The term classic is kind of overused with old cars. But what the Classic Car Club of America considers true classics might be better described as true collectors items. In my book the '66 Mustang (or should that be '65?) and '57 Bel Air are definetely classics.

I know what Neptune is saying but I can't agree with it 100%, with cars I refuse to consider any old rubbish as classic. Neptune says as long as something is in mint condition it's fine, but you can't polish a turd, some cars were just crap when they were new and they'll always be crap. Or average. If a car means something to it's owner, that's fine, but sentimental value only applies to that one person, it doesn't mean anything to anyone else. So you can't call something a real classic unless it's widely regarded as one. That doesn't only mean things like the Jaguar E-Type and Aston Martin DB5 (two of the ultimate classic British cars and thus are pretty expensive in mint condition), a classic has to be something special. And I don't really buy into the idea that classic status is only determined by age. Today there are so many cars on the market, they can't all be become classics. Things like the Rover 200/25, Vauxhall/Opel Vectra and Nissan Primera will never be real classics. Unless they became extremely rare, but when that happens imagine how rare all the exotic cars will be, and they'll be far more valuable. And that's the way life is, the greatest things cost the most money. Yes, there are classic cars which are more affordable (and classic cars aren't just for the rich), but not everything can be "classic".