Those of you who manfully did yesterday’s homework assignment will understand the background reason behind this post. Those of you who have put up with my countless rants against the creeping intrusiveness of the auto industry — where your driving behavior is tracked, your wallet is picked with “subscription” services, and all the other little games played under the maskirovka of “convenience” — will also know where this is heading.
So today we’re going to play a little game whereby we go back in time — back when car manufacturers weren’t the bloodless accountants of today, when they weren’t obsessed with controlling you, but were only interested in providing you, the customer, with the very best performance and driving enjoyment that they could.
Here’s the fun part. You can decide which era would have provided you with the best solution to all that, and then play the game, as follows.
Assume that, somehow, you were given the opportunity of taking possession of a car (or truck) in precisely the same condition as it was on the day when it left the showroom with its first owner.
Which single car would satisfy your needs today?
Let me elucidate. You’d be looking at a car that was reliable and wouldn’t be breaking down every fifty miles — or even if it did, its woes could easily be addressed by either yourself (if so inclined) or a competent mechanic — and that had adequate performance (you get to decide “adequacy”).
The car could be the one you had on a poster in your bedroom or den, or one you always wanted to own back in the day, but couldn’t afford. It could even be the car that your Dad owned (and you miss it still), or by a friend or neighbor whom you secretly envied for their choice.
It could be one that you would like to own to carry your family (kids, grandkids, etc.), or just one that you (and yer Missus, if applicable, or a good friend) could use to blast around the country on long road trips, or across terrain that would frighten a mountain goat.
It could be as practical as you wish in terms of luggage capacity, or gloriously impractical (what my Dad used to refer to as a “blonde and a toiletries bag” car).
To help in your quest, you can peruse the websites of various sales outlets such as my favorite, Hemmings, or the du Pont Registry. The only restriction I’m going to apply is against resto-mod outlets like IDR or Eagle E-type: your choice must be a bog-standard (optioned by choice), as-issued model from the manufacturer.
So let me start the ball rolling by showing examples of what I would choose. (As with watches, I’m somewhat constrained by my insistence on manual operation — stick shifts only need apply — but you’re free to go with an automatic transmission, if you’re that way inclined).
1967-71 Mercedes 280 SL (W113)
To me, this car has everything: understated, classy looks (note the interior), that brilliant 2.8-liter six-cylinder engine (“adequate” performance, for me), and enough room to hold suitcases and/or gun bags. I also like the flexibility of hard-roof vs. convertible driving (I don’t much care for canvas tops because eventually, they all perish and/or leak). And they were available with a 4- or 5-speed stick shift as well as auto transmission. Most importantly, it was built at a time when “Mercedes engineering” was a discipline and not just an advertising slogan: they built cars to be reliable, and to last.
By today’s standards, of course, it’s not much — most modern economy models could outperform it — but once again, I don’t care about that. But if I did want a car that could stick with everything on the road, even today, I’d go for the next one:
1997 Porsche 993 Carrera GT
Okay, like Clarkson, I think that Porsche 911s are fugly. But this one — the last air-cooled model they made — is the least ugly Porsche they made until the Cayman (which isn’t a 911 anyway). But a 3.6-liter flat six engine and a six-speed stick shift… if that isn’t enough power for most ordinary mortals, there’s something wrong in the definition somewhere. Also, it has Porsche engineering which means there are going to be many years of relatively-carefree driving in your future. And if I wasn’t that interested in “racing” (i.e. driving like a bat out of hell) but cruising — assuming the above-mentioned Mercedes doesn’t fit the bill, even though it should, then I’d probably go for this last one:
1970 Mercedes 280 SE 3.5 (W111)
This bad boy has the 3.5-liter V8 engine, a five-speed stick shift, and can comfortably seat another couple in the back — say, if I wanted to take a friend plus his spouse out to dinner of an evening, or to the range by day. And of course this car, by virtue of its vintage, has all the qualities of Mercedes Benz manufacturing as per the 280 SL above. And for what it’s worth: among the three cars listed above, the 280 SL wins by a day’s march.
What all the above cars have in common is what they don’t have: computers and all the electronic nonsense associated with modern cars (like keyless entry, “engine management” systems, “subscription services”, “automatic stop-start” bollocks and intrusive snooping capabilities). You unlock the door with a metal key, start the engine with the same key, put the thing in gear and drive. In the case of the two Mercs, there isn’t even a warning buzz or tone to remind you to put your seatbelt on. (Yeah, also no airbags, which is why they have such clean lines. The nice thing about the Mercedes cars of that era was that their engineers had perfected the concept of “crumple zones” before anyone else, so even in a direct collision or rollover crash, you had a good chance of survival.) The 911 is a performance car, so there are risks involved: your choice.
The above are cars that treat you like adults, and expect you to behave accordingly.
Finally, the joys of off-roading travel have always escaped me; hence there are no entries like Range Rovers or G-wagens.
Okay, that’s me. Now it’s your turn. You can reply in Comments, or just send me an email. In the latter case, feel free to include pics and/or links.
Here’s the thing: I’ll post your choices on this website over the next week or so, for others to enjoy/criticize.
Have fun storming the castle…
