Back in the 1970s, there were cars that identified their drivers as very special people. These were the cars that delivered either super-high performance, exotic show-car styling, the highest levels of opulent, over-the-top luxury appointments, or an intentional combination of these traits. If you were behind the wheel of one of these cars, you definitely drew the crowd’s attention. The drivers of these cars were well aware of the appeal their vehicles held. 

The specific cars in this article are from several European countries. Two are from Italy, two are from Great Britain, and one is from Germany. One of them can claim to be the original exotic car, one takes the crown as the ultimate luxury car of its day, and one is a thoroughbred sports car that had both a successful racing career and what appeared to be a starring role in a trend-setting TV show. One of these cars used advanced technology to deliver the performance of Italian exotics while remaining a daily driver without compromise, as long as you avoided terminal oversteer. And one combined luxury and high performance into a unique blend that to this day is still associated with the public’s favorite fictional secret agent. Enjoy our diverse selection of “Living the Dream” cars.

Let’s start with one of the most outrageously styled and high-performance exotic cars of the 1970s and beyond — the Lamborghini Countach, which turned 50 years old in 2021. Although it debuted at the 1971 Geneva Motor Show, Lamborghini did not put it into production until 1974. The very first Countach, the LP 400 chassis 0001, was made from 1974 to 1978 in a quantity of 152 cars. It was followed by the Countach LP 400 S, which featured the now-familiar fender flares, huge rear wing, large front spoiler, and telephone-dial-styled wheels. Produced from 1978 through 1982, 235 examples of the LP 400 S were made. These two models, made in the 1970s, were followed by three more powerful versions of the Countach, which endured until the car was discontinued in 1990.

Powering the LP 400 was a 3.9-liter V12 engine with 375 horsepower, mounted behind the driver and driving the rear wheels through a five-speed manual gearbox. Motor Trend performance testing of a Countach LP 400 generated a 0-60 mph time of 5.2 seconds and a top speed of 162 mph. Fun fact — the Countach was the first Lamborghini to have its body produced in-house. Before this, Lamborghini used outside coachbuilders.

The Rolls-Royce Corniche Convertible was made from 1971 until 1996, outlasting its coupe counterpart by 14 years. This iconic symbol of financial success was owned by luminaries such as Paul McCartney, David Bowie, Elton John, Tom Jones, and Dean Martin, with Frank Sinatra also owning one. Named for the roads running along the Côte d’Azur in France, the Corniche Convertible was a luxurious, comfortable yacht that cruised on land. In the words of the Robb Report, the Corniche was, “…the automotive equivalent of lighting a Cuban cigar with a hundred-dollar bill.”

The Rolls-Royce Corniche Convertible was derived from the 1965 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow, which featured a contemporary monocoque body. Coachbuilt by hand at London’s Mulliner Park Ward, the Corniche Convertible measured 17 feet long, weighed nearly 5,000 pounds, and took months to build. The Corniche Convertible’s 6.75-liter V8 engine’s output was described as “adequate,” as Rolls-Royce liked to say. Its three-speed automatic transmission sent its power directly to the rear wheels. Rolls-Royce performance estimates for this vehicle included a 0-62 mph acceleration in 11 seconds and a top speed of approximately 124 mph. 

Needless to say, luxurious accommodations abound in the Rolls-Royce Corniche Convertible. From the gorgeous wood dash and door trim to the sumptuous Connolly leather seats to the heavy carpeting underfoot, you are treated to a truly upscale experience. The standard equipment list also included air conditioning and power windows. These were items that were definitely not included on all luxury cars back in the 1970s. 

The Ferrari 365 GTB/4 Daytona was Ferrari’s top dog and most powerful road car to date, with 352 horsepower from its front-mounted 4.4-liter V12 engine and a top speed of 174 mph. Produced from 1968-73, it was called by Road and Track at the time, “…the best sports car in the world…” Unofficially named for Ferrari’s 1-2-3 sweep of the 1967 Daytona 24-hour race, most Daytonas (1,284 of 1,406) were coupes or Berlinettas in Ferrari lingo, while the rest were Spyder versions, identified as the 365 GTS/4. If you were behind the wheel of one of these, you stood out, both in terms of style and street cred.

Another interesting historical footnote about the 365 GTB/4 Daytona is that it won the second running of the unsanctioned Cannonball Baker Sea-to-Shining-Sea Memorial Trophy Dash, driven by famous racer Dan Gurney and auto journalist Brock Yates. This was an “outlaw” cross-country race that went from New York City to Los Angeles, which Gurney and Yates completed in an incredible 35 hours and 54 minutes. Another bit of notoriety was achieved by what appeared to be a 365 GTS/4 Daytona Spyder that was featured in a starring role in the 1980s TV series “Miami Vice,” but it wasn’t a Ferrari at all.

The Ferrari 365 GTB/4 Daytona was also successful as a racing car. Its outstanding durability made it an excellent endurance racer. At the 1972 24 Hours of Le Mans, the Ferrari Daytona claimed the top five spots in its class.

The Porsche 911 Turbo Carrera, also known as type 930, was first shown to the public as a concept at the 1973 Frankfurt International Automobile Show. While it was released by Porsche for the 1975 model year, none of these first-year cars, which were both under-braked and under-tired, came to the U.S. We got the 1976 model, which ran through 1977 and was then replaced with the slightly renamed 911 Turbo, which had a larger, 3.3-liter engine (up from 3.0 liters) and an air-to-air intercooler to cool the intake air after its trip through the turbocharger. The 911 Turbo 3.3 was available in the U.S. through the 1979 model year, but thanks to emissions regulations, wouldn’t return until 1986.

The Porsche 911 Turbo, in either version available through the 1970s, was a performance legend but could be difficult to handle at its limits, which earned it a nickname, “The Widowmaker.” Car and Driver tested its 1976 911 Turbo Carrera, with 234 horsepower, achieving 0-60 mph in 4.9 seconds, a quarter-mile time of 13.5 seconds at 105 mph, and an observed top speed of 156 mph. Roadholding came in at .93g. This was very impressive for 1976.

The Porsche 911 Turbo will take its place as the first production sports car to be fitted with a turbocharger. It delivered performance comparable to the Lamborghinis and Ferraris of the day, while retaining the 911 hallmark of everyday practicality. Driving a 911 Turbo puts you in a special category.

The Aston Martin DBS followed the Aston Martin DB6. The DB6’s predecessor, the DB5, had already become well known as James Bond’s ride in the early Bond films and also appeared in later ones. The DBS also starred in a Bond film, 1969’s “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service,” starring George Lazenby. Aston Martin celebrated the film’s 50th Anniversary by making a limited edition of 50 2019 Aston Martin DBS Superleggeras. Fun fact — after the DBS appeared in its single film role, a full 18 years would go by before Bond would next drive an Aston Martin in a 007 film.

The DBS was originally powered by the same 4.0-liter inline-six-cylinder engine used in the DB6, as the planned V8 engine was not yet ready. The DBS was heavier than the DB6, as it was designed as a GT capable of comfortably seating four. The DBS V8 featured a 5.3-liter V8 engine with Bosch fuel injection and four overhead cams producing 320 horsepower, good for a 0-60 mph run in 6.0 seconds and a top speed of 160 mph. This made the DBS V8 the fastest four-seat production car in the world. You could think of the Aston DBS V8 as a cross between the Rolls-Royce Corniche and the Ferrari Daytona — furnished in Connolly leather, with well-built seats and plush carpeting inside, but also possessing the performance to humble anything else on the road in its day. Driving one made you feel special.

DeWalt’s 20V Max cordless drills have become a common choice for both professionals and serious DIYers, largely because the lineup is wide, the battery platform is shared across the system, and the tools themselves are powerful enough to handle most real-world jobs. DeWalt’s cordless drill lineup ranges from smaller models like the DCD800 and the DCD805, which are often used for household and day-to-day tasks, to some of the best hammer drills like the DCD900 and the DCD1007, which are designed for heavy-duty tasks that once required a corded drill.

That popularity is part of the reason DeWalt has such a strong reputation, but it also means these drills get used in more varied situations than most tools, and there’s far more feedback to sift through as a result. Owners with very different needs and expectations often end up reporting the same problems — not complaints that their drill “doesn’t have enough power,” but drills that sometimes do nothing when the trigger is pulled, chucks that don’t hold drill bits in place just after a few holes, and drills that shut down mid-cut even with a charged battery.

Owners also seem to be reporting that the drill’s safety mechanism kicks in mid-use even when there’s no sign of overheating or overload, and it’s reportedly happening enough times to throw off the workflow. These are some of the issues that come up enough to be worth taking a closer look at.

If there’s one area where DeWalt owners vent the most, it’s the chuck, and unfortunately, it’s not a single problem. The first issue owners describe on compact DeWalt drills like the DCD800, DCD796, and DCD805 is runout or wobble, where the drill bit doesn’t spin perfectly straight, and it reportedly shows up on fast pilot holes, when working with longer bits, or any job where you’re trying to keep a hole centered in wood or brick. Some owners even report experiencing this on newer, higher-end models where buyers expect tighter tolerances, and some report that even replacing the drill doesn’t eliminate the issue.

Bit retention is another common problem. Owners describe tightening the bit carefully, drilling a few holes, and then finding the bit has worked itself loose — sometimes slipping loose, other times falling out completely. Several say it can happen repeatedly during a single project, forcing them to re-tighten every few minutes. Over time, this has led some users to share tips and tightening methods just to keep bits from backing out mid-job.

At the far end of the spectrum are chucks that bind or jam completely, usually after being opened wide for a larger bit, where the jaws refuse to move, and the chuck just clicks without tightening or loosening. Once that happens, the drill is effectively out of commission until the chuck is freed or replaced.

Some owners of DeWalt’s brushless cordless XR drills describe situations where the drill seems fine: the battery is fully charged, the work light comes on, and yet when the trigger is pulled, the drill simply doesn’t respond most of the time. In those cases, they’ll often say they have to pull the trigger several times before it “wakes up” and finally starts spinning.

On a DCD800, this can show sporadically at first, while on models like the DCD999, the drill starts to spin and then immediately cuts out again, sometimes under light load and sometimes with no obvious trigger, leaving users speculating whether the problem is with DeWalt’s power tool battery, the trigger switch, contacts, or internal wiring. And since the drill suddenly starts working normally again, it’s hard for owners to pin down whether it’s one of those failing components or just a quirk that comes and goes.

Another issue tied directly to DeWalt’s drills is the speed control. Instead of smooth drilling, some owners report their drills not responding proportionally to trigger pressure. That includes cases where partial trigger pulls produce higher speeds than full pulls, and cases where squeezing the trigger all the way results in noticeably reduced speed, or the drill dropping into what owners describe as a “half-power” mode instead of delivering full speed.

As DeWalt’s cordless drills have gotten more powerful, the company has started adopting electronic safety systems to reduce injury, especially anti-rotation/anti-kickback protection. These systems work by cutting power if a drill suddenly rotates uncontrollably to help protect your wrist and forearm. This system has been standard on DeWalt’s recent 20V Max drills, and for most users working overhead or in awkward positions or using hole saws, auger bits, or large spade bits, the feature works as intended.

For owners drilling through dense material or large-diameter holes, where resistance naturally spikes and drops as the bit clears, the anti-rotation system seems to be kicking in prematurely. Owners describe the drill shutting itself off mid-hole, even though the drill isn’t twisting violently or trying to rip out of their hands. Several say the shutdown happens repeatedly during the same task.

Models like the DCD806 and DCD1007 frequently come up, with users comparing them to earlier XR models like the DCD791 and DCD999 and saying the newer drills feel more sensitive, to the point where they’re not sure if the tool is protecting them or just getting in their way.

Owner feedback is rarely unanimous for any power tool, especially one as widely used as DeWalt’s cordless drill lineup, which is why this article focuses on the brand’s 20V MAX cordless drills. These models are DeWalt’s most common drill platform in North America and, just as importantly, they’re the ones that generate the most real-world feedback (and most usable complaint data). This distinction allowed us to look past one-off bad experiences and instead narrow down the issues that keep resurfacing across different cordless models, described by different users, often working in very different environments.

However, none of this suggests that DeWalt drills are poor tools — in fact, the opposite is true. A few issues don’t instantly cancel out decades of proven reliability; they just stand out more when a platform is popular.