But do we look at the true classic cars of the 50s, 60s and 70s in that way? There are things that are "of their time" and other things that are more "timeless". Nobody looks at the Spitfire or Hurricane and says, "well that would have no chance against a Eurofighter".

To call the Tempo ugly and boxy as not an "ignorant statement", it's an opinion. I admit I know very little about the car, but then it's simply not a car I'm interested in. Besides I didn't start this thread to talk about the Tempo. The reason at the start I said I'd leave out American cars is because originally I wanted to be a discussion between me and antp (but he didn't seem to be interested), and we are more familiar with European cars than American cars, I just wanted to keep things simple. Also American cars used to have a different design philosophy to European cars, you just can't compare a 80s Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham to a Jaguar XJ6. Both are luxury cars, but in different ways. I quite like the squareness of old Cadillacs and Lincolns, but I don't like the old Volvo 200 series much.

This thread is about the aesthetic value of cars, not the reliability or efficiency or innovative value of cars.