Frankly, like Brian, I thought GM was going too far with the "sharp edged" look (that they stole from the Japanese---it first appeared on the back end of the Isuzu or Mitsubishi SUVs). I call it the "Transformer" design look because the back end of that particular Isuzu/Mitsu looked like one of those Transformer toys--both had symmetric multi-angled designs that repeated themselves over and over. The back of that SUV looked like the designer lost control of his protractor...angles just for the sake of angles and then more angles to match the other angles, etc, etc. But--let's step back a little. GM watched Ford tank with the jelly bean Taurus redesign and still came out with the Lacrosse and Lucerne which I think will also amount to nothing more than another jelly bean reject. Alas, they didn't let Buick rest on its jelly bean laurels for long as Buick seems to be the dumping ground for GM's angular failures (read: Aztek morphed into this HIDEOUS Buick Rendezvous.....they should have named it the Buick Recycle). Now--move over to Mopar---they have not rejected the angular look at all--just look at the chiseled edges of the 300/Magnum/Charger and then tell me "it doesn't sell" with a straight face. Me---I think the Camaro is excellent looking and I am not a fan at all of the angular look. The Challenger looks like a, well....weenie-Challenger...a toned down version of the original. And a slab sided one at that! Talk about lack of original design thought. The Camaro is a new-generation of the old---new design that utilizes subtle design tie-ins with the old. OK--I agree--if you have a cool design like the original Challenger then why mess with it. On the other hand you need to appreciate the ability of GM to evolutionize it's Camaro design. It needed some design notes from the old which the last couple generations lacked completely. I guess all the 70 Challenger restorers will be happy though--looks like OEM body panels will be available again soon. :shock: I go back and look every day and the Challenger gets worse looking every time I look at it(except for the interior). Patton
I guess my biggest complaint about the new Challenger is that it looks a little "cute" due to the softer edges. The original, with crisper edges, simply looked mean. If they wanted cute, maybe they should have made it a Road Runner instead. I do respect that GM has retained so much of the original Camaro in the new design, and I respect that they aren't afraid to move forward by adding modern styling in tune with the rest of the GM line. Very similar to what Ford did with the Mustang. I just think it's a little overboard. It makes me want to laugh, like I did a couple years ago upon seeing the cartoonish nose of Pontiac's TransAm with its exagerated scoops and lines. Paging Elmer Fudd.....
who do you work for???? I don't know Patton, your starting to sound like one of the magazine editor's for either Motor Trend(snooze) or Auto Week(snooze) They alway's give poor review's to the neat looking retro styled car's, and give high praise for the Transformer/Go-bot looking garbage that GM keep's crapping out year after year, or turd after turd :boring: I realize everyone has their own opinion, and I respect that, but I totally disagree about the Camaro being better looking than the retro Challenger. The Mustang is proving everyday that retro sells, the Challenger is to me Chrysler celebrating, or revisiting where it came from, it's not lack of original design idea's, it's taking an icon of the Musclecar era, and modernizing it without losing the key feature's of the 70 Model that make it easily recogniz- able. You look at it, and you know it's a Dodge Challenger. You look at the proto Camaro, and you......question, is that the new Caddy cts, or the new Pontiac Aztek,vibe,blah :sleep: Look at all the hype on all the web sites about the Challenger, most common statement I've seen people say is " there will be one in my garage if they build it like the prototype" :TU: Most common statement about the Camaro is, " it does'nt look enough like a Camaro" or, " they need to change the grill design", or, " the side of it look's like a poor copy of a new Mustang", or, "Nice Caddy-Stang",etc,etc,etc. As usual, GM has totally missed the boat with what the public want's and ask's them for year after year, turd after turd o No: Not picking on you Patton, or arguing just for something to do, it's simply a matter of opinion.
I think you hit the nail on the head!That transformer looking crap has got to stop the only reason for retro is the've run out of GOOD new ideas.Between GM and Nissan I can't decide who's styling department sucks more. Tim
The Camaro grill is what turns me off The good thing about retro is the Asian imports can't do it. Unless your hankering for a retro Honda Civic CVCC. :laugh: The hard thing is where to go after retro......... I hope GM doesn't leave the show thinking they have a winner because of some pseudo styling intellectuals from the media with only taste in their mouth. When Bowtie junkies think the Camaro is a mutated Cadillac......that's bad. When even folks who view cars as transportation like the Challenger.....that's good. Either way, like Boyer said, I hope they both sell well.
Because of our LS1 cars I visit a lot of late model boards, and a large majority of the 3rd and 4th gen Camaro owners seem to love the Camaro concept...in fact, the majority of the gripes are that it's *too* retro?! I don't know if they're just glad to have *something* from GM with the Camaro badge on it, or if they generally love it...but my gut says that since the majority of the 3rd/4th gen Camaro owners are younger folks, they have less ties to the original cars, and are more inclined to want to be *ahead* of the design curve. But the *older* folks who were around the 1st gen Camaros (as well as a few misplaced youths like myself!) tend to think there should be more retro cues...it seems a lot of the older market prefers the new Challenger's way of thinking while the younger folks prefer the proposed Camaro... o No: ------------------------ Hillbilly Racing Team "Tired of AutoZone's limited selection? Try the Pottery Barn!"
If there was any doubt about which car will sell more, it has been settled: tDETROIT -- Forget Desperate Housewives, the sexiest display at the Auto Show may have been one that started long after the doors were locked. Show officials are trying to learn who sneaked a tipsy blond woman onto the Cobo Center show floor about 2:30 a.m. Monday to pose nude atop the new Dodge Challenger. "We heard they were all over the Challenger," said Jason Vines, vice president of communications for the Chrysler Group, which earlier brought in the very-clothed actress Eva Longoria to pose with its exhibit. "Obviously, this car is a magnet. We want people to love these cars but not in that way." Workers said security guards found the woman posing while more than a dozen others gawked and snapped photos with camera phones. Cobo Director Glenn Blanton said the city is investigating. "If employees were involved, there will be discipline," he said. Show officials are taking the security breach seriously. "The only people who are supposed to be on the floor at that time are people who are working," said Rod Alberts of the Detroit Auto Dealers Association, which sponsors the show. "We want to get to the bottom of this and make sure it doesn't happen again." The Challenger makes chicks clothes fall off, and isn't that the real reason to buy a Mucsle Car ???
Now I know why I don't like the Camaro concept...... It's a retro '77 Trans Am with a Cadillac grill! :laugh: :laugh:
Sounds like something Pat Robertson would say. :laugh: Sure, it's mixing species. But what could be wrong about a naked chick rolling around on a muscle car? o No:
Tom-I see your point and I think I am in Brian's camp on the Challenger---it is too soft looking in the front end--not "chiseled" enough or aggressive enough looking and the slab sides only add to that soft look. I take back what I said earlier---I do think it is cool looking but just not aggressive enough (especially for a Mopar). They don't like the Camaro grille---jeeeeeez!!----looks like a pretty good rendition of the 69 eggcrate pattern to me with the same layout as the 69 (full width rectangular eggcrate with headlights on each end--all inside a clean sharp metal grille opening--clean and simple). On the Transformer comparison I observed this back when one of my nephews was a kid in that era. You may remember those things---the toy was designed to "unfold" or transform into some other beast looking toy when the kid grabbed the arms, etc and twisted and pivoted them into the transformed state. The thing that always got me (outside the transform feature) was all the little mirror image angles that appeared on the face, arms , etc of the toys. Then one day I'm sitting at a light behind one of those SUVs looking at the tailgate/rear bumper assembly and the thing had so many angles in it (none of which seemed to serve any particular purpose other than the break up the design) it looked exactly like one of those toys. They could have eliminated at least half of them and still had a cool looking rear on the vehicle but it seemed like they just kept repeating the angles on each part for no reason at all. Worked great on the toys but on the car the tailgate only opened and the car sure as heck didn't look like another badass mean looking space beast with the tailgate up! The over-angled look is prevalent on the Escalade and the Avalanche---all these vertically-oriented angles have a tendency to emphasize the vertical on any car they appear on so when it's applied to an already tall vehicle it OVER-emphasizes the look or exaggerates it. Same thing on those Caddy cars. I guess on the Camaro the part of this I like is the car appears low and wide enough to incorporate the angled look and not appear "too tall" or vertical. Your eyes move from side to side when viewing this new Camaro--thus enhancing the low, wide look. Your eyes move up and down when looking at a CTS or an Escalade---leaving you with the impression of height not width. For a musclecar I think the side-to-side, low impression adds to its nature. On the Mustang, I like it.....until you get to the rear quarter panels---the cars are jacked up in the back and the too-narrow wheel/tire combo adds to the vertical look and takes away from the low/wide look. Of course, maybe Ford's goal was to achieve the "day-two" look of the times and do the jacking up for you at the factory! (advertisements could say: "...and the new Mustang comes jacked up from the factory to save you the time and expense!") ou: Good thread. Thanks, Patton
Seems to me Detroit has bigger problems than a naked chick rolling around on a car. o No: o No: Now if Lutz had rolled around naked on top of the car with panties on his head................ :Brow: :Brow: :Brow:
