Author Topic: Challenger Rebirth? (Automotive) (Read 1069 times)

Ripsnort · « **on:** November 21, 2005, 03:21:42 PM »

http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=103629

What say about this design, eh?

United · « **Reply #1 on:** November 21, 2005, 03:32:02 PM »

Not so bad. Its better than their pathetic attempt at the Charger.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #2 on:** November 21, 2005, 03:33:16 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by United
Not so bad. Its better than their pathetic attempt at the Charger.

The charger is utter crap for design. The same ugly people that buy those box-type Japanese cars will buy the ugly charger.

United · « **Reply #3 on:** November 21, 2005, 03:36:28 PM »

Now that I look at it more and actually read the article, it is very appealing. I'm definately a fan of the 6 speed. IMO, the only thing that could hurt it is price. They may or may not screw that up. I'd probably buy one if it was set right.

Debonair · « **Reply #4 on:** November 21, 2005, 03:36:52 PM »

another retro vehilce, how creative

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #5 on:** November 21, 2005, 04:31:01 PM »

Hmmmm I need a moment alone........

Thats hella bad ass....

If they make it, it will sell.

I like that way better then the mustang.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #6 on:** November 21, 2005, 05:12:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Debonair
another retro vehilce, how creative

Better than the "Everything looks like a bar of Dove soap" design age, no?

Sandman · « **Reply #7 on:** November 21, 2005, 05:14:32 PM »

Wind tunnels pretty much destroyed automotive design.

J_A_B · « **Reply #8 on:** November 21, 2005, 07:54:16 PM »

Holy crap....they got it right.

And that's a concept car....and concepts ususally look worse than the production models derived from them.

The mirrors are right
The headlights are right
The "girly" waist is right
The low roofline is right
The hood is right
The engine is soooo right

Heck...even those skinny tires which I normally hate look somehow right on that car.

Hopefully they build it.

It isn't retro in my mind....it's what a sports car is supposed to look like. Retro is only retro if it's recreating something that's otherwise "abnormal" (say, a new car with 50's -style tailfins).

Thanks for the link Rip.

J_A_B

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #9 on:** November 21, 2005, 09:16:14 PM »

Mullet growers rejoice!

Debonair · « **Reply #10 on:** November 21, 2005, 09:48:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Better than the "Everything looks like a bar of Dove soap" design age, no?

wait 15 years & "classic taurus" will be all over the place, although personally i prefer slightly earlier "square on top of a rectangle" era

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #11 on:** November 22, 2005, 10:49:12 AM »

The taurus will never be a classic.

Not even the SHO.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #12 on:** November 22, 2005, 11:40:22 AM »

Detroit crapped out a lot of garbage in the 60's and 70's, and plenty of that is considered classic, so I don't see why Taurus et al would be exempt.

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #13 on:** November 22, 2005, 04:54:45 PM »

Name some 60 and 70s cars that are crap that are considered classics?

Don't be a Americar hater Funky, Detroit put out some very nice cars in the 60s and 70s.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #14 on:** November 22, 2005, 05:33:44 PM »

http://vintagecars.about.com/od/startercars/a/merccomet70.htm