Irresponsible Classic Car Mags

[TerryG]

I quite like reading about modified cars, I find the work behind getting modern running gear in to a classic car interesting.
I would agree that a zetec engined MK1 escort isn't really a classic any more and restorations are definitely more in keeping with the "scene" but it's still interesting.
Perhaps suggesting engine swaps as a way of improving economy is a bit of a strech, calling the article upgrading your classic would probably have been a better headline.

[karlsgazelle]

I don't want to cause controversy with my first post on this new forum (hello all), but:
Why would you want to drive your classic on a motorway anyway? I always choose the scenic A and B roads, take my time and try to enjoy countryside.
Having said that the automatic Gazelle with 1725cc engine is well up to keeping up with modern traffic, even catches some young kids in their hot hatches by surprise in the traffic light derby.
My "Practical Classic" is for everyday use, so I don't see anything wrong with modern seat belts, uprated brakes etc. I still enjoy the sound of the engine and the funny looks

[Gary Stretton]

Hello Triumph Driver,
forums can be the devil's work and policing them a full time job in itself, as we can all testify.
If you don't mind I'll respond to your 'feedback' of our article here to set the recored straight for the owners whose cars were featured, as you don't post on CM's forum (yet?) but you bought the mag. Interesting that.

They're advocating ruining the originality of three perfectly good cars for what? Then of course we require brake upgrades to cope with the extra power... what rubbish they fill the heads of young enthusiasts with these days in the name of speed. It's totally pointless illustrating the simplicity charm and economy of small 50s cars then immediately putting this down and recommending fitting bigger engines for, it appears, no real reason.
I thought Classic car mags were here to preserve cars, and to leave the botching and modifying to hot rod mags or Max Power mags?

Our article advocates no such thing. The engine upgrades are listed as possible recommendations as already performed by enthusiastic owners of the marques featured. The gorgeous cars we featured are original cherished examples and we've celebrated them as such.

Irresponsible forum postings can drive a pointless wedge between enthusiasts.
As for preserving classic cars – have you signed our Reshell or Die petition yet? Please do.
Maybe decaf coffee next time.

All the best,
Gary Stretton, Editor. Classics Monthly.

[Joloke]

Its a hard one to answer this
I agree with triumph driver but on the other hand sometimes there are good reasons for a transplant

If our Wonderful Government (excuse the Sarcasm) keep moving the goal posts before too long our old original engines may not be able to meet emmisions at all

Then if the fuel keeps climbing even though we may only use our cars every so often we may not even be able to afford to use them at all

If a newer engine keeps the car going and on the road in the public eye im all for it,better that than it be cubed as part of a "Criminal and Barbaric" Scrappage Scheme Cull

Jodie

[Dave3066]

Why would you want to drive your classic on a motorway anyway?

My classic is my daily driver and my only car. I do enjoy driving it on A and B roads but the motorway is still the quickest way to get from A to B so I drive on motorways. I'll be driving 600+ miles on motorway this weekend to visit friends down south. The P6 is the consumate cruiser though

Dave

[TriumphDriver]

Sorry Gary, I'll clarify a few points: firstly I should make it clear this wasn't an attempt to denigrate your mag by posting on another forum where your readers or staff couldn't reply - I don't go to, or post, on CMs forum for my own reasons (there are only so many you can go to or post on in the course of the usual day) so I just use this one as a general classic car forum with no preferences or villains.
On the opening page of the article there is a small box beside each car with Market Value, recommended upgrades, and common faults. The word says recommended upgrades, not suggested or possible. This appeared to me as an occasional reader of the mag (no subscription, I used to get it every month but have now dropped to maybe every second or third issue) that you can't wait to get to the upgrades. A small footnote at the end of the article may have been a suggestion as to future modification, but to put it right on the first page, beside the photo of the car to which it refers, made me feel it was being pushed as the first thing to do if you ever buy one.
My intention was not to drive a wedge between enthusiasts, but to highlight what is becoming all too pervasive in our hobby: UPGRADE UPGRADE UPGRADE. Those of us who prefer cars as they were originally often feel sidelined, and many of the features commence along the lines of: "first thing I'm going to do is to do away with the woefully underpowered engine... the terrible brakes... the rough suspension..." This is how the cars were; I'm not saying they were perfect, but I feel that buying older cars and then modifying them immediately to make them compete with modern traffic on todays fast roads is becoming too common in our hobby. As a Triumph enthusiast I meet new club members who want to buy a car, but then - with no experience of the original car or its' characteristics whatsoever - want to replace or upgrade the engine. The Herald has to be 1500, the GT6 has to be 2.5 litre. WHY? Because everyone else is doing it, and the magazines are plugging it. It's often a losing battle trying to explain why the original drive is a much more satisfying experience to many, and I fear that more and more owners are buying the cars for the wrong reasons - not for the nostalgia, or the experience, but as cheap motoring - a modern car with free road tax.
This was my personal opinion, based on my interpretation of the article, and posted on a forum for discussion between like-minded enthusiasts, nothing more. I may be wrong and I welcome your input, but it's how I saw it.

[Seth]

... who want to buy a car, but then - with no experience of the original car or its' characteristics whatsoever - want to replace or upgrade the engine.

Might sound odd coming from me but I'm right with you on that one. An almost roadworthy car can very quickly become an unfinished project and one very small step away from frag-fodder.

My classic is my daily driver and my only car. I do enjoy driving it on A and B roads but the motorway is still the quickest way to get from A to B so I drive on motorways.

Agreed. Mrs_Seth likes to be able to get home from work before she'd need need to leave again. She does have a summer A/B road route for part of her journey though, when she fancies it. I drove my Hillman to Brighton and back a couple of weeks ago. I headed down there in the early Sunday morning so went straight through the centre of London and down the A23 through Brixton/Croydon etc. Coming back mid afternoon there's no way I'd do that route and expect it to be as quiet so took the M25 route around. The two journeys took a very similar time but if I'd have come back the way I went it would have taken a lot longer.

[mr rusty]

I have a theory on the upgrade-your-classic mania. basically, it's because nobody makes 'bad' cars anymore and even a £500 banger is in general a pretty good car now (well my Rover is, anyway...) and people have got to used to 'good' cars.

There's a whole generation of people now who've never known anything other than quiet comfortable fuel efficient cars with good brakes, pas, decent lights, etc, who look in a classic mag, think they like the look and style and image of the cars but have no actual experience of them...... they do a bit of research, buy one for lots of money, and are somewhat shocked by the experience of actually driving them and then want to make them drive as close to their modern car experience as possible.

Take for example my daughters Metro- now to me it's something I'm used to, a modern car in my book, but to her it's positivley prmeval! The driving school bmw mini has a six speed box- the Metro has 4 on the floor, elbow grease powered windows, and not even an intermittent wiper setting: now to her that's dark age tech. It came as a real shock to her that even good cars were like that not so long ago

But then again I may be wrong!!

[Luxobarge]

But then again I may be wrong!!

But I don't think you are - you're bang on the money there IMHO.

And it's that "primeval" feeling that I like about classic cars, which is why I'm generally totally with the OP on this one, if I wanted a car that drove like a modern, I'd buy one - heaven knows they're cheap enough!

[Gary Stretton]

Thanks Triumph Driver for your clarifications.

We'll take on board the potential ambiguity of the 'Recommended' heading.

I'm off to tinker with my straight-six, 1964 Mk1 Spitfire, 'modified' by a previous enthusiast in the 1970s, but retained with Mk1 brakes.
When I restored it 12 years ago I made sure it had the 'stop' bits to match the 'go' bits. Power without control is a hedge.

Have a grand weekend.
All the best,
Gary