| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/02/2009 05:49:02 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by JulietNN:
Just a little thing Imight point out, which may have been discussed in all the car techy bits.
But sometimes there are huge differences between American made styles bodies and European made Style bodies in the same type cars. |
I did mention that above when I referenced the Series II cars.
Generally, and I'll speak mainly of British cars as I'm most familiar with them, there are Home Market cars, i.e. for Jolly Ol', right hand steer, and the first & foremost, US Spec, which involves all the flaky rules and regualtions of the safety & environmental departments and ROW....or Rest Of World.
Until 1968, the US Spec cars really weren't much different other than having the steering wheel and driver controls on the "Wrong" side of the car, but in 1968, things became much different.
Cars like Triumphs were no longer injected here like they were in England, dual braking systems were required, lights and lenses ahd to be plasticm, and manufactured to certain standards, and in 1971, it just started to get even worse.
Around '78, you pretty much couldn't get a British car that wasn't injected, and without a full complement of safety and emissions equipment which was ONLY for the US market.
Things is, since we were their largest market, they catered to ur ridiculous demands to a certain point.
The collapse of our market for the quirky roadsters killed of many companies like MG, Triumph, Sunbeam, Morris, Austin, and a whole pile of others that never really had much foothold here in the first place. And some didn't even die off completely, they just stopped coming to the US.
Some died entirely......the Austin-Healey 3000, one of the most popular and desirable British roadsters ever made was shot right straight through the heart and dropped in its tracks by the 1968 US standards. No matter what they did, they couldn't get it to pass either safety or emission standards, so they killed it.
|
|
|
|
07/02/2009 06:02:31 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Some died entirely......the Austin-Healey 3000, one of the most popular and desirable British roadsters ever made was shot right straight through the heart and dropped in its tracks by the 1968 US standards. No matter what they did, they couldn't get it to pass either safety or emission standards, so they killed it. |
That was a sad day; for looks alone, that was one of my favorite cars in the world...
R. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 06:10:27 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Things is, since we were their largest market, they catered to ur ridiculous demands to a certain point. |
I'm having a hard time classifying safety features, better mileage, and reduced emissions as "ridiculous" ...
Message edited by author 2009-07-02 18:10:58. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 06:16:59 PM · #79 |
So I guess what you're all saying is that my Ford Taurus is a superior machine? Am I reading you correctly?
Sweet. I think so, too. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 06:40:45 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
Originally posted by snaffles:
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
Originally posted by snaffles:
here is an old Jaguar, a good 30 years old.  |
If it's a series 1 then I think it will be somewhat older then 30 years.
Over here I think they build the last ones in 74/75, and they were all series 3 V12 as I recall.
Jeb is this about right? |
This just in from a guy who works at the shop where the Jag is kept: I believe your autophiles missed the mark by a decade , I believe it is a '63 XKE. |
Errr this is what we said wasn't it |
OK fwiw, here's the owner hisself having his say: Thank you for the picture. The jag is: Series 1 - 1963 |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 06:48:33 PM · #81 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
Originally posted by snaffles:
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
Originally posted by snaffles:
here is an old Jaguar, a good 30 years old. |
If it's a series 1 then I think it will be somewhat older then 30 years.
Over here I think they build the last ones in 74/75, and they were all series 3 V12 as I recall.
Jeb is this about right? |
This just in from a guy who works at the shop where the Jag is kept: I believe your autophiles missed the mark by a decade , I believe it is a '63 XKE. |
Errr this is what we said wasn't it |
OK fwiw, here's the owner hisself having his say: Thank you for the picture. The jag is: Series 1 - 1963 |
Errr yes I know lol
In fact in 1963 I was 3 years old and living 10 miles from where it was built
Message edited by author 2009-07-02 18:55:02. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 07:46:50 PM · #82 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Phil:
Also, I want to make sure I'm understanding how to do this from now on. If we have an insect challenge I need to be an entomologist or know a lot about bugs to cast a valid vote? If we aren't experts in the category we shouldn't vote, right? We need the "proper credentials"? |
No, but would you argue with a doctor about medical opinion?
Or a chef about how to cook?
My only point was to try and respond to why the OP got pinged about having a current production automobile in an old cars venue.
Since I *DO* have forty years of experience with cars, and Jaguars in particular, I figured I was reasonably qualified to state unequivocally that it's NOT an old car.
From there on, do as you like.....8>) |
Yes, yes.
But for the record, I wouldn't classify the car as old. Just making a funny.
I wonder if my many years of owning my own dealership and body shop helped me come up with that opinion? Prolly not as no matter the experience you have in cars you're not any more qualified in classifying something as old as the next fellow, nor should it give you the right in telling people they're wrong for not agreeing with you. Just like it didn't make the OP right in telling the voters that they were wrong for voring his image down based on age.
"Oldness" is subjective no matter if you're using KBB or NADA guides. When you're 5, twenty is old. When you're 40, twenty is not. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 08:34:53 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by Phil:
Prolly not as no matter the experience you have in cars you're not any more qualified in classifying something as old as the next fellow |
Yes, actually it does if you're experience & skill is in the Old Car industry.
When you achieve a certain standing within your field based on that knowledge & experience, you *are* more qualified to ascertain whether or not something fits into certain parameters.
That's part of the reason I was accepted when I appraised cars for insurance purposes.
I could provide the necessary provenance, and had the experience and knowledge to ascertain whether or not the specific car that I was appraising was, in fact, a worthy example of the marque.
Now I was also sensible enough to not get involved with cars outside my realm of knowledge, so I did turn down people from time to time when asked to appraise a car, and I wouldn't inflate the value of a car because someone wanted to insure it for more than it was worth......most reputable appraisors are the same way....
Anyhow, all of this is moot, and pretty much overkill for the purpose of the OP.....it is amazing how these discussions go down a rabbit hole, isn't it.
|
|
|
|
07/02/2009 11:06:13 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Phil:
Prolly not as no matter the experience you have in cars you're not any more qualified in classifying something as old as the next fellow |
Yes, actually it does if you're experience & skill is in the Old Car industry.
|
No it actually doesn't. And I have never heard anyone looking for an old marque or even an old car industry.
That being said, there is no gauge that makes a car old (remember, we're talking old, not antique) whether you appraise cars for insurance purposes or buy them for your own. Old, once again, is only in the eye of the beholder. Like most here, I don't think the OP's car is old; however, someone who buys a new car every year may very well think so. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 11:16:37 PM · #85 |
| Old cars are probably like Old computers nowerdays. 3 year old computer is a classic!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
07/03/2009 02:02:29 PM · #86 |
[quote]Errr yes I know lol
In fact in 1963 I was 3 years old and living 10 miles from where it was built[/quote]
NOW you tell me! Jeez! :-0 |
|
|
|
07/03/2009 04:32:29 PM · #87 |
Hi Joe,
I knew it was an old-ish car, I remember when they came out. I have to say I gave it a 5, but only because I thought it was just an average shot. Sorry, but it just didn't do anything for me.
Look forward to seeing your next submission :-).
Bill.
|
|
|
|
07/03/2009 05:17:52 PM · #88 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
[quote]Errr yes I know lol
In fact in 1963 I was 3 years old and living 10 miles from where it was built |
NOW you tell me! Jeez! :-0 [/quote]
I was just trying to avoid letting on about my age lol |
|
|
|
07/06/2009 07:40:56 AM · #89 |
Originally posted by johnnyphoto:
I should add that I consider my parents 13 year old minivan to be pretty darn old! |
...and, were I your age I would tend to agree with you. I on the other hand have a 1948 TA-14 Alvis in my garage, and I don't consider it old. Why not you ask?... a quick peek at my profile will provide you with the answer.
Ray |
|
|
|
07/06/2009 09:03:45 AM · #90 |
|
|
|
07/06/2009 09:32:28 AM · #91 |
Originally posted by goc:
did he leave ? |
No he is "sticking around" as he put it.
By  Judojoe:
07/02/2009 03:56:41 PM
Kicked up a Bit of a Stir didnt I, all things being equal I enjoy the crack and I have had far greater experiences than Bad.
I a not an expert on Cars, irrespective as to what some Super Human enthusiastm ay talk about Grills ect.
Next time I enter a Challenge I will be right on the Button.
I went off to the Farne Islands yesterday which is a Wild Sea Bird sanctuary and I was engrossed so I will post some later, as I m stickin around.
Thanks for the Support and Constuctive Coments.
Cheers.
Joe
Message edited by author 2009-07-06 09:33:22. |
|
|
|
07/09/2009 12:20:40 AM · #92 |
During the challenge I got this email/PM
DPChallenge user judojoe has sent you the following private message:
What is your interperetation of an Old Car,
Rusty, Bits Hangin Off, Flat tyres ect
this car is 15 years old that means it was made when you were four years old !
whats your views now then !
My reply was simply, an old car to me is one that you don't pay road tax on.
The Jaguar is a modern car, it has airbags, ABS, a quiet, efficient engine that meets Euro legislation for emissions, it would pass a EuroNCAP safety test, it has power steering, central locking, an alarm system....a thoroughly modern car by any standards.
|
|
|
|
07/09/2009 01:20:03 AM · #93 |
Originally posted by dd1989:
During the challenge I got this email/PM
DPChallenge user judojoe has sent you the following private message:
What is your interperetation of an Old Car,
Rusty, Bits Hangin Off, Flat tyres ect
this car is 15 years old that means it was made when you were four years old !
whats your views now then !
My reply was simply, an old car to me is one that you don't pay road tax on.
|
Now you want him to be dq'd for violating the rules by trying to get you to change your vote during the challenge? He was mad enough about his score but decided to stay after all. What do you think will happen if he is dq'd?
|
|
|
|
07/09/2009 02:40:43 AM · #94 |
hah I don't see how this thread could have lasted 4 pages - the car is not "old" by any reasonable interpretation of the challenge criteria, and it's not cool to harass people for DNMCs.
|
|
|
|
07/09/2009 09:42:35 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by senor_kasper:
Originally posted by dd1989:
During the challenge I got this email/PM
DPChallenge user judojoe has sent you the following private message:
What is your interperetation of an Old Car,
Rusty, Bits Hangin Off, Flat tyres ect
this car is 15 years old that means it was made when you were four years old !
whats your views now then !
My reply was simply, an old car to me is one that you don't pay road tax on.
|
Now you want him to be dq'd for violating the rules by trying to get you to change your vote during the challenge? He was mad enough about his score but decided to stay after all. What do you think will happen if he is dq'd? |
I have made no reference at all as to whether I think he should be disqualified. All I am saying is, I got a confrontational PM during voting, and I replied accordingly with my view on the issue.
If he leaves because he was disqualified, then that's his choice if he wants to throw the dummy out the pram...it's no skin off my nose.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 11/18/2025 09:20:03 PM EST.
