Cars that look dated in 2014

I think the dated term is generally used wrong, and in some of these cases specifically. People are referring Iconic as dated. The reason Iconic cars seem dated is actually they define an era. Cars that come to mind are as someone mentioned finned Cadillacs ala Hank Williams, Magnums Ferrari and sonny Crockets Ferraris, Kit from Nightrider and the Mercedes from Dallas. In reality those aren't dated, they are iconic. AMC pacers and Gremlins are dated, as are pintos and Vegas (still can't believe there was a cosworth one). Plymouth satellites are dated. But the iconic, They are art defining an era.

 

Funny, in some cases I think certain aspects of a car's design make them seem "dated". A good example are the wheels on the yellow Diablo posted here, a few posts back. The Diablo's design itself is aging nicely, at least the raw coupé version of it (the ones with too many wings, or even the targa to me didn't age so well) but those wheels, there's just something that screams 90's opulence about them. And that will never change. The design on the classic Lamborghini Diablo wheels, from when the car first came out, has aged nicely but the evolutions not so much. The same can be said about the wheels on the 550 Barchetta. I love the design of the Ferrari 550, even if 10 years ago one might have called it "dated" too. But the raw design, first proposed and shown, has aged terribly well. The evolutions such as the triple headlights on the 575 and the speedline style wheels on the barchetta etc, have some elements that are exaggerated and - to me - seem very specific to that particular era.

Other aspects like color (90's TVR mutating paint jobs are a great example), various trim accessories, mid-life facelifts (996 headlights for instance went from pure Boxter, to Turbo-style straight edged, before the 997. A rare improvement making the older ones more dated), and industry wide tech developments (first gen xenon headlamps etc..) are what "date" car design.

The devil is in the details.

 

Agreed on the stock wheels, which were another derivation on a Countach design. Thats why I threw them aside for '01 6.0 wheels, which are my all-time favorite Lamborghini design.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

That's what she said

 

As I've always understood the thinking behind the side strakes on the 348 and TestaRossa, they were actually added due to concerns about debris/rubbish/bags etc., being drawn into the intakes, collecting in front of the radiators and causing the engines to over heat.

If anything, they were primarily about function rather than form. They remained on the Testarossa/512 series as it was a bit of a trademark for that model, and when the 355 came along, it was decided that the strakes were not needed after all and so were removed from the design.

Had it been shown that the low side intakes on both cars did in fact collect debris/rubbish/bags etc., then I suspect that the intakes on the 355 would have looked somewhat different!

 

The strakes are still inside the scoop, presumably to prevent things getting to the radiator so they didn't get rid of them altogether.

 

Interesting about the strakes. Though I'm surprised some mesh wasn't used. Must have been thinking in the automotive world. Doesn't seem to prevent Bobcats and small animals from being sucked up.

 

I think the strakes added some benefit in terms of straightening the air so the radiators would get maximum airflow, which is why they're still inside the scoops of the 355. The challenge cars had a mesh cover over the strakes as well to protect them from puncture as the slicks picked up a lot more rocks and the cars would be closer together than you'd get on the street.

 

According to my recollection, The TR strakes are there to keep small children out.The same way we have to remove refrigerator and appliance doors here in the USA...so kids can not lock themselves in..
Rubbish and debris can still enter at any point but now kids can not!
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Wait a minute! Did Mr Spiro say my car looks like a Mitsubishi?

Oh no you didn't!
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

You're on a roll with your responses in this thread.

 

I think wheels are the single biggest thing that can make a car look "dated."

Take the NSX. With the stock '91 wheels, it looks very dated to my eye. However, with larger, modern wheels is could almost pass as a new car 24 years later.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Yeah... just like it. I'll bet people stop you and ask you all the time "Is that a Gallant?"

LaFerrari looks just like a Honda.

 

Given how fuggly many modern cars look I'm glad that mine's dated.

 

It it has sealed beam headlights, it looks dated.

 

Chrome on cars.

 

Yes, smaller pieces of rubbish and debris can still enter the intake, and over a period of time can build up and cause heating problems due to blocking the radiators up (Regular inspections of the intakes should take care of that though).

However, something larger such as a stray carrier bag getting drawn into the side intake would cause a problem much faster! There would be a high risk of the engine temp climbing rapidly, getting overlooked and the engine getting damaged. The side strakes would help deflect such things away down the side of the car, reducing the risk of any possible mechanical failure.

That's interesting!

I've not had a proper look over a 355 so I wasn't aware that there were still some strakes inside the scoop - That alone disproves the theory that they are simply "form over function".

 

Always the problem with the 328. I ordered some Griot's Child Remover, which helps but doesn't solve the basic issue.

 

This made me laugh out loud!!

 

Not sure I understood this post completly
so I had to look..

Did you mean My post may end up on a XXX web site?


Google Guide > Part II: Understanding Results > How Google WorksNext: Results Page »

How Google Works


If you aren’t interested in learning how Google creates the index and the database of documents that it accesses when processing a query, skip this description. I adapted the following overview from Chris Sherman and Gary Price’s wonderful description of How Search Engines Work in Chapter 2 of The Invisible Web (CyberAge Books, 2001).

Google runs on a distributed network of thousands of low-cost computers and can therefore carry out fast parallel processing. Parallel processing is a method of computation in which many calculations can be performed simultaneously, significantly speeding up data processing. Google has three distinct parts:

Googlebot, a web crawler that finds and fetches web pages.
The indexer that sorts every word on every page and stores the resulting index of words in a huge database.
The query processor, which compares your search query to the index and recommends the documents that it considers most relevant.
Let’s take a closer look at each part.

1. Googlebot, Google’s Web Crawler
Googlebot is Google’s web crawling robot, which finds and retrieves pages on the web and hands them off to the Google indexer. It’s easy to imagine Googlebot as a little spider scurrying across the strands of cyberspace, but in reality Googlebot doesn’t traverse the web at all. It functions much like your web browser, by sending a request to a web server for a web page, downloading the entire page, then handing it off to Google’s indexer.

Googlebot consists of many computers requesting and fetching pages much more quickly than you can with your web browser. In fact, Googlebot can request thousands of different pages simultaneously. To avoid overwhelming web servers, or crowding out requests from human users, Googlebot deliberately makes requests of each individual web server more slowly than it’s capable of doing.

Googlebot finds pages in two ways: through an add URL form, www.google.com/addurl.html, and through finding links by crawling the web.

 

The ferrari testarossa is certainly dated...

So is the Mona Lisa...

Michaelangelo's David...

Andy Warhol...

Geesh. We should burn them all...

All replaced now by cellphone "Selfies."


Just yesterday I was driving down the road, and a toyota tercel with two tattooed and pierced chicks pulled up to me. Tongue piercings, facial tattoo's, grungy hair... the whole bit. They loved the car . That there, is the "youth stamp of approval" that the TR should do fine in the future.

Bo

 

"Dated" is only pejorative if your objective is to appear modern. Modern isn't synonymous with "good" and "dated" isn't synonymous with "bad." By 1974, a classic Steve McQueen Bullitt Mustang was dated and the gruesome Mustang II was modern.

If the Stanley Steamer look ever comes back into vogue, your favorite "timeless" design will appear - by definition - "dated."

It's probably better to ask whether a design has aged well, which is really just another way of asking if we still like it.

 

Agree. This is a beauty and time has no impact on its attraction

 

Perhaps "dated" for the purpose of this discussion means a design that has not aged well, something not attractive even in the context of its time. An example might be those early 70s men's clothes with large collars and bell bottoms. In contrast, a dinner jacket from the period, even with the wider lapels, will still look good today. Another example might be those shoes with the very wide square toes, which nowadays look ridiculous.

I hope I didn't offend anyone.