Best aging car thread?

are you kidding? that model has aged awfully, I would've put that as one of the worst aged cars. Everything pre-2006 Audi is generally atrocious looking.

Pic related looks good after 13 years.

looks like my sonata shitbox

>bugeyes
>aging well

maybe the CLK, but not the rest.

ya, nah m8

Such a unique look for a car, don't really find that body style anywhere else with it's huge front hood

CL and CLK both look gorgeous

>took trip off

ya nah m8 I only see teenage bitches drive those shit boxes

Still highly resemble the newest ones, and they're 15 years old.

...

>huge front hood

what are roadsters?

and the shape is a pretty unique, i will agree.

This is incorrect.
This is correct

First gen is ugly as fuck tho.

>it's 11 years old
>had two major restyles throughout its life
>still looks new
Giugiaro really knows how to design cars.

I know most people hate them, but I like them, and I stand by them aging well.

Granted, 90's era Mercs have probably aged much better

...

I like first gen

Had a friend who owned one, always made me want one for myself.

early ones had great engines, then later on they turned into shit.

almost 15 years old and still looks relatively modern

not really

aging well implies they still look in place compared to modern automotive design, which they don't

>big ass square halogen headlights
>generic mercedes wheels

they look really old.

SL might be a competitor though, it certainly looks newer than it actually is.

The front is really awkward looking, especially the GP one.

Round light Mercedes have aged worse than any other Mercedes period. Especially the W203 and W210.

I really want one m8. You seem knowledgeable m8 what to look for?

>aging well implies they still look in place compared to modern automotive design

I would disagree with that. "Aging well" doesn't have to be exclusive defined as older cars that still look modern/newer than they are.

It can also be cars with designs that still look aesthetically pleasing years/decades after they have gone to market. A timeless design doesn't have to look modern to be striking or amazing. Obviously not all designs age equally. Plenty of people thought the Aztek looked great when it first came out, but a 190e cosworth is always going to look great.

i hate to argue with you, LPG

but your mercedes fanboyism is showing

and yeah, if you consider how aesthetically pleasing a car is a factor of how well its aged, SOME of the older mercedes fit just fine

essentially the same deal as BMW's, look out for one with a decent maintenance history that wasn't abused.

as i said earlier, R50 minis had the best engines, but the wackiest interiors with 2 spoke steering wheels.

later minis are more prone to electrical issues and problems with the turbo engines.

>tfw no clubman

Of course it is, I love older Mercs, hence why I think they have aged well. Fully aware most people don't see it the same way

I just don't agree with the definition of 'aging well' being exclusive to a car still looking modern. You have plenty of great designs that don't look 'modern'

Non-Merc related, I think the Viper has aged well.

...

...

Fuk u my carfu is b e a utiful

lol.

1994 called.

It said fuck you.

Gen V Preludes and I also agree with this user.

never was a fan of the V. while it fits the classic Prelude body lines, I preferred the Gen IV

Can I hang out here

How do these handle compared to say, an E39 or an E34?

>they still look in place compared to modern automotive design
modern design a shit
to be timeless all you have to avoid is tacky gimmicks

Honestly, and this is coming from an audi enthusiast that maintains a 1995 urS6

Like shit. They are a highway/high speed car. Engine out way over the nose, pretty god damn heavy, etc.

But

That fucking power. out of a 2.2L motor. Amazing torque. Noise can't be beat.

Couple mods to cope with the tendency to understeer and some heavy meats and they do alright. I run big continentals and newer S4 wheels on my car and you can push it through corners pretty well.

Car is a decade old yet still looks like it belongs right next to the modern lineup

...

the 300zx has aged incredibly well in my opinion. Really hope that if nissan ever does make a new Z they redesign the body to look more like the 300 rather than the ugly as sin 350/370s.

...

more z porn

That's a facelifted one, maybe 2005 or something.

...

ageing well =/= not ageing at all

these threads are always filled with old cars that aged like shit

>released in 2001
/thread

that's an RX7 lol

I can't believe you think that aged well.
those headlights were dated the moment they rolled off the assembly line.

I think you meant to post the Acura tl

this is the only one you got right

afik that's a concept. all miats were verts, Verts can't age well.

yes

no

yes

yes

LOOOOOLno

I said that's an RX7. not a miat

>Based on a '94 concept
>still looks good

>pic unrelated

...

Hello Mehmet, nice to see you enjoy life in germany. Good.

R50 minis were a rover design, hence the interior.

> thinks a RX-7 is a Miata

These threads are ALWAYS fucking disaster.

Either people just post cars "they like" and don't get the topic at all or they just shit on anything the other posts even when it does have a timeless design.

Every time, like a clockwork.

The bloating of cars automatically destroyed any potential there might have been in "timeless design".

Since the mandatory beltline increase took place in the early 2000s every car before that will instantly seem "dated" because they have big windows and seem more sleek.

>people just post cars "they like"
yes because posting cars they don't like would make more sense

aged well =/= looks modern

>Viper
The dream lives on... :(

can't believe Veeky Forums is still this easy to bait

so true.
thanks pedestrians!

ageing well means it looks much newer than it really is.
so a design that was ahead of it's time.
yes, certain technological advancements can date a car but a 1985 ford sierra with flush glass and led lights will still look old

One of the worst designs in modern cars desu

...

>yes because posting cars they don't like would make more sense
you don't fucking get it, idiot.

>Wheelly_McWheelgap.jpeg

I do get it, your implication is that there is some overarching truth to picking cars that have aged well, which is shit. Aging well is something that comes down completely to personal taste

>being a stancetard

first gen was best gen, it just got more bloated and deformed over time

>this car is over 60 years old
just letting that sink in

sadly, this.
if someone had the idea to make a normal sedan with 90's style proportions while being completely up to date in ever way it would still look like a dated car.
that shit ruined cars in so many ways.

The bug eye benzes aged so bad they look older than they are.

When I see a egglight c-class it looks 90s as fuck in that outdated bubbley way

>being a gaptard

>wheel travel is immoral and all manufacturers who design for it are dumb

Even as a huge fan of the Turbo Mopars, the LeBaron hasn't aged that well. It's old and looks ancient.

This thing is around the same age and looks much, much newer and has aged miles better.

Ageing well can just mean it holds it's own in terms of looks and value even after a significant amount of time, usually at least 10 years.

At least, that was my interpretation of it. I'd consider the 2003 Camry to be a car that "aged well" because it doesn't look terribly offensive and will always have some of the highest sales numbers and strongest reliability records to back it up.

Did I have to go this far down the thread to not see a Citroen DS? Step it up.

>style is immoral and all manufactures who don't include excessive wheel gap are dumb

we can do this all day, but that horrendous wheel gap will still look like shit.

Panhard 24

get out with ur miata

>ugly as shit when it was new
>still ugly as shit today

Technically, I guess you're right.

...

Both cars from 2001.

Both cars butt ugly but the one on top doesn't look like a 15 years old car and the one on the bottom does look almost a decade older than it is.

They could have honestly held off the R34 Skyline design till now & just released it as a 2015 or 2016 model.
The angry look would look right at home competing with new Camaros, Mustangs, & Challangers

>They could have honestly held off the R34 Skyline design till now & just released it as a 2015 or 2016 model.

Lol, no.
The car is not tall enough. Also, the sides are not bulgy enough. People would think it is unsafe and pedestrians would be scared of them, too.

The facelift was 2007.

...

If time has shown us anything, it's that Detroit likes to dwell in the past. They've considered this up to date in 1989. Not 1974. 1989.

They still look kind of up to date because they're pretty much style icons - if you like the current styling or not.

If you hate it you could also call them main culprits instead of icons.

still surprisingly expensive for such an old shitbox

...

how's that expensive for a 5 series?

because it's just a fucking family car around here and not looxoory like in burgerland

>2003
>almost 200k
>only 2.0l engine
>black steelies
>almost barebone
>previous owners sucked all life out of it

Dude, it's a fucking shitbox and almost 5k is too much for it.