a victim of collateral damage in removing it.

Hope you are not too offended.

Good, I expected if the post was removed, so would be the reply. Glad to see you are on to them!

Chris M.