- Joined
- May 15, 2020
- Messages
- 2,406
- Reaction score
- 3,901
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 68
- Location
- Atlanta
- Vehicle Year
- 1997 1987
- Make / Model
- Ranger XLT x2
- Engine Type
- 4.0 V6
- Engine Size
- 4.0 & 2.9
- Transmission
- Manual
- 2WD / 4WD
- 4WD
- Total Lift
- 97 stock, 3” on 87
- Total Drop
- N/A
- Tire Size
- 235/75-15
- My credo
- Never put off ‘til tomorrow what you can put off indefinitely
That sucks!Guess it really depends on a variety of things. I originally fell in the Gen X category until they moved the line. I still identify as Gen X. Have a hard time accepting that the vehicles of my childhood are now “Classic” and “Antique” because they don’t seem that old to me. My real irritation anymore is that PA took away the reasons to get “Classic” or “Antique” plates for your vehicles. Classics now have to meet all of the “safety” stuff that regular plates have to (inspections and stuff), and you are limited to like 3k miles a year. Antiques now are daylight only and limited miles.
On the general topic, I can understand why all you younger folks don’t think of a 25 year old car or truck as an antique these days.
When I started driving late 60s/70s (driving vs legal driving), the cars were far from what we have now, and if you went back 25 years from those, (1940s, WW II stuff which was really 30s stuff), it was like driving a horse drawn wagon with a makeshift motor.
The cars they’ve made from the late 70s (after downsizing and if maintained) are all perfectly practical functional vehicles for use today, and a lot of the 80s and later doesn’t even look that much different since everything started to require aerodynamics.
My daily drivers are 87, 87, 88, and I’d still do anything and go anywhere I needed to with my 96 F250 or the 97 Road Ranger. The 78 is the only one I have to think twice about driving because it’s so huge (19’ 3”long, 6’ 4” wide), and it gets 7 miles a gallon on premium!
But hey, cars are all about the fantasy, living the dream, huh?