Challenger.

I completely agree. The other issue is, where do we go from here? Do they do their cars from the 1980s next? The retro Fox Body Mustang. How about a retro F body Firebird? Complete with Kitt Knight Rider factory package! Maybe I'm over rationalizing all of this, but retro seems like such a cheap way out, a band-aid solution for the sputtering domestic car companies that will ultimately fail and leave them in even worse shape.

I will offer another example of a car that works-- the Chrysler 300c. While I don’t love it, many do, and it captures elements of the past, but rewraps them in a contemporary design rather than just exhuming the body of a dead relative and forcing it to march around once again.

 

Having owned an A body 69 barracuda convertable I say they should build this instead.

71 cuda retro.
1 with the hockey stripe in Thunder Blue the other paying homage to the 70 AAR in Sublime Green
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I agree with a few on here. I have always loved late 60's early 70's American muscle cars for as long as I can remember.

When I see one now they still put a big smile on my face. This Challenger looks really nice, the Mustang does too.

But I would not buy one. Like my Ferrari it would be a "toy", I would buy the the real McCoy and get myself a 60/70's car.

I like the Magnum and even the new Charger. They have the muscle looks but not copying a beautiful original design.

Leave the 60's/70's muscle cars where they belong I think. I love them that way. If I want a modern car I will buy a Honda or Audi etc.

 

1971 Hemi Cuda re-creation
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

After seeing the new challenger in person I can say it looks way better than in pictures. I just hope gas prices don't kill off this second muscle car era like it did the first time.

 

They got it right?!?

No, they got it a biggie sized combo with extra mayo.

That car is FAT. If the original was a supermodel, this thing is definately "full figured..." and not in the good way!

I loved the original, but this I will pass.

 

Wrong hood. It need a "shaker".

 

Not going for an exact match. The vehicle will not have the Fender "Gills" either. Its going to be more of an "inspired" re-creation, not a "replica" re-creation.

The main goal is to justify the use of the "Banners". Since the Cuda was the only vehicle to have them, and the 71 Cuda was the only model year to have 4 headlights, it was an easy fit.

 

If the finished product looks that good. I will get one to have parked next to the fiero.

 

What's the price of that very cheap looking car? I can just feel the cheap plastic and plastic chrome on the interior... running my hand down the mostly smooth cheap plastic body... what a POS that's going to be.

 

Ugh, Chip Foose strikes again! Bring on the $8 gasoline to kill this idea please... I hate these retro designs (except the Ford GT which is a great sports car).

BT

 

It's hideous. Sorry, but I guess I can say it on a Ferrari board, lol. It looks like someone took the metal bits off the original, slathered it with Bondo and hit it with a lot of Krylon.

It's not hard to see why DaimlerBenz drop-kicked Chrysler out of the family.

+1. The original was overrated and poorly built, and this plasticked-up version is another easy trip to the retro trough.

Now we need a new Gran Torino with smooth plastic bumpers and a Starsky & Hutch paint option...

 

Yes. Shame!

 

Shame for liking it. Bad word OK if you think it is too fat.

 

Ford really stepped in it with that thing!

The Mustang II best served as a donor car (especially front suspension) for countless streetrod projects.

 

I would have liked to live in the neighborhood that day.

"CHRYSLER YOU LAZY BUM, GO GET A JOB AND STOP WASTING YOUR MOTHERS MONEY!"

 

You have to say that in a German accent to get the full effect!

 

They tried looking forward but it wouldn't sell.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Well, looking forward if the world was "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow." I do applaud them for taking a design theme risk though - which is GM and Ford's downfall right now.

I think this challenger looks great but fear the "dealer market price adjustment" they're going to drain out of everyone who wants one within the first year or two - see PT Cruiser for example.

 

Pontiac Aztec.

 

Retro design isn't a bad direction if done correctly. The Ford Gt, Camaro and that Lambo concept are extreme design bastardizations that invoke the gag reflex.

This design is nice.

As Ryalex said, dealers are going to milk customer teet like there's no tomorrow.

But like the new old stang, I'll be sick of seeing them after a week.

 

I think thats where you are wrong. Many of the guys who buy the Mustang still take the car to the 1/4. A live axle is much better at the drag track which is a much more common place to your average Mustang owner then the road track. The IRS would also add more weight to the already heavy mustang and it still sells without it. One could of said the same thing about the 53 vette but its style will be rembered for years to come.

 

The problem there wasn't that they took a risk, it was that SOMEHOW in a gazillion-dollar new product rollout they designed and approved the most hideous civilian vehicle ever conceived. It defies imagination that a team of executives looked at it and ever let it be sold to the public.

 

I don't what they were trying with the Crossfire. Sad thing is the original SLK looked a lot nicer than what Chrysler did to it.

But the launch party was fun!
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

It seems as if Rod Serling has been running that company for two decades or more.