Do you agree with Tim Allen?

[Ferrer]

Not sure if the new one is that cheap....or that basic for that matter. Same with Mini or the new Beetle(in general, the remake). The originals were classic because they were made with a premise(cheap, basic, affordable cars with clever engineering like wheels way out there in the corners and light weight), and the nifty handling and fun factor is a side effect. The remakes were made to emulate the effect, but not the philosphy and thus makes it artificial. If you were to say what was supposed to be the new "mini" or 500 in real term, it would be something like a Tata Nano, but you would never see that as a "good car" or a classic...

I mean the 30's and 50's versions of the 500, but I get your point.

There are still small interesting cars that will be future classic. The Toyota iQ I mentioned is a classic case in point, and while not especially cheap it does follow the other principles quite well. The Smart will be a future classic too, if only because it was Mercedes attempt and failure at making a city car.

You may have point though in that cheap, basic, icons may be a thing of the past, especially since in the 50's Europe had just come out of wars and cars were icons not only for their abilities or charisma, but because they gave many people the chance to go to places and this won't happen anymore in Europe or the US. But the Nano, while probably not as able, could fulfill this role and become an icon 50 years on.

[TheScrutineer]

But the Nano, while probably not as able, could fulfill this role and become an icon 50 years on.

The Nano has the same appeal as the old 500, in cheap affordable transport. Great engineering, but dynamically they don't have anything on the original Mini.

[Ferrer]

True but then, the Nano is a tall, small wheeled, rear engined car. I'm not sure it'd be very safe, in either actively or passively sense, to push it to its limits.

To find the new Mini you've got to look at Toyota. The iQ is the new Mini.

[TheScrutineer]

To find the new Mini you've got to look at Toyota. The iQ is the new Mini.

Or you can pay over 3 times as much for the 'Aston Martin' Cygnet

[IBrake4Rainbows]

The Mini was designed to be space economical and relatively cheap.

The iQ is one of those things.

[Ferrer]

And sold at a loss.

[RacingManiac]

I think iQ will be a classic, it basically took the concept of Smart but done better. Nano, I am not so sure. The jury I think is very much still out on that one since in order to be remembered fondly it still has to be good.....It cannot be remembered just as the "cheapest POS I bought"....

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Nano will be fondly remembered but not in the western world - in it's home market it will become the 2CV or VW beetle of it's time - Cheap basic transportation that takes on a a character of its own through journeys made and experiences created.

the iQ is too cerebral I believe.

[TheScrutineer]

The jury I think is very much still out on that one since in order to be remembered fondly it still has to be good.....It cannot be remembered just as the "cheapest POS I bought"....

I think making a dirt cheap car thats actually reliable, drives okay and is available to the masses is a greater engineering achievment than some Yaris/Matiz cross that is the I.Q.

[Ferrer]

I think making a dirt cheap car thats actually reliable, drives okay and is available to the masses is a greater engineering achievment than some Yaris/Matiz cross that is the I.Q.

The iQ's achievement is the excellent packaging in such a small vehicle. Like the original Mini.

[TheScrutineer]

The iQ's achievement is the excellent packaging in such a small vehicle. Like the original Mini.

Can't visualise the I.Q winning the Monte Carlo Rally 4 times! Well, nor can I visualise it rusting or killing all its occupants in a 30mph crash

[RacingManiac]

Nor can I visualize a old Mini surviving in a crash....or even a Nano for that matter...

[Ferrer]

Can't visualise the I.Q winning the Monte Carlo Rally 4 times! Well, nor can I visualise it rusting or killing all its occupants in a 30mph crash

But those were the Coopers, which Isigonis hated.

[Timothy (in VA)]

I disagree. There are definitely cars around today that will be classics down the road.

Some good ones have been mentioned, but I'd like to add a few more to the list. First, the Pontiac G8 - a good car that sold in small numbers and could be considered the last great hurrah from a once-great brand. Second, the Hyundai Genesis (both coupe and sedan) - Korean cars are pretty much ignored by collectors today, but if Hyundai continues on their current course of success, then 30 years from now the Genesis will be remembered as the car that started it all.

Also, there are weirdos who will collect anything. I guarantee that 30 years from now there will be a Pontiac Aztek Club with owners that defend their unusual vehicles as passionately as Edsel enthusiasts do.

[wwgkd]

I think making a dirt cheap car thats actually reliable, drives okay and is available to the masses is a greater engineering achievment than some Yaris/Matiz cross that is the I.Q.

I would agree, if it actually met crash safety and emissions standards to be sold world wide. Since it doesn't, I think the reason it's cheap is that it shortcuts around many things that are required in other markets. Not really a great engineering achievement so much as a cost cutting one. Impressive, but it has to be taken in perspective.

The reason the rest of these cars don't meet your requirements is that they DO meet those standards, thus adding cost, weight and reducing interior volume. 50 years from now, what overweight overpriced monstrocities will be considered normal? Would make even the new Mini seem epic.